Thursday, April 7, 2011

Close Encounters of the Second Kind, physiological effects, part nine-c.

Continuing to go down the home stretch now with these things. Cases #131-135. 1979-1980 era. We are just about to witness the precipitous fall-off of these things; just a small "moment" later than that of their other CE2 category "cousins" [ex. traces, engine stops ].
These cases are so-so. Certain British researchers would regard some of them as outstanding, and perhaps they are; that's the advantage of being "at home" with the investigation and its qualities. The Netherly case could be a non-case and the vague CUFOS case also. The only reason that I included the CUFOS case is that there must have been something more to it or Hynek would not have selected it to go into the IUR. The statement that trees withered and the witness got a classic sunburn makes one think that this might be a good case if some documentation were about. Both of these weak cases are small spheres, which, I'll admit, I am a bit of a sucker for. They make me wonder about alternatives to the typical techno-UFO hypothesis --- everything from unmanned probes to bits-of-space affected by distant technology to Jack O'Lanterns from Magonia. I have no difficulty, as most of you know, imagining that several different sorts of things are smushed together in our UFOlogical files. But, to keep setting the record straight on my "undisciplined speculations", I have never wavered from the primary hypothesis for most of the well-documented core cases of UFOlogy being the ETH. Earlier in this blog, you can read the thought processes going into the concept of three types of advanced ET civilizations and their approaches to interfacing with other planets lesser equipped.

The Livingston case is a case which some British UFOlogists regard as the strongest case in Britain. I don't agree with this, preferring some of the radar cases for instance, but people who like the extensive ground traces left in this case, and the apparent correlation with elements of the witness' story, have their points to make. The most interesting parts of this to me are the initial paralysis of the witness, and then the arrival of two little "robot-globes" which make the paralyzed person involuntarily walk with them to the craft. I am also always a sucker when a craft or occupant is described as "semi-transparent" as one then wonders whether that means only partially present in a solid form.

The Exhall case might command higher rating than three, but with nothing more than a notice in Northern UFO News, I can't go there. It's a three on the basis that I have high respect for NUFON and Jenny Randles. The intriguing element of the case is that this is a burn case due to direct contact with a hot steering wheel. As the case is described, one gets the feeling that the field generated by the UFO created "resistance heating" in the wheel, which might give a hint to the type of force involved there.

The final case is Barrowford. Here we have a Jenny Randles investigation, which is always of higher quality than most. Credibility here is, therefore, strong. We have a lot of classic elements in this one: a nice detailed disk, an introductory humming, an OZ environment, a electrical interference with headlights, eye irritation, and then some really high strangeness. The high strangeness involves going unconscious and waking about an hour later driving much further down the road. That's plenty strange alright, but my own favorite part of the case is that the two entities, that the witness saw just while driving by, suddenly "pixillated" and disappeared. Jenny I believe wants to see this as an abduction, but there is no investigative evidence of that, and I leave that guess aside. What there IS CE2p-wise is eye-irritation, bringing up of dream-state imagery, unconsciousness, tiredness upon waking, and a leg bruise. And for me, those fascinating pixillations.

Hopefully, this entry won't pixillate away before you get a chance to read it. I'll return if "they" let me. [The Leprechauns, I mean].


  1. Bob Taylor's incident at Dechmont Law is a personal favourite; not for being a particularly strong case, but for being a good UK case. We don't seem to have as many as Stateside and this one is high quality. Taylor was seen by wife, doctor, police and local journalist within hours of his arrival. He didn't have a reputation for being anything other than a hard-working man. A sad aspect of the events is that, according to an old colleague, Taylor felt compelled to move from the area when the ridicule factor became too much.

    One explanation that hasn't been reviewed is the possibility he experienced a minor-stroke (TIA). This isn't intended to be Menzellian or pelicanist and I don't give great weight to the idea! Nevertheless, symptoms of a TIA can involve a revolting smell, vision effects and a dreamlike reality.

