Thursday, 21 July 2022
Continuation?
I have tried and tried but I am only posting to myself it seems. Therefore unless I get some reactions this page will have to call it a day as of Friday next week.
Pointless wasting time posting what I already know for myself.
I Tried To Explain Away -And I Could Not. Why?
I have now written four books on what were called Close Encounters of the Third Kind and Alien Entity cases. If you Google even "real life Close Encounters of the Third Kind" you will get a lot about the 1970s Spielberg movie but, it seems, nothing about alleged real life encounters with alien beings.
Everything today is pop culture. People eat up all the fantasy TV like X-Files, Dr Who, Star Trek etc etc etc as well as the badly faked "real life" TV and internet shows in which the same "UFO experts" spout out the same false information -often twisted so that it conforms to the latest "trend". Look at You Tube and, quite literally, it is impossible to find anything on the subject that is not ten years old and conforms only to the Hopkins and Jacobs "format encounters" - and the videos that reveal Hopkins was "stacking the decks" when it came to 'evidence' and was quite happy to go along with hoaxes are never ever referred to. Neither is Jacobs tarnished reputation. These were both men I supported back in the 1980s.
Basically, the same old cases are referred to continuously -the "classics" as they are called; Betty and Barney Hill, Pascagoula and Travis Walton. Entity types have been "rebooted" so that they are "Greys" and so have facts.
Probably the biggest shock I got was in finding that many reports, often repeated over and over again online (to the point of me wanting to poke my eyes out and not see them again) and which people have added 'facts' and details that never existed. These falsehoods are then copy and pasted by others. Approximately 90% of Close Encounters of the Third Kind were never investigated -conclusions were made by reading newspaper clippings and in some cases when, after 25 to 30 years an investigator decided to contact the percipient they had the temerity to scream out at the inaccuracy of journalistic reports! Even today some of the biggest names in Ufology around the world judge reports on news items from TV, the internet (good lords) and newspaper clippings.
There are major cases from the United States that are not even the centre for UFO Studies has records of but I do. Why? Because I research and investigate (CUFOS is not an investigative body so no blame attaches to them) and I dig until I get as much data as possible. Take the 1973 Euporia, Mississippi encounter which was a major UFO incident but even with Ted Bloecher pushing for an investigation it never happened -the witnesses were all black and even in 2020 MUFON refused to re-open the incident as a cold case. The number of incidents involving black Americans that were thrown out is incredible -yet white people reporting lights in the sky got full investigation teams calling on them.
Many physical trace cases listed in the catalogues of the late Ted Phillips were known hoaxes back in the 1960s. The Vallee Landings catalogue list reports that were hoaxes and even misidentifications -known just after they were reported in the 1950s and 1960s and are still quoted today as "solid cases".
Carl Sagan stated that we would not see continuous visits by alien civilisations due to the vast distances that needed to be traversed and, after all, we are NOT a very important planet (unless you want to study how humans are destroying it).
I have written before that so called alien abductions may not actually have been abductions and that the process used to semi-remove memories of incidents may cause the human mind to begin to misinterpret events. Let's be honest; if someone hears all through their lives that UFOs are not real and "all that alien junk" is fake and then finds themselves confronted with the phenomenon as real -that would blow away any world view held by that person. We can see in many cases, as I noted back in the mid 1990s, post traumatic stress syndrome in percipients and we also find that well known and "credible" UFO investigators did not give a damn so long as they got their reports -as in the Liberty, Kentucky case.
Let me make it clear that there is no 100% real solid evidence of alien visitation to Earth. We can also throw out a large percentage of reports as false, misidentifications (a driver repairing a bus by the roadside in France during 1954 was described as a UFO repair incident and still is!) or even "psychological" and I want to make even clearer that this does not include persons who have Ruth syndrome (as explained fully in UFO Contact?) which is complex but there is so much that helps us explain hauntings, poltergeists as well as Bigfoot cases. Slipping into an altered state of consciousness is not as rare as we might assume and I have seen this in a number of non-UFO cases.
We throw all of those out and we are left with percipients (human beings) who suffer mental trauma -shock- and even post traumatic stress syndrome after an alleged encounter. In some cases these cases of PTSD and shock are not reported because after over 50 years UFO researchers are still copying and pasting and have never even looked at the actual reports. There has to have been something that caused this because a regular human being going out berry picking or for a country walk or drive does not suddenly go into mental shock and they certainly do not develop full on PTSD which they suffer from even after 40-50 years.
What caused that?
These same people do not suddenly "just happen" to get a high dose of radiation and display signs of radiation poisoning.
