Speaker 1: I take a book. Hello, and welcome to the talson
Speaker 1: the Dark Podcast. I'm your host, Bob. You're my co host, Brittany.
Speaker 2: Hey, guys, what's up Brittany.
Speaker 3: How's it going.
Speaker 2: It's going pretty good. How are you?
Speaker 1: Oh, it's it's going good. Another day in April, ready
Speaker 1: for the spring to actually kick in. But it's fine.
Speaker 2: You have a you have an eternal war with winter
Speaker 2: every single year.
Speaker 1: Well, yeah, it's just the worst. It doesn't have to exist.
Speaker 1: I don't care what anyone says. It doesn't have to exist.
Speaker 2: Winter Wonderland has to be like your number one op.
Speaker 3: They got shooters. I heard too. That's that's the problem.
Speaker 1: So let's let me ask you a quick question. How
Speaker 1: you know because we had word on the show, and
Speaker 1: did you have you looked at any of his like
Speaker 1: like the artwork for Dark Collar. No, so the artwork
Speaker 1: is beautiful. Shout out to whoever did that. I know
Speaker 1: when we had him on the show a few weeks ago,
Speaker 1: he had mentioned like he kind of stole from the
Speaker 1: Ozarks the symbolism that he does for the episodes. But
Speaker 1: one really interesting thing about Dark Haller is he put
Speaker 1: high strangeness in low places.
Speaker 3: And that's kind of the hook on a lot of his.
Speaker 1: Like the the like artwork and stuff and what's been used,
Speaker 1: like the media push for Dark Hollar, And it kind
Speaker 1: of set me down a rabbit hole of Appalachia as
Speaker 1: a whole. But then also the Ohio River Valley, because
Speaker 1: the Ohio River Valley seme you know, very very similar
Speaker 1: and set up to a lot of the rivers that
Speaker 1: run through Appalachia. Well, there's not a lot of you know,
Speaker 1: big rivers in the areas, you know, that's that's bigger
Speaker 1: than the Ohio River that I'm familiar with, except for
Speaker 1: the Mississippi, which of course led me into the episode today,
Speaker 1: which the pass At Gula abduction. Have you heard of
Speaker 1: this before?
Speaker 2: I feel like I've heard about it in Passing, but
Speaker 2: I don't think I've ever actually researched it.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's interesting because it has some crossover with the
Speaker 1: flat Woods Monster, which there's some debate over the flat
Speaker 1: Woods Monsters. The Flatwoods Alien or UFO or whatever the
Speaker 1: terminology used is very strange. But the Flatwoods Monster specifically
Speaker 1: was kind of mechanical in a way. Yeah, and that's
Speaker 1: sort of how they describe this, depending on which like which.
Speaker 2: Point of view?
Speaker 3: Yeah you read?
Speaker 2: Yeah, okay, Yeah.
Speaker 1: Now what's really interesting to be about the pass At
Speaker 1: Gula abduction is is it was two guys that mainly
Speaker 1: had the encounter, but not too long ago more people
Speaker 1: started to speak out about this, like forty fifty years later.
Speaker 2: Don't you love how that works? I mean, they finally
Speaker 2: get the the gumption to bring it up, you know
Speaker 2: what I mean? Maybe that's what Maybe that's the case.
Speaker 1: Well, and what it where my mind always goes with
Speaker 1: this kind of stuff is you have to instantly be
Speaker 1: skeptical of new experience just coming out of the woodwork.
Speaker 2: This late in the game.
Speaker 1: Yeah, but it also makes me wonder with all these
Speaker 1: things like you know, the UAP committee hearings and stuff
Speaker 1: that we're hearing about and all the big disclosure that's
Speaker 1: supposed to be happening, Like, is it is it far
Speaker 1: fetched that there's more people coming out of the woodwork
Speaker 1: that saw this, or is it less far fetched because
Speaker 1: people think it's okay to talk about now because it's
Speaker 1: in the mainstream so much more.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's being accepted somewhat better than it has and
Speaker 2: late late years.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and it just makes me wonder, like I said,
Speaker 1: is is it should you continue the same skepticism with
Speaker 1: these new contact ees or like we've discussed a thousand
Speaker 1: times on the show, do we have to be equally
Speaker 1: sympathetic to all contact these of all sorts or it's
Speaker 1: it's a hard kind of line to draw between where
Speaker 1: healthy skepticisms healthy skepticism comes in and just like this
Speaker 1: is nonsense, I also have to care about your story
Speaker 1: at the same time. Okay, I don't know, it's hard
Speaker 1: to describe. It makes sense in my brain, but it's
Speaker 1: just it's hard as hard as a researcher to look
Speaker 1: at something forty to fifty years after the fact, is
Speaker 1: like equally as impactful as the as the original?
Speaker 2: No, and you're absolutely right, especially because there have been
Speaker 2: a lot of hoaxes that throughout the years have come
Speaker 2: to light from people trying to just do quick cash
Speaker 2: crabs or or what have you. So I mean it
Speaker 2: is normal to have that kind of skepticism with the story.
Speaker 2: But regardless, I think everyone deserves at least at least
Speaker 2: the chance to be examined, you know what I mean?
Speaker 1: Yeah, everyone deserves the other voice heard yeah now rather
Speaker 1: or not now? It's just so hard because I have
Speaker 1: the same issue with like an Injured Cold encounter in
Speaker 1: twenty twenty four, Like it's it's very difficult for me
Speaker 1: to hear, you know, because there was a story about
Speaker 1: a month ago on Reddit about a supposed encounter with
Speaker 1: Injured Cold in West Virginia and it was like, I
Speaker 1: want to believe.
