• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

The Pascagoula (Mississippi) Abduction (Hickson & Parker; 1973)

About time someone brought out the truth in this case, their fright and panic sounds very much like Betty and Barney Hill's!
Thank You!
It's been a case which, since from when first discussed here, I intended to have another look at, when time permitted.

Now resolving the apparent hurdle, as to how the object could have appeared behind them, yet they were floated across water to it and back again, suddenly this element made sense.

Also confirming the documented sighting, of what could be the same object, circling overhead beforehand, establishes a possible 'UFO' connection.

It needed that particular evidence to be clarified and this description does exist - right from the outset.

On which, I have deleted the post with Hickson's actual quote, as there is a much more informative posting I can offer instead.

Still working on a timeline and not far off completing that. Again, it all seems cohesive and nothing whatsoever to indicate the accounts from both men - up to the point of actual first contact - are untrustworthy.

The following will hopefully explain more:

PASCAGOULA - IN PERSPECTIVE

This is the first actual publication from Charles Hickson and Calvin Parker of their story, albeit it's effectively Hickson's account, as Parker had no recollection (at this point in time) from the moment he "passed out", following their initial observation and contact.

Remarkably, this full account of events on the night of Thursday 11 October, 1973, did not appear in the press until a month later, published by the 'National Tattler'.

Although I can not presently locate a copy of that publication, the contents were reproduced:

Berkeley Daily Gazette (Berkeley, California)
19 November, 1973

_Pair tells of being taken aboard UFO_

By CHARLES HICKSON and CALVIN PARKER

We were fishing behind the old Shapeter Shipyard building on the Pascagoula River. I turned to get some more bait, when I heard a ripping sound.

I turned around and saw a spacecraft with bright, flashing blue-looking lights. It just hovered without touching the ground.

It seemed to open up, but there really wasn't a door there at all. These three creatures came floating out toward us. I was so scared that I couldn't believe it was happening.

The creatures were pale, ghost-like, about five feet high. They were sort of light flesh-colored, or more pale gray, with crab-like claws for hands and rounded feet.

THE CREATURES were on us before we knew it. Two of them seemed to lift me off the ground, and I became motionless and glided into the craft (Parker said he passed out as he was carried into the craft).

After I got inside, I had no feelings. I was helpless, but I could still move my eyes. It was real bright inside, but no particular color. There were no light fixtures, but it was plenty bright.

Something big and round, which looked like a big eye, moved back and forth across my body. The two creatures moved me around so the eye could check me in various positions. I just kind of floated without touching anything. I didn't see any attachment for the eye. It was just kind of suspended in air.

THE TWO THINGS left me for a while, maybe half a minute, and I was in there just motionless. All I could do was move my eyes.

I never felt any pain. They didn't hurt us at all.

Later, they carried me back outside and I floated down on my feet. I was so weak-kneed, I think I fell over. The creatures didn't walk at all. Their legs stayed together and they floated.

After I have thought more about it, I believe they were more like robots. They acted like they had a specific thing to do, and they did it. They didn't try to communicate with us.

I HEARD ONE OF them make a buzzing sound. I might have been in contact with something somewhere else. I didn't see the opening in the front of the face move.

I didn't see anything that looked like eyes. There was something pointing out like a nose and then an opening under this, but no eyes.

The craft. which was sort of rounded or oval, was about 8 to 10 feet wide and about 8 feet high.

It came upon us in a split second and it left with a zip. It was gone in a half second.

There were on us so quick, we couldn't do anything. I doubt if we could have resisted them, if we had tried to. I'm sure they are far more advanced than we are.

(...)

(End of extract)

The original, entire article, can be found on my website:

www.jceaston.com/1973_11_19_Berkeley_Daily_Gazette.pdf

So far as the object being observed aerially, this is noticeably absent.

As previously highlighted on a separate thread, I thought that in the audio of the interview by law enforcement officers, there sounded like a mention from Hickson of what was presumed to be the same craft, circling overhead beforehand.

It was, however, insufficiently clear from the recording, to determine this with certainty.

