40th anniversary of Pascagoula abduction

[quillius]

I can see that many aspects of this case are pretty unexplained, the only problem I have with this case is that they passed over a lie detector test from a trained and experienced practioner and opted for a test by a green horn that happened to be friends with their lawyer at the time.

As Zoser pointed out, their Lawyer (who was basically in it for the money) was the one who chose the practitioner. The two men soon realised the lawyers intentions and fired him. Also there is nothing to say the results were incorrect even though the practioner was 'green'.

The fact that the toll booth operator and shipyard cameras saw nothing adds a little more credence to the pure anecdotal evidence that is pretty damning to the case.

that is actually not a fact. Who checked the cameras? and when? who checked they had a clear sighting to the spot? who knows if they were actually even recording? who spoke to the operators? (clue: it wasnt Joe)

Even in the case that the later was a complete fabrication, still no physical evidence. What is crazy is the time the two were left in the interogation room.

why would there be physical evidence?

and yes the interogation room scene is remarkable.

From the transcripts I have read, they did seem to be pretty hysterical, every site I have come across has them saying the same thing. Is there any links to the actual audio?

If you go to the old thread, link posted earlier on page one here. There are numerous links to the intergations and more, coupled with transcripts.

[quillius]

Plenty of red necks would think it would be a great joke to plan something like this. Just saying.

great way to ruin your life. I suggest you listen to the recordings and look at some of the facts.....nothing points to a 'joke'.

Boredom. Really. Come live in Pascagoula and see. I am sure they thought they could make some cash off of it as well and they did.

really? can you show me who and where? maybe worth looking at what happened to poor Calvin afterwards.

[kraftman]

I didn't konw this abduction. Very interesting.

[EnderOTD]

But you cant argue that Hickson had a motive at all, like I said earlier not even a year later he was on the Tonight Show touting his experiences, he did make a nice living of this. And as far as Parker is concerned, I think there may have been a reason he never really spoke out. Hicksons story became more and more bizare as time passed on, go figure.

[quillius]

But you cant argue that Hickson had a motive at all, like I said earlier not even a year later he was on the Tonight Show touting his experiences, he did make a nice living of this. And as far as Parker is concerned, I think there may have been a reason he never really spoke out. Hicksons story became more and more bizare as time passed on, go figure.

actually I think I could.

I guess a good starting point would be to prove a 'nice living'.

as for Parker, yes I agree there was a reason...the most obvious being the trauma from the experience and the attention (hounding/ridicule) that followed

[zoser]

Boredom. Really. Come live in Pascagoula and see. I am sure they thought they could make some cash off of it as well and they did.

Not good enough. They were fishermen. No evidence that were after making a nuisance of themselves.

[scowl]

Not good enough. They were fishermen. No evidence that were after making a nuisance of themselves.

Plenty good enough. Fisherman don't get bored, Mr. Zoser? And what does "making a nuisance of themselves" have anything to do with anything?

[zoser]

Plenty good enough. Fisherman don't get bored, Mr. Zoser? And what does "making a nuisance of themselves" have anything to do with anything?

Fraud is not making a nuisance?

Nope. Boredom is well known as a cause for a lot of things. Running to the local police with an abduction report ain't one of them.

Here were two genuinely frightened men.

Don't buy it.

Edited October 14, 2013 by zoser

[scowl]

Fraud is not making a nuisance?

You don't need a history of fraud to commit fraud. A person can rob a single bank and be declared a criminal.

Nope. Boredom is well known as a cause for a lot of things. Running to the local police with an abduction report ain't one of them.

Yes, people only go to the police when they've actually been abducted by aliens because in the entire history of law enforcement no one has ever filed a false report to the police.

Here were two genuinely frightened men.

Because you were there.

Don't buy it.

Sounds like you already did.

[quillius]

Because you were there.

I think if you listen to the recording which enables a first hand glimpse into the level of fear they were experiencing then this is as close to being there as you can get.

have you listened to the recordings?

do you think they made it all up as a hoax?

[scowl]

I think if you listen to the recording which enables a first hand glimpse into the level of fear they were experiencing then this is as close to being there as you can get.

Yes, but it isn't very close.

have you listened to the recordings?

I believe I did several years ago. My impression was that Hickson did experience something but I don't believe he had been kidnapped by mummies from outer space like he said. As for Parker, the guy conveniently fainted so he couldn't corroborate or dispute anything Hickson said.