Speaker 3: You so bad?
Speaker 1: Does that make me blind to the fact that you know,
Speaker 1: injured's kind of a big thing right now.
Speaker 2: Again, I mean, I think the issue in your statement
Speaker 2: is what you started with that you want to believe.
Speaker 2: I mean that if you go back to John Keel,
Speaker 2: everyone to take a shot like the belief is the enemy, yeah,
Speaker 2: and that case. And so you just really do have
Speaker 2: to come in at any of these stories, especially any
Speaker 2: that you would have any kind of emotional connection with
Speaker 2: from a scientific point of view. But I will say
Speaker 2: that even with cases like notorious uh contact contactors like
Speaker 2: Indrick Cold coming into the limelight again, they were so impactful,
Speaker 2: like the original story was so impactful in the community,
Speaker 2: and you know, maybe the name itself became larger than life.
Speaker 2: I mean, you never really know, like it's not like
Speaker 2: they come up to you with a driver's license in
Speaker 2: some form of identification.
Speaker 1: So you're saying some UFOs could be some aliens here
Speaker 1: could be.
Speaker 2: Like impersonating, Yeah, absolutely, like.
Speaker 3: Stolen valor for the UFO community basically.
Speaker 2: I mean, there's there's no why Why would it all
Speaker 2: be on the contact tee to be making it up?
Speaker 2: You know what I mean. I mean we talk about
Speaker 2: the trickster like elements of these beings of this phenomenon constantly,
Speaker 2: So why wouldn't they trick you into thinking it's something
Speaker 2: it's not.
Speaker 1: That's a good point, Okay, So on here to the
Speaker 1: Pascagoula abduction. On the nine of October eleventh, nineteen seventy three,
Speaker 1: Charles Hickson and Calvin Parker were fishing together to an
Speaker 1: abandoned shipyard near the place that they work together.
Speaker 2: This is a sacred activity. How dare the how dare
Speaker 2: the aliens?
Speaker 3: Yeah?
Speaker 1: Right now, I guess when I think of fishing stories
Speaker 1: being embellished, it's never about a UFO coming. It's just
Speaker 1: how big is that catfishing? I really got. As the
Speaker 1: story goes, a blue light emerged from the clouds above them,
Speaker 1: and the men watched a football shaped object descend and
Speaker 1: hover nearby, from which two unusual beings emerged. So I
Speaker 1: want to keep that in mind. The football shaped object,
Speaker 1: that's hyper specific.
Speaker 2: And somewhat unique. I mean, I'm sure there's been a
Speaker 2: couple of encounters with foreign objects, yeah, shaped that way,
Speaker 2: but yeah, that's not that's not the regular cigar or
Speaker 2: just disc shape that you hear typically.
Speaker 1: Yeah, what I would love to see it, and I'm
Speaker 1: sure someone smarter than me has already done this. But
Speaker 1: see a graph of not a graph, but like a
Speaker 1: I guess, like a timeline of UFO encounters versus UFO shapes,
Speaker 1: and see if during these window areas, these flaps that occur, is.
Speaker 2: There like a specific time period that has a specific shape.
Speaker 1: Yeah, is there a commonality between these shapes? And do
Speaker 1: they disappear and then reappear at later flaps like forties
Speaker 1: to the sixties, sixties to the eighties, so on and
Speaker 1: so forth.
Speaker 2: I think the issue that we're also probably running into
Speaker 2: now is, while yes, we do have history for this phenomenon,
Speaker 2: we're not even we haven't even hit one hundred years yet,
Speaker 2: since like actual documented cases, I mean there's documented cases
Speaker 2: for thousands of years, but not to the extent that
Speaker 2: we have recent in recent history started documenting.
Speaker 1: The scientific approach of ufology, which that's an oxymoron in
Speaker 1: its own right.
Speaker 2: Yeah, well it had to turn into that because again
Speaker 2: we talked about objects in the sky pre blimps, like
Speaker 2: nothing should have been in the sky except for birds.
Speaker 1: It was way easier to be a fologists during like
Speaker 1: Egyptian times.
Speaker 3: Yeah all I'm saying.
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, Hickson and Parker were somehow forced onto the
Speaker 1: aircraft in which examinations were performed on them before they
Speaker 1: were released, again bewildered and badly frightened. I wonder if
Speaker 1: this is where like the probe Mantra came from.
Speaker 2: Bewildered and badly frightened.
Speaker 1: Yeah, well no, like you've heard of like the whole
Speaker 1: uf alien probe thing, right, Yeah, I wonder if that's
Speaker 1: where it came from.
Speaker 2: As you said, this case.
Speaker 3: I don't know about this.
Speaker 1: Case, but these like onboard examinations that seemed to occasionally occur.
Speaker 2: I just being at a doctor's office isn't uncomfortable enough,
Speaker 2: Like we don't need the aliens to come and do
Speaker 2: the same kind of stuff.
Speaker 1: Yeah, we just have to hope they have a neuralizer.
Speaker 1: So we just forget the whole thing happened.
Speaker 2: Poking men in black calmed down.
Speaker 3: The two men.
Speaker 1: Subsequent they went to a local authority and the press,
Speaker 1: at which time a secret recording was made by law
Speaker 1: enforcement of the two men privately discussing how terrified they were.
