A Wake Up Call

I was told this morning that a few sites are using my posts and either cutting out huge chunks or just reposting whole as their own work.

I was then asked why I was bothering since no one ever comments or contacts me via the blog.

Considering the other blogs run by plagiarists are getting comments I agree.

Save everything in case I do another book. 

NASA: NASA’s TESS Shares First Science Image in Hunt to Find New Worlds

Look at the photo.  That is just one small image of space. Add all the rest to this and you still don't think there is intelligent life out there?

I would much prefer more SETI and CETI attempts aimed at closer space.

The Transiting Exoplanet Survey Satellite (TESS) took this snapshot of the Large Magellanic Cloud (right) and the bright star R Doradus (left) with just a single detector of one of its cameras on Tuesday, Aug. 7. The frame is part of a swath of the southern sky TESS captured in its “first light” science image as part of its initial round of data collection.

Credits: NASA/MIT/TESS

More TESS "first light" multimedia

Download high-resolution versions of this and other TESS “first light” images from the Scientific Visualization Studio at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center.

Credits: NASA/MIT/TESS

More TESS "first light" multimedia

NASA’s newest planet hunter, the Transiting Exoplanet Survey Satellite (TESS), is now providing valuable data to help scientists discover and study exciting new exoplanets, or planets beyond our solar system. Part of the data from TESS’ initial science orbit includes a detailed picture of the southern sky taken with all four of the spacecraft’s wide-field cameras. This “first light” science image captures a wealth of stars and other objects, including systems previously known to have exoplanets.

“In a sea of stars brimming with new worlds, TESS is casting a wide net and will haul in a bounty of promising planets for further study,” said Paul Hertz, astrophysics division director at NASA Headquarters in Washington. “This first light science image shows the capabilities of TESS’ cameras, and shows that the mission will realize its incredible potential in our search for another Earth.”

TESS acquired the image using all four cameras during a 30-minute period on Tuesday, Aug. 7. The black lines in the image are gaps between the camera detectors. The images include parts of a dozen constellations, from Capricornus to Pictor, and both the Large and Small Magellanic Clouds, the galaxies nearest to our own. The small bright dot above the Small Magellanic Cloud is a globular cluster — a spherical collection of hundreds of thousands of stars — called NGC 104, also known as 47 Tucanae because of its location in the southern constellation Tucana, the Toucan. Two stars, Beta Gruis and R Doradus, are so bright they saturate an entire column of pixels on the detectors of TESS’s second and fourth cameras, creating long spikes of light.

“This swath of the sky’s southern hemisphere includes more than a dozen stars we know have transiting planets based on previous studies from ground observatories,” said George Ricker, TESS principal investigator at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s (MIT) Kavli Institute for Astrophysics and Space Research in Cambridge.

Show only LeftShow only Right

The Transiting Exoplanet Survey Satellite (TESS) captured this strip of stars and galaxies in the southern sky during one 30-minute period on Tuesday, Aug. 7. Created by combining the view from all four of its cameras, this is TESS’ “first light,” from the first observing sector that will be used for identifying planets around other stars. Notable features in this swath of the southern sky include the Large and Small Magellanic Clouds and a globular cluster called NGC 104, also known as 47 Tucanae. The brightest stars in the image, Beta Gruis and R Doradus, saturated an entire column of camera detector pixels on the satellite’s second and fourth cameras. Drag the slider back and forth to see the labeled and unlabeled versions of the image.

Credits: NASA/MIT/TESS

TESS’s cameras, designed and built by MIT’s Lincoln Laboratory in Lexington, Massachusetts, and the MIT Kavli Institute, monitor large swaths of the sky to look for transits. Transits occur when a planet passes in front of its star as viewed from the satellite’s perspective, causing a regular dip in the star’s brightness.

TESS will spend two years monitoring 26 such sectors for 27 days each, covering 85 percent of the sky. During its first year of operations, the satellite will study the 13 sectors making up the southern sky. Then TESS will turn to the 13 sectors of the northern sky to carry out a second year-long survey.

