Up-Date On 1930 Case

I just got an email from Jerome Clark and his source is Rogerson's IntCat so, basically, the report is useless unless I can find that source and I cannot find it in the IntCat entries.

Sadly, Ufologists quote and quote and quote with little regard to going directly to the original source and so the myth of a CE IIIK/Entity encounter becomes 'fact'.

Entries in IntCat I have had to correct using the original source.

So if you know the source Rogerson refers to (I heard nothing back from Magonia) please let me know.

1930 Case -Help Needed.

I'm hoping that some of the Ufologists who pop by might be able to help.  Seriously, I'm not asking a lot!

This 1930 case is quoted over and over online and Rogerson's IntCat cites "MacGregor 1955, p.200" as the source but it does not give the source. It is not A. A. MacGregor’s Peat Fire Flame because I have a copy and that was published in 1937 and no such case exists within it.

Most are citing Jerome Clark's UFO Encyclopaedia (I'm guessing volume 1)  and since volume 1 and volume 2 are both selling for between £150-335 ($325-500+) and I don't have that kind of cash to throw around, I wondered whether one of you lovely folk had a copy and could check Clark's source for me?

The details are:

 

  1930 (approx date) - 2130 hrs
TOMINTOUL (BANFFSHIRE : SCOTLAND)

Alexander Irvine and a friend were walking in Smiddy Lane when they saw a white light like a meteor. This light brightened and in it a number of figures could be seen moving around. It was regarded locally as the prevision of a nun’s death.

Note (TH): book published 1937 so contemporary not modern take on event.  Awaiting copy of book.

• MacGregor 1955 p200.

All help appreciated!
Terry

Here we go again. People need to understand that scientists are always discovering things that create new noise out in space.  Quasars, planets -there's a whole parcel of causes.  So, while this sounds interesting, all other possible causes need to be ruled out first -it is a nightmare as the AOP Bureau's Signals From Space under Franklyn A. Davin-Wilson found out.

Oh, and then you have to ask if whoever sent the signals still exists as a civilisation now.

meh

Two Weird ‘Alien’ Radio Signals Are Detected From Outside Our Galaxy

Rob Waugh

Parkes

Astronomers heard two mysterious radio signals from outside our galaxy - unexplained blasts of radio energy which last a few milliseconds then are never heard again.

Scientists using the Parkes radio telescope in Australia heard two ‘Fast Radio Bursts’ this month - separated by just 2.4 milliseconds, according to researchers at the Max Planck Institute.

Radio telescopes have detected Fast Radio Bursts since 2001 – incredibly short, high-energy pulses which last for a few milliseconds and erupt with the energy the sun releases in a day.

But follow-up searches by non-radio telescopes have come up empty - leaving the source of the high-energy signals a mystery.

Astronomers have previously speculated the signals could come from evaporating black holes, or even from distant alien civilisations.

The new ‘double flash’ rules out some of the sources astronomers previously thought might cause Fast Radio Bursts.

For instance, the bursts could not be caused by neutron stars colliding - as they can collide only once.

"Alien Megastructure" is actually likely to be "just comets" -NASA

 
Mysterious debris surrounding a star that scientists earlier this year posited may be an alien megastructure is actually likely to be just comets, according to NASA.

Damn!  And here we were hoping. Anyway, if you are disappointed (you never really expected a huge craft of some type did you?).  Here is the report by NASAs Jet Propulsion Laboratory:


A star called KIC 8462852 has been in the news recently for unexplained and bizarre behavior. NASA's Kepler mission had monitored the star for four years, observing two unusual incidents, in 2011 and 2013, when the star's light dimmed in dramatic, never-before-seen ways. Something had passed in front of the star and blocked its light, but what?

Scientists first reported the findings in September, suggesting a family of comets as the most likely explanation. Other cited causes included fragments of planets and asteroids.

A new study using data from NASA's Spitzer Space Telescope addresses the mystery, finding more evidence for the scenario involving a swarm of comets. The study, led by Massimo Marengo of Iowa State University, Ames, is accepted for publication in the Astrophysical Journal Letters.

