UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 22

Re: Gill Sighting - Shough

From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 11:36:43 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 08:31:17 -0400
Subject: Re: Gill Sighting - Shough


>From: Manuel Borraz <maboay.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 21:43:31 +0200
>Subject: Re: Gill Sighting

>Concerning whether Rev. Gill knew anything about Adamski. In the
>following paragraphs, the Reverend was talking about Stephen
>Moi's sighting on June 21, 1959. Note the "saucer shaped object
>with four little black bumps" that Gill finds "at the back of
>his mind":
 __

<snip>

>Well now, I had, somewhere or other, read about flying saucers,
>but I wasn't terribly interested in it, and I had recalled
>somewhere at the back of my mind that there was a saucer shaped
>object with four little black bumps -or bumps of some kind-
>underneath. So I reproduced from memory what I had at the back
>of my mind, and put in these little black dots that Stephen
>described. I said: "Was that it?" He said: "Yes, exactly".

>[Rev. Gill's talk to the Victorian Flying Saucer Research Society
>on October 28, 1959]

Hello Manuel

Thank you very much for sending me the full text of this talk.
I'd only seen excerpts before.

That image _may_ have come from hearing Norman Cruttwell
describe an Adamski "scout ship". Cruttwell was familiar with
Adamski's photographs and describes showing them to a Papuan
witness after a sighting in July. Or it could have come from
seeing magazine pictures at some time.

Gill himself suggested to David Durie in a letter on June 26,
before the main event at Boianai that night, that the "saucer"
seen by Stephen Gill Moi (or Moi Gill) on the 21st could have
been influenced by an image lodged in his unconscious, as it was
"very likely" that Stephen had "seen illustrations of some kind
in a magazine". He challenged Stephen: "Surely you've seen
pictures or heard people talk of flying saucers?" Stephen said
no. But evidently Gill was aware that such materials had been
available from time to time around Boianai.

But it's also interesting, isn't it, that Stephen's sighting was
completely independent of Gill in the sense that the latter had
been away on patrol in the mountains and returned to hear
Stephen's story a couple of days after the event. Stephen
apparently volunteered the description spontaneously, without
any coaching from Gill, who believed that Stephen had "no
knowledge of previous sightings". And Gill himself did not
describe seeing an Adamski-style craft on June 26, but rather an
object with an odd arrangement of "legs", just like the other
witnesses, including Stephen. The only thing in Gill's report
that might plausibly be traced to things he had previously heard
or read from Cruttwell is the "mother ship" reference. __

>C. Allan and M. Shough have commented on Rev. Gill probably
>misidentifying Venus on July 6, 1959. Note also how it all
>began on this particular occasion:
 __

>I was visiting David's college - the teachers' training college
>there - 20 miles away from us, and we were talking about this
>experience. With me was the Reverend Edwin Dams, the Reverend
>David Durie, the acting principal, and his wife. And after we
>had discussed it for a few minutes he said, well, why not come
>out and have a look at the sky and see if there's anything
>there? And I said, oh, they just don't come at beck and call
>like that, I think that would be rather useless. He said, well,
>I'm going out at any rate. And he went out and he came rushing
>back and said, "There is something - I'm sure there is". And so
>we all went out and sure enough, I identified it as one of
>these objects.

>[Same source as above; Rev. Gill answering written questions at
>the end of the talk.]

I find this interesting too, again on the positive side. I
pointed out elsewhere that what they described was a fairly
accurate portrait of Venus setting, correct as to times and
elevations and with details of the planet's phase visible in
binoculars, reddening due to atmospheric scattering near the
horizon, and autokinetic jiggles of the observer's eye. Now we
find that this is so, even though they had just been talking
about Gill's sighting and were (at least some of them) very much
"in the mood" to see UFOs.

The mundanity (is that a word?) of this sighting is in contrast
to the very remarkable phenomenon described by Gill at Boianai a
week earlier. Just the restraining influence of normative peer
pressure maybe? Or do we have to concede that there were other
physical factors involved at Boianai? So very gross is the
disparity that in my view we ought to concede that there were
other physical factors. But what were they? As I can't really
believe in the astronomical/meteorological theory as it stands,
that leaves the Gill case - and several others from the flap -
 an unknown in my book.


Martin Shough




[ Next Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |

UFO UpDates Main Index

UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp


Archive programming by Glenn Campbell at Glenn-Campbell.com