Hickson's story became longer and more detailed as he conveniently "remembered" things just before he appeared on television shows. For example he claimed his eyes were injured on the spaceship but he didn't mention this in his original interview.

do you think they made it all up as a hoax?

Yes, Hickson's inability to stick to his original story and habit of adding more and more details as he became more famous is typical of fabricated tale.

Here we are forty years later with absolutely no new information. No one else has been kidnapped by mummies in spaceships. That speaks louder than words.

[zoser]

Yes, Hickson's inability to stick to his original story and habit of adding more and more details as he became more famous is typical of fabricated tale.

Can you substantiate that his story varied? Proof required please.

Assuming you can do that:

Then we need to consider details added due to regaining of memory after the shock had subsided.

Saying of Zoser:

'Ufology is a flower with many petals'.

Edited October 15, 2013 by zoser

[J. K.]

I've seen the transcript, but I never knew that the recording was accessible.

[scowl]

Can you substantiate that his story varied? Proof required please.

I already gave you one example. Hickson later claimed that the lights inside the space ship were so bright that they injured his eyes, however during his interview with the sheriff he didn't mention any problems with his eyesight or say that he needed medical attention. In fact he was so traumatized that went back to work the next day. Oddly Parker was the one who said he might want to see a doctor for his nerves although he never did.

Compare the detailed story Charlie told on the Dick Cavett Show over a year later after the taped interview. He "remembered" some interesting details during that period.

[psyche101]

And the craft varies between 8 and thirty feet long depending on what interview you look at, is both oval and cigar shaped, and the incident happened in full view of a toll booth but nobody saw a thing.

Quillius actively and well destroyed Joe Eszterhas' claim of cameras. But it is true that there are many discrepancies, Z has special glasses that block them out I think.

My personal speculation is that the men were traumatised, they seemed religious folk, and the local fire and brimstone men seemed to think this was related to the devil, and I do believe that Charlie using a rock to further communicate with said aliens, and the 20 year return visit parker received is a genuine "lost his marbles" story, going deeply into religion, and the Aliens confirming the existence of our Christian God. I have suspected a chance gay encounter after a few whiskeys between the men might have been more mentally traumatising than they expected, but no proof of this exists, I feel the stressed statements offer this may be a possibility.

But I agree with Quillius that something does seem to have traumatised the men. Some of the things they have claimed certainly indicate a need to validate some aspect of their lives.

Edited October 16, 2013 by psyche101

[psyche101]

But you cant argue that Hickson had a motive at all, like I said earlier not even a year later he was on the Tonight Show touting his experiences, he did make a nice living of this. And as far as Parker is concerned, I think there may have been a reason he never really spoke out. Hicksons story became more and more bizare as time passed on, go figure.

Parker has lost his marbles altogether.

And this is where my suspicious about an unplanned sexual encounter begin

I was raped by beings from another planet

The 1993 video begins with a statement that, between the lines, we can indicate the reasons that led Parker to produce this video and most likely, to invent new details: "Raped. I have been violated. I have been raped by creatures from another planet. " Start the video claiming to have been violated is, somehow, trying to break free of guilt about what happened in 1973. But freedom from guilt to whom? reviewing, in detail, your new account you can conclude that Parker sought to redeem himself in his faith: Christianity. In the original story of the 1973 abduction, Parker said she collapsed when one of the beings robots seemed touched his arm. In this testimony, 1993, Parker explains that these robots injected with a substance in the arm to paralyze: "And when they came (the people who seemed robots), one of them injected me something in the arm, and my body was completely paralyzed, I could not feel anything, I could not move anything, my muscles were paralyzed. "

Things that make you go hrmmmzzz......................

Many terms there I would expect to hear from one of the Abductees that are also "raped"

Like an attractive female can rape a bloke!!!! LOL. POLICE POLICE Polizzeee ..... phuleezeee ..... PLEASE ... DONT STOP!!!!!!

In a later interview over 20 years after the initial incident, Parker's story became much more elaborate. Here Parker confessed to lying about fainting in sight of the creatures. He claimed that he was in fact conscious when the creatures took him on board the craft and led him into a room at the other end of a hallway to the left of the craft's entrance. He claims he was laid down on a sloped table and examined by a 'petite,' evidently female, being. Though he was paralyzed, he was able to observe the being inject a needle into the base of the underside of his penis. The being later communicated with him telepathically, suggesting that he had been taken for a reason. While he was not able to define it, Parker felt a sense of imminent harm. Nevertheless, he was led back outside the craft and deposited back into his original position unharmed. He then claimed that 19 years later, he came in contact with the same craft again. This time he voluntarily walked aboard the craft and met with the same female being that had examined his body in 1973. He claimed he had a conversation with the being, in English, in which she communicated to him a religious message. She informed him that they shared the same God, that the bible was an authentic text, and that her species wanted to live on earth but could not due to humanity's tendency towards war and destruction.