One way to learn more about the star is to study it in infrared light. Kepler had observed it in visible light. If a planetary impact, or a collision amongst asteroids, were behind the mystery of KIC 8462852, then there should be an excess of infrared light around the star. Dusty, ground-up bits of rock would be at the right temperature to glow at infrared wavelengths.

At first, researchers tried to look for infrared light using NASA's Wide-Field Infrared Survey Explorer, or WISE, and found none. But those observations were taken in 2010, before the strange events seen by Kepler -- and before any collisions would have kicked up dust.

To search for infrared light that might have been generated after the oddball events, researchers turned to Spitzer, which, like WISE, also detects infrared light. Spitzer just happened to observe KIC 8462852 more recently in 2015.

"Spitzer has observed all of the hundreds of thousands of stars where Kepler hunted for planets, in the hope of finding infrared emission from circumstellar dust," said Michael Werner, the Spitzer project scientist at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California, and the lead investigator of that particular Spitzer/Kepler observing program.

But, like WISE, Spitzer did not find any significant excess of infrared light from warm dust. That makes theories of rocky smashups very unlikely, and favors the idea that cold comets are responsible. It's possible that a family of comets is traveling on a very long, eccentric orbit around the star. At the head of the pack would be a very large comet, which would have blocked the star's light in 2011, as noted by Kepler. Later, in 2013, the rest of the comet family, a band of varied fragments lagging behind, would have passed in front of the star and again blocked its light.

By the time Spitzer observed the star in 2015, those comets would be farther away, having continued on their long journey around the star. They would not leave any infrared signatures that could be detected.
According to Marengo, more observations are needed to help settle the case of KIC 8462852.

"This is a very strange star," he said. "It reminds me of when we first discovered pulsars. They were emitting odd signals nobody had ever seen before, and the first one discovered was named LGM-1 after 'Little Green Men.'"

In the end, the LGM-1 signals turned out to be a natural phenomenon.

"We may not know yet what's going on around this star," Marengo observed. "But that's what makes it so interesting."

Ames manages the Kepler and K2 missions for NASA's Science Mission Directorate. JPL managed Kepler mission development. Ball Aerospace & Technologies Corp. operates the flight system with support from the Laboratory for Atmospheric and Space Physics at the University of Colorado in Boulder.

JPL manages the Spitzer Space Telescope mission for NASA's Science Mission Directorate, Washington. Science operations are conducted at the Spitzer Science Center at the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena. Spacecraft operations are based at Lockheed Martin Space Systems Company, Littleton, Colorado. Data are archived at the Infrared Science Archive housed at the Infrared Processing and Analysis Center at Caltech.

Caltech manages JPL for NASA.

For more information about Kepler and Spitzer, respectively, visit:
http://www.nasa.gov/kepler
http://kepler.nasa.gov
http://www.nasa.gov/spitzer
http://www.spitzer.caltech.edu




 

Of Plaster Casts, Area Maps And Running Scared If You See A Light!

It is quite true that, though I try as hard as I can, I just cannot suffer fools.  I cannot abide so called "professionalism" where the alleged "professional" is incompetent at what he does.

Around 1976 I accompanied the late Graham F. N. Knewstub of the British Flying Saucer Bureau (BFSB) on an investigation.  Graham was getting on a bit in years and suggested that I take over as head of Investigation and Research (I & R) but there was some opposition as I was an "H-dropper" and "not from quite the right background" for some members -an attitude toward me that, eventually,  made Franklyn A. Davin-Wilson eventually resign from the BFSB Committee.

However, on the day in question I had gone with Graham to a place called Little Stoke.  Two young women had been terrified by a very large, discoidal object late one evening and had been in such a panic that they began banging on the door of the family home to get in (they had been so scared they could not use the door key).  So, Graham and I questioned both in a very relaxed manner on a nice sunny day.  

As we all talked I made a line drawing of the family home, showing position of street light, tree and then a much larger sketch of the area.  The girls were asked to point to where the object was seen and we were able to estimate size, etc., and realised the object was quite low -probably 50-60 feet (15-17 m).