I believe that question has now been resolved and in the affirmative:

The Times and Democrat
21 October, 1973

Hickson, a foreman at the Walker Shipyard, said it all happened at about 8 p.m. as he and Parker were casting for hardhead or croakers from a pier at old Schaupeter shipyard. The old yard has the sunbleached skeleton of a barge drydock and a couple of iron piers, flanked by rusting auto hulks, empty bottles and beer cans.

Though directly across the 100-yard wide river from Pascagoula, it is isolated. The great cranes of Ingalls Shipyard loom about a mile to the south. Busy US. 90 runs about 150 yards to the north.

Hickson said the UFO circled, then came down to hover just above the junk. Suddenly an opening appeared and the three creatures, "all wrinkled and pale," glided out.

"There I was, me with just a spinning reel, and Calvin done went hysterical on me," Hickson said. "You can't imagine how it was."

Hickson, whose interrogation by police was recorded, was vague on details. "Boss," he said once, "I just don't know. You got to remember how scared I was.

Both Hickson and Parker, after the first day or so, refused to talk further with newsmen.
(End)

We therefore do appear to have sufficient, documented evidence, all of which exists prior to any hypnosis being involved, of an Unidentified Flying Object and with it, a case which has seemingly stood up to scrutiny.

Moreso, it perhaps is stronger having come through that

It does leave you wondering if there might conceivably be...

..."something to all of this about UFOs"...
 
... We therefore do appear to have sufficient, documented evidence, all of which exists prior to any hypnosis being involved, of an Unidentified Flying Object and with it, a case which has seemingly stood up to scrutiny. ...

I'm not so sure about this "prior to any hypnosis being involved" aspect.

Harder (APRO; from California) and Hynek (Illinois?) were claimed to have arrived on the scene within 2 - 3 days. According to multiple accounts Harder tried hypnotism on Hickson soon after arrival. The most specific time attribution I've found is this:
"... On Sunday morning, October 14, Dr. Harder hypnotized the two men separately, and regressed them back to the time of their experience, the terror of which they both relived. ..."
http://www.ignaciodarnaude.com/ufologia/Heiden,Abduction 1973,Pascagoula,FSR74V20N6.pdf
(Richard Heiden article; revised version of one published in Spanish in September 1974)

I don't see how the Berkeley Daily Gazette article can be construed as pre-hypnosis without further verification. The Gazette article of 19 November (5 weeks after the incident) only claims the National Tattler version was released earlier that same week. It doesn't claim the Tattler article being re-published was original to the October 12 - 14 timeframe before Harder performed his hypnosis sessions.

If you've found evidence for the origin and provenance of the Tattler article I'd like to know what it is.

In this September 2021 interview:

https://countryroadsmagazine.com/art-and-culture/people-places/the-pascagoula-abduction/

... Parker claimed that on the morning after (i.e., 12 October) the shipyard (his new job location) was swarming with news reporters wanting to question him and Hickson about the incident.

If reporters were swarming for the story during the first day or two following the incident their reports would seem to be the only documentation that preceded the hypnosis sessions on Sunday.
 
OK ... I've finally tracked down the original APRO Bulletin reports on the Pascagoula incident. The earlier issue (22-2) contains Harder's report as well as the most detailed account of the Harder / Hynek investigative visit I've seen.


APRO Bulletin 22 no. 2, 1973*
https://archive.org/details/apro-22-2-1973/mode/2up

*NOTE: APRO Bulletin issues were recurrently published later than their titles suggested. This issue could not have been published as early as October, because it refers to an event occurring on 31 October. The copyright date indicates it was published within 1973 (i.e., by the end of the year).


APRO Bulletin 22 no. 3, 1973**
https://archive.org/details/apro-22-3-1973/page/6/mode/2up

**NOTE: This issue wasn't published until sometime in early 1974 (per the copyright date).
 
Because the earlier of the two APRO Bulletin issues contains the original substance of the investigation reporting, I'm posting the page images for archival purposes.
APROBulletin22-2-PAGE1.jpg
APROBulletin22-2-PAGE3.jpg


APROBulletin-22.2-PAGE4.jpg
SOURCE: https://archive.org/details/apro-22-2-1973/page/4/mode/2up
 
Some initial comments about events and timeline based on the APRO Bulletin report ...