Sounds like a plot to a bad movie?

Either way, something up with that.

Edited October 16, 2013 by psyche101

[quillius]

I believe I did several years ago. My impression was that Hickson did experience something but I don't believe he had been kidnapped by mummies from outer space like he said. As for Parker, the guy conveniently fainted so he couldn't corroborate or dispute anything Hickson said.

interesting.....so you say you believe he did experience something. yet later say it was a hoax????? is this not a contradiction?

as for Calvin, he corroborated plenty, from the blue light, the door opening to the descriptions of the beings.......so your comment is incorrect and in fact I would say leading by using the term 'conveniently'.

Hickson's story became longer and more detailed as he conveniently "remembered" things just before he appeared on television shows. For example he claimed his eyes were injured on the spaceship but he didn't mention this in his original interview.

becoming longer and more detailed is very different from a changing story. plus I see the word 'conveniently' being pushed again....no bias then? As for his eyes, he claimed a welders flash, why would he have mentioned this in the first interview or the second at the army base? hardly worth mentioning amongst the rest of the events is it?

Yes, Hickson's inability to stick to his original story and habit of adding more and more details as he became more famous is typical of fabricated tale.

Here we are forty years later with absolutely no new information. No one else has been kidnapped by mummies in spaceships. That speaks louder than words.

he did stick to the story, what changed? adding bits is not changing bits.

as for 40 years on, actually there was further info given by Mike Cattaldo (excuse spelling) some years later corroborating teh blue light he witnessed and reported. As for no one else being kidnapped by aliens, so what? we are constantly told why would they need to keep abducting people when once should be enough..........

[quillius]

[/size]

I already gave you one example. Hickson later claimed that the lights inside the space ship were so bright that they injured his eyes, however during his interview with the sheriff he didn't mention any problems with his eyesight or say that he needed medical attention. In fact he was so traumatized that went back to work the next day. Oddly Parker was the one who said he might want to see a doctor for his nerves although he never did.

Compare the detailed story Charlie told on the Dick Cavett Show over a year later after the taped interview. He "remembered" some interesting details during that period.

yes and also compare the interrogation by the military a few days later.....

then go and show me where his story has changed. it doesnt happen, he is consistant even if more elaborate.

[quillius]

And the craft varies between 8 and thirty feet long depending on what interview you look at, is both oval and cigar shaped, and the incident happened in full view of a toll booth but nobody saw a thing.

Quillius actively and well destroyed Joe Eszterhas' claim of cameras. But it is true that there are many discrepancies, Z has special glasses that block them out I think.

My personal speculation is that the men were traumatised, they seemed religious folk, and the local fire and brimstone men seemed to think this was related to the devil, and I do believe that Charlie using a rock to further communicate with said aliens, and the 20 year return visit parker received is a genuine "lost his marbles" story, going deeply into religion, and the Aliens confirming the existence of our Christian God. I have suspected a chance gay encounter after a few whiskeys between the men might have been more mentally traumatising than they expected, but no proof of this exists, I feel the stressed statements offer this may be a possibility.

But I agree with Quillius that something does seem to have traumatised the men. Some of the things they have claimed certainly indicate a need to validate some aspect of their lives.

gidday mate, fighting through the pain due to teh passion I feel for Pascagoula.....ouch.

anyhow, the size and shape we never concluded as I still dont agree that it varies, or at least not without explanation. I dont feel this dents a hole in the case, but ofcourse willing to keep digging into this aspect as I think it does matter.

I do agree that Parker lost his marbles over time hence why it is not worth persuing his comments in later years unless it is to confirm that he lost the plot.

Probably worth us going into the old thread to finish off our business it seems the shape and size would be a godo starting point.

Did you ever get to listen to those recordings I posted?

[quillius]

good to see you live at the same time as me mate

[psyche101]

yes and also compare the interrogation by the military a few days later.....

then go and show me where his story has changed. it doesnt happen, he is consistant even if more elaborate.