Speaker 1: Thus the world soon learned of what became known as
Speaker 1: the Pasca Gula incident. The details are astounding, indeed, whatever
Speaker 1: they might entail. I say this not with cynicism about
Speaker 1: the pairs retelling of the events per se, since the
Speaker 1: details of their story remained remarkably consistent over the years. However,
Speaker 1: despite generally a good case as far as the crazier
Speaker 1: UFO reports go, there were never any evidence that the
Speaker 1: men had conspired as attention seekers. For instance, there are
Speaker 1: some peculiarities with the Pascagoul incident that are worthy of mention.
Speaker 1: So I want to bring that to you. To it
Speaker 1: from a journalistic and scientific aspect. Do we put too
Speaker 1: much weight into human memory and into keeping stories straight
Speaker 1: over the years, because some people say, you know, it's
Speaker 1: hard to keep track of a lie over that long.
Speaker 1: You know, in the first person that comes of mine
Speaker 1: as Bob Blazar, like he can't possibly be lying because
Speaker 1: the story is stayed consistent. But I think back to
Speaker 1: like certain nursery rhyme, and it's hard to compare this
Speaker 1: to a nursery rhyme, but certain things from like my childhood,
Speaker 1: my youth that I have hard times remembering, you know, yesterday,
Speaker 1: let alone my youth, but I can recall these things
Speaker 1: with exact detail. Are we putting too much weight into
Speaker 1: the human's ability to remember things?
Speaker 2: In what context? What do you mean? Like? What do
Speaker 2: you mean about the weight of their memory? Are you
Speaker 2: trying to say that because they can still remember the
Speaker 2: incident years later, they're trying to add validity.
Speaker 1: To the yeah, because it's still fresh in their mind
Speaker 1: and they haven't changed their story.
Speaker 3: Does that we hear.
Speaker 1: That the Bobs are a lot that because he hasn't
Speaker 1: changed the story since the eighties and nineties, it must
Speaker 1: be true. And again, I'm a Bob supporter, like first
Speaker 1: and foremost don't get it twisted. I am very much
Speaker 1: a believer in his story. But do we put too
Speaker 1: much weight on that as a community?
Speaker 2: I would say no, because yes, okay, yes, and no.
Speaker 2: Let me ride the fence a little bit more here,
Speaker 2: But the reason why I would say that is because
Speaker 2: these events, which it sounds like it's going to be,
Speaker 2: can be very traumatic for the contact ease and whatever
Speaker 2: they may go through in this experience. But it's similar
Speaker 2: to trauma in just regular day to day that you
Speaker 2: can experience. Some people have retention of the memory. Some
Speaker 2: people refuse to actually remember the trauma and push it
Speaker 2: down and don't remember it till years later. But I mean,
Speaker 2: memory is a very fickle thing, and so to be
Speaker 2: able to recall details so late in life should give
Speaker 2: some kind of credence to the story in my opinion,
Speaker 2: because I mean memory goes out the window, yeah, years
Speaker 2: and years and years later, so to be able to
Speaker 2: recall the same thing, it kind of leans more towards yes,
Speaker 2: this happened, and yes this was traumatic.
Speaker 1: Okay, fair enough, I just wanted your take on that.
Speaker 1: So again kind of going into the weird instances in
Speaker 1: this story for instance, as it must be admitted out
Speaker 1: right that Hickson and Parker story is quite unlike most
Speaker 1: other UFO reports. In fact, many aspects of the incident
Speaker 1: were completely unique and bore no common features with other
Speaker 1: popular UFO narratives. Chief among these have been the entities
Speaker 1: encounter during the experience. As skeptic, Joe Nichol is noted
Speaker 1: in the past quote three robotic like aliens exited the craft.
Speaker 1: Although they were gray humanoids just over five feet tall,
Speaker 1: they were otherwise of a type not reporter before or sense.
Speaker 1: Now as a potential skeptic believer, do you use that
Speaker 1: as evidence to it being nonsense because it was an
Speaker 1: unreported type of being.
Speaker 2: No, because I think I think we try to put
Speaker 2: stuff in the boxes way too early on in the
Speaker 2: in this kind of thing. Yeah, because I mean it
Speaker 2: goes back to what we just talked about about us
Speaker 2: not having us having less than one hundred years of
Speaker 2: documented like actual documented history of these events and a
Speaker 2: scientific approach of these events. So like us trying to
Speaker 2: put all these things in little boxes and categories. Well, yes,
Speaker 2: it seems natural to do from a scientific standpoint, does
Speaker 2: not fit the characteristics of the phenomenon.
Speaker 1: Yeah, And I think that loosely a basis for that
Speaker 1: comes from we're comparing them to other people, like like
Speaker 1: for the most part, like you know, skin tones of
Speaker 1: different body shapes, different height, that sort of thing. Yeah,
Speaker 1: But for the most part, if you see a person
Speaker 1: you can say that's a person.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: But if we expand this to let's just say reptiles,
Speaker 1: there are reptiles are so diverse across the board. You
Speaker 1: can see, like, you know, the difference between a turtle
Speaker 1: and a salamander. It's still a reptile, but it's like
Speaker 1: I wouldn't say, look completely different. Yeah, I would never
Speaker 1: look at it at a salamon er. So, yep, that's
Speaker 1: a turtle for sure. That's a turtle.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: So I think it's one of those that if you
Speaker 1: are approaching it from the worldview of these are all
Speaker 1: human like entities, you might say, well, this sounds like nonsense,
Speaker 1: because that sounds like nothing we've heard before from the ufologists.
