Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 5
quillius

Pascagoula case

313 posts in this topic

Hey Psyche,

will come back to you tomorrow on the various points.

Gidday Mate

You know where to find me ;)

In the meantime, I think you should look up Murphy Givens........the source of Joe's information regarding toll booths and cameras :)

(spent hours upon hours researching this case over the weekend again....)

not only that, the article was not a small one apparently...eight pages long with only a small throwaway paragraph about the toll booths and cameras (whilst confirming that the info is from Murphy Givens).....the rest of the article was basically a p**s take of the whole situation and not there to debunk or or show a balanced investigation of the case.

plus there is interesting talk of Coolingo and Joe discussing a million dollar scoop :)

(should hopefully have some links for you with this info tomorrow)

Good call. I have not dug much up on Murphy Givens, just this uninformative link that merely mentions the men, but have found some other interesting stuff along the way. From what I can tell the article is very scathing.

This is the issue we want. I might shell out and grab an Ebay copy, it seems the only way to get a look at the article.

eij2iowx6k4goixi.jpg

And this is it:

Claw-men1.jpg

LINK

Closest so far :D I managed to get some quotes from the article:

the officers ¡§were listening and taping and expecting the whole idiot yarn to turn into warm wind and p***¡¨ but only heard Hickson say things like ¡§my nuhves is wrecked,¡¨ while Parker carried on ¡§like a backfish girl who¡¦d just been baptized.¡¨

: Hickson ¡§a wiry 45-year-old with a boneweary face and backalley, crapshooter¡¦s eyes,¡¨ who had lost his job as an expert shipfitter for borrowing money from his subordinates ¡§then paying them back by trying to finagle them promotions;¡¨ and, Parker, little more than Hickson¡¦s lackey, an uneducated hick, ¡§a bib-overall farmboy with lantern jaw, creole cheekbones, and wrist-wide sideburns spilling into his neck.¡

Link Quotes

OK, it does not sound all that impressive. Almost slander I have to admit. In fact, in all fairness I have to say, your intuition was correct it does not seem to have much substance. However, this article seems to think the toll booths were in plain sight, and this picture of the roadway looking back at the fishing spot has none other than Charlie Parker, with his son, who most certainly would have pointed out of the claim was erroneous on the spot:

Also in August 1974, the researcher visited the area Mendez Highway 67 in which the event occurred. Mendez found in that area, the road offered a clear view with no obstacles that could have obstructed the view of witnesses.

Charlie-Hickson-and-his-son.jpg

The aforementioned researcher is William Mendez. Interestingly, it also delves into an apparently little known video of Parker, and in it he says:

I was raped by alien beings

The video begins 1993 with a statement that, between the lines, we can state the reasons that led Parker to produce this video and most likely, to invent new details:

"Violated. I've been violated. I've been raped by creatures from another planet. "

Again, this seems rather co-incidental considering my personal hypothesis. I had no idea Parker had expressed this.

However, this path has led to a most perplexing conundrum. The ship itself. I have tried long and hard to find any given dimensions, but failed with each attempt. In this search, I found this:

LINK

The ship half approximately three to four feet wide, three feet high and ten feet long. Emitting a blue light and did not produce intermittent sounds similar to those of an engine.Charlie said he had seen something like a window on top of the object.

LINK- Let me know if this link does not work, I have tried to link you directly to the translation page.

​Three to four feet wide? Ten feet long? If this is correct, and the actual dimensions given by Hickson and Parker, I think this is case closed.

Is this the deal you mention?

According to statements collected by journalist Colingo Joe Eszterhas, when he told Walker Colingo for abductees, the lawyer showed no interest in the case. It was when Walker told Colingo "Damn, if they have seen it say they have seen, this story is worth about a million dollars." which Colingo became interested in the case.

LINK

Does not seem much to it?

LINK - Scathing article with little to say

For posterity:

Pascagoula-Pic-2.jpg

In the picture we can see the place where the abduction took place in Pascagoula.

The red circle marks the spot where you were fishing Calvin and Charlie.

The black circle marks the spot where the ship landed and the blue circle where the vehicle was parked in Charlie.