MIT coordinates with Northrop Grumman in Falls Church, Virginia, to schedule science observations. TESS transmits images every 13.7 days, each time it swings closest to Earth. NASA’s Deep Space Network receives and forwards the data to the TESS Payload Operations Center at MIT for initial evaluation and analysis. Full data processing and analysis takes place within the Science Processing and Operations Center pipeline at NASA’s Ames Research Center in Silicon Valley, California, which provides calibrated images and refined light curves that scientists can analyze to find promising exoplanet transit candidates.

TESS builds on the legacy of NASA’s Kepler spacecraft, which also uses transits to find exoplanets. TESS’s target stars are 30 to 300 light-years away and about 30 to 100 times brighter than Kepler’s targets, which are 300 to 3,000 light-years away. The brightness of TESS’ targets make them ideal candidates for follow-up study with spectroscopy, the study of how matter and light interact.

This animation shows how the Transiting Exoplanet Survey Satellite (TESS) will study 85 percent of the sky in 26 sectors. The spacecraft will observe the 13 sectors that make up the southern sky in the first year and the 13 sectors of the northern sky in the second year.

Credits: NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center

The James Webb Space Telescope and other space and ground observatories will use spectroscopy to learn more about the planets TESS finds, including their atmospheric compositions, masses and densities.

TESS has also started observations requested through the TESS Guest Investigator Program, which allows the broader scientific community to conduct research using the satellite.

“We were very pleased with the number of guest investigator proposals we received, and we competitively selected programs for a wide range of science investigations, from studying distant active galaxies to asteroids in our own solar system,” said Padi Boyd, TESS project scientist at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland. “And of course, lots of exciting exoplanet and star proposals as well. The science community are chomping at the bit to see the amazing data that TESS will produce and the exciting science discoveries for exoplanets and beyond.”

TESS launched from NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Cape Canaveral, Florida, on April 18 aboard a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket and used a flyby of the Moonon May 17 to head toward its science orbit. TESS started collecting scientific data on July 25 after a period of extensive checks of its instruments.

TESS is a NASA Astrophysics Explorer mission led and operated by MIT in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and managed by NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland. Dr. George Ricker of MIT’s Kavli Institute for Astrophysics and Space Research serves as principal investigator for the mission. Additional partners include Northrop Grumman, based in Falls Church, Virginia; NASA’s Ames Research Center in California’s Silicon Valley; the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics in Cambridge, Massachusetts; MIT’s Lincoln Laboratory in Lexington, Massachusetts; and the Space Telescope Science Institute in Baltimore. More than a dozen universities, research institutes and observatories worldwide are participants in the mission.

---

By Jeanette Kazmierczak
NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Md.

Last Updated: Sept. 17, 2018

Editor: Rob Garner

UFO Contact? Looking At The Evidence For Alien Visitation

Terry Hooper-Scharf

530 pages

illustrated with maps, photographs and more

A4 format

B&W

Price: £20.00 (excl. VAT) special offer until 15th October: £18.00

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.

Reports Are Far Rarer Than We Think

I think that when ufologists claim that "many thousands" of CE3K/abductions are on record they are correct. That would be proof.

However, when you consider that "many thousands" of those cases were not investigated then that is proof of nothing.

There are claims made based on statistics and "data" that have been accepted by ufologists.  This is false data.  Looking at the reports ( you cannot call them cases as they were not investigated) used there are well known hoaxes, cases that involved people with psychological problems, there are reports of airships, aircraft, helicopters, meteors, aurora. For the 1954 French "UFO wave" the CE3Ks include a man who was repairing a motor vehicle, another involving a local hermit -it goes on and on.

This means that all the proposed theories based on dates, times and locations are invalid. The "Mars Cycle", ortotheny -it all falls to pieces.

The 1954 French 'wave' probably was not a big UFO event.

