Sunday, February 27, 2011

Close Encounters of the Second Kind, physiological effects part seven-a

Rolling onward folks. These cases will be #'s 91-105. 1970-1974. I'll break them up into three pieces again. After all of this part is over, we'll have about 50 more to go. It might be enough to tell us something about the physical effects of UFOs; we'll see.
This set of five contains three decent "4"-level cases, but none I can recommend as a "star". Still, they are interesting. And you may have noticed that the phenomenon is showing off all over the world, even in my US-dominated files.

Let's start with a trip to Kinnula, Finland. This thing has a cartoon of the main scene [to the left], which I have messed up by coloring it in for our amusement. Two woodcutters see the thing as pictured and a being come floating out of it in a diving-suit-type outfit. It approaches and one guy feels threatened [he turns on his chainsaw and advances]. The being turns and floats up slightly in the air to rejoin the craft [other such entities are seen in the windows]. The one woodcutter tries to grab the floater, catching its boot. This results in an extreme transmission of heat and a severely burnt hand. Released, the entity floats up and into the craft, which takes off. It left a trace in the snow. Besides the burn, both men found they could not talk for a while thereafter, and felt stiff for quite some time. This only slowly left them. Another UFO sighting occurred in Kinnula the same day. Investigators were impressed by the witness testimony and the reluctance that they wanted to speak about the whole affair at all [they'd already received more mockery about their report than they cared for. ]

El Castenuelo Spain is another "4". Here a 7 1/2 foot tall "refrigerator" object was sitting at the edge of a road, mounted on four legs. It had "windows" in each of its bottom corners. It buzzed and had a non-dispersing "cloud" hanging overhead. A farmer carrying a heavy sack approached, but when still 180 feet away became paralyzed [as did his dog and the nearby goats]. Most oddly, the sack that he was carrying seemed to lose its feeling of having any weight. When the craft/object lifted off and flew away, the paralysis left and the weight of the sack returned. Curious business that.

The last "4" is Kempsey NSW. This was in the midst of a general flap in the area. It is, for me, the weirdest of the incidents, though whether it counts as CE2p is questionable. Since it's too much fun to ignore though, I include it. The witness saw a pink "flare" move down the river and later saw a "face" in his kitchen window. [he must have made some startled noise as his wife came out to see the next act half way through]. He then was pulled by unknown force through the glass window and hurled about 12-feet total into the yard, landing in a crumple. The landing was strangely "soft" however as if broken abnormally by that force. The wife rushed out to find him running and then squatting down sobbing with fear. His only physical injuries were cuts from flying through the breaking glass. This is another well investigated Ozzie case [Bill Chalker sent me a report review], and probably is a solid one despite its weird character. The artistic rendering of the case appears at the bottom of this post.
Lots of oddball details in all these things. Different shaped craft/machines or no machines at all. Entities or none. Disks, lights, and refrigerators. When we strip these ,in my opinion, details-of-legerdemain away, there will be a pile of "paralyzers", of "burners", of "noisy irritators", and a vast framing obfuscation of anything one can pile on. Onwards.


  1. I wonder if there has ever been any sort of graph of things/processes/forms etc cataloged in a visual form? All the strangeness sort of overwhelms. but my gut feeling is that there is an evolving (or at least changing thereof) of the 'stage sets'...seems for while there were lost of reports of 'soil samples' being taken but then maybe that is just because there is not as much grunt work being done...One is tempted to say that there is so much cultural static that it is hard to pick signal from noise...but then I think it's not even clear what is the signal and what is the noise!!

  2. Well, your intuitions are at least partly serving you well. The task of trying to "surround" the changing "visuals" of the field is almost impossible for a variety of reasons. The most important of these is that the distinguishing between signal from noise is very difficult. My whole "career" has been trying to get around this problem by seeing if I could determine clusters of phenomenology based upon anchor cases and buttressed by a larger set of probably good ones.

    Secondly, ones choice of which aspect of the phenomenology to research is a moment of fun, but leads quickly to the awareness that their were a very large number of other choices one could have made. Being only one person, and most of us truly working alone, the task of a comprehensive listing, grouping, and evaluating of UFO case characteristics becomes unthinkable.

    Thirdly, the phenomenology is so numerous and so widespread geographically, that thoughts of anything like a "complete set" are impossible, and thoughts that some phenomenology might be almost completely missed [due to it not cooperating and showing up mainly in media and investigator-poor parts of the world] arise easily. So each of us does what we can in the hopes that someone will use our poor incomplete bricks to build a better ontological structure for this field.

    Every few years or so, some energetic person comes into the field wondering what can be done. Most of us suggest that they take a specific of some kind and become expert on it {Feindt's Water cases are one of the best recently]. We trudge on, knowing that we are too small for the size of the task.



Blog Archive