Both men predicted that return visit too:

The promise of the return

The second post-abduction experience happened one night Hickson February 1974. Charlie was sleeping when the barking of a dog, which appeared to come from the garden behind his house, woke him:

"As I walked behind the house toward the wooded area, I saw that the dog was running as if someone was chasing. Suddenly the 'radio' is on again: 'You have to tell the world that we do not want to hurt. Your world needs help. We will help in the future before it's too late. You are not ready to understand. Back soon '.The 'radio' went out. There was nothing but a clear sky full of stars. I stood there for several minutes but that was the end of the message. "

Then he had the "family" experience"

A family experience

On May 12, 1974, Charlie had his last post-abduction experience.

Charlie, his wife Blanche, his son Curt twelve, her daughter Tisha 20 months, his daughter Sheila and her husband Kenny, and Kenny's younger brother were in the vehicle traveling Kenny Highway 67 toward Ocean Springs when Charlie saw that a light was following.

Again, all from this link.

Both men claimed the return visit was going to happen, Hicksons version could be plausible, but Parker messed the entire thing up with his religious tales, which he seems to regularly do? Hicksons "return" visit also featured in his hypnosis sessions, which I feel is more likely to plant common elements, which we do see in this case. Many of which are listed in the "scathing" link above.

LINK - Creating False Memories

But all in all, the biggest surprise for me is the physical size of the craft. If that is the final call on dimensions, I think that alone is a massive blow to the credibility of this case.

Cheers.

Edited by psyche101
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes spinning skills......I see many 'sentences' that simply cannot be taken any other way...then you post another interpretation....it was a compliment BTW

LOL, sweet, I have not had the term applied as a compliment, TSR uses the term in a derogatory manner with regards to myself on a regular basis. What a maroon.

ok, can you list two doctors from that list?

actually maybe I will list someone from the military everytime you name a Doctor :)

You should find two of the names of the health professionals I gave at this breakdown at this link - SOCIETY OF AIR FORCE PHYSICIANS but I am not sure why Winans is not listed, suffice to say, Amdall and Rudolph are certainly licensed physicians. Hanson is a vet. Maybe there for Parker? LOL. They were not taken to the base, it was a concern from the possibility of radiation, and the local hospital was inadequate for testing purposes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gidday Mate

You know where to find me ;)

LINK

Cheers.

glad you googled Murphy Givens.....it was certain you would end up on Luis site. I thought he done a fantastic job of laying it all out with some good additional bits of info for us.

anyhow, I may be out of action for 5-6 days so will jump back on this soon as I can.

for what its worth I dont think the article will give us much now that we can confirm that Joe carried out no investigative research himself, and also that the article was basically a 'comedy' piece which I cant really attack Joe for, seeing as he is not taking it seriously and that he makes this clear in the article.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL, sweet, I have not had the term applied as a compliment, TSR uses the term in a derogatory manner with regards to myself on a regular basis. What a maroon.

spinning puts a point through its paces and if its a strong valid point , then it should prevail......

You should find two of the names of the health professionals I gave at this breakdown at this link - SOCIETY OF AIR FORCE PHYSICIANS but I am not sure why Winans is not listed, suffice to say, Amdall and Rudolph are certainly licensed physicians. Hanson is a vet. Maybe there for Parker? LOL. They were not taken to the base, it was a concern from the possibility of radiation, and the local hospital was inadequate for testing purposes.

(I did find that link yesterday also but wasnt sure what it proved)

let me ask you this another way.

Can you have the title Major Colonel etc etc without being in the military?

To be honest in my mind this is a moot point to an extent. Maybe we should revisit it shuld it have some validity to any specific point. if you agree?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another excellent read and the jostling between Quillius and Psyche has been most enjoyable and informative. I (pardon the term!) swing both ways between you two from one post to the next - both viewpoints have almost equal 'fors' and 'againsts'. :)

With regards to this point raised by Psyche last year:

The reason I find the corroboration not corroboration is mainly that nobody reported the same shaped craft as the men, whilst some descriptions claim blue lights, shapes described are definitely saucers. They are not the same thing.

Is it possible that the object was of a shape that could look both 'cigar' and 'disk' dependant on the viewing angle? I suppose the best way I could explain this would be as an example: A car tyre - perfectly round from the side, but if viewed 'top down' it's almost rectangular. So dependant on the viewing angle there, an observer might see either a circle or a rectangle.