However, and this is the important part: there are CE3K/AE cases from that period that look quite sound. Sound in the sense that they survive scrutiny but none actually furnishing actual proof of, say, extraterrestrial visitation. Almost 70 years later no such devices as described by witnesses have emerged as terrestrial test or secret aircraft -so where are they from?

Now this is important. It means that there are not "many thousands" of CE3K/AE reports but maybe a few hundred -which without thorough investigation may be an exaggeration- actual incidents.  But this means that cases from the past do become far more important because if they are genuine then this may give us a better insight into what is going on or, at least, the type of entities behind the UFOBs -seemingly solid and constructed objects.

This is why, in my last post, I wanted to stress the importance of actually  tracking down the witnesses/percipients to these incidents -if we can talk to those from 1954, when the activity really seemed to begin in earnest, then that is important. All of those reports are scraps of paper unless you can say that the person(s) involved were spoken to and they seemed genuine even after these decades.

But we are definitely dealing with CE3K/AE reports that are rarer than we thought.  Certainly UFOB sightings are rarer because if we rule out everything other than an investigated report that appears genuine we have...only scraps of paper.

With funding I'd spend the time I have left chasing up these case -but there is no funding for this type of work.  I have tried UFO organisations but they have no interest -membership and financial gains seem to be the main aims.

If ufologists in France, Belgium, Netherlands, USA -where ever think the project worthy then go for it!  We seriously need to carry this work out or we have truly lost valuable information.

Are We Going to Let All of the Information Fade Away: Or Are We Going To Do Something About It?

I would like to offer this page from Patrick Gross' Ufologie page.  It shows the results for an incident during the 1954 "French UFO flap" -which may not have been a flap at all (see Unidentified-Identified):

The 1954 French flap:

The index page for the 1954 French flap section of this site is here.

October 3, 1954, Marcoing, Nord:

Reference number for this case: 3-oct-54-Marcoing. Thank you for including this reference number in any correspondence with me regarding this case.

Reports:

[Ref. la1] "L'ALSACE" NEWSPAPER:

The newspaper reports on October 6, 1954, with no other information, that there was a sighting in Marcoing. The date is not given but the sighting is mentioned among others that took place on October 2 and 3, 1954.

See the article here.

[Ref. li1:] "LIFE" MAGAZINE:

MARTIAN MEN'S HEIGHT is shown by two bakers. Pierre Lucas (left) of Loctudy was going to well when, he said, orange ball fell from the sky. Suddenly a small bearded figure with one eye in the middle of his forehead tapped him on the shoulder. Serge Pochet (right) of Marcoing was approached by two small shadows.

[Ref. ar1:] ALBERT ROSALES:

103. Location. Marcoing France Date: October 3 1954 Time: night Bakers apprentice Serge Pochet was approached by 2 small shadowy entities, about 3-feet tall. No other information. Humcat 1954-67 Source: Humcat quoting Newspaper reports Type: E?

[Ref. dj2:] DONALD JONHSON:

Donald Johnson says that on October 3, 1954, a humanoid report occurred later than 6:45 p.m., in the night and did not involve a UFO sighting: young baker's apprentice S. Pouchet, was approached by two small shadowy beings, about three feet tall, in Marcoing, Nord, France.

The sources are noted as "Webb, David F. & Bloecher, Ted. HUMCAT: Catalogue of Humanoid Reports, case A0271, citing Life Magazine, November 1, 1954" and "Life Magazine, November 1, 1954".

[Ref. gn1:] "GNEOVNI" UFOLOGY GROUP:

In "Special notes" of their catalogue, the GNEOVNI group indicates that there exists in several books, such as Aimé Michel's "M.O.C.", Planète publishers in 1966, in which there is a number of observation cases in the Nord and Pas-de-Calais which are not included in their catalogue because there "remains much doubts as to their credibility." One of them is noted "3-10-54 Marcoing nord".