Speaker 2: That yeah, that's a very very good point. We might
Speaker 2: be trying to compare human like to human like, but
Speaker 2: in actuality it's a turtle to a salamander. That was
Speaker 2: a very good point. I never thought of it like that.
Speaker 3: You're welcome.
Speaker 1: The Clarion Ledgers recently reported that Parker, the younger of
Speaker 1: the two witnesses, has recently authored a book about his experience,
Speaker 1: in which he described I had the craft as it
Speaker 1: first appeared as them as follows A big light came
Speaker 1: through the clouds. Parker said it was a blinding light.
Speaker 1: Soul of the Sarus. Is this you or Paul as
Speaker 1: he's known in the New Testament. It was hard to
Speaker 1: tell with the lights so bright, but it looked like
Speaker 1: it was the shape of a football. I would say,
Speaker 1: just estimating it was around eighty foot. It made very
Speaker 1: little sound, and it was just a hissing noise. While
Speaker 1: the craft described by the witnesses it often likened to
Speaker 1: a blue colored football. It's important to know how Parker
Speaker 1: described it here and breaking his silence about the incident
Speaker 1: after all these years, so says the Ledger, at least
Speaker 1: he's actually discussed the incident several times, and he seemingly
Speaker 1: changed your updated aspects of his encounter over the years,
Speaker 1: many of which will discuss later. As Parker says, it
Speaker 1: was hard for he and his companion to tell precisely
Speaker 1: what the shape of the object was due to the
Speaker 1: lights it produced. Additionally, although Parker says the object made
Speaker 1: little in the way of a sound, he does describe
Speaker 1: a hissing noise more to the zipping noises described by
Speaker 1: the witnesses and previous interviews. It might seem like a
Speaker 1: stretch to propose that this could have been any kind
Speaker 1: of conditional aircraft. However, it might be worthwhile to compare
Speaker 1: it this part to the narrative of other famous UFO
Speaker 1: encounters from a few decades earlier, that of Brazilian farmer
Speaker 1: Antonio Villa Bowas, who, on October evening in nineteen fifty seven,
Speaker 1: was taken aboard an unusual aircraft and made to have
Speaker 1: sexual relations with a beautiful young woman with large eyes
Speaker 1: and other appealing assets.
Speaker 2: Wait what you heard me?
Speaker 1: This Brazilian farmer got lucky with some Venusians. Matthew Bird's upset.
Speaker 2: Oh my god, I'm just saying.
Speaker 1: Villa described the aircraft that appeared on the night in
Speaker 1: question as being oval shaped and having made little noise
Speaker 1: apart from a sort of whirring sound. See, yes, we're
Speaker 1: comparing the sounds a little bit here, but that's not
Speaker 1: that uncommon in these cases.
Speaker 2: It just feels like they pulled that out of left field. Yeah,
Speaker 2: it feels like they were really they just really wanted
Speaker 2: to talk about them having intercourse with an alien.
Speaker 1: So what he does continue on here, which it's it's
Speaker 1: worth noting we needed to dive deeper into Ufo Cortus
Speaker 1: coitus coitus.
Speaker 2: Yes, it just sounds like you just really want to
Speaker 2: talk about that, like you and this this author might
Speaker 2: have a that's.
Speaker 1: A Patreon episode for sure, so he continues in the
Speaker 1: article here, I recall talking to my friend and fellow
Speaker 1: Mysterious Universe writer Nick Redfern about the case a few
Speaker 1: years back, and remarking that Villa would have been able
Speaker 1: to identify the object had it merely been a helicopter.
Speaker 1: What Nick said in response is what surprised me. Well,
Speaker 1: hold on, he began. I could hear him ruffling through
Speaker 1: the papers and files over the phone as he for
Speaker 1: his notes about the actual wording used by Villa, rather
Speaker 1: than that of the later writings and rewritings about the
Speaker 1: incident in UFO literature, which simply described an oval or
Speaker 1: an egg shaped object. Sure as helen Villa's original description,
Speaker 1: he discussed there being something above the oval shaped or
Speaker 1: a craft that appeared to be spinning. In retrospect, that
Speaker 1: sounds like a helicopter. Someone put them on the helicopter
Speaker 1: and then had their way.
Speaker 3: With this guy.
Speaker 2: That's crazy. That's a crazy thing.
Speaker 1: I don't know, but it sounds like a good bit
Speaker 1: that it could have involved some kind of helicopter, perhaps
Speaker 1: of military variety, that employs a variety of stealth technology
Speaker 1: that would lessen the sound of helicopter blades. Okay, we're
Speaker 1: now saying the military used a stealth helicopter to assault
Speaker 1: this man on a farm.
Speaker 3: With this in mind, if.
Speaker 1: We give further consideration to Parker's description of the object,
Speaker 1: where he says, quote it was hard to tell with
Speaker 1: the lights so bright, but it looked like it was
Speaker 1: shaped like a football, and that it made quote very
Speaker 1: little sound apart from a hissing NOI. Similarities do emerge
Speaker 1: between the two incidents, Granted, rather than being definitive details
Speaker 1: about the two leged crafts, what the similarity suggest is
Speaker 1: that neither man got a very good look at the
Speaker 1: actual shape of the object, and then at least one
Speaker 1: of the two cases, it sounded like a lot or
Speaker 1: it sounded a lot like a helicopter of some kind.
Speaker 1: What are your thoughts on that, Brittany, because I feel
Speaker 1: like you got a lot to say here.