As always, appreciate the research that has been carried out and laid out clearly for me to enjoy here. :)

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

glad you googled Murphy Givens.....it was certain you would end up on Luis site. I thought he done a fantastic job of laying it all out with some good additional bits of info for us.

anyhow, I may be out of action for 5-6 days so will jump back on this soon as I can.

for what its worth I dont think the article will give us much now that we can confirm that Joe carried out no investigative research himself, and also that the article was basically a 'comedy' piece which I cant really attack Joe for, seeing as he is not taking it seriously and that he makes this clear in the article.

Perhaps but thank you anyway mate, it was an excellent read I agree. I think it does indicate Joe's article to be of little worth to be frank. As you say, it seems more of a comedy piece that I think is laden with shock value. I think the best source on the net considering this case. That Spanish article I linked to show the ugly side of debunking. It's just a rant really. But rather than Given's. I think the gem here is William Mendez, definitely my next avenue of investigation.

I look forward to your return, timing is good, I am flat out too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

spinning puts a point through its paces and if its a strong valid point , then it should prevail......

:tu: Cheers mate, I am glad you mentioned it, nice to see the term in a different light.

(I did find that link yesterday also but wasnt sure what it proved)

let me ask you this another way.

Can you have the title Major Colonel etc etc without being in the military?

To be honest in my mind this is a moot point to an extent. Maybe we should revisit it shuld it have some validity to any specific point. if you agree?

:innocent:

colonel.jpeg

Do you feel a military Doctor is not a doctor? Or not bound by hippocratic oath? That link does qualify these people as physicians.

But yes, probably moot, it does not bother me if we drop it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another excellent read and the jostling between Quillius and Psyche has been most enjoyable and informative. I (pardon the term!) swing both ways between you two from one post to the next - both viewpoints have almost equal 'fors' and 'againsts'. :)

With regards to this point raised by Psyche last year:

Is it possible that the object was of a shape that could look both 'cigar' and 'disk' dependant on the viewing angle? I suppose the best way I could explain this would be as an example: A car tyre - perfectly round from the side, but if viewed 'top down' it's almost rectangular. So dependant on the viewing angle there, an observer might see either a circle or a rectangle.

As always, appreciate the research that has been carried out and laid out clearly for me to enjoy here. :)

Gidday Matt

Thanks for the kind words, it truly is a pleasure to discuss any subject with Quillius. He is living proof that believers and skeptics can work together. I hold him in very high regard. Please feel free to chime in anytime mate.

That is a good call, I have asked the same question on other cases. With this one, we have this drawing:

Pascagoula-Pic-3.jpg

Which does seem to indicate a saucer type craft, due to the flat bottom, I think it could be viewed as a sphere with some parallax error, but I do not think a cigar. Possible I grant. However if this link is accurate, it's an impossible craft, particularly with regards to interstellar travel. I do not even see how both men and all these aliens managed to fit in.

The ship half approximately three to four feet wide, three feet high and ten feet long.

LINK

That is just too small for both interstellar travel, or the described abduction experience. Perhaps it is a translation error?

Edited by psyche101
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cheers Psyche, keep up the good work. :-) Look forward to chiming in a lot more.

Going to re-read some of the supporting evidence on this one again now.

Edited by Matt Vinyl
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cheers Psyche, keep up the good work. :-) Look forward to chiming in a lot more.

Going to re-read some of the supporting evidence on this one again now.

Gidday Matt

Looking forward to it mate. With all the looking around, Quillius prompted me to seek out this site, it is one of the most informative I have seen on the subject - LINK. I used Google translate, and it comes up quite well.

Cheers

Edited by psyche101
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps but thank you anyway mate, it was an excellent read I agree. I think it does indicate Joe's article to be of little worth to be frank. As you say, it seems more of a comedy piece that I think is laden with shock value. I think the best source on the net considering this case. That Spanish article I linked to show the ugly side of debunking. It's just a rant really. But rather than Given's. I think the gem here is William Mendez, definitely my next avenue of investigation.

I look forward to your return, timing is good, I am flat out too.