Parker was the one who made the changes mostly, would you not call elaboration changing a story?

But I do not disagree with anything else, good to see you back mate, I was just talking about you.........

In a good way!! Hows the arm?

[psyche101]

gidday mate, fighting through the pain due to teh passion I feel for Pascagoula.....ouch.

anyhow, the size and shape we never concluded as I still dont agree that it varies, or at least not without explanation. I dont feel this dents a hole in the case, but ofcourse willing to keep digging into this aspect as I think it does matter.

I do agree that Parker lost his marbles over time hence why it is not worth persuing his comments in later years unless it is to confirm that he lost the plot.

Probably worth us going into the old thread to finish off our business it seems the shape and size would be a godo starting point.

Did you ever get to listen to those recordings I posted?

I'd be happy to go back there, I thought the closest you got there was "well, 30 feet is longer than 8 feet"

Come on maaaaattteeee

I am not ready to run with that yet, I reckon he is a bit dodgy on that line, but I admit, I am running low on other ammo, you have made a good case for Charlie in that thread mate Hats off to you!

Sorry, good to be on at the same time, but duty calls, and I must rush. I'll get back as soon as I can to see where you are up to. What the heck are you going to put me through the wringer on this case with next??

[quillius]

Parker was the one who made the changes mostly, would you not call elaboration changing a story?

But I do not disagree with anything else, good to see you back mate, I was just talking about you.........

In a good way!! Hows the arm?

Parker lost the plot, I think we all agree on that, so I place little value in anything he says apart from the intial transcripts from the sheriff and the military interview.

I think elaborating is very different to changing a story, saying you saw a blue light then changing it to a red light is a problem. Saying you saw a blue light then later adding it was a blue light that dimmed at times is elaborating which is ok, maybe not accurate as subject to memory change but certianly not a problem as far as honesty goes.

thanks mate, as for the arm, I think trying to use it too much which will only spell trouble for me down the line but hate the inconvenience so trying to battle through...plsu being the right arm it gives a number of other issues I would rather not discuss here hehehe.

[quillius]

I'd be happy to go back there, I thought the closest you got there was "well, 30 feet is longer than 8 feet"

Come on maaaaattteeee

I am not ready to run with that yet, I reckon he is a bit dodgy on that line, but I admit, I am running low on other ammo, you have made a good case for Charlie in that thread mate Hats off to you!

Sorry, good to be on at the same time, but duty calls, and I must rush. I'll get back as soon as I can to see where you are up to. What the heck are you going to put me through the wringer on this case with next??

as I said before mate, without your pushing I would have got no where on my own.

I will finish by saying that a case can be made for a UAP causing some form of hallucination, then the short discussion the men had after whilst still groggy from the effects created the corroborating experience even if it was only one of them that expereinced the hallucination of the beings. Although there are still aspects that go slightly against this, such as Parker interjecting during the military interview when describing the claws ( I believe he said like lobsters or crawfish) but nonetheless this would be the front runner in my mind as far as prosaic (even if the anomoly is unknown) answers go.

see you soon buddy

[scowl]

interesting.....so you say you believe he did experience something. yet later say it was a hoax????? is this not a contradiction?

No. For example I could get lost in the woods. That would be a valid experience.

I could then say I didn't get lost. I was abducted by mummy aliens. That would turn the experience into a hoax.

as for Calvin, he corroborated plenty, from the blue light, the door opening to the descriptions of the beings.......so your comment is incorrect and in fact I would say leading by using the term 'conveniently'.

He was sure about the blue light. When he talked to Charlie about the "door" when the sheriff was out of the room, it sounded like he wanted to make sure he got the description correct.

becoming longer and more detailed is very different from a changing story.

No, it's no different from changing the story. Try making your police statement "longer and more detailed" while you're on the witness stand and see what happens.

plus I see the word 'conveniently' being pushed again....no bias then? As for his eyes, he claimed a welders flash, why would he have mentioned this in the first interview or the second at the army base? hardly worth mentioning amongst the rest of the events is it?

Because his vision had been damaged, or so he later claimed. Is impaired vision not something you would concerned with?

as for 40 years on, actually there was further info given by Mike Cattaldo (excuse spelling) some years later corroborating teh blue light he witnessed and reported.

I do believe that the two saw a blue light.

As for no one else being kidnapped by aliens, so what? we are constantly told why would they need to keep abducting people when once should be enough..........

Then the aliens are gone and we should just forget about them.