Thursday, April 28, 2016

Woman Claims She Was Abducted By Blonde Alien With Cat-Like Eyes


From cryptozoologynews.com: A woman claims she was abducted by a blonde alien that had cat-like eyes.

“He grabbed a small white sheet with many holes in it, and placed it on my exposed back. It stuck there, between my right shoulder and my spine. He grabbed this device with several small needles that matched up with the holes in the device and poked my back through the sheet. It stung when the device was inserted, but the procedure was quick. He came up to me and told me that what he will do next may hurt but is necessary for me. He grabbed a mechanical arm from the ceiling and brought it towards where I was seated. He gently took my left hand with his and held it so my index finger and thumb were spread. Grabbing the mechanical arm, the black head of it changed shape to form two long needles, about 1cm apart. He told me once again that he was sorry if this will hurt, and that it will sting. I watched as the two needles entered the space between my index finger and thumb. Seconds after the device being in my hand, I felt something similar to an electric shock after it was removed from my hand,” she recalled.

For the full article, click here. 

52 comments:

  1. Kate Moss looking good.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. reptilian humanoids like the GRAYs have been here for years

      Delete
  2. One day in August 1965, while backpacking in the vicinity of California's Minaret Mountains, retired physician Dr Robert W. Denton from Bishop, California, assisted a Mexican farm worker in hauling his mule out of a muddy bog at Hemlock Crossing near the bank of the San Joaquin River, and as the mule struggled free its flailing hooves uncovered a large bowl-shaped object in the mud. When Denton examined it, he found that it was a calvarium - the top and rear portion of a skull - which looked humanoid, but unusual in shape and size.

    Dr Denton forwarded this odd calvarium to pathologist Dr Gerald K. Ridge at Ventura County General Hospital for examination. On 29 September 1965, Ridge replied, noting:

    "[The calvarium]...turned into a rather interesting specimen largely by virtue of the unusual length of the skull as well as a very unusual development of the nuchal ridge [a bony cranial ridge or crest to which the jaw muscles are attached] in the occipital zone. This latter fact for a time had me thinking this must be the skull of some anthropoid species other than human, inasmuch as this amount of nuchal ridge development had not been observed by me."

    In his letter, Ridge also revealed that he had shown the calvarium to two colleagues - Drs Jack Prost and Herman Bleibtreul (spelt 'Bleibtreu' in some accounts) - in the Department of Anthropology at UCLA (University of California, Los Angeles campus). Both researchers were similarly surprised by the extent of nuchal ridge development exhibited by the calvarium. Nevertheless:

    "Their conclusions were quite definitely that this is the calvarium of a young human, but that it represents that of an Indian [male], the remains very probably having been in the matrix or adjacent area for many, many years...with no indications of any medico-legal import."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ridge had allowed Bleibtreul to retain the calvarium, but was given a receipt for it, and informed Denton that the two anthropologists had expressed an interest in ascertaining its precise provenance, in case it was an area that had not been investigated archaeologically in recent years. On 10 December 1965, Denton duly forwarded a map of the locality to Ridge - after which the promising case of the Minaret skull came to an abrupt, mystifying end.

      In August 1973, while researching for his forthcoming book, Bigfoot (co-authored with B. Anne Slate), bigfoot investigator Alan Berry met Denton. Learning about the Minaret calvarium, he was both intrigued that Ridge had entertained the notion of it being from some form of anthropoid, and very surprised to hear that Denton had never received any reply or further information after posting off his map to Denton almost eight years earlier. Was it conceivable that this strange cranial portion had been part of a bona fide bigfoot skull?

      Anxious to find out more, Berry elected to pursue the case himself, and began by contacting Ridge, but he too had not heard anything more about it. Moreover, enquiries made directly, as well as via an anthropologist colleague, to UCLA regarding the calvarium's current whereabouts also drew a complete blank. Clay A. Singer, a technician at the museum of UCLA's Department of Anthropology, attempted a thorough search of the records and collections for any clues, but again without success. As for Bleibtreul and Prost (both of whom had left UCLA by then): according to Berry's documentation of this very curious affair in Bigfoot (1976), neither of them claimed to have any memory of the calvarium.