[Ref. ta1:] "THINK ABOUT IT" WEBSITE:

Location: Marcoing France Date: October 3 1954 Time: night Bakers apprentice Serge Pochet was approached by 2 small shadowy entities, about 3-feet tall. No other information. Source: Humcat quoting Newspaper reports

[Ref. ub1:] "UFO-DATENBANK":

This database recorded this case 9 times:

Case Nr.	New case Nr.	Investigator	Date of observation	Zip	Place of observation	Country of observation	Hour of observation	Classification	Comments	Identification
19541003			03.10.1954		Marcoing	France	Night	CE III
19541003			03.10.1954		Marcoing	France	20.00	NL
19541003			03.10.1954		Marcoing	France	20.00	NL
19541003			03.10.1954		Marcoing	France	20.00	NL
19541003			03.10.1954		Marcoing	France	20.00	NL
19541003			03.10.1954		Marcoing	France	20.30	NL
19541003			03.10.1954		Marcoing	France	20.30	NL
19541003			03.10.1954		Marcoing	France	20.00	NL
19541003			03.10.1954		Marcoing	France	Night	CE III

Explanations:

Not looked for yet.

Keywords:

(These keywords are only to help queries and are not implying anything.)

Marcoing, Nord, Serge Pochet, entity, entities, dark, small, two

Sources:

[---] indicates sources which I have not yet checked.

• [la1] Article in the regional newspaper L'Alsace, Mulhouse, France, October 6, 1954.
• [li1] Part of the article "Astral Adventurers - Frenchmen report meetings with unlikely creatures", in LIFE Magazine, USA, page 28, November 1, 1954.
• [---] "HUMCAT: Catalogue of Humanoid Reports", compiled by David Webb and Ted Bloecher, Center for UFO Studies (CUFOS), USA, circa 1978.
• [ar1] "1954 Humanoid Reports", compiled by Albert Rosales, circa 2001, at www.ufoinfo.com/humanoid/humanoid1954.shtml
• [dj2] "The Worldwide UFO Wave of 1954", electronic article by Donald Johnson, Ph.D., USA, page 5, 2009, at www.ufoinfo.com/onthisday/papers/Worldwide%20UFO%20Wave%20of%201954.pdf
• [gn1] "Catalogue Régional d'observations", by the Groupement Nordiste d'Etudes des Observations d'Objets Volants Non Identifiés (GNEOVNI), France, undated, circa 2009, at www.geru.fr/fr/catalogue-regional-observation-ovni-nord
• [ta1] "1954: October Sightings", catalog on the UFO website Think About It, USA, not dated, found 2014, at http://www.thinkaboutitdocs.com/8-1954-october-sightings
• [ub1] Online database UFO-Datenbank, Germany, found in 2016, at ufodatenbank.de

So what do you notice? Perhaps that someone notes that someone referred to this case...appearing in newspapers?  I am hoping that this sticks out like a ten feet (3m) high glowing red thumb. We have a case, once again, of 'investigation' by news-clippings.

Two reported incidents of alleged actual landings and entities and who turns up after -the press. There were people claiming to be flying saucer investigators but that amounted to noting down a news item on the radio or adding a newspaper clipping to the scrapbook. From the news clipping these people could pontificate and waffle on over pages.

I understand that there was no funding for flying saucer research but most of these people involved in the subject knew each other one way or another. There was a very real attitude, not just in France, that even if a report came from a mile or two away -why go investigate when the newspapers had all the information?

I actually almost choked on a swig of coffee when I read Italian investigators, who had not once even attempted to go and investigate Rosa Lotti's encounter in 1954 until the early 2000's, complaining and criticising newspapers and journalists for leaving out information and not doing a thorough job. Well, at least the reporters got off of their arses and went to see her.  There are literally hundreds of cases like the one above.