- Harder arrived on the morning of Saturday the 13th. He met with Hickson and Parker in two sessions - one in the morning and one in the afternoon. In the afternoon session Harder hypnotized Hickson after others demonstrated to Hickson there was nothing to fear about being hypnotized. Harder obtained little information from this hypnosis session.

- There was a subsequent meeting on Sunday the 14th. It was in this meeting that Harder hypnotized Hickson (for the second time) and Parker. This was the session from which Harder obtained more detailed information about the incident.

- Any "pre-hypnosis" account from Hickson therefore had to have been obtained prior to Saturday afternoon.

- Any "pre-hypnosis" account from Parker therefore had to have been obtained prior to Sunday afternoon.

- APRO personnel had no further direct contact with Hickson or Parker beyond a contact with their attorney a week after the incident.
 
Now ... Regarding the origin / provenance for the Berkeley Daily Gazette / National Tattler articles quoted earlier ...

I've found compelling evidence indicating the National Tattler article isn't the original text source. Flying Saucer Review (FSR) ran an article covering the Pascagoula incident in early 1974:

MAJOR 'FLAP' IN THE UNITED STATES
Eileen Buckle
Flying Saucer Review (FSR)
Vol. 19 No. 6
November / December 1973
(Published April 1974)
http://www.ignaciodarnaude.com/ufologia/FSR 1973 V 19 N 6.pdf

Buckle states the following:
FSR-19-6-1974-Buckle.jpg

... and then quotes an extended account that is "99%" identical to the Berkeley Daily Gazette / National Tattler text.

This means the earliest published account (we've found to date; as quoted in full by Buckle) was obtained a week after the incident - i.e., days after the hypnosis sessions on the 13th and 14th.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BS3
Because the earlier of the two APRO Bulletin issues contains the original substance of the investigation reporting, I'm posting the page images for archival purposes.
SOURCE: https://archive.org/details/apro-22-2-1973/page/4/mode/2up

So - the writer of the article basically states that after the initial brief interview with Hickson and Parker, before the group adjourned, they gave "a brief resume of earlier cases" like the Hills, telling the witnesses they are among a very small group of people to have had this experience.

This is a concern as they are already encouraging the witnesses to fix what is presumably a distressing, garbled memory in a very specific context.
 
Last edited:
One thing I was quite surprised to find out recently was that the well-known initial drawing of the 'entity' was actually done by one of the shipyard foremen.

I have to say I'm still not any clearer about how the object arrived. Is there anything in the initial transcript indicating it circled? The men focus on a door 'opening up' rather than on noticing the object descending, circling, whatever. And where is the confirmation that the men were in an area of " marsh terrain, littered with garbage [...] evidently unsuitable for any vehicle to have driven there"? As far as I have been able to gather they were by an old pier, behind a shipyard building, but to all intents and purposes in a shipyard. There was a garbage dump over which the object was perceived to 'hover' but this rather implies that vehicles had been able to get in to dump the garbage!

It would have been helpful if APRO had taken some photographs of the sighting area.
 
Last edited:
Regarding the “crab-like hands”, this reminded me if the early-70s diving suits:

View attachment 57104

I still think that divers provide the best 'conventional' explanation of the entities - plus the vicinity of Pascagoula, with its shipyards and naval facilities, is exactly the place you'd expect to find 'professional' divers, the sort who might have used the more outlandish-looking specialist gear that's a bit closer to the witness descriptions.

One of the apparent corroborating witnesses says they'd seen a figure in the water at the time they claimed to have seen a blue light in the sky. Who knows how accurate this account is but if truthful, it suggests the presence of divers to me.
 
And for a slightly more sensational interpretation of the 'diver' angle, have a look at the equipment a Soviet submariner might use to exit a submarine - note those gloves in particular.

You could imagine a scenario where Hickson and Parker, with spectacular bad luck, happened to have set up their rods in the same spot some Soviet operatives were being landed from a mini submersible, or similar. Still wearing their submariners' drysuits, the Russians would have had to neutralise the men (probably using an injection - exactly as described by Hickson) and establish they were not part of a counter espionage unit. Who knows, maybe the 'light in the sky' was a flare signalling 'bollocks, we've been found'?