Hey Psyche,

hope all is good!

http://www.theblackvault.com/encyclopedia/documents/MUFON/Journals/1984/May_June_1984.pdf

read the last part of page 9 and first part of page 10 from the 'army' interogation. The main part I am looking at is to do with Mr Broadus who was one of the two witnesses along with Larry.

I started trying to look at their first hand descriptions along with those of Charles and Calvin.....I think your idea of looking into the craft as a starting point is a good idea, hence my looking into as many descriptions as possible (but trying to avoid all second hand ones to avoid the chinese whispers effect)

Question why did Broadus go to the police station?

looking into Mendez is also quite an important line of investigation, I agree that maybe we should spend some time on him too.

Shall we focus on the craft and craft alone for now then move onto Mendez?

(I am just glad Joe's out of the picture)

also have you ever seen Klass 19 page 'write up/debunk' on this case?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which does seem to indicate a saucer type craft, due to the flat bottom, I think it could be viewed as a sphere with some parallax error, but I do not think a cigar. Possible I grant. However if this link is accurate, it's an impossible craft, particularly with regards to interstellar travel. I do not even see how both men and all these aliens managed to fit in.

The ship half approximately three to four feet wide, three feet high and ten feet long.

LINK

That is just too small for both interstellar travel, or the described abduction experience. Perhaps it is a translation error?

Hey Psyche,

yes I think translation problem.

We at least know that he described it as 8ft x 8ft x 8ft in the 'army' interogation (you know the one...with all those army people :) just teasing...) anyhow, the 'beings were described as 5ft and the distance to craft was estimated at 35-40 yards.

There is an interesting part during that interogation where I think Hickson tries to convey that he thinks it was too small from the outside to reconcile his experience inside......will get back to you on this.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Psyche,

hope all is good!

http://www.theblackv...y_June_1984.pdf

read the last part of page 9 and first part of page 10 from the 'army' interogation. The main part I am looking at is to do with Mr Broadus who was one of the two witnesses along with Larry.

I started trying to look at their first hand descriptions along with those of Charles and Calvin.....I think your idea of looking into the craft as a starting point is a good idea, hence my looking into as many descriptions as possible (but trying to avoid all second hand ones to avoid the chinese whispers effect)

Question why did Broadus go to the police station?

looking into Mendez is also quite an important line of investigation, I agree that maybe we should spend some time on him too.

Shall we focus on the craft and craft alone for now then move onto Mendez?

(I am just glad Joe's out of the picture)

also have you ever seen Klass 19 page 'write up/debunk' on this case?

Gidday Mate

Broadus went to the police station, I assume because he was a detective? In fact, the parole officer in the list you provided. It seems quite a stretch to connect the two, as Broadus merely described a streak of light in the night sky.

As if that weren’t intriguing enough, former Pascagoula detective “Puddin” Broadus told Captain Ryder that me saw something streak through the air that same night. According Ryder, Broadus, who has since passed on, was an honest man not prone to flights of fancy: “Puddin’s dead now, but he was a fine man. He wouldn’t make up something like that.”

LINK

Yes, one thing at a time is good thinking, Mendez can wait a little, he I feel will be more convincing than the article by Joe. I find the craft very hard to reconcile at such a small size, and it does not seem to have flown.

Hickson: I couldn't see anything from inside of it. I don't know...

Derrington: Did it go straight up?

Parker: No sir. It just disappeared... "zzzp" and it just disappeared.

Hickson: And really, I don't know how it got there

It does not sound like a physical craft at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Psyche,

yes I think translation problem.

We at least know that he described it as 8ft x 8ft x 8ft in the 'army' interogation (you know the one...with all those army people :) just teasing...) anyhow, the 'beings were described as 5ft and the distance to craft was estimated at 35-40 yards.

There is an interesting part during that interogation where I think Hickson tries to convey that he thinks it was too small from the outside to reconcile his experience inside......will get back to you on this.

Hey Mate

Even with he translation problem. that is still way too small.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gidday Mate

Broadus went to the police station, I assume because he was a detective? In fact, the parole officer in the list you provided. It seems quite a stretch to connect the two, as Broadus merely described a streak of light in the night sky.

As if that weren’t intriguing enough, former Pascagoula detective “Puddin” Broadus told Captain Ryder that me saw something streak through the air that same night. According Ryder, Broadus, who has since passed on, was an honest man not prone to flights of fancy: “Puddin’s dead now, but he was a fine man. He wouldn’t make up something like that.”