    I prefer to take his word for it and see the unusual elements as being strengths. In a sense, it's reminiscent of the Pascagoula case and has similar aspects that are truly 'alien' and reassuringly fractured. Both of these cases lack the 'story arc' that makes me wary of others. Allied to that is Mr Taylor's later actions; he didn't embelish or do the interview circuit.

    These material cases, with physical effects on witnesses and occasional trace evidence, are more appealing to my senses. They are tangible and conform more to our notions of reality. In terms of patterns however once more they are confounding and stubbornly refuse to be repeated. Did our visiting friends make progress with a 'research sample' of one?

    Perhaps one of the reasons I enjoy this blog is the shared notion that physical traces and mechanical objects, in some cases, point to physical objects? If indeed, Taylor's spheres were as described, they were manufactured somewhere. Maybe there is a time-tinkering omniscient intelligence putting on shows as it strives to elevate us to a higher consciousness? It's an idea. On the other hand, a sophisticated ETH seems more reasonable and immediate.

  2. I appreciate the additional information and analysis. Case is probably higher than my "4". Some brain-generated imagery could be involved, but brain-imagery doesn't generate traces, so the case still stands. Your info on Taylor's character and subsequent sociology is significant to me.

    I have been entirely open to the idea that something in the UFO phenomenon is being done for "our benefit", but over the whole 60+ years I don't see it ... nary a trace. I have been stuck with the idea that whatever this is, it's for "their" benefit, benign, neutral, or otherwise, and rather opaque to say the least.

    John Mack was a lovely man; that characteristic within him is the source of his view that the phenomenon "meant us well". That happy thought is, in my opinion, much more John than ET. [The same can be said for Leo Sprinkle --- both of whom I knew/know --- another unusually fine person.] [p.s. paradoxically, two more of my old buddies, Budd Hopkins and David Jacobs, are also, despite current hullaballoos, very fine fellows at heart, but took a 180 degree different trajectory on this ... getting into trouble as they went.]

    The assignation of positive or negative intent to the UFO activities is a risky business at our primitive state of knowledge, it seems. One should lay down ones ideas only with great humility and flexibility.

  3. If we inhabit a universe teeming with life, and if there are many civilizations present in it, we might expect a lot of visitors from various realms. These visitors might use many different ways of reaching our little corner of reality. They might have little in common beyond having the means to visit other realms. Having the ability to get here in one form or another does not guarantee any level of sophistication otherwise. It does not seem too big a stretch to think they might not all be aware of one another's presence. We don't know, of course, it's just a way of looking at the body of experience we have at hand.

    The parable of the blind men encountering the elephant seems to fit well here. One way or another.

    Thank you for returning with your Santa bag of treats, Professor. I know you have heard it before, but your little island here is a wonderful retreat from the sweaty hubbub of "the field". It's kind of an ugly scene out there right now, so it's important to have a place to relax and consider these reports and the ideas they generate in the company sober adults.

  4. I understand your views, both ontological and sociological ones. I have been blessed by a). not chasing any personal "exposure" nor gain while exploring this, and b). finding at the Center for UFO Studies mainly colleagues who feel the same way and can concentrate on the adventure and being friends and a team.

    Almost everybody else I know who has "chased" something here has degenerated in their flexibility of thought and consequently their ability to remain a friendly and open truth seeker, who thinks of their colleagues before their own opinions. It's been often awkward walking the UFOlogical minefields, and running into tight-fisted non-sharing of all the facts. I've sworn to myself to not contribute to this other than when a promise to someone or a sensitivity to someone is involved.

    This big book project that is written but awaiting editorial minutiae has been generally a joy in that the team there has tried hard to BE a team of friends. When the editorial stuff is complete, and the beast is finally printable, I believe that you will see what can be accomplished when multiple persons-of-knowledge come together to do their best.

  5. Hello Professor

    Have you seen The West Lothian Question?

    This might fill in some details of the Livingston case for you.



Blog Archive