As for the apparent door opening, the simplest explanation might be that the Soviets had ensconced themselves in an existing building on site, and what the men saw was simply a lighted doorway opening where they weren't expecting one?

All sounds far-fetched, but still less so than crab clawed alien robots, surely?
 
Last edited:
And Calvin Parker and Charles Hickson might just be telling the absolute truth about their experience.
 
... I have to say I'm still not any clearer about how the object arrived. Is there anything in the initial transcript indicating it circled? The men focus on a door 'opening up' rather than on noticing the object descending, circling, whatever. ...

This is another one of those famous UFO cases in which the original testimonies are vague or contradictory regarding a UFO's arrival and / or departure.

Harder's account from the 14 October hypnosis sessions states Hickson and Parker observed the object hovering circa 2 feet off the ground about 40 feet away (in a position that was behind them as they'd been sitting and fishing). There's no mention of having seen the object aloft nor having seen it "land." Harder writes that the object "descended", but nothing in his or the other early first-person accounts supports the notion Hickson and / or Parker actually saw it descend from the sky. In other words, Harder prejudiced the impression portrayed by phrasing things to suggest a flight / descent that was never reported.

Harder's account specifically states, "Neither Hickson nor Parker saw the object leave."

The apparent Mississippi Press (and others') account obtained a week later merely states Hickson heard a sound and turned to see the object (behind his fishing position) already in its hovering position near the ground about 40 feet away. This early passage doesn't conflict with the Harder account. However ...

Conflicting with both this version of the arrival and the Harder / hypnosis claims, this / these newspaper account(s) include(s) a claim that the object "... came upon us in a split second and it left with a zip. It was gone in half a second." This early newspaper version contradicts itself about the nature of the arrival, and it conflicts with the Harder / hypnosis departure claim obtained from the witnesses. Even then, the documented testimony doesn't mention anything about flight, landing, or takeoff.

IMHO the only reasonable interpretation from the earliest evidence (we've found ...) is that the object was suddenly / unexpectedly "there" and just as suddenly "gone."
 
  • Like
Reactions: BS3
In case it's helpful ... Here's the listing of early Pascagoula incident reports and accounts cited in 1973 - Year of the Humanoids.

73-Year-Humanoids-Refs.jpg
This listing includes both the APRO Bulletin articles.

I notice there's no entry for any publication by Hynek. I'm increasingly curious about Hynek's impressions of the incident and what he may have published about it. If you check the earlier APRO Bulletin article (images posted earlier) you'll notice the remarks most often cited as being Hynek's were really Harder's.
 
I'm not so sure about this "prior to any hypnosis being involved" aspect.
Thank you for the reply - I was looking forward to your feedback.

Firstly, a misunderstanding exists, which can readily be clarified.

The pre-hypnosis documentation, referred solely to our interview audios.

As you note, the 'hypnotic regression', kicked-in early and consequently, that audio, being pristine, is priceless.

Since my post, there have been some other developments - shall address them in separate responses.

One is incredibly important - a transcript of the interviews which took place next day, at Keesler AFB.

Again, mercifully devoid of any potential 'hypnosis' contamination, we have significantly more input from Calvin Parker.

I have located a full copy which can be made available and duly uploaded the following to my website:

MUFON UFO JOURNAL
No. 195
May-June, 1984
Pages 6 - 9

THE AIR FORCE AND PASCAGOULA

www.jceaston.com/1984_195_MUFON_JOURNAL.pdf
 
A copy of the full, first 'official' statement by Hickson and Palmer, albeit effectively by Hickson alone, has been uploaded to my website.

This publication, by the 'Berkeley Daily Gazette', on 19 November, 1973, acknowledges same to be a reproduction of an article, first printed by the 'National Tatler', earlier that week.

I could not locate a copy of the original.

Although the content dates from after our 'hypnotic regression' become involved, nothing of note seems to have been added to the initial, pre-hypnosis interviews, conducted by the Sheriff's department, on the night of Thursday 11 October.

www.jceaston.com/1973_11_19_Berkeley_Daily_Gazette.pdf
 
Courtesy of the 1974 book publication, 'Beyond Earth', by Ralph and Judy Blum, we have a full transcript of those seminal witness interviews, from only circa 3 hours after the events had taken place, on the night of Thursday 11 October, 1973.

