We have previously discussed the first of three subjects supporting the accuracy of the report of Herbert Schirmer concerning his abduction. We follow here with the second and third subjects.
Our second point of interest concerns radar. Schirmer, under hypnosis, states what he was told by the talkative alien “Now they are telling me their ships have been knocked out of the air by radar.” Asked by the Dr. Williams how radar could do that, Schirmer replied “I don’t know… there’s something… ioniz.. it is a long word which I can’t pronounce.” “Ionization?” asked Williams. Replied Schirmer: “Yes, that’s the word.” Imagination or recollection?
We turn to an account by Sergeant Clifford Stone who served in the U.S. Army for twenty-two years, ending in 1988. He had been very much involved in the military investigation into the UFO phenomenon. To Steven Greer, as reported in “Disclosure,” Stone stated that by 1969, when he was first briefed that there were only a few dozen cases of downed UFOs. “And… it sounds crazy but our radar wreaked havoc on the ET guidance systems and they had to make adjustments to their guidance systems for that.”
Were each of these two men actually told that by aliens, either first or, in the case of Stone, second hand? Probably. Was radar actually a danger to the aliens’ craft? Possibly not. We turn to Philip Corso’s “The day after Roswell (p 293). He states that U.S. forces were at some point sending space based high energy lasers against the alien craft, the technology for which had been reverse engineered from the craft downed at Roswell, and presumably other places. These lasers acted like the lightning strike that had so thoroughly disrupted the electromagnetic wave propagator of the UFO at Roswell that the pilots couldn’t maintain control. Assuming Corso is correct, it appears quite possible that the aliens, knowing only of our use of radar, nothing about our development of lasers, did indeed convey to both Earthlings that they were endangered by radar. Or maybe it was in fact the radar. In all events they did make adjustments. For one thing they made themselves invisible to radar resulting in many visual sightings thereafter resulting in no radar confirmation.
Point three concerns the force field, most particularly its use as a defensive measure. Force fields as a means of UFO propulsion were discussed little, if at all, before the 1990s, and have apparently never been discussed as a defensive weapon, except as a secondary and probably unintended result of the propulsive force. And except, that is, by Schirmer. Schirmer explained to the hypnotist how the aliens extracted small amounts of electricity from Earth’s power lines. Asked by the hypnotist why they did so, Schirmer replied: “When they land, an invisible force field is thrown around the ship in a circular pattern. He said [quoting the alien] that the electromagnetic field is a defense mechanism.”
One of the clearest and most detailed explanations of the force field as a means of propulsion is discussed by Paul R. Hill in his “Unconventional Flying Objects,” a term he prefers to “Unidentified.” He was a highly respected and highly experienced scientist. In his 1995 book, still one of the best scientific explanations of the of the UFO, he offered convincing proof for the force field as the means of propulsion, and cited in support several cases of encounters with UFOs. Unintentional though it may be, one of those cases in particular, and many other encounters, point to use of the force field as a defensive one, though never discussed by Hill as such. The defensive aspect of the field was considered almost universally as an unintended by-product of the propulsion system. But it is apparently used as a defensive system even when there is no propulsion and the craft is at rest on the ground.
The one case in particular cited by Hill occurred February 14th, 1967. A farmer in Missouri, just before sunrise, saw a lighted object on the ground about fifteen feet in diameter and several small humanoids outside of it. As the farmer got within about eighty feet of the object, the humanoids entered it. When the farmer approached to within about thirty feet, he picked up some rocks, thinking he would knock holes in it. The first rock “stopped about fifteen feet from it and just hit the ground.” The next one was thrown on top of it, and it “hit something and bounced.” The farmer then decided to walk right up to it, but when about fifteen feet from it “I just walked up against a wall; I couldn’t see it at all.” He explained that there was just a pressure holding him back. The top, it seems, might be an Achilles heel, not protected as are the horizontal rims.
There are many other such encounters. On the night of November 3rd, 1973, a New Hampshire man ‘s dog seemed restless and the master went to the door to let him out. He was shocked to see two oddly shaped and suited creatures. There was obviously a craft in the woods behind them. The man’s snarling, vicious German Shepherd obeyed his order to attack, but upon reaching just short of the trespassers, the dog stopped in his tracks and returned whining into the house. The aliens then left. The dog had obviously met with some unexpected impediment, most probably the force field from the nearby craft.
On September 10th, 1954, in Valenciennes, France, a thirty-four year old metal worker heard his dog bark. But when he went outside to investigate he saw the dog whining and crawling on his belly. Circumstantially it thus appears that this dog also had met a force field.
There are reports of bullets fired from weapons dropping short after travelling only a few yards, and other similar incidents. In an article by author John Keel in Saga Magazine, winter issue 1974, he writes: that often witnesses approaching a grounded UFO “found themselves barred by an invisible wall or shield around the object.” But if anyone other than Schirmer has uttered the thought that these force fields were intended as defensive weapons, it has been difficult to locate it in the literature. But it would comport with observed facts and appear to be a significant bit of intelligence.
Postscript: According to the Condon report: “No evidence was found that a physical object had been present as claimed.”
Among the findings of author Eric Norman, who investigated a field, not far from the highway: There were three pointed marks where the tripod landing gear had sunk deep into the earth. Patches of grass had been swirled and twisted into odd patterns as though the vegetation had been under powerful centrifugal pressure.”
A pity the Condon group did not find this evidence. Perhaps it might have changed their conclusion. Then again it might not have.
The author’s web site is www.ourinterplanetaryfuture.com