Let's give this a second look.
My first glance at this particular pile of cases [always remembering that they're only cases that I happen to have folders for in my own files and that more cases exist elsewhere] in the previous blog encouraged me to state that it looks as if we have good evidence that UFOs can project attractive and repulsive forces. I.E, "pulls" AND "pushes". Today I'm going to stand by half of that assertion.
To begin with, though, I think that I should remind everyone that there is nothing "scientific" about such a graph. We almost never can be overly confident in the Credibility rating of a case [because the information has passed through witnesses' brains, witnesses' language, writer's brains, and writer's language before it gets to our own brain and our own formulations.] I personally try to rough these things out by going more strongly for those cases with investigations by people who I know something about. Some persons try to make a robotic thing about single witness vs high credentialed single witness vs multiple witness vs independent multiple witness, and though those delineations have SOME statistical relationship to good reports, slavishly following that mantra is foolish. Each case is its own "beast".
Also, my take on "Strangeness" is different from my colleagues. Most of them seem to want to escalate strangeness in a more or less Hynekian way, according to the categories of Close Encounters et al. While I understand the lure of this, it is also pretty foolish when you actually give it some thought. ANY high credibility case which contains elements in it which are beyond the technological capabilities of 21st century engineering/science IS AS HIGH A STRANGENESS AS YOU GET. When one is at the point of complete impossibility for current human capability, what's the use for UFOlogy's sake, of claiming that one completely impossible thing is stranger than another? When you actually search your soul on this, you come to the conclusion that you are separating infinities on nothing but emotional "WOW!" grounds.
Well, not me, I hope. But my own graphing still has plenty of "just-my-intuitions" in it, and I can see where others would put their case ratings elsewhere. But... the above is my array.
What I was looking for was a way to {maybe} better sift the 49 case pile. Although this graphing exercise doesn't give one scientific data, as said, it DOES force you to discipline yourself a little more while trying to evaluate things. Tremendous cases like #31 "The Coyne Helicopter Lift" {above} are still going to end up in the top righthand corner of the Hynek graph in the realm of "golden" foundational incidents. Coyne is joined there by #19 [Plattville's carlift], #8 [Herman's trucklift], and 5 others. These eight incidents form the groundwork for whatever "conclusions" I might feel defensible.
There are seven other cases which I then judge to be close in quality to these cornerstones. These are the cases similar in credibility but perhaps slightly less clear in strangeness. Still, these 15 cases constitute a formidable base.
Along with the 15 anchors, there were, I guessed, eight more pretty strong cases in the highly strange areas which had good provenance. And I added in four more "on-the-reasonable-margin" incidents to constitute 12 further incidents to support the 15 anchors. 27 cases to seriously look at, and leaving 22 of the original 49 behind as "maybe but who knows?"
So what does one see when one looks at the sifted pile? Of the 14 power cases, there are six carlifts and three trucklifts. These are mostly lifts which are completely off the ground, and with no direct contact by an offending UFO. The other five incidents are the Helicopter lift, a car shaking, a pulling of a car and motorbike at the same time, a pulling on a man, and a holding back of a boat.
The supplementary cases have three carlifts, a car pivot [which almost had to have a lift therein], three car shakes, three human lifts, one horse lift, and a man knocked down.
Above is case #29, a carlift which I upgraded just since yesterday when I found a bit more investigative information by APRO.
When I wrap my head around these cases, what I see are almost entirely attraction forces. These things emphasize "pulling up" and "grabbing tight". There is only one case in this lot which is a projection of a repulsive force [the knockdown case], and interestingly it is the only case wherein the investigators had some stated reservations about the witness.
So.... my statement from the previous blogpost is now this: Using cases of this sort of physical interference on material things' motions, we have strong evidence that UFOs can project ATTRACTIVE forces capable of lifting mass and holding objects [while other influences like shaking could be impressed upon them]. There is little or no evidence in this particular type of UFO case for the use of repulsive or delivered punch/blow type of force.
Time for absurd speculations: these cases make me wonder about a lot of UFOlogical things. They make me wonder about "electromagnetic vehicle stops" and UFO-related EM effects in general. We could speculate upon anti-gravity fields of course, but one wonders if ET could have mastered magnetic lasers --- or whatever the analogy of that concept would be. But autos don't show evidence of being swathed in high density magnetic fields. But what if those fields could be collimated so narrowly to act as a surgical instrument? And ... what if, just like their sawed off lightbeam technology, they can operate a collimated magnetic projection the same way? A "tractor beam" without antigravity? And no "stray force" to damage incidental humans in the cars?
Maybe. But the lifts of humans and our French horse give us some further problems. Do we have to go antigravity for those? Can diamagnetic forces in non-metallic substances do? Could they be strong enough to lift, but not to physiologically hurt? If our friends upstairs have found such controllable force projections, EITHER magnetic or antigravitational, would the same "trick" to hold a boat or a car work just fine to hold a human. Is the so-called "paralysis beam" just a variety of the car-hold-and-shake?
All this is musings, a little more than purely idle I hope, since we at least looked at the cases. The data-driven bottomline can get us this far, though: UFOs, regardless of their external appearances, and with no visible beams whatever, can hold and lift material things by some sort of force "at-a-distance".
That's plenty strange enough for me.
Till the next time the drawers open, have days full of wonder, friends.