Speaker 2: I really don't. I am baffled that the only reason
Speaker 2: why they're comparing these two cases is that they kind
Speaker 2: of look the same.
Speaker 1: And they made a similar hissing noise, and the military
Speaker 1: has a history of abducting people farmers, do they farmers
Speaker 1: and fishermen?
Speaker 2: Are you trying to tell us that they both start
Speaker 2: with f.
Speaker 1: Another interesting parallel between Parker's narrative and the Villa incident
Speaker 1: only came to light years later, when Parker began to
Speaker 1: express in interviews that he had apparently had additional encounters
Speaker 1: in the decades following Pascagoula. Parker also made this claim
Speaker 1: many years later his memories of the time you spent
Speaker 1: on board the aircraft in the original nineteen seventy three
Speaker 1: incident began to return, in which you recalled additional details
Speaker 1: that included a woman on board of the craft and
Speaker 1: that you subjected to some variety of sexual examination while there.
Speaker 1: It's not as far out as what Villa reported from
Speaker 1: his time with a woman on board of UFO, but
Speaker 1: the similarities here are notable regardless. But why did Parker
Speaker 1: only recall this so many years later, and why so
Speaker 1: often do these alleged abductions bear elements that involve sexuality
Speaker 1: in this way? I don't feel like we hear a
Speaker 1: lot of that in recent times, and it.
Speaker 2: Maybe they I don't. I don't know. That's that's just
Speaker 2: always a tough tough topic for me to even breach
Speaker 2: because it's like, but that that seems to be an
Speaker 2: attribute of the phenomenon in general. I mean, you know,
Speaker 2: talking to previous heuthologists in like Alan Greenfield, you know,
Speaker 2: and John Keel, they said that the phenomenon seems to
Speaker 2: follow and harass like teenagers who were going out to
Speaker 2: the park and doing some kissing.
Speaker 1: Yeah, there are there are those who think that the
Speaker 1: moth may only happen because you know of what was
Speaker 1: happening out there. Yeah, don't get me started on John
Speaker 1: Keel's cosmic Clap discussion. What if you guys have never
Speaker 1: read The Eighth Tower, I highly recommend there's. It's about
Speaker 1: midway through and it comes out of left field where
Speaker 1: he starts talking about like space syphilis that he calls
Speaker 1: the cosmic clap, what and how he just came down
Speaker 1: with it one day randomly, And it's like, sir, what
Speaker 1: were you doing?
Speaker 2: I think you got the actual clap?
Speaker 1: Sir? Were you with some Venusians of the night? Is
Speaker 1: that what was happening, sir? Let me get the cosmic
Speaker 1: clap is wild.
Speaker 2: That's a crazy thing to claim, but you know, well,
Speaker 2: it's it is what it is.
Speaker 1: I guess the weird thing is John Keell's on a
Speaker 1: farmer or a fisherman, So it wasn't the military, definitively.
Speaker 2: That's if your name starts with F you beare watch out.
Speaker 1: I'm very real cautious out there in the.
Speaker 2: Fields two poison a fields.
Speaker 3: Oh god.
Speaker 1: Parker wasn't the only one who claimed to have had
Speaker 1: ongoing contact with his UFO beings. However, Hickson also claimed
Speaker 1: to have had numerous UFO sidings the following year, and
Speaker 1: further claimed that the beings on board the craft communicated
Speaker 1: to him that quote they were peaceful. Another lingering question
Speaker 1: involves why Hickson and Parker seemingly cooperated with the beings
Speaker 1: that attempted to bring them on board the aircraft. As
Speaker 1: Parker recently recounted for the Ledger, I think they injected
Speaker 1: us with something to calm us down. Parker said, I
Speaker 1: was kind of numb and went along with a program.
Speaker 1: Nick Redfern has also speculated recently about the possible role
Speaker 1: of mind altering drugs in some UFO cases, citing similar
Speaker 1: ideas proposed or researcher Rich Reynolds. He recently wrote about
Speaker 1: it here on MU saying, having known Rich for more
Speaker 1: than a few years, I should note that he's a
Speaker 1: deep interest in the possibility that at least some significant
Speaker 1: UFO incidents may have had a hallucinogen of some kind
Speaker 1: in their core. We're not, however, talking here about the
Speaker 1: use of LSD for recreational purposes. Instead, we're talking about
Speaker 1: situations which may have been utilized by military and intelligence
Speaker 1: services to an essence fake a UFO events.
Speaker 2: So now they're saying they're drugging the people in the
Speaker 2: air to incite a UFO event.
Speaker 1: So we I mean, we do know that this was happening,
Speaker 1: not not the UFO aspect, but the CIA was. It's
Speaker 1: not I don't think it's Operation Midnight Climax, but it
Speaker 1: might have been Operation Midnight Climax.
Speaker 2: Oh my god, what is up with these names today?
Speaker 2: What is happening?
Speaker 1: I don't remember if it's if that's what it was,
Speaker 1: But basically what was happening was this this CIA group.
Speaker 2: Didn't they lace an entire like township's water with LSD
Speaker 2: at one point?
Speaker 1: No, So actually I think it was Operation Midnight climax
Speaker 1: because it was like a suboperation of MK Ultra. I'm
Speaker 1: gonna say it was very definitively here, and I might
Speaker 1: be wrong, but basically what was happening was there were
Speaker 1: these brothels set up out in California. I'm gonna say
Speaker 1: it's California, definitively. Probably was organ.