This comes under 'fair use' copyright, permitted by subscription to the source.

Being so lengthy, copies of the original print have been uploaded to my website:

www.jceaston.com/Transcript_01.jpg

www.jceaston.com/Transcript_02.jpg

www.jceaston.com/Transcript_03.jpg

www.jceaston.com/Transcript_04.jpg

www.jceaston.com/Transcript_05.jpg

www.jceaston.com/Transcript_06.jpg

www.jceaston.com/Transcript_07.jpg
 
Because the earlier of the two APRO Bulletin issues contains the original substance of the investigation reporting,....
Thank you - this is incredibly helpful, as it ties-in with all else known.

As regards a timeline...

From the Keesler AFB interviews:

Derrington: What time would you say lapsed from the beginning until you were released?

Hickson: Oh, it had to be - it's hard to say.

Derrington: Was it hours or minutes?

Hickson: It had to be an hour or so. to be that long, but it seemed like an eternity. As far as I know I was conscious but I had no sensations inside of there — I didn't have any power to move.

(...)

Derrington: Did you discuss what had happened between you?

Parker: I passed out. I did not remember anything.

Hickson: We discussed what had happened to me. We talked a while trying to decide what to do. We drove to a quick service store and discussed it for almost an hour before we decided to go to the Sheriff's office...
(End)

The understanding now, including from other snippets, would seem to be that they first drove to the Mississippi Press office, discovered there was no reporter available until next morning and then drove on to the service store.

From there, they telephoned Keesler AFB and were duly advised that as UFOs were no longer investigatd by the Air Force, it would be a matter more appropriate to the local Sheriff's department.

Confirmed elsewhere by Hickson, it was at this moment, they deliberated at length, as to whether they wanted to tell their story to the police.

Hickson has commented on the dilemma - a need to have someone in authority being alerted to what they had experienced, versus the almost certainty of being laughed at by local law enforcement officers.

The two men were advised to remain where they were and a police car arrived within 10 minutes. Hickson was given a prerequisite sobriety check and only when deemed fit to drive, were they àsked to follow the police car back to the Sheriff's department, where they arrived at around 11:00 p.m..

Next, the interviews took place.

Although there is more involved concerning the actual clock time when our incident began to unfold and its duration, there is no possible certainty - neither Hickson or Parker were wearing a watch.

Overall, its probably the closest we can expect to achieve and sufficiently adequate.

It all seems to be cohesive, with nothing relatedly disconcerting being evident.
 
Last edited:
These are my stated conclusions.

It might now be so far as we can go, in search of essentially gathering existing, earliest, case material together in one place, for consideration.

We can demonstrate that the story of events preceding and subsequent to the central incident, are cohesive and nothing disconcerting emerges - quite the contrary.

As things stand and always subject to revision should circumstances change, this following, personal view, is based on a presumption - no evidence otherwise - that the closest of encounters described by Charles Hickson & Calvin Parker, is founded on a genuine occurrence.

As regards the foremost element of being temporarily captured ànd subjected to an apparent study, before being set free, this is a profoundly alarming and sinister matter.

To venture that both men were released unharmed, would be an antithesis of the truth.

There is one aspect, which is particularly notable in the Charles Hickson & Calvin Parker, Pascagoula case.

The documented, evidential outcome, from only circa three hours afterwards, is that something so profoundly traumatic took place, it affected both participants to an extent they were reflecting on their religious beliefs, searching for an explanation which could fit within their pre-existing, Biblical concepts.

Whilst Hickson's comparative maturity enables a rational contemplation, conversely, Parker is still a teenager and can not come to terms with the seemingly unfathomable terror experienced.

Both innocent victims were life-long casualties.

Whether the perpetrators were from another world, or another dimension, how they were able to manifest and retreat and what their purpose was, we shall doubtless never know.

Repercussions extend far beyond.

If the Pascagoula case evidences a reality, then where might it exist elsewhere?