Writers -'ufologists'- are making money out of including these cases in their books and worst of all in their "data" or "sightings breakdowns" that make them look so good.  The truth is that they are producing nonsense: they have no data other that he wrote what so-and-so wrote who got it from whatshisname who found it mentioned in a newspaper clipping. That is then the solid data used by people like Jacques Vallee who does not actually check anything himself. 

The period 1947-2018 has literally achieved nothing when it comes to ufology other than over-hyped hysteria, bunko-men and...literally, huge volumes of trash.  Graham F. N. Knewstub's British Flying Saucer Bureau Technical Report No. 1 was in the 1950s, we all thought that we were seeing real science (I was fooled, too) when Vallee published his work on UFO Waves, Flaps and so on.  He included well known hoaxes, misidentifications of aircraft, meteors, weather balloons and much more in amongst the not investigated UFO cases. The data was useless.

Then we saw Ted Bloecher Report on the UFO Wave of 1947, published in 1967. This was an actual attempt at analysis and to piece events from that year together.  Published work that could be peer reviewed. It was as early as 1956 that Bloecher became intrigued by the growing number of “UFO occupant” reports and along with researcher David Webb, started to work on what would become the Humanoid Catalogue –HUMCAT: a collection of early “humanoid” sightings. I prefer not to use the term “Humanoids” as an all-encompassing term but the important thing is that the work began.

   Ted Bloecher’s major interest was always in occupant reports or Close Encounters of the Third Kind (CE3K), as they would be called after J. Allen Hynek set out his categorisation of UFO sighting reports.  Bloecher had been one of the top thinkers in the Civilian Saucer Investigation group and after that became active with the National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena (NICAP) and when  NICAP became “moribund”, Bloecher moved on to the Mutual UFO Network (MUFON) and the Center for UFO Studies (CUFOS).  He was still concentrating his efforts on investigation of CE3K reports with David Webb. In 1978, CUFOS published his and Davis's Close Encounter at Kelly and Others of 1955, based on the investigation of the Kelly-Hopkinsville case.

   Bloecher could well be called the top authority on these cases in the United States by the 1970s and though he did everything he possibly could (see UFO Contact?) to get the Euporia, Mississippi landing/entity case prioritised and investigated it never was –presumably due to the prejudices of the two investigators.

   But being the top man does not come with a university grant or even financial funding and to keep records complete Bloecher filed away press reports.  This should have been the data base used for thorough investigation of the cases. Instead, ufologists just quoted Bloecher and that he, himself, was referencing newspaper reports.

   Then came the big excuse of the “Grey Abduction Paranoia” –if a case did not involve Greys then it was a fake or misidentification.  No need to bother. Or to use the much criticised US Air Force ‘excuse’ used so well by MUFON today: the amount of time that has passed negates any fruitful investigation.

Ufology does not “get the respect deserved”?  You earn respect.

Two cases from recent years I have tried to get more information on so I went to the site owners who reported on the cases.  In each I was told “I picked that up from (website) –best you contact him” and so I did: “I read that on (name of website) because it seemed interesting” and then I was advised to contact the “original source”. This original source turned out to have copied the item from some newspaper item and he could not remember which or the date. This is the most common response I get when following up old reports and today I more or less expect it.

Ufology is basing all of its claims on cases –including plain old “UFO” sightings- that were never investigated because it is much easier to sit in a chair and say “The evidence is all there” –it is not.

In the United States, France and Belgium I think there are enough ufologists with some credibility who can open cold case investigations on old CE3K/Alien Entity cases.  Once the witnesses, now in their 60’s, 70’s and 80’s are gone then so are all of the facts that they can tell us and to ascertain which, if any, of the CE3K/AE reports is genuine could provide us with the valuable data we need.

I am undertaking this work in the UK (though some prominent ufologists appear to not want this –I wonder why?) and I just hope and pray that someone out there will do likewise in their own country.  PLEASE!