Speaker 2: It was probably Nevada.
Speaker 1: No, I'm pretty sure it's California. But anyway, there were
Speaker 1: these brothels set up and these Venusians of the Night.
Speaker 1: They weren't atually Venusians. There were ladies of the night
Speaker 1: would bring the johns to this location and instead of
Speaker 1: sleeping with them for money, they would give them LSD
Speaker 1: and then there would be a two way mirror and
Speaker 1: the agents would be on the other side watching the
Speaker 1: interactions that would occur. I think in some instances there
Speaker 1: was some like actual sexual contact that occurred, but for
Speaker 1: the most part, they were just like tripping balls and
Speaker 1: we were watching it happen.
Speaker 3: This is a real thing. I'm not making this up
Speaker 3: at all.
Speaker 2: Okay, but that's like that's a controlled environ somewhat controlled environment.
Speaker 2: And yes, they were drugged without consents. It is definitely
Speaker 2: illegal and definitely, we should not have done that as
Speaker 2: a government. But you know, neither here nor there. These
Speaker 2: are two men on the bank of the Mississippi fishing.
Speaker 2: How are they gonna get drugged with LSD? Are they
Speaker 2: air dropping that?
Speaker 3: I don't know.
Speaker 1: First off, you've never been inside the Mississippi.
Speaker 3: You have no idea.
Speaker 1: It could all be LSD the whole thing.
Speaker 2: God, I would hate to see what those fish see.
Speaker 2: If that's the case.
Speaker 1: Well, well no, no, hear me out. Maybe they're watching.
Speaker 1: Maybe it's like they're watching us from other so the
Speaker 1: double sided mirror, and.
Speaker 2: That's you know, they pity our existence and the non LSD.
Speaker 1: I can't believe that this is the first time you're
Speaker 1: thinking about Operation Midnight Climax.
Speaker 2: I feel like I have heard about. I know they
Speaker 2: did some messed up things and experiments with LSD, but again,
Speaker 2: like this, that is a semi controllable environment.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 1: Do you think they chose the men for that because
Speaker 1: like they can't go home and tell their wives I
Speaker 1: was drugged at a brothel.
Speaker 2: Oh yeah, I almost guarantee that some of it was
Speaker 2: used for blackmail. Oh, I almost guarantee it.
Speaker 3: I don't know how we got on this topic, but.
Speaker 2: We derailed completely.
Speaker 1: Someone correct me if I'm wrong. But if it's not
Speaker 1: Operation Midnight Climax, they really screwed the poochrol on that one,
Speaker 1: because that's the perfect name for an LSD brothel like
Speaker 1: CIA operation. Anyway, faithful devotees of the idea of an
Speaker 1: alien presence in relation to some of the more bizarre
Speaker 1: UFO events that have occurred over the years will dislike
Speaker 1: such speculations presented here. However, the idea should at least
Speaker 1: be given consideration, since they are of greater merits. The
Speaker 1: polarized views of hopeful ufologists have tossed all their chips
Speaker 1: and in on an extraterrestrial hypothesis or on another extreme
Speaker 1: they all are nothing skeptics who argue in every such
Speaker 1: instance that UFO experiencers are just liars, frauds, or publicity seekers.
Speaker 1: Neither of these extreme views present a truly objective assessment,
Speaker 1: something that will be required if we ever wish to
Speaker 1: understand the true circumstances behind some of these outstanding and
Speaker 1: long standing UFO cases. I don't know. I struggle with
Speaker 1: this whole thing because when you try and rationalize something.
Speaker 2: That is innately irrational.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's the same. We're normalizing abnormalities.
Speaker 2: You can't. You can't do that.
Speaker 1: I mean, it's literally the normal versus the paranormal. Like
Speaker 1: this is my problem with eupology, and this is why
Speaker 1: I throw my hands up so frequently with these cases,
Speaker 1: because it's like, sure, I would love to you to
Speaker 1: the bottom of it, really would, But the most likely
Speaker 1: scenario is they're coming from here, and everyone and their
Speaker 1: sister that's done DMT or acid or whatever has accidentally
Speaker 1: stepped foot in that realm that they're coming from. That
Speaker 1: That is where I stand right now of what's going on.
Speaker 1: I don't think they're coming from Zeta reticul or Mars
Speaker 1: or Venus or wherever. I think they're coming from here.
Speaker 1: I think they've always been here and they're always going
Speaker 1: to be.
Speaker 2: Here, and their condition of our existence.
Speaker 1: Exactly because the phenomenon has existed as long as human
Speaker 1: beings have existed in some way, shape or form.
Speaker 3: They just have.
Speaker 2: It's just manifested differently, or it's not even manifested differently.
Speaker 2: We've interpreted it differently as we've grown as a species.
Speaker 1: There you go, that we've solved it. You're welcome, listeners,
Speaker 1: that's it. Okay, So this is kind of what I
Speaker 1: touched on at the top of the episode here with
Speaker 1: the more recent people, because again I could have gone
Speaker 1: into more detail, but a lot of it's a little
Speaker 1: too explicit for like radio regular podcasting, and there's not
Speaker 1: a whole lot about the case to me that stands
Speaker 1: out as like this has to be told to understand
Speaker 1: the story. If that makes sense. Yeah, you know, we
Speaker 1: could have gone into detail about the medical examinations, that
Speaker 1: sort of thing. I encourage everyone, if you're interested, look
Speaker 1: in the story a bit deeper. But what gets me
Speaker 1: is a the book writing so long after, because initially
Speaker 1: they were adamant. You know, it was very much at
Speaker 1: Kelly Hopkins'll situation of.