      When Berry mentioned to Bleibtreul that Ridge had obtained a receipt from him after leaving the calvarium with him back in September 1965, however, Bleibtreul was able to recollect it, and revealed that although a search had been planned at the site of its discovery for further relics, it had never actually taken place. As for the calvarium itself, Bleibtreul was convinced that it had indeed been catalogued and retained in UCLA's collections, and he promised to investigate the matter, but when he spoke with Berry again in May 1974 he announced that he had not succeeded in locating it.

      Delete
    2. Matt Moneymaker of the Bigfoot Field Researchers Organization (BFRO) is also interested in the peculiar history of the Minaret skull, after first learning about it in 1988 while attending UCLA as a student, and he raises some salient points regarding it on his website. Bleibtreul had revealed to Berry that although he and Prost believed the calvarium to be from an ancient native American, they were puzzled that it did not correspond with any known population from that area. Moreover, while conversing with Berry, Ridge had described this anomalous specimen as "a rather massive piece of bone of peculiar shaping".

      Yet when Moneymaker queried UCLA anthropologist Professor Ted Rasmusen concerning how ancient native Americans and modern Americans compared, Professor Rasmusen revealed that for dietary reasons the former are normally smaller than the latter. He added: "It's possible for an ancient Indian to have a skull larger than a modern, six-foot-tall, Anglo Saxon male, but it's uncommon...not unknown, but very uncommon".

      In view of this, the conclusion by Bleibtreul and Prost that the calvarium was from a young ancient Indian is somewhat mystifying - as is the calvarium's pronounced nuchal ridge. In any event, as Rasmusen also noted, it would be very difficult to ascertain an individual's race merely from a calvarium; such identifications normally require facial bones and teeth.

      And what of the biggest mystery of all - the Minaret skull's current whereabouts? After speaking with a friend who had been a graduate student in UCLA's History Department and had spent one summer working in the off-campus museum annexe building at Chatsworth, California, Moneymaker considers this huge specimen-packed warehouse to be the likeliest locality for the cryptic calvarium. However, he concedes that it would be no easy task to persuade anyone to search through such an extensive array of material specifically for it.

      Yet even if a portion of a bigfoot skull really does lurk unrecognised and uncatalogued within the museum collections of UCLA, it would certainly not be unprecedented. As I have revealed in my book The Encyclopaedia of New and Rediscovered Animals (2012), there are many case histories on record of a major new species having been 'discovered' not in the field but in some museum collection, following an alert, informed researcher's examination of a hitherto overlooked or misidentified specimen. Perhaps one day, therefore, history will repeat itself yet again, and divulge another zoological surprise.

      http://karlshuker.blogspot.co.uk/2012/08/mystery-of-minaret-skull-mislaid.html?m=0

      Delete
    3. 2 things. Why did you post this out of the blue. And 2, do you think anyone will take the time to read it?

      Delete
    4. 1. Because I came across it by listening to a Ron Morehead interview, it makes better reading than the usual Joe attacks on here and alludes to significant biological evidence for a hominid being lost.

      2. I don't expect anyone like you to read it, you're not here for the subject matter anyway.

      Delete
    5. That is called spamming Joe. What if everyone posted random things they came across on the web that they thought were interesting. No one asked you to do this, and no one cares. And apart from 1 or 2 people, no one will ever read that long book. Quit spamming Joe. That should be a banable offense.

      Delete
    6. If you don't like it, complain to the admins... Nobody particularly wants to read your usual dribbles about how much you hate Joe either, at least this is on topic.

      Deal with it or sod off.

      Delete
    7. ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

      Delete
    8. ...Actually I read it and liked it...I was waiting for it to turn into some MIB cover-up non-sense and was pleasantly surprised to find that was not the case: no one is denying the existence of the skull or the fact that it was(is) puzzling..
      For people who do not want to read it:
      ...Like we always say when people complain about the joking on Evidence: if you dont like somthing, use the scroll bar...

      Delete
    9. LET ME GUESS,,THE SKULL IS MISSING AND IT IS ONLY REPORTED ON BY BIGFOOT ROLE PLAY WEBSITES.

      BIG SURPRISE.

      Delete
    10. You don't role play the contented sceptic too well, kid.

      Delete
    11. Al Berry was a journalist who started out trying to debunk the Sierra Sounds. He's as credible as you're gonna get.

      Delete
    12. No skull. Story only covered on bigfoot sites.




