Wednesday, 30 November 2022
Researchers talk about UFO landing sites, 1970s/80s/90s -update with some notes
I tried a few times up until his death to ask Ted Phillips how I could get to see the test results from his "decades" of gathering samples and carrying out analyses. I know that my messages WERE received but no responses. This seemed to be odd from a man who wanted to see Ufology be scientific and convince the scientific community about UFO reality.
I have searched for technical papers, which researchers are expected to publish for peer review (science). Nothing.
CUFOS only has the notes ("Catalogue") which are pointless since, as I repeatedly pointed out, this contains a number of historical cases for which we have NO evidence and also includes reports from Vallee of known hoaxes and so forth. NOT in the least bit scientific and the "catalogue" was shocking.
After Phillips' death his work was inherited by Thomas M. Ferrario who claimed that Phillips said various things which seem odd but, hey -Phillips cannot tell us if true or not. Ferrario also claimed in intervioews that he was continuing the "highest scientific standards" as set out by Phillips. I have tried to get some sort of conversation going with Ferrario and my last email from a few months back read:
"Hi. My name is Terry Hooper-Scharf and I am based in the UK. From 1977 -2007 I "Officially Unofficially" investigated UFOs Reports as Head of the Anomalous Observational Phenomena Bureau (AOP B) and from 1974 to date I have specialised in CE3K reports and run the CE3K/Alien Entity Project. I was hoping that you might be able to help me with a query.
One thing I keep getting asked by more science orientated folk is why is there no physical evidence of UFOs. I have tried to look on the internet for any of the work carried out by Ted Phillips that lists evidence found and what tests results showed. To date I have failed. So can I ask if there is a data base of the evidence and test results I can access?
I'm hoping you'll have the answer!
My thanks in advance.
Terry"Straight forward and polite inquiry, right? Not a word in response and I have tried Face Book messenger and email. Then a whilke back I watched his interview in which he exposed the fact, well, just came out with it and he had never mentioned this on serious UFO podcasts, that he was into the whole Illuminati, pseudo-religious almost cult UFO belief -don't believe me? https://terryhooper.blogspot.com/2022/09/the-dave-emmons-and-tom-althouse-show.html
I could actually feel the blood drain from my face in disbelief. It was quite clear that Ferrario had totally opted out of science and into fringe cult.
There are no papers or test results available and what you see in the video above ("contaminated" soil floating on water while "normal" soil absorbs water ) can be faked. Is this something of a bitter pill to swallow? Yes. For years our response to debunkers was that Ufology had some scientists involved and we pointed to Jacques Vallee (which nowe makes me feel like a moron) and we also stated that Ted Phillips, a friend and collaborator of Vallee's, had gathered hundreds of samples and had just as many analyses carried out -hard science.
I think that we were all conned. Whether financial or other reasons were involved I have no idea. However, and I have asked as many people as possible, no scientists have seen Phillips' work and analyses. It's a pot full of flying monkies. It might be why, when I was watching Phillips interviews he kept querying aspects of UFOs that his analyses etc were supposed to have covered.
There are scientists associated with Vallee and others who are also playing the "we have analyses proving we have exotic materials" and then they tell us the tests have not yet been carried out.
One of the commonest materials submitted as being UFO related is aluminium alloy. I have handled these and analyses often come up with strange results "not of this Earth" YET I know exactly where the samples came from and even submitted samples as "test pieces". Aluminum alloys can be broadly separated into two categories which are: cast aluminum alloys and wrought aluminum alloys. The cast alloys of aluminum are those which contain > 22% alloying elements by composition: wrought alloys of aluminum contain ≤4%. And there are three basic types of Aluminum comes in three basic types: 1100, 3003, and 6061. The grade of the aluminum will determine the end-use application. 1100 is a lower-cost material than 6061 but cannot be used for high-temperature applications like cooking utensils or pot lids. Two samples of aluminium I had tested were taken from an old bus depot and repair sheets kept in store: "Composition not known on this planet".
I publish all the test results and I have even shared some "UFO samples" which were declared to be of a genuinely "unknown material/composition" and even sending a photograph of the sheet the material came from resulted in nothing but a couple declarations that I had no idea what I was talking about and/or had been "deceived".
I have asked UFO organisations such as MUFON i9n the United States as well as BUFORA in the UK for any copies of analyses of materials claimed to have originated from a UFO. Several times. Several times polite requests, messages received but no responses. The Ubatuba, Brasil UFO fragment is often cited as being of unknown origin. Truerr BUT not extra terrestrial origin as pointed out in a 2004 paper by P. SturrockComposition Analysis of the Brazil Magnesium https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Composition-Analysis-of-the-Brazil-Magnesium-Sturrock-Sturrock/c1f8a88ed69cf2a6dcccacebe992db42df814bef
"Some of the surviving fragments of the Brazil magnesium that purportedly had their origin in the explosion of a UFO have been subjected to surface, internal and isotopic analyses. The surface composition of four of the specimens has been determined to better than 1 part per million (ppm). There are some similarities, but also significant differences, so it is clear that the specimens were subjected to different influences.
"Some of the impurities (such as sodium and calcium) may be due to seawater or sand, but many of the impurities are incompatible with such contamination. Some of the impurities (titanium, chromium, iron, cobalt, selenium, strontium, yttrium, niobium, palladium and barium) may point toward an origin in a technological device or devices. Two specimens of Brazil magnesium, together with four comparison specimens, have been subjected to internal analysis by a laser ablation inductively coupled plasma mass spectrograph (ICP-MS) instrument.
"This analysis shows that the Brazil specimens contain calcium at a few thousand ppm and (as found by the Colorado Project) both strontium and barium at a few hundred ppm. One specimen also contains titanium at a few hundred ppm. This analysis indicates that the existing Brazil samples are not as pure as magnesium specimens readily available in the 1950s. Some of the specimens have been subjected to isotopic analysis.
"The only departures from normal isotopic ratios are small differences that may be attributed to fractionation as a result of heat treatment. The origin of these fragments remains a mystery. There is no evidence that the specimens are of extraterrestrial origin"
All I can say is that the Ubatuba is one of those mythical things within Ufology and you can read more about it at UFO Casebook https://www.ufocasebook.com/ubatuba.html
We need to see analyses carried out openly by recognised labs and those analysis results openly published -this can be done online these days- so that scientists can peer review and where possible request samples to carry out their own analyses.
Like Vallee's fiction heavy UFO Landings Catalogue I think that we can safely ignore the Phillips Physical Traces Catalogue unless data is released as it, too, is fiction heavy.
If I am wrong and there are papers and analyses please feel free to correct me (and I am not talking about an odd article Phillips may have written for a magazine) and I can correct my statement.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)