LINK

Yes, one thing at a time is good thinking, Mendez can wait a little, he I feel will be more convincing than the article by Joe. I find the craft very hard to reconcile at such a small size, and it does not seem to have flown.

Hickson: I couldn't see anything from inside of it. I don't know...

Derrington: Did it go straight up?

Parker: No sir. It just disappeared... "zzzp" and it just disappeared.

Hickson: And really, I don't know how it got there

It does not sound like a physical craft at all.

Hey Psyche,

ok, we can go back to Broadus and discuss when and why he was there at another time. It is stated in the report that he and Larry reported seeing an object glowing in the vicinity the men were fishing in. They also say they viewed the object for three minutes.

Huntley: and there description and everything. They even described the blue lights and everything.

hmmm, it would be good to see the statements of both Broadus and Larry. In addition the time at which they reported it.

Collingo asks who came and reported the 'glowing craft' first...was it the men or Broadus?

why is no one sure? at least this is how the conversation continues...with uncertainty.

Why did Broadus take away the tape recording? I mean if the men went in at around 10-11pm then what time did Broadus go in? how many copies were there?

anyways...back to the craft...for now

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hickson: I couldn't see anything from inside of it. I don't know...

Derrington: Did it go straight up?

Parker: No sir. It just disappeared... "zzzp" and it just disappeared.

Hickson: And really, I don't know how it got there

It does not sound like a physical craft at all.

hmm why not?

there are plenty of descriptions throughout intiial interview and the army interogation. They describe the craft at various times including the perceived shape, the glow, the door/opening, the size.....

as for the comment above you highlighted about it disappearing....let me try this..

the car headed away from me at breakneck speed....then it just disappeared in the distance........ speed coupled with turn of phrase explain the word disappearing. Also Parker was facing the river apparently so not even sure he could have seen the craft on take off. If you remember Charlie says when he woke off the ground he could see Parker staring out into the River in a frozen like state/daze.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Psyche,

ok, we can go back to Broadus and discuss when and why he was there at another time. It is stated in the report that he and Larry reported seeing an object glowing in the vicinity the men were fishing in. They also say they viewed the object for three minutes.

Huntley: and there description and everything. They even described the blue lights and everything.

hmmm, it would be good to see the statements of both Broadus and Larry. In addition the time at which they reported it.

Collingo asks who came and reported the 'glowing craft' first...was it the men or Broadus?

why is no one sure? at least this is how the conversation continues...with uncertainty.

Why did Broadus take away the tape recording? I mean if the men went in at around 10-11pm then what time did Broadus go in? how many copies were there?

anyways...back to the craft...for now

Gidday Mate

I really need to see the statement to comment further, because going by Collingo's statements they saw different things

Pascagoula detective “Puddin” Broadus told Captain Ryder that me saw something streak through the air that same night

But the men say it "disappeared" not few away:

Parker: No sir. It just disappeared... "zzzp" and it just disappeared.

Hickson: And really, I don't know how it got there

Nobody is sure how made the first report, because nobody in the room actually witnessed the call.

Huntley: No, you are talking about Larry. He owns a Standard station. Evidently — the chief passed this on to me this morning

I do not know if the Sheriff was ever asked more about it.

What is this about Broadus reporting a UFO in Gautier and how did the men know he had reported it?

Hickson: Yeah. Not too long ago in Gautier there was one of these.

But indeed the craft is not an Interstellar one. I cannot reconcile an 8 foot x 8 foot craft crossing space with several inhabitants, heck, how did they even fit the men in there with the "beings", the carrot heads and the men?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hmm why not?

there are plenty of descriptions throughout intiial interview and the army interogation. They describe the craft at various times including the perceived shape, the glow, the door/opening, the size.....

as for the comment above you highlighted about it disappearing....let me try this..

the car headed away from me at breakneck speed....then it just disappeared in the distance........ speed coupled with turn of phrase explain the word disappearing. Also Parker was facing the river apparently so not even sure he could have seen the craft on take off. If you remember Charlie says when he woke off the ground he could see Parker staring out into the River in a frozen like state/daze.