I then set about drawing a rough map of the area including house, garden, tree and light positions and noting distances and so on.  Once we had finished we drove off, stopping along the way to go over the report. Graham was, apparently, impressed at how I had made the line drawings, map and so on.  "But that's how everyone does it -right?"  It seems not.  I was told that most investigators filled in a witnesse report form and might double check things -in a case like this investigators usually never bothered because, initially, it was classed as a Light-in-sky (usually a satellite or aircraft, etc.).

Graham told me "It's probably because you are a naturalist!"

I know what he means.  You see, if a naturalist or zoologist goes to an area they will carry a local map. Often they will make a smaller, hand drawn version to fit into a pocket.  Once at a site they will mark out reference points and usually estimate distances and sizes.  They might also make sketches or line drawings for their notes. Even at that time this was just standard for me.  It helped me vizualise in my mind what was where -and it made explaining to others easier.

Later Graham told me that he had swung the I & R job for me by showing this report and, surprisingly to me, the Committee had been "overwhelmed" by the detail.

However, as I was in contact with more and more groups I found that most lacked even the basics. Some vital evidence was lost in two cases for the simple reason that in one group no one knew how to get plaster of paris let alone how to make a cast of ground marks said to have been left by a UFO.  The other group had gotten some plaster of paris but added too much water so after two hours left the scene.  Had they sketched and measured the ground markings?  "Well, roughly triangular....6 or 7 inches?"  Later in the 1970s a vital piece of evidence was lost when a group made a plaster cast of a foot print said to have been made by an entity in a garden. Never even having practiced making plaster casts the mixture was too dry and the footprint "crumbled to pieces".

We never had digital cameras or phone cameras back then and, unbelievably, a camera (using film) was a luxury.  Yet I had at least two "in case".  So all the evidence was lost.  I then produced a four page Field Investigators Guide and sent it to all of the UK groups I could find.

When I later helped set up UFO groups in Somerset, Wiltshire, Gloucestershire and South wales everyone was given the Field Investigators Guide.  Time and again I heard of problems that lost evidence or information that was useful and time and again when I pointed out this was all covered in the Guide I got a response of "Oh. Right.  Didn't think of checking that"

There are Entity cases of High Strangeness, Missing Time cases, etc., in the UK, where I read "No investigation carried out" and then I get angry.  Why not?  It seems that the very unscientific approach used by some Ufologists (who want their subject to be accepted as a science!)  is that "I don't believe that" or "Probably cranks" and so a case is filed away or lost.

There were two cases from the 1970s involving women who had both had lifelong "experiences" -this was well before Budd Hopkins and the "abduction explosion".  One woman had so many correlations with abductions noted in the later literature -but hypnosis was NEVER used- that it still stands out today (I have no idea where either percipient is these days as they were very -VERY- badly treated by Ufologists.  The first had been thrown from UFO group to UFO group and I still have one very well known veteran UK Ufologists letter telling me they "all know about her, we just don't bother"!  The second woman was never insulted to her face but she knew what was going on behind her back and decided that she would only discuss what was going on with me.

The thing is, even if you suspect there might be a psychological reason for a claim, if someone comes to you with an account and asks for advice then, as a UFO investigator or researcher it is your duty to offer help or advice not just milk someone for information so you can write the next book or claim "Yeah, I've investigated UFO abductions" and throw it on your website.  These are people and if this is all too much like work for you then go jump onto the paranormal or other latest trendy subject.

The same applies to investigating UFO landing sites. I have talked to one 'investigator' after another who would not go to an alleged landing site for these reasons:

1.  "It's December -it's too cold!"

2.  "It's been raining since the report so any signs have probably gone"

3.  "Oh, it was so muddy I didn't want to get covered in the stuff!"

There is a report from NUFOIN of an investigator who, at his father's rural home, along with his family, observed a low level UFO that landed in a copse in a nearby valley -about three minutes walk away. The investigator, in his report, states how he was so scared that he did not want to go and investigate -his father went instead!  Some ground traces but these were found hours later in daylight when the investigator felt "a little safer" -we have his word on these traces.  No photoes,etc..