Unidentified - Identified: Special Offer

Terry Hooper-Scharf

220 pages

A4

perfect bound

paperback

Fully illustrated with photographs and illustrations

 List Price: £20.00

Price: £18.00 (excl. VAT)You Save: £2.00 ( 10% )

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 Berwyn Mountains ‘UFO’ Crash Retrieval   

 Strange Pennsylvania Entity Encounter                                                         

 UFO Abductees and Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome                               

 The UFO That Landed On A US Highway                                                     

 My Encounters With The Men In Black                                                         

 A Previously Un-noted Alien Entity Type                                               

       

 Early 20^th Century UK Close Encounters of the Third Kind                       

 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 Isle of Wight and at Felixstowe?                             

 The ‘Lost’ Belgian UFO Landing Case                                                        

  

 Strange Aliens from Outer Space?                                                              

   

 Encounter with Black Aliens and Landed UFO                                 

           

 Preliminary UK CE3K/Alien Entity Catalogue                                            

Strange Ohio Humanoids: What Should We Accept As Evidence?

   Regarding mysterious Ohio creatures there was this report in 2014:

Alien Encounter in Cincinnati, Ohio, 12^th December, 2014

“We recently bought a place in the fort hill area. we first noticed after about 30 days of living here that we suddenly have a perfect circle that stays fresh green, no matter what weather, in our front yard. friday night (the 12th) we were driving home and after turning on carmel rd which leads to our road (washburn) we went around the curve by the carmel church and then up a small incline and approx. 10 feet over the incline and in front of our truck, the alien ran across the rd and into the woods. my husband saw it. he is a skeptic, almost 60 years old and a proud marine. he wouldn't have admitted to seeing it if he hadn't been in shock. i had him draw it for me when we got to the house. he says it was asphalt gray (our asphalt is gray) and about 7 foot tall, no arms that he could see, but muscular in the legs area. no jawline and it's legs were bent backward and it leaned forward as it ran.”

   The legs looked very odd –almost as though they belonged to a quadruped. However, as I do not live in Ohio I have no idea of the full variety of wildlife there but then I accidentally found the Doubtful News website and it featured this very brief incident.

https://doubtfulnews.com/2015/01/ohio-alien-creature-sighting-may-have-logical-explanation/

   In her piece, Idoubtit, expressed the opinion that what was seen was nothing more than a white Tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) on its hind legs or, as others suggested, great blue heron (Ardea herodias): there are other suggestions and based on the fact that there is so little information on this sighting I tend to go for a natural explanation.

   Now there are three other incidents and they are reported on at Phantoms and Monsters, not the most evidence based website as I have found several times. Lon Strickler wrote:

  

“I recently received a 3rd report of a humanoid sighting in the Mount Vernon, Ohio area. The eyewitness' daughter contacted me:

“Hi, I am reaching out not as a hoax but to let you know that I received a phone call from my mom in Mount Vernon, Ohio recently telling me that she saw a figure of what appeared to be an alien come in one side of her basement and go out the other end of the basement. She describes this thing as being tall with long arms, and she didn’t see his face as she watched him from a side view but she did say that his head looked just like the one in this picture I’ve attached (from my last report and above). I wish to have her identity anonymous please if she is not contacted. I thought you might be interested to know that there has been another sighting in this area. My mom said that she wasn’t scared nor did she feel any danger by this presence and that it just came in and left. Thank you....

“NOTE: I am attempting to gather more information from this sighting. Lon”

   Unfortunately, for researchers this report is immediately thrown out.  We have an anonymous report which is okay if the writer clearly identifies herself to the investigator but this is not even her sighting.  It is her mother’s.  The problem is that unless an independent investigator can view and confirm the existence of the witness and that an email was sent reporting the incident and that the actual witness has confirmed details –the report is of no use.

   Does the witness use any medication or have any existing physical health problems –mental/physical?   What was her frame of mind at the time of the sighting –what kind of day had she had; any stress?

   Really, unless an investigator can talk to the witness of an event it cannot be taken as even hearsay: far too much hoaxing and fabrication takes place on the internet.