Then would they not say "when we came to, it was gone"? I think "disappear" is pretty descriptive? And if Broadus could see it fly, surely these men could not be confused with extreme speed?

But why I was saying "not a physical craft" is not only the disappearing act, but the fact it is simply too small. This might be better explained as some sort of portal if the ET strain is to be continued?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gidday Mate

I really need to see the statement to comment further, because going by Collingo's statements they saw different things

Pascagoula detective “Puddin” Broadus told Captain Ryder that me saw something streak through the air that same night

But the men say it "disappeared" not few away:

Parker: No sir. It just disappeared... "zzzp" and it just disappeared.

Hickson: And really, I don't know how it got there

Nobody is sure how made the first report, because nobody in the room actually witnessed the call.

Huntley: No, you are talking about Larry. He owns a Standard station. Evidently — the chief passed this on to me this morning

I do not know if the Sheriff was ever asked more about it.

What is this about Broadus reporting a UFO in Gautier and how did the men know he had reported it?

Hickson: Yeah. Not too long ago in Gautier there was one of these.

But indeed the craft is not an Interstellar one. I cannot reconcile an 8 foot x 8 foot craft crossing space with several inhabitants, heck, how did they even fit the men in there with the "beings", the carrot heads and the men?

Broadus didnt report a UFO in Gaultier? and where does it say the men knew Broadus had reported such?

Hicksons words above just mention there was 'one of these' in Gaultier??

I will go through all firsthand accounts reports etc and try and detail everything we have on the craft and descriptions.

And I will come back to Broadus, if thats ok....when time is short I struggle to go in too many different directions....

Will try and post the descriptions later today.

:tu:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then would they not say "when we came to, it was gone"? I think "disappear" is pretty descriptive? And if Broadus could see it fly, surely these men could not be confused with extreme speed?

But why I was saying "not a physical craft" is not only the disappearing act, but the fact it is simply too small. This might be better explained as some sort of portal if the ET strain is to be continued?

and as per my example of 'disappearing car' is this not also pretty descriptive? I assure you I wasnt suggesting the car vanished into thin air. :) The size is debatable IMO.

If the men were slightly out with both distance and size by say 4-5 ft then this works. If the craft is a type of drone...or research craft from a mothership then again this works...but you know I am not a fan of invoking such theories and would rather stick with what we have.

The craft size is not a factor for me, but I know its a big sticking point for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Broadus didnt report a UFO in Gaultier? and where does it say the men knew Broadus had reported such?

Hicksons words above just mention there was 'one of these' in Gaultier??

I will go through all firsthand accounts reports etc and try and detail everything we have on the craft and descriptions.

And I will come back to Broadus, if thats ok....when time is short I struggle to go in too many different directions....

Will try and post the descriptions later today.

:tu:

Yes he did report that in Gaultier, what are the men speaking of if that is not the instance?

Catch ya tomorrow mate, Im off to get ready for bed.

Cheers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes he did report that in Gaultier, what are the men speaking of if that is not the instance?

Catch ya tomorrow mate, Im off to get ready for bed.

Cheers.

sweet dreams...

and yes lets catch up tomorrow as I must have missed this part :)

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

.

Hiya Quillius.....I can see why you have an interest in this case...

I haven't studied it like you have and I don't want to interrupt your line of enquiry or conversation with psyche

but I listened to the interviews again on page 2..and had a quick wizz through the thread and had a couple

of thoughts...

I think the nuclear connection could be important and would go someway, perhaps to why the experience took place where it did.

You and Psyche talked about it somewhere in the thread regarding the level of surveillance and the lack of cctv evidence.

I am thinking more of Bruce Cathie's theories about the magnetic/gravitational/light earth grid.....that links up with UFO sightings

and is also connected to the nuclear 'stuff'......nuclear bomb detonation but also the siting of Nuclear Reactors.......?????... :unsure2:

http://en.wikipedia....ls_Shipbuilding

In the 1950s Ingalls started bidding on Navy work, winning a contract in 1957 to build 12 nuclear-powered attack submarines.

I don't think for a minute that any footage would be released if a UFO WAS filmed...

It would all be classified....

There is generally a lot about the UFO/ET and nuclear connection. This case could, at it's heart, be another one of those.

