https://animoto.com/play/J1b7Yk0d9ZKHP1Lp3gQ0XQ

Evidence Ignored: The South American Roswell of 1957

The year that saw a man-made satellite launched was also a strange year with vast areas of the planet reporting a) UFOS over military installations, b) interference with electrical systems of cars, planes, and other equipment and c) wide spread reports from several countries in the same windows of time. It was also, by the way, the 10 ear anniversary of the "non-event" at Roswell.  The one where paper thin and harder than metal debris were held and collected.

Oddly, in 1957 the big complaint was the lack of hard physical evidence to support the theory of interplanetary visitors. 

Into that void stepped a medical doctor from Brazil, Dr. Olavo T Frontes, who followed up on a snippet of story concerning a UFO, an explosion, and falling debris. The debris site was near Ubotuba, San Paulo, Brazil. Two men out fishing in the daytime saw a glowing disc appear to crash-diving into the water. At the last minute, it nosed straight up and exploded. Raining down were bits of debris.  The men gathered some of this: metallic looking but so lightweight it was amazing. 

Read the technical report of analysis done of the debris : ubatubatd (nicap.org).  Also, The Ubatuba Incident - A UFO Exploded in 1957 with Fragments? - Strange Strange Strange AND the Condon Report of their exploration at Ubatuba Incident - Condon (nicap.org).  The case still has many fascinating aspects and many unanswered questions.

The men notified a well-known radio personality who then in turn made contact with Dr. Fontes. He was a growing name in the study if UFOs in Brazil at the time. A member of A.P.R.O. he published several major studies in their newsletter. The purity levels of some materials found in the debris was troubling and apparently eliminated the idea of earth made objects or satellites as well as mere meteorite materials.

Fontes died in 1969 but left a legacy often ignored.  Here, ten years later, there was evidence and it matched in some descriptive elements that reported by witnesses at Roswell. A small sample sent to the Air Force was destroyed before testing was completed and APRO was reluctant to give them more and offered to co-study the material but never received a response to their offer.

Fontes, in taking charge and arranging the analysis and then publishing the results was a true scientific pioneer stepping where few had been willing to venture. 

'THE THING' from Another World: What Was that in the Ice?

 The two versions of the movie THE THING were inspired by a short story by Who Goes There? a 1938 novella by American author John W. Campbell, written under the pen name Don A. Stuart. 

The 1951 movie version The Thing: From Another World, was directed by Christian Nyby and Howard Hawks, screenplay written by Charles Lederer, John W. Campbell Jr., Howard Hawks.   The stars included Kenneth Tobey, Margaret Sheridan, James Arness (as the creature). The release date was April 7 1951. A later remake by John Carpenter will align itself more with the original story by Campbell and will be more dark and nihilistic in nature.

The original movie is a favorite for many based on its close ensemble cast of characters, the fast talking and natural patter between them, and the pace and dramatis evoked through film and soundtrack. For this writer. it was also the ending scene were the newspaper man is radioing back his story of the fight for humanity at the North Pole.  He urged people to "watch the skies."

Re-watching the film recently it was noticed that the head of the creature, the thing, varied from the way it looks in other scenes in the film.  Arness' makeup later in the film will be more reflective of the influence of "Frankenstein" than anything else.

The THING in the frozen slab of ice:

Note the large dark eyes - far more reflective of the image on the cover the novel Communion decades later!

The THING in a publicity still from 1951, aka James Arness:

Note the absence of the large dark eyes...

The question for this writer was - where did that image of large dark eyes originate?

This writer suspects that the concept was influenced by the rumors of just that type of creature from Roswell in 1947. Just prior to the film's release what was in the news was has come to be known as The Aztec, New Mexico UFO hoax  of a flying saucer's crash alleged to have happened in 1948 in Aztec, New Mexico. The story was first published in 1949 by author Frank Scully in his Variety magazine columns, and later in his 1950 book Behind the Flying Saucers.  There are many who believe in this crash and one at Kingman, Arizona. This author, however, feels that they were the result of an attempt to clamp down the lid over the events of Roswell.

At decade's end, many military and civilians may have begun to feel free to discuss events related to the Roswell Incident. Leaks and loose lips.  How to make dure those people were not believed?

The big gun in debunking has always been ridicule. The events of Aztec, so close but so incredibly contrived, too large, and just "off", coupled with shady con-men, insured that the story would not be believed and further call into question anyone who thought it was real.

So....the use of what would later be called "stereotypical abduction era" depiction of a big headed, big eyed alien, could be due to the influence of someone who knew...someone who had talked with someone at a cocktail party or over a meal of something they saw "once upon a time"...in the desert of New Mexico.

Decades later, before the book Communion, there will be witnesses who share images of big headed, large eyed creatures seen in connection with "flying saucers", "discs", and "UFOs."

So...the big eyed creature in the ice...where did that image come from and what was it intended to say?