I have been at Cradle Hill, near Warminster and chased 'UFO' hoaxers -on two occasions between 20-30 people including UFO investigators, were calling me back and getting hysterical because I was "risking" my life!!

If you are going to investigate UFOs learn HOW to investigate.  If the idea of approaching a possible landed UFO gives you the terrors -this is not the right field for you.

A Previously Uncategorised Entity Type and A Unique UK Case -but that's for 2016!

Thanks to Luis Gonzalez in Spain I have managed to up-date the Spanish section of the AE CE IIIK data base and, as I am an idiot, I have ordered so quite old books that may contain references to possible UK cases prior to 1950.

I do not really have the room for all the books and I've even been going through the 20-40 years old folder files to try to sort things out and that may entail box files.

But I do love reading books and the only books I buy tend to be for reference or research which, to me, is pleasure rather than a chore.  After all, it has taken me 35-40 years to finally close some cases (the longest was the file I opened in 1977 and only closed (finally) in 2012).

And, yes, I have realised that such long term projects are things of the past as in 40 years I'd be 98!

The number of cases to be listed by Date, Time, Location and Possible Explannation (if any) from my own data base, I believe, will run to 2-3,000.   However, before that, the actual report summaries need to be up-dated and replaced because even in plastic wallets inserted into arch files, you can imagine that 40 years sees a lot of wear and tear!

One thing I have discovered, quite by accident, going through UK reports from 1900-1990 as well as non-UK cases, is a type of entity that appears to have slipped past researchers.  Initially I thought "Two cases -coincidence" but a third...a fourth and then a fifth?  So in 2016 I'll present those cases in my book.

There is also another case, from 1978, in Devon, that has a very High Strangeness rating but, sadly, we will probably never get more details than those I will present in the book.  Reading through the notes and then file last night really brought home how unique this case is but the local investigators simply messed everything up to a point that I recall telling the head of the group what I thought of their actions.

But this is all for next year.  For now, I'm off to check on more reference sources.

Guess What? They Found A (Fossilized) Tropical Forest In The Arctic

A team of scientists has unearthed the fossil remnants of a tropical forest on the arctic island of Svalbard, and, according to them, it could well  help explain what is known to be one of the most dramatic climate shifts in Earth’s history.

The fossil forest—stumps of lycopod trees that reached heights of about 13 feet—dates back to the late Devonian period, or some 380 million years ago.   Today, Svalbard, is  a frozen wasteland, but at that time was a huge area of equatorial jungle.  This is amongst some of  the oldest forests ever discovered and is eclipsed only by a mid-Devonian forest in Gilboa, New York.

The end of the Devonian was marked by a dramatic global cooling event caused by a drop in atmospheric carbon dioxide levels. One explanation for the atmospheric shift is the rise of CO2-hungry forests, but to date, very few Devonian trees have actually been found.

Firm evidence for tropical forests at the end Devonian supports the theory that trees had a big role to play in the climactic shift that would usher in an era of complex terrestrial ecosystems.

 Above: A reconstructed drawing of a Svalbard fossil forest. Image Credit: Chris Berry/ Cardiff University


“During the Devonian Period, it is widely believed that there was a huge drop in the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, from 15 times the present amount to something approaching current levels,” said Cardiff University’s Chris Berry, lead author on a study appearing this week in Geology.

“The evolution of tree-sized vegetation is the most likely cause of this dramatic drop in carbon dioxide because the plants were absorbing carbon dioxide through photosynthesis to build their tissues, and also through the process of forming soils,” he continued.

Ultimately, Devonian trees probably set the stage of land-based life as we know it.

[Read the full scientific paper at Geology h/t Atlas Obscura]

The question, though, how long before we stumble upon fossil remains of hitherto unknown species of fauna?  It's funny to think that when I read those magazine articles and books as a youngster that told how arctic and other "desolate" locations might once have been teeming with vegetation and life, those "in the know" used to mock the theories.

Only the ignorant claim we know everything about the past.