Zimbabwe Schoolkids UFO Chronicler Cynthia Hind -- reports 'mothership UFO'

Quite by chance I noticed a remarkable coincidence between special cases I've been studying [satellite reentry fireball swarms creating 'mothership UFO' mass sightings] and the Zimbabwe schoolkids encounter -- the same local UFO investigator, Cynthia Hind, did both cases.

Here's my report on that event and on her views of it:

satobs.org...

She seems careful and fastidious, but maybe a smidgeon too eager to imagine far-out ideas to explain discordant witness reports. The actual event was a fireball swarm about forty miles high moving about 15,000 mph but to accommodate witness discrepancies she hypothesized three or more DIFFERENT objects crossing the area more or less in tandem. And when different clock times are reported, she mentioned how it supported her theory that UFOs actually alter the local time flow for different witnesses.

And there's no evidence she ever realized her imagined time-warping UFO fleet really was a single old satellite slipping back into the atmosphere to its fiery destruction. Does this calibration cast her reportage of the schoolkids' experience in a different light?

My overall study was sparked by the October 24 'Hawaii mothership UFO' which is linked here:

www.astronautix.com...

The critical ground observation for the Oct 24, 2010 event was made from Waikoloa Scenic Point on the big island, where the keen-eyed observer noticed the fireball swarm pass left-to-right directly across Polaris [the North Star], giving an elevation angle of 20 degrees. Since observers on Maui 100 mile away saw it passing directly overhead flying WSW to ENE, simple trigonometry gives an altitude of 40 miles, exactly the level that typical satellite fragments are brightest on their long shallow descent. And that path was exactly the one pre-calculated for the demising satellite rocket. Pretty much seals the deal on the rocket reentry explanation for that Hawaii case.

Great find, thanks so much for sharing. Still working trough the Powerpoint, so many interesting links.
Don't really see the resemblance to the Zimbabwe school incident, as didn't the aliens actually land there and exited the ufo?
Or maybe i am mixing up encounters as there undoubtedly have been more then one in Zimbabwe.
Zimbabwe school encounter description

I did found a great reference in one of the reddit links to a earlier incident that happened in Poland and looks eerily similar.
You judge for yourself:

Thanks about the UFO footage from Poland as I am here