What caused that?
There are deep impressions in the group that people who passed by the day before state was not there and the dry, packed earth was tested and jumped on but no imprint of significance was left.
What caused that?
If just the percipient we can offer all types of explanations and even the silliest ones get accepted because then the percipient was "a nut-job" and we can all get back into our world view. It is why I prefer to look at cases with 2+ percipients because if A slips into an altered state then B cannot -should not- be affected. Yes, I have looked into such cases so I am not just shooting out weird theories.
Here is the thing in both single percipient and multiple percipient cases; they are physically and mentally affected and it is not "mass hysteria" but there is some physical trace evidence left behind.
What caused that?
A case of one or several percipients involves someone else who was not aware of the encounter but observed a strange object over the area of the encounter (and in fact -Liberty- saw a strange light above a car)? Interesting but then you have several independent observers reporting a strange object (night or day) as well as an unusual noise coming from the direction of the (unknown to them) encounter.
What was it?
We know that none of the objects or entities encountered were United States or Soviet test craft and pilots -that stretches credibility to the stupid extreme. Debunking. Look at the top secret aircraft that we finally got to see the SR-71 Blackbird, B-2 Bomber, F-117 and the designs that aviation experts have been looking at and speculating on -not one looks anything like the old type "UFOs" encountered. Certainly UFOs was a good cover story for U.S. experimental aircraft and testing but the various encounters over the years -no.
If these people encountered a solid, constructed object (craft) and entities from them and there are all of the above aspects of PTSD/mental shock, physiological effects, traces plus other independent observers what do we call that? Well, it is not 100% proof because only those percipients were present and only they experienced the actual event. Mental trauma can alter percipients for life even if they claim it does not -Charles Hickson and Mona Stafford (and her late friends) are certainly examples of this. For many it is a case of never going out driving or walking at night -even if people are willing to accompany them. For others they shrug and say "It's something that happened" and get on with their lives (no one knows what is really going through their minds but they decide to get on with life aqnd treat it as a one off event).
When I wrote Some Things Strange and Sinister and Some More things Strange and Sinister I included some CE3K/Entity reports -reports accepted as factual even today (because no one has bothered checking). There were interesting cases but some fell apart just through mild scrutiny. It made me sit back and think. I had to ask "are all of these reports just pure bunk. Un-investigated trash to fill and sell books?" I was, after looking into these reports since 1974, a full-on sceptic with huge files and reference material going up to the ceiling (not an exaggeration). Time, I thought, to look into some of the "classic cases" as well as other reports and show once and for all that we had all been taken for a (non-UFO) ride.
My approach to putting together UFO Contact? The evidence for Alien Visitation was simple -I gathered together the case reports I wanted to include and would look at each and when I mean look at I read as many debunking post and articles on the individual cases that I could as well as the pro-material. I looked at all of this with no bias because looking at it in any other way -anti or pro- would make the work just another pointless piece of pap to add to the Ufological book shelf.
After a year I concluded the work and my manuscript was written. I sat back and was not very happy. I had not reached the conclusion I had expected before work began. I threw the work out and started again and this time checked and double checked the debunking sources quite sure that I had missed something. I threw out the second draft and started again because all I was finding was that the debunking side side were lying as badly, if not worse than the pro UFO side.
I looked at the psychological side of things and came up with "Ruth Syndrome" and a "classic" British abduction case fell to pieces as it was evident from the earliest reports that the percipient was apt to fall into waking-dream states. Unfortunately, that did not help. In fact I found some of aspects of reports that Ufologists had not disclosed.. that made cases stronger. There could obviously be no 100% proof because of the nature of the reports but I tried and retried and in the end had to conclude that the percipients were giving truthful accounts and that many had independent back up in the form of unconnected observers of a UFO at the time.
To many this is annoying because I would not write "this is evidence that aliens are visiting us" -it is anecdotal and circumstantial evidence that these events very likely happened but it is still not 100% physical proof.
With the second book Unidentified -Identified: UFO Crashes and Alien Entity Encounters I looked deeper into certain cases, again some "classics" but which were not fully investigated and had far more evidence never included in online accounts or books. While many aspects of cases could be explained away based on what had already made it into print there was the problem that a great deal had never been reported such as in the Rosa Lotti case which when I read it all (having had to translate much of it) had be stumped. From a silly story of aliens stealing a stocking and flowers it became a fully credible case.
Using the same working process as with the previous work and digging into more non-UFO related (we assume) events parallels could be found including specific entity types that appeared in a number of reports but no one, it seems, had ever noted this.