Speaker 2: We don't want to talk about it, we don't want
Speaker 2: to acknowledge it, like.
Speaker 1: Yeah, we're ridiculed, we're ostracized from our community. We don't
Speaker 1: want this. And then a book comes out it's like, well,
Speaker 1: that's a little strange, but sure maybe, but okay, this
Speaker 1: is what I was talking about that in the beginning.
Speaker 1: Where so now we have more people coming out all
Speaker 1: out of the woodwork. Years later, in an interview with
Speaker 1: the Jackson Mississippi daily newspaper The Clearion Ledger, Joey Nelson,
Speaker 1: a mobile Alabama, describe what he and three friends allegedly
Speaker 1: saw on the night of October eleventh, nineteen seventy three,
Speaker 1: as they sped west through Mississippi on their way to
Speaker 1: New Orleans on US ninety. We've driven that road. That's
Speaker 1: a strange road, dude to drive at night. M. M.
Speaker 1: Nelson was a front seat passenger in the car and
Speaker 1: estimates they were between Pascagoula and Biloxi, Biloxi, Biloxi, Biloxie
Speaker 1: when he and says everyone in the car saw the ORB,
Speaker 1: which was hovering in front of the vehicle. They appeared
Speaker 1: to keep on driving when he claimed a smaller ORB
Speaker 1: dropped down from the larger one. That sounds a little
Speaker 1: eerily familiar to something you've experienced.
Speaker 2: Not quite, not quite, but well.
Speaker 1: I guess you didn't see the orbs separate.
Speaker 2: From one another, now, hmm hmmmm.
Speaker 1: It was about the size of a beach ball. I'd say,
Speaker 1: I don't know how far away it was, but it
Speaker 1: seemed like if that windshow wasn't there, I could have
Speaker 1: touched it. It started flashing and clicking and flashing and clicking.
Speaker 1: We could audibly hear it. I know it sounds crazy,
Speaker 1: but it seemed like they were taking pictures. It seemed
Speaker 1: like it was in front of me ten minutes or
Speaker 1: ten minutes or so.
Speaker 3: I don't know.
Speaker 1: We were just sort of mesmerized. Okay, if alien are
Speaker 1: still using like a Kodak camera, we can take them
Speaker 1: in like an intergalactic warfare for sure at that point.
Speaker 1: At that point, the Orbs flew away and the three
Speaker 1: continued to New Orleans, never telling anyone what they saw,
Speaker 1: depending on what they got into on Bourbon Street.
Speaker 3: This is not that unbelievable.
Speaker 1: Now, it's not because you can see some weirder things
Speaker 1: on Bourbon Street than like an intergalactic polaroid.
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, you can. That's that's no why.
Speaker 1: Nelson claims that recent articles about the incident prompted him
Speaker 1: to finally share a story forty six years later. Forty
Speaker 1: six years and he just now is like, oh, yeah,
Speaker 1: remember that crazy thing that happened.
Speaker 2: Okay, well, is there anything else? Was he abducted or
Speaker 2: anything like that?
Speaker 3: We'll continue.
Speaker 1: Unfortunately, there's no corroborating testimony from the other two witnesses
Speaker 1: in the car.
Speaker 3: This is a quote.
Speaker 1: I saw a falling star. Then I realized it wasn't
Speaker 1: actually falling, It was moving across the sky. It was
Speaker 1: at two o'clock. It was at the two o'clock position,
Speaker 1: and when it got to the ten o'clock position, another
Speaker 1: light shot out of it. This is what Rossie Nail
Speaker 1: told the Clarion Ledger when she was in Bruce, Mississippi,
Speaker 1: when she allegedly had a similar experience that exact same night.
Speaker 1: Bruce is over three hundred miles north due of Pascagoula,
Speaker 1: almost on the Tennessee border. Nail's account on the two
Speaker 1: lights seems similar to Nelson's, although what she saw was
Speaker 1: not right next to her on a porch in Bruce,
Speaker 1: but far away in the distant sky. When other similarity,
Speaker 1: Nail waited forty six years to tell her story and
Speaker 1: finally came forward after reading other recent accounts. This is
Speaker 1: a quote. They're all coming out of the woodwork. It
Speaker 1: makes me feel pretty good that I'm not the only
Speaker 1: one who saw something. Most of these people are credible people.
Speaker 1: So we have two people not together. I would love
Speaker 1: to hear from the rest of the folks in the car.
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, I mean it's not. Another side effect of
Speaker 2: the phenomenon can be memory loss. Yeah, and maybe it
Speaker 2: really was like a key that was unlocked because of
Speaker 2: recent stories. I mean, it might literally be exactly what
Speaker 2: they say it is and nothing nefarious. Is it a
Speaker 2: little sketch waiting that long? Sure?
Speaker 3: Yeah?
Speaker 2: But I mean, hell, we've been through phenomenon and forgot
Speaker 2: that it happened until you know, something else triggered the
Speaker 2: memory exactly.