   The following is the first Ohio report:

Mount Vernon, Ohio:

“As I was driving home on 31 July 2018 at 01:43 on Ohio state route 13 north of Mount Vernon, OH a 7-8ft tall, skinny, humanoid like creature ran across the road out of a corn field across into a soybean field (from a east to west direction). I noticed the creature in my headlights from 50-75ft away as I was traveling at a rate of 55-60mph. As it came out of the cornfield I immediately let off the accelerator. At first thinking it was a deer but then seen the creature walked upright. It was 7-8ft in height, tall slender body, arms and legs small in diameter, hands and feet looked over-sized for its body proportion, small neck with oval elongated head, being dark tan to light brown skin tone and had no body hair. The creature slightly turned its head towards my vehicles headlights and I seen the creatures black eyes and small mouth just open slightly as it continued to run across the road. It barely took 2-3 steps and it was across the road at a tremendous rate of speed. I was in total shock and thought I should check it out at first but then thought for a second and being uncertain of what I may have just seen I had better get out of the area. I lost sight of the entity due to darkness. I am a 24 year USAF retired aircrew veteran with a top secret security clearance. Not to be totally bliss but would someone please advise me on what I seen because it still and truly and frightened me”. - MUFON

   The news item can be found here: https://mountvernonnews.com/article/2018/08/10/alien-sighting-north-of-mount-vernon/

   I am sorry to say that just because it carries a “MUFON” (Mutual UFO Network) tag most people will accept this outright.  What we have, though, is the old problem: a single witness driving along a dark road in the early hours. Again, you could go for a deer crossing the road but there are other options such as a waking dream and this could be a viable explanation but unless MUFON provide online access to the investigator’s report we have no idea how the interview was carried out.

   There are reasons why I tend to be more sceptical about quick sightings under these conditions but in the end it is down to what you want to believe.

   Strickler then goes on to refer to a second sighting in the Mount Vernon, Ohio area:

“Mount Vernon, Ohio - 2018-08-17: I had just gotten back to the parking lot down from Mount Vernon’s Wolf Run Park and when I turned on my lights to leave I saw it in the woods. I felt like I was being followed my entire hike and I got a little lost on the way since I was feeling super sketched out so when I saw it I was panicking and super scared. It looked startled as my lights came on and made this strange gargling scratching sound and I felt super sick to my stomach. I don’t really know what it was. Like I thought it was just someone in the woods but it’s eyes looked weird and it looked smooth and naked. It seemed to vibrate in front of my eyes as I looked at it and I ripped my phone out of my pocket and tried to take pictures but my phone seemed to lag. I have a iPhone 6 plus and I know my battery is having issues but I’ve never had anything like that. I slammed my car in reverse and got out of there as fast as I could. The noise it made still freaks me out like it was like a Velociraptor from a movie but it made me light-headed and made me feel sick in a strange way I’ve never felt”. - MUFON

   There are a lot of warning signs here: the witness felt he had been followed throughout his hike and even describes himself as “feeling super sketched out” and also: “The noise it made still freaks me out like it was like a Velociraptor from a movie but it made me light-headed and made me feel sick in a strange way I’ve never felt”.   The psychological frame of mind of the witness would need to be ascertained as there really are a lot of red lights here.

   How often did the person go hiking?  Had they been under home or work pressure at the time and had they had any other experiences before?

   The problem is that ufologists will accept these reports based on the website version or news item.  This is really –really- bad practice. We need as much information as possible about the witnesses and their lives at the time of their sightings –so long as it can be confirmed that the witnesses do exist they need not be named: it is important that genuine witnesses need their anonymity protected but research hers need to know that they are not being fed a story because that could result in months or even many years wasted –and of course bad data is used.

   Also, there are a few fake videos out there of very similar entities which makes me suspicious.  See...

   For these reports we quite honestly have nothing.

   You may think we do but that is down to personal opinion and beliefs.