I realised that I needed to get away from a lot of the classic reports and search my files for reports either poorly reported in English language sources or totally unknown outside of the country the reports came from. I also decided to see how other countries dealt with UFOs and CE3Ks. This led to Contact! Encounters With Extra Terrestrial Entities?
By this time I was beginning to ask myself why the various Search for Extra Terrestrial Intelligence (SETI) programs as well as astronomers were not concentrating more on Near Space rather than Deep Space where a message sent would reach its destination in 55,000 years and we would need to wait another 55,000 years for a response (if any)? Yes, there are astronomers who are willing to look at (mainly) sightings of objects and a very few might discuss what aliens might look like yet none had a system of checking reports and investigating them if they were sound enough as the French had been doing since the 1950s.
I looked at the possibility of "lurkers" within our solar system -automatic alien probes that might be sent out to carry on long term surveys. I questioned whether private SETI might be needed (years before, of course, NASA decided that it would look at UFO reports). My conclusion was that 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. Why is NASA not looking at these? Why are astronomers so reticent? In a number of cases with astronomers the reason is almost hysterical fear that there might be alien life let alone aliens passing by.
Even more was uncovered as I found previously unknown (in English and in their own countries) French, German and Australian cases as well as reports that were never fully followed up in the United States but which had many parallels with others cases and especially the entity descriptions.
My ultimate question had to be why was I (supposedly trying to explain away such cases) turning up so much in the way of correlations and new evidence that big UFO investigation organisations had not?
I thought I would give two good examples of "debunked" cases such as that of "Sonny" DesVerger and Dionisio Llanca... I then found that Ufologists had followed the U.S. Air Force line with DesVerger and even the Blue Book and Ruppelt's later book contradicted themselves; rather dubious Ufologists were quite willing to spread a lie that DesVerger, a scout master, was "fond of boys". As I read more the case (tarnished slightly by the fact that DesVerger was known to tell a tall tale or two -as a joke) went from Ufology's outright hoax to credible. That was not something I wanted to find out.
**********************BOOK DETAILS/ORDERING*************************
Please note that there is no expensive international shipping involved as books are printed and posted from the region they were ordered in.
£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.
220 pages
A4
perfect bound
paperback
Fully illustrated with photographs and illustrations
£20.00 (excl. VAT)
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
Preliminary
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?
Monday, 18 July 2022
Saturday, 16 July 2022
Thursday, 16 June 2022
Alien Abduction and UFOs: Why Are Grays So Common? (feat Josef Lorenzo) ...
Saturday, 11 June 2022
"How the **** can you present this evidence and then state you will not say it was aliens involved?"
Not just the debunkers, who honestly are a poor bunch these days and do not put the work in like the old guys did. Also involved in this misinformation -downright lying, twisting of facts or making cases up, are the Ufologists. Not just the new generation who get their education in UFOs from trash books and online blogs or You Tube but the alleged "above board, dedicated seekers of truth".
To find that one case I had supported for years was based on lies by a Ufologist was bad enough but then a second case was bad. Imagine finding out that dozens of reports are "tainted" when you have spent decades (almost 5 now) building up files and a data base of Close Encounters of the Third Kind/Alien Entity encounters and find that the 'investigation' consisted of....reading a newspaper item. No investigation or talking to those involved even if they lived not far from the "investigator".
What I did was look back into my rather large archive of reports and picked out ones that were rarely touched on or never reported in the English language. There were highly interesting cases from Germany that had never even been mentioned by Ufologists simply because they had no interest in anything that was not in English.
Spain, France, Italy, Finland, Norway and other countries had some extraordinary accounts that have not appeared in English. I contacted many of the original investigators -those still alive or willing to talk to me (again it was nice that many in Europe and Australia remembered me from the 1970s/1980s but finding out that most of my contemporaries had died was a little bit of a shock!).
One thing that I found is that there are two camps in Ufology.
Camp 1 -they do not believe any of the UFOs or encounters reported to them are proof of anything other than a psychological condition or natural phenomena that they know nothing about. When I asked why they were still involved in Ufology if it was all "crap" I was told "To make sure the truth is told". However, if you look at a report already concluding what it is then that is not a "scientific approach".
Camp 2 -even meteorites were extra-terrestrial space craft. America seems to be the only place where the mass abduction of humans appears to still be accepted despite proven falsehoods and "stacking" the evidence. I was dumbfounded to hear "40 year veteran Ufologists" state in online interviews "and then we have these little guys getting out of these saucers -what's that all about? I don't know!" That is a quote. My guess is that the decades "in" Ufology did not involve anything but chasing lights in the sky because how the hell do you look into a phenomenon but only look at 50% of what is reported? That does not make someone a Ufologist but a rather blinkered hobbyist.