In the interview Hickson said he estimated the size of the craft to be 30 - 40 foot long and 8 - 10 foot high...

Which is still a bit small...but who knows...with the magnetic fields operating around and within the craft there

may have been a kind of Tardis effect. Perhaps that's where the Dr Who story has it's roots..... :)

And why there was a hard-to-explain dream-like quality to the experience....

The other thing I picked up from the interview was when Hickson was asked how long the experience took

and he had to estimate because he said he didn't wear a watch, because...."a watch won't keep time on me."

So he must have been one of those people who's natural body chemistry/magnetism (or whatever) is a bit 'different'...

And that might be why he was picked? (pure speculation and just a thought)...

I know the other young man was with him...and that he too didn't have a watch on....for whatever reason we don't know..

but he suffered a mental breakdown didn't he...so perhaps he wasn't such a good abduction subject....dunno....

I am always very wary of abduction stuff....especially how people pop up all over the place on the internet making claims...

but this IS a pretty compelling case, I have to say.....

cheers and thanks for the thread

:tu:

.

Edited by bee
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

.

Hiya Quillius.....I can see why you have an interest in this case...

I haven't studied it like you have and I don't want to interrupt your line of enquiry or conversation with psyche

but I listened to the interviews again on page 2..and had a quick wizz through the thread and had a couple

of thoughts...

I think the nuclear connection could be important and would go someway, perhaps to why the experience took place where it did.

You and Psyche talked about it somewhere in the thread regarding the level of surveillance and the lack of cctv evidence.

I am thinking more of Bruce Cathie's theories about the magnetic/gravitational/light earth grid.....that links up with UFO sightings

and is also connected to the nuclear 'stuff'......nuclear bomb detonation but also the siting of Nuclear Reactors.......?????... :unsure2:

http://en.wikipedia....ls_Shipbuilding

I don't think for a minute that any footage would be released if a UFO WAS filmed...

It would all be classified....

There is generally a lot about the UFO/ET and nuclear connection. This case could, at it's heart, be another one of those.

Hiya Bee, great to have you join in this thread. Yes I really do like this case and havent seen any big holes shot in it yet.......and it seems plenty have tried. Quite a lot of the 'debunk' was based around some flippant comments (from thrid hand info) that Joe said in a magazine article, revolving around the CCTV and toll booth operators. I think its safe to say this line of 'debunking' has not amounted to much.

I have never made the 'nuclear' connection to be honest....I do like it though......however it seems proving the men had the experience and that there was a UFO present is still priority. If I can get Psyche to that point then it will be some achievement....may even be enough to have him change sides :w00t: He would be one hell of an asset if using the same devestating debating tact he currently employs.

In the interview Hickson said he estimated the size of the craft to be 30 - 40 foot long and 8 - 10 foot high...

Which is still a bit small...but who knows...with the magnetic fields operating around and within the craft there

may have been a kind of Tardis effect. Perhaps that's where the Dr Who story has it's roots..... :)

And why there was a hard-to-explain dream-like quality to the experience....

30-40ft? I though he says 30-40ft in the distance but only 8ft wide and high?

may need to look into this somemore. I was actually due to try and list all comments regarding craft, but using only first hand descriptions.

The other thing I picked up from the interview was when Hickson was asked how long the experience took

and he had to estimate because he said he didn't wear a watch, because...."a watch won't keep time on me."

So he must have been one of those people who's natural body chemistry/magnetism (or whatever) is a bit 'different'...

And that might be why he was picked? (pure speculation and just a thought)...

I know the other young man was with him...and that he too didn't have a watch on....for whatever reason we don't know..

but he suffered a mental breakdown didn't he...so perhaps he wasn't such a good abduction subject....dunno....

I am always very wary of abduction stuff....especially how people pop up all over the place on the internet making claims...

but this IS a pretty compelling case, I have to say.....

cheers and thanks for the thread

:tu:

not sure why they were (could have) been selected. They seem quite ordinary folk, if anything they didnt come across as the brightest individuals IMO, but I certainly felt the sincerity in what they said (along with the obvious confusion and fear that they were feeling)

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

30-40ft? I though he says 30-40ft in the distance but only 8ft wide and high?

I have to go out now but I'll go and double check that later......

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 5

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.