OKC UFO JUNE 30-JULY 1 (2023)

A man I will call Anonymous "E" contacted UFO Skies. He had a report and a video.  His report was fascinating: "I saw a super bright orb Friday night, in the southeast Oklahoma City sky, throwing lasers with other orbs , with color red and green on each end of the lasers. The lasers seemed attached to the main orb. Freaking weird.  Then there were black helicopters in the sky. I was looking towards downtown and  the building with the triangle but the object was to the left. I'm originally from New Jersey and when I was 11, I saw a UFO on top of the Hudson River. "  

He was asked if he might have seen fireworks, but he was certain what he saw were not fireworks. Then he said he had seen an object he saw "when I was on southwest 74st Street. It was daytime aa shiny silver. It stand still in the sky then just speed off super fast." Last, he sent a short video clip of an orb he had observed... Thank you Anonymous "E".  

If you see something I encourage you to report to the MUFON webpage. They are busy collecting information to help prove the reality of what is being seen across the globe.

 

Synchronicity of March 13, 1997: Were the Phoenix Lights Only Part of a Larger Event?

A list of "coincidences" related to March 13, 1997, as shared by Lynne D. Kitel, M.D. in her work, The Phoenix Lights (Hampton Roads, pg. 100).

• The U.S. Government went into DEF-CON 3 alert
• Then President Clinton disappeared for hours to an undisclosed location
• The battery on an crucial satellite used to detect incoming missiles went dead
• Scientific American (July 1997) carried a story about bursts of gamma rays in our atmosphere from an unknown source.

In my own research I have seen numerous times that events did not occur in an vacuum. Sightings in one location were often mirrored in distant locales. A big picture seemed to be in play.  At times, it seems that only from space can the true scope of a series of events be understood.

Disclosure is a term in the news and in discussions in this field. Would we recognize disclosure when we tend to focus on just one aspect of a larger event and never step back to see what else may be going on?

Some things to consider as the topic moves forward...

Can we see the larger meaning of what is happening and understand the meaning?

THE ROAD TO NOWHERE: Destroying Disclosure

 It has been said that the best way to destroy something is from within. This is the message of the story of the Trojan horse. It is also a familiar, yet well hidden tool, to subvert true investigation and progress in the area of UFOlogy. Let's look at some examples.

In the late 1950's there were approximately 500 or more UFO groups in the US alone. Some were based on the Contactee/Metaphysical views of the topic, some were based on a purely scientific examination of evidence and some a mix of both.

The first and last of those would eventually fade or break up remaining only in one or two lingering odd cults into the 2000's. The Contactee/Metaphysical view had merged with a growing drug culture by the 1970's causing many to drop away from the topic. Others, fell apart due to lack of funding, negative reports created in the wake of the Condon report, ridicule, and other similar reasons.

That leaves two of the major science based groups, NICAP and APRO, alone in the arena by late 1950's and through most of the 1960's.  Oddly, these two will collapse due to interior pressures that have led many to suppose they were infiltrated for the purposes of dismantling them. Some released government records appear to support that idea. That Trojan Horse approach. There were tensions of leadership, conflicting views on importance of data, needed goals, and necessary actions. The result was both would fold.

Fast forward to the 1990's and MUFON.  MUFON had emerged to occupy the void left in 1969 when Project Blue Book closed. In the decade of the 1990's there were concerns and rumors of infighting and other issues that included loss of records and reclassifications of previously accepted reports. The result many people - as witnessed by comments on bulletin boards, webpages, and in books - expressed a loss of trust in the organization to be objective and dedicated to the truth.  Currently, the organization has taken great strides to make sure reports are complete and through and investigated with a gratifying level of scientific yet open-minded professionalism from its volunteer field investigators.

Press that fast forward button again and it is today - now - with a new open attitude unlike anything since 1947.  Social media, online videos, podcasts, books, articles, and government hearings make the news and discussion highly accessible. 

The result?  There is clearly a cadre of debunkers who seem to have a detailed task to troll such sites making negative comments or off hand debunking without examining the evidence or exploring the topic.  There are people who post videos of objects that appear to be designed to merely confuse the issue through fake cgi generated images, obvious misinterpretations of sky objects any sixth grader SHOULD be able to identify, or who hold a blanket acceptance anything they see or view on a video.  The presence of these in any four pages or comment blocks appears to be abnormally high.   Plus, the presence of "gotcha" trolls, ugly commentors, debunkers and the like seem abnormally high. 

They are all unwilling to offer solid evidence or even to discuss their assaults. When pressed they often - turtle like - slink their heads back into their invisible online shells.

It is obvious from history that a successful tool to manipulate the topic of unknowns was the planting of individuals inside groups to cause disruption and bring about the destruction of the goals of the organization.  The field should be alert to the potential for that to be happening again, take measures to guard against in-fighting, to insure that open discussion is encouraged, and that all is done in an open and science-based manner to insure the best results. 

Project Blue Book set the template: dazzle with science, dismiss with ridicule, and infiltrate to weaken.  

It is time to be aware of the pattern and arrange the discussion in such a manner that we strive for the highest standards and hold one another there. 

Disclosure?: Whistleblower David Grusch Interview