Addendum on Occupant Reports (CE III’s) from the 1947 UFO Wave
Prepared November 30, 2005
When this report was written in 1967, I had come across only two UFO occupant cases from newspapers that I had examined up to the time of publication. These were Cases 547, in Tacoma, Washington, on July 7, and 698, in Acres Home, Texas, a Houston suburb, on July 8. Neither of these two cases appeared very impressive – at least based upon the accounts that had been published in the local papers.
In the Tacoma incident (Case 547), several people, including Gene Gamachi, of 1309 South 8 Street, I. W. Martenson and Gordon Pollack, together with a group called “the Center and J Street Neighbors,” had reported that a flying saucer, one of several, had landed on a rooftop at an unspecified time, and that several “little people” had gotten out; the occupants “vanished when reporters approached.” No other information was included in this abbreviated account in the Tacoma News Tribune, of July 8th.
In the Texas report (Case 698), an unidentified merchant seaman, walking on Route 149 in the Acres Home addition north northwest of Houston, called the Houston Post and reported that “a big, silver disc” had landed nearby and from it emerged a “little man two feet tall” with a head “as big as a basketball.” He “shook hands with the seaman” and got back into the object, which then took off, according to the brief account from the Houston Post, July 9th. Because neither of these two CEIII cases were reported seriously and both included only a minimum of detail, not much could be made of the occupants of the 1947 wave – an area of UFO reports that would, within a few years, become a much more pronounced part of the UFO phenomenon.
In subsequent newspaper searches by myself, and others, at least three other CEIII incidents were discovered: In Webster, Massachusetts, an unidentified woman had called the office of the [Worcester?] Telegram to report that a 70-year-old relative had seen an object “shoot by her window” at about 11:30 p.m. on June19th. In the saucer, which was “a little bigger than the moon,” she saw “a slim man in what looked like a Navy uniform.” No other information was forthcoming. An account appeared in the Telegram on July [?].
On June 24th, the same afternoon that Kenneth Arnold had his sighting on the western flank of Mount Rainier, an unidentified Pendleton, Oregon man was driving along a rural road outside of Pendleton when he saw a large disc-shaped object hovering six feet over a nearby field. He could see “two short figures wearing green suits and white helmets” standing under the object. The figures “suddenly vanished” and the object then “shot towards the Columbia River, made a big circle” and then disappeared toward the mountains. The report appeared in the Pendleton East Oregonian, following the publicity given to Arnold’s report.
In Nashville, Tennessee, a man wrote to the Nashville Tennessean to report that while he was driving on a highway outside of Nashville, he saw a flying saucer land in a field and two “strange little men” emerge. They were “all heads and arms and legs and glowing like fire-flies.” They “exchanged greetings” with the witness and re-entered the object, which then “took off in a cloud of dust.” This brief account was published in the Tennessean of July [?].
There were several overseas accounts of UFO occupants in 1947: One, near Pitanga, Brazil, on July 23rd, in which a man named Jose C. Higgins observed a lens-shaped object land 150 feet away. Three seven-foot occupants, dressed in inflated, transparent suits, emerged and spoke to him in an unknown language. They tried to get Higgins to enter their craft, but the witness refused, and they allowed him to go. The beings remained in the area for a half-hour, observed by the witness some distance away, then re-entered the object, which took off. The case was reported by the Lorenzens in the APRO Bulletin of May, 1961.
The other report, a landing-with-occupants in Raveo, Carnia, in northern Italy, occurred on August 14, 1947: R. L. Johannis came upon a disc wedged into a mountain crevice. He saw two small three-foot figures with large heads nearby. When he asked who they were, the beings released a gas that immobilized the witness; a few minutes later he saw them enter the ravine. Shortly after that, the disc rose out of the ravine in a vertical position, hovered about fifteen feet above the ground, then leveled a bit and took off with a blast of air. An account of this case appeared in Flying Saucer Review, Vol. 13, No. 1. However, since the Report on the UFO Wave of 1947 dealt exclusively with domestic UFO accounts (including some from Canada), these two foreign CEIII cases are mentioned here only in passing.
There were, of course, reports of recovered alien bodies – four in some accounts, five in others – disclosed more than thirty years after the fact in connection with the “debris” discovered by William W. ("Mac") Brazel on a farm outside of Corona, New Mexico, early in July, of 1947. But as these bodies – two dead, one injured and one taken alive, according to most reports – were not disclosed concurrently with the crashed “flying disc” reports that came out of Roswell on July 8th of that year, they do not actually qualify as UFO occupant reports from the 1947 wave of sightings. In 1967, when the Report on the UFO Wave of 1947 was published, there were still absolutely no references on public record to any UFO occupants associated with the crash of a “disc” near Corona.
It would be another ten years before such allegations would begin to emerge. In spite of all the research, all the claims and counter-claims, and all of the published material that has subsequently appeared on Roswell, the author retains a basic uncertainty about an alleged “extraterrestrial” connection with the Roswell incident. This seemingly arbitrary position will undoubtedly antagonize and provoke many partisan researchers on the subject of Roswell, but the author insists on reserving his basic skepticism toward an “extraterrestrial” interpretation of this most provocative mystery, feeling that it still remains inconclusive and unresolved nearly sixty years after it first occurred.
Back to the Table of Contents On to Section II