I was once a "true believer" and just accepted that the Ufologists who wrote for Flying Saucer Review (not beyond a little hoaxing or tampering with accounts themselves and seldom if ever actually following up when reports were explained) or had books published were carrying out investigations. They were not.
At one point I almost destroyed all of my archive because I could not trust any of the reports. My late friend Franklyn A. Davin-Wilson told me once that: "You check everything as many times as you can. You have one source? Check what a second one says and keep checking any source you can find but if you can contact the witness directly." And I do. Every case I write on has a full list of references which means that others can do the same checks and add to it -if they can.
I have tracked down 'lost' or very rare photographs and for each case I write about I have searched for days or weeks to find a photograph of the actual person involved. That is very important because if you can see the person involved you understand that they are a normal human beings. People like us who went through an extraordinary event
I deal with reports mainly where there is more than one person involved as it rules out hoaxing, hallucinating/altered state conditions. However, if you have one percipient and there are reports of someone seeing a strange light object ascend from the encounter location and someone else reports that they saw a light following a car on the road -the percipient's car- then that means something interesting happened.
Liberty, Kentucky involved three percipients and some of the above. And there are other cases.
IF the people or person involved is affected physically and then displays classic post traumatic stress disorder -how is that explained? How does someone or a group develop radiation sickness or other ailments while driving out on a rural road? In my books I have looked at this in more detail than I believe (and I have a lot of books) any other person dealing with UFOs has. "Ruth syndrome" can explain some reports (and not just of UFO encounters) and it is very important to understand possible explanations because if you can rule them out what are you left with? Genuine encounters?
When I look into a report, re-open it to look at the facts that can be found and are checkable, I do not go looking for evidence which proves or disproves it. There are certain cases I always felt were..."hogwash" until I looked into them myself. That was a bit of an eye-opener.
I will let you all into a secret: when I began my work on Looking at the Evidence for Alien Visitation my intention was to prove once and for all how the subject was full of hoaxing and fakery. It was a modern delusion. However, I had to proceed as open minded and examining the evidence. One case I looked at I ended up concluding that "something" really did happen. However, I was not going to accept that and dug deeper....then deeper still and I could not prove that the case was a fake. I jumped in on the debunkers sites and quotes and one by one those fell apart. So I went on to the next case and same thing -I had chosen "classic cases" because they were so reported on debunked that if I could prove they were fake then I would have achieved what I set out to do but by examining and using the evidence.
By the time I had finished the manuscript I was not happy. Fare from proving cases were fake I was doing the opposite. So I went back to report one and started again. I actually restarted the research four times checking in case I made errors or there were misquotes and anyone who knows me will tell you that once I sink my teeth into something I will keep biting and digging and in some cases it took me 30-40 years to prove they were hoaxes (made me poor but...).
Why am I looking at these reports rather than alleged constructed craft? I decided back in 1975 that this is what I would look at; if there were alleged alien craft flying around the skies then they must have a crew/pilots and they would give us a better insight into what we were dealing with rather than a light in the sky. I hit obstacles -people who would not accept any entity other than one of Adamski's Venusians or Saturnians. I encountered racism against percipients, lies against them. Outright lies and nasty "I heard that..." type comments. I had Ufologists including people I thought were friends, call me a "UFO Nut" because of the research.
My books are designed for everyone not just the people who wanted to throw lots of technical jargon around because it makes them seem above everyone. I have had two Ufologists criticise me for "explaining things as though talking to someone in the street" and that I accept. Why spout of big words or technical jargon -any I use I explain in the text- that only someone with a Phd might understand? It is important that everyone understand the evidence and situation which exists and then they can decide whether they believe it or not or, at best, know what is going on just in case they are driving along that quiet country road one night....
What do I conclude? Really you need to read the books. If a report appears to be genuine does that mean I can say 100% "aliens!" -no. Because we are going by testimony and the effects on those involved. "Derek" was a UFO sceptic so I let him have a copy of UFO Contact? then heard nothing until two months later. Derek had been digging into my references and doing his own checking and he wrote: "How the **** can you present this evidence and then say you will not state it was aliens involved?" Apparently I had turned the die hard sceptic!
I present the facts and evidence but it is up to the reader to decide on what they think not for me to tell them. Of course, a full set of the books was purchased by someone and the address was Pentagon Washington, DC 20301-1400. No, they or he/she never let me know what they thought.
You have to decide for Yourself