      FAILING GRADE

      Delete
    13. https://thedavisreport.wordpress.com/2014/03/18/unusual-skull-found-near-lovelock-nevada-in-1967/

      Delete
    14. Ikdummy pastes bigfoot role play sites as his source.

      HA HA!

      Delete
    15. That anthropological paper is not from any "Bigfoot" source. Continue ad hominem though by all means, you're practicing your pseudosceptic religion well.

      Delete
    16. Here's an excerpt from an article I had just found...Interesting.

      "Take the Kipunji monkey for example: a species that eluded scientists into the 21st century and continues to baffle them today. First spotted in 2003 in Tanzania, Africa's rarest monkey was once believed to be a myth, a spirit animal thought up by people indigenous to the Rangwe Nature Reserve in the country's Southern Highlands."

      http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/26/africa/kipunji-monkey-tanzania/

      Delete
    17. Excellent, NC.

      Iktomi, try to be more like NC. Misusing Latin won't help. I rebutted your information and information's source, not you.

      Delete
    18. A rebuttal is a form of evidence that is presented to contradict or nullify other evidence that has been presented by an adverse party.

      You did nothing of the sort, wakey, wakey...

      Delete
    19. ^ you plagarized once again Joe. You didn't cite the source where you pulled that definition from. Those arent your own words. What do you have to say for yourself for such blatant plagarism?

      Delete
    20. It was probably lifted from Wikipedia, the favorite resource for uneducated dunces.

      Delete
    21. Serious question... What you gonna do about it, nut shiner?

      Delete
    22. Just wait till dmaker sees this. I think this makes about the 100th time you have blatantly plagarized. Thats illegal you know.

      Delete
    23. Oh no, nut shiner! Please don't tell dmaker! What are you gonna do, phone the police? I tell you what's illegal, racism... Psycho.

      Delete
    24. Son, I am disappoint.


      Delete
    25. And I'll "plagiarise" another gazillion times, as long as it makes your arguments look silly, you'll like it or lump it, ha ha ha!!

      Delete
    26. ^ bigfoot role playing at it's most desperate

      Delete
    27. Racism is illegal??? HAHAHAHAHA, maybe over in the UK, but here in America we enjoy being as racist as we want. And it is so legal, that even the cops do it. I really can't believe you actually said that racism was illegal, lol. How stupid.

      And i am glad to see that you don't care about plagarizing and that you proudly admit it Joe.

      Delete
    28. Still not even a single argument against the evidence? Wow, no wonder you're so butthurt. Don't worry, you can pretend people pretend in the end, that'll stop you looking like an idiot alright.

      : p

      Delete
    29. 9:43... I would gladly admit to plagiarising a sentence from Wikipedia in the face of some psychopath coward who boasts he's a racist. If you were that proud, you'd have your name to your post, coward. You can't even be a proper racist, ha ha ha!!

      Delete
    30. Iktomi,

      You should talk. Calling the guy a racist when you're appropriating a Native American Cultural Figure and well as claiming Russia's Bigfoot is a African woman. You routinely make homophobic comments as well.

      If you're going to be a politically correct wuss, at least be consistent.

      Delete
    31. I've used a Native American name because I admire their culture, and Zana couldn't have been a slave because there is no skull in Africa at the time that had her son's skull morphology. Would you like to post one example of where I have posted anything homophobic? Of course not, you're a gutless troll.

      Delete
    32. ^ 10:40 Get lost, racist nut shiner.

      Delete
    33. Are you capable of having an original thought whilst dmaker isn't around?

      Delete
    34. You're clueless, Iktomi. He called you that to point out your hypocrisy.

      Delete
    35. Go away psycho nerd, audacity knows no boundaries when your sausage fingers let fly at the keyboard.

      Delete
    36. Mock the arthritic much, Iktomi? Iktomi: the racist formerly known as....


      I'll give you a break, kid. ;)

      Delete
    37. Iktomi = nut shining, sausage fingered, bigfoot believin' wanker

      Delete
    38. Oh come on nerd, surely you can do better than that?

      Delete
  3. I thought we only wanted Sasquatch stories? Now if googly eyes was abducted by a blonde haired Skookum beast a.k.a. Ridge runner then I would use up my busy time to read this loony toon's fable!

    ReplyDelete