Speaker 1: Okay, So it continues on. Really, Calvin Parker, the survivor
Speaker 1: of the two actual Legendi abductees, is obviously glad people
Speaker 1: are finally agreeing with him. But our forty six year
Speaker 1: old accounts really credible. That may include Parker, who was
Speaker 1: a silent partner in this account, allowing as much older
Speaker 1: friend Charles Hickson to tell the story. As one might expect,
Speaker 1: the reason for the recent publicity about the alleged Pascagoula
Speaker 1: abduction is due to the long away to publication of
Speaker 1: Parker's account. Pascagoula the closest encounter. What should we make
Speaker 1: of an alleged eye witness account that's had forty six
Speaker 1: years to absorb intentionally or by osmosis details from a
Speaker 1: well publicized and much written about story before finally being
Speaker 1: told in an era of instant internet fame and hopes
Speaker 1: of a fortune. Do they reinforce the validity of the
Speaker 1: alleged incident or murky the water some more? One thing
Speaker 1: is certain, these won't be the last of the Pasca
Speaker 1: Goula witnesses. Does this qualify as a storming anyone for
Speaker 1: some Pasca Gula pale ale?
Speaker 2: I mean it does. It does make the information a
Speaker 2: little bit more difficult to weighe through, that is for sure.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 2: Does it take away from the validity of the witnesses, No,
Speaker 2: I don't think so, not necessarily, But it is something
Speaker 2: to keep in mind when researching this particular case and
Speaker 2: knowing what when the accounts came out, what details came
Speaker 2: from when.
Speaker 1: Well, and one thing just kind of came to mind.
Speaker 1: Just now we are approaching this skepticism skeptical aspect of
Speaker 1: these retellings, as if everyone is a ufologist and everyone
Speaker 1: has a shared interest in these things. Let me take
Speaker 1: a step back and present this as an alternative I
Speaker 1: guess bit of thought science here. What if they saw
Speaker 1: something weird, they knew roughly what year it was, let's
Speaker 1: say it's around their birthday, just for sake of the argument.
Speaker 1: I knew this happened around my birthday, knew it was
Speaker 1: nineteen seventy three weeks that's when I got the grand
Speaker 1: old jalobby. Whatever, if you're not a eufologist, you wouldn't
Speaker 1: think to go and tell your friends about this, because again,
Speaker 1: we got to remember the seventies bit different of times.
Speaker 1: It's not like it is now where you can just
Speaker 1: go on Twitter and just blast out in a hashtag
Speaker 1: UFO Twitter and get a bunch of retweets and people
Speaker 1: like believing your story. If you're someone from these small towns. Again,
Speaker 1: we've driven through Missus Sippy. We're very from over Tennessee.
Speaker 1: We understand the folks in this region and they aren't
Speaker 1: interested in these topics. They didn't share it. And then
Speaker 1: here is this book. Of course, publicides in a small
Speaker 1: town newspaper, especially in Pasca Gula, because that's where the
Speaker 1: case occurred. It might jog the memory of something that
Speaker 1: did happen in nineteen seventy three around your birthday when
Speaker 1: you got that old jalobby. Like, maybe that's the easier explanation,
Speaker 1: because again we're approaching this as if everyone's a ufologist,
Speaker 1: everyone has the same level of interest in the paranormal
Speaker 1: into high stranges as we do.
Speaker 2: But yeah, I mean the event, unless traumatizing, wouldn merit
Speaker 2: a lifetime obsession, you know what I mean. Yeah, Like,
Speaker 2: if you're if you have no you're right. If you
Speaker 2: have no interest in UFOs or the paranormal or high strangeness,
Speaker 2: there's no reason to think about it consistently, I mean,
Speaker 2: or even talk about it consistently, except maybe in passing about, Hey,
Speaker 2: this really weird thing happened. When do you think about it?
Speaker 2: But yeah, if you have no interest, I mean, there's
Speaker 2: no point in continuing the discussion unless there's reason to.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 1: It reminds me of I went to a Cincinnati Reds
Speaker 1: baseball game I don't know, forever ago, and it was
Speaker 1: a really important game because like Joey Vodo, who I believe,
Speaker 1: I want to say, is the first baseman I think
Speaker 1: of the reds't I'm not a baseball fan. I got
Speaker 1: free tickets from somewhere. It was a super important game
Speaker 1: because Joey Vodo did something important to the Reds franchise.
Speaker 1: I think maybe might have been when he got his
Speaker 1: own cereal. I don't remember, but something happened. It was
Speaker 1: very important in that game. And recently I saw a
Speaker 1: post that was discussing that game and I was like, man,
Speaker 1: that like sounds very familiar. I was at the game.
Speaker 1: It means nothing to me, but it jogged that memory
Speaker 1: of Oh, I do remember when that thing happened because
Speaker 1: I was there at the game.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it could be, it could be.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 1: So that that's where we're gonna end the past at
Speaker 1: Google Abduction, and I'm gonna leave this kind of how
Speaker 1: we've left last couple episodes were you know, twenty twenty
Speaker 1: four is flying right by right now, It's gonna be
Speaker 1: twenty twenty five soon. What do you guys want to
Speaker 1: see from us? Do you want to see some noted strangeness?
Speaker 1: Do you want to see some for legal reasons? What
Speaker 1: do you want to see? Be sure to let us know.
Speaker 1: Join the Facebook group, emails at Tales from the Dark
Speaker 1: White at gmail dot com. Let us know because I'm
Speaker 1: not saying we're out of ideas, but we love your suggestions.
Speaker 1: And with that being said, miss Brittany, unless you have
Speaker 1: anything else you'd like to add, I do not I
Speaker 1: think we're gonna have to add this episode of the
Speaker 1: Pasca Goola abduction and the subsequent contact these afterwards.
Speaker 4: Two our never ending but are always growing tails from
Speaker 4: the dark, as
Speaker 2: Include