It is unique in having an ostensibly creditable, primary witness in Charles Hickson, who consciously recalls critical details of what transpired. Furthermore, his account is partially corroborated by Calvin Parker, until Parker lost consciousness.

Did something go wrong... was Hickson supposed to end up like Parker, both regaining consciousness having only the vague memory of a bright light and seemingly a period of time unaccounted for?

Ultimately, it remains a case which despite ticking almost every evidential box you could realistically ever hope to, leaves us to make a personal judgement call.

Perhaps it is indeed akin to having a peek inside Pandora's box.
 
These are my stated conclusions.

It might now be so far as we can go, in search of essentially gathering existing, earliest, case material together in one place, for consideration.

We can demonstrate that the story of events preceding and subsequent to the central incident, are cohesive and nothing disconcerting emerges - quite the contrary.

As things stand and always subject to revision should circumstances change, this following, personal view, is based on a presumption - no evidence otherwise - that the closest of encounters described by Charles Hickson & Calvin Parker, is founded on a genuine occurrence.

As regards the foremost element of being temporarily captured ànd subjected to an apparent study, before being set free, this is a profoundly alarming and sinister matter.

To venture that both men were released unharmed, would be an antithesis of the truth.

There is one aspect, which is particularly notable in the Charles Hickson & Calvin Parker, Pascagoula case.

The documented, evidential outcome, from only circa three hours afterwards, is that something so profoundly traumatic took place, it affected both participants to an extent they were reflecting on their religious beliefs, searching for an explanation which could fit within their pre-existing, Biblical concepts.

Whilst Hickson's comparative maturity enables a rational contemplation, conversely, Parker is still a teenager and can not come to terms with the seemingly unfathomable terror experienced.

Both innocent victims were life-long casualties.

Whether the perpetrators were from another world, or another dimension, how they were able to manifest and retreat and what their purpose was, we shall doubtless never know.

Repercussions extend far beyond.

If the Pascagoula case evidences a reality, then where might it exist elsewhere?

It is unique in having an ostensibly creditable, primary witness in Charles Hickson, who consciously recalls critical details of what transpired. Furthermore, his account is partially corroborated by Calvin Parker, until Parker lost consciousness.

Did something go wrong... was Hickson supposed to end up like Parker, both regaining consciousness having only the vague memory of a bright light and seemingly a period of time unaccounted for?

Ultimately, it remains a case which despite ticking almost every evidential box you could realistically ever hope to, leaves us to make a personal judgement call.

Perhaps it is indeed akin to having a peek inside Pandora's box.
Great analysis.

PC Alan Godfrey also suffered life-long adverse consequences from his Yorkshire UFO encounter that ended his Police career early and led to him at one point drinking a bottle of vodka a day:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...encounter-branded-crazy-fallout-cost-job.html

Whatever happened to these guys - and others - we always need to bear this in mind (especially so the skeptics)
 
These are my stated conclusions.

It might now be so far as we can go, in search of essentially gathering existing, earliest, case material together in one place, for consideration.

We can demonstrate that the story of events preceding and subsequent to the central incident, are cohesive and nothing disconcerting emerges - quite the contrary.

As things stand and always subject to revision should circumstances change, this following, personal view, is based on a presumption - no evidence otherwise - that the closest of encounters described by Charles Hickson & Calvin Parker, is founded on a genuine occurrence.

As regards the foremost element of being temporarily captured ànd subjected to an apparent study, before being set free, this is a profoundly alarming and sinister matter.

To venture that both men were released unharmed, would be an antithesis of the truth.

There is one aspect, which is particularly notable in the Charles Hickson & Calvin Parker, Pascagoula case.

The documented, evidential outcome, from only circa three hours afterwards, is that something so profoundly traumatic took place, it affected both participants to an extent they were reflecting on their religious beliefs, searching for an explanation which could fit within their pre-existing, Biblical concepts.

Whilst Hickson's comparative maturity enables a rational contemplation, conversely, Parker is still a teenager and can not come to terms with the seemingly unfathomable terror experienced.

Both innocent victims were life-long casualties.

Whether the perpetrators were from another world, or another dimension, how they were able to manifest and retreat and what their purpose was, we shall doubtless never know.

Repercussions extend far beyond.

If the Pascagoula case evidences a reality, then where might it exist elsewhere?

It is unique in having an ostensibly creditable, primary witness in Charles Hickson, who consciously recalls critical details of what transpired. Furthermore, his account is partially corroborated by Calvin Parker, until Parker lost consciousness.

Did something go wrong... was Hickson supposed to end up like Parker, both regaining consciousness having only the vague memory of a bright light and seemingly a period of time unaccounted for?

Ultimately, it remains a case which despite ticking almost every evidential box you could realistically ever hope to, leaves us to make a personal judgement call.

Perhaps it is indeed akin to having a peek inside Pandora's box.
Brilliant work on this case, Thank you for bringing the entire story out in the open and allowing everyone to see the truth.
And frankly the negative reactions to hypnosis are a bit stunning, I realize there is a feeling that subjects can have experiences 'suggested' to them, but how can memories be retrieved from the subconscious if not for hypnotism?
In my experience, the 'forgotten' memory instantly came forward in every detail. I am no expert, but it seems hypnotism can be very valuable.
 
something go wrong... was Hickson supposed to end up like Parker, both regaining consciousness having only the vague memory of a bright light and seemingly a period of time unaccounted for

Again we seem to be suggesting that abductions involve some kind of 'memory erasing' technology. A technology so good that abductees can quickly recover, er, detailed memories.

A more likely explanation is that the men received varying doses of an (earthly) tranquilizer and that those administering it were equally earthly. Which is equally disturbing, when you think about it.

the Pascagoula case evidences a reality, then where might it exist elsewhere?

I think it evidences that they experienced something they did not understand or expect and which terrified them. It's a long way from that to hard proof of an anomaly, though. Pascagoula is very strange but just enough details peep through the murk (how about that 'USO' seen a few days later - one which a Navy anti submarine specialist was investigating at the time?) to suggest that there may be something physical and earthly behind it. I do not follow the Klass / Nickell line that the men were lying or simply drawn into a hypnogogic folie a deux, but I think we need to look towards a possible military solution for this.
 
Last edited:
Charles Hickson, speaking about his terrifying experience, which never left him (from 2011, following his death):

Remembering Charlie Hickson, a rare Pascagoula UFO abduction transcript​


1658067664690.png

Charles E. Hickson, Sr., better known as Charlie Hickson, passed away in Ocean Springs, Mississippi, last Friday September 9 at the age of 80. A foreman at the now closed Walker Shipyard in Pascagoula, which built U.S. Navy ships, Hickson is best remembered as the key protagonist of a famous UFO abduction incident in Pascagoula on the early night of October 11, 1973. He was then 42 years old and on that fateful night was fishing on the Pascagoula River with his buddy Calvin Parker, a 19-year old welder at the yard. Little they knew that what they were about to experience would make them world famous.

The Pascagoula case quickly became one of the three classic alien abductions (together the Betty and Barney Hill case of 1961 and the Travis Walton case of 1975) in the era before this subject gained a wider public exposure thanks to the works of Budd Hopkins, Whitley Strieber, David Jacobs, Dr. John Mack and others. Included below is a rare transcript from a lecture given by Charlie in Mississippi in 1991.

1658067755024.png


https://www.openminds.tv/rare-charl...,paralyzed in fear and Parker just passed out.
 
Whatever happened to these guys - and others - we always need to bear this in mind....
That is precisely the point I found myself making and there are indeed, unfortunately, other cases where we can make a comparison.

The devastating aftermath, for both Hickson and Parker, wasn't an angle I had set out to emphasise and then realised it was, in fact, what had struck myself most.

Hickson, who was a Korean war veteran, at one point, in an evident allusion, remarks that he never thought he would have to 'go through hell' again.

We end up in the interview audio with Parker talking quietly to himself:

"It's hard to believe.... Oh God, it's awful... I know there's a God up there...".

Something experienced earlier that night, must surely be responsible for these extraordinarily deep-rooted sentiments. .

I am not a huge fan of the UFO & alien abduction scenario implied here... just all seems a bit... 1970s sci-fi, with floating creatures/robots, the two-men suddenly also being able to defy gravity and our equally floating eyeball-like scanner...

Then the UFO vanishes in an instant...

Nonetheless, it's what exists and there simply doesn't appear to be any room for manoeuvre.

It's either that, or an entire fabrication by both men, an alternative which seems to arguably be even more inconceivable.
 
Excellent!
This now suggests strongly that the locus was at what is now known as Signet Maritime Corporation, on the west bank of the river, between the road- and rail bridges ...

This is correct, and here's a contemporary image to prove it ...

The local newspaper (Mississippi Press Register) assembled clippings, images, and comments relating to the incident and the following week's events into a booklet entitled UFO's Over Mississippi: A 7-Day Space Odyssey, which they then marketed by mail order. This booklet seems to have been published in late 1973 or very early 1974.

I've located a few photos of the booklet from an online sales offering.

On page 3 of the booklet is a full-page photograph of the scene where the incident occurred. Here's the photo caption (from page 2):

photocaption-p2.jpg

Here's an annotated version of the photo image:

photocaptionX-Rev-A.jpg

There are multiple old piers / docks visible in the photo. It appears to me there's more than one of them that might match other (closer) photos of the place where Hickson and Parker were fishing at the time of the encounter.

The western shore has been considerably modified since 1973. With respect to the maps / photos Max posted this past March, this vintage photo corresponds to this area (the same as finally nominated by MO):

Pascagoula-Site-WestBank.jpg
 
Last edited:
In my experience, the 'forgotten' memory instantly came forward in every detail. I am no expert, but it seems hypnotism can be very valuable.
It so happens that earlier today, I was looking for a definitive quote regarding the entire issue and from a qualified source. This seems to be the situation:

Hypnosis and memory retrieval

Using hypnosis to extract hidden or vague memories may not be reliable. Although there is a widespread belief that hypnosis produces accurate memories, researchers found that hypnosis does not work well as a memory-recovery method. In addition, people who have been hypnotized tend to feel confident that their memories are accurate, contributing to the persistence of false memories.

Source: John Hopkins Medical, John Hopkins University.

In essence, evidence without the use of hypnosis, does not involve this inherent doubt

We could perhaps refer to it from now on as simply evidence BH (before hypnosis) and evidence IH (involving hypnosis). :)

Would save myself some writing, because it keeps coming up, as it is now a mainstay of ufology.

The significance of this case are our extremely rare, if not almost unique, witness accounts, albeit primarily Hickson's, which were thankfully documented at the time.

In addition to the Sheriff department audio, these Keesler AFB statements are equally invaluable, especially as Parker provides some additional evidence.

Whilst not perfect and naturally leaves us with many unresolved questions, at least we gain a clearer perspective.

Contemplating more about the point as to where we might be otherwise, then, as suggested, we could have two people who remember seeing sn intensely bright light suddenly appear and next thing they remember, is being in a dishevelled state, with no obvious explanation.

Subsequently discovering it's much later than thought, they realise an hour, maybe two, can not be accounted for.

Would swear I've heard about something like this before...
 
Now, about the press coverage during the first days and week following the incident ...

The Mississippi Press Register did in fact run a front page story about the incident on 12 October (the following day). The UFO's Over Mississippi booklet the newspaper assembled and marketed contains the following note on its first page:
EditorsNote-P2.jpg
... and a crumpled copy of the 12 October newspaper appears on the booklet's cover:

Cover-Newspaper.jpg

I've not (yet) been able to locate a copy of the 12 October headline story in any form. In any case, the above evidence demonstrates the earliest news publication occurred on the day immediately following the incident.
 
Continuing with tracing the news coverage ...

The Mississippi Press Register ran (at least) two additional stories the week following the incident - on 18 / 19 October. The article of the 19th represents the item quoted by Buckle in her FSR article, and it's obviously the original source for the text reprinted in the National Tattler and Berkeley Daily Gazette later.

Here's the 19 October article in its original form ...

MissPressReg-731019.jpg

NOTE: As the article notes, this interview was conducted on Thursday, 18 October. I still don't know whether any direct interview with Hickson and / or Parker had been conducted in preparing the newspaper's 12 October headline article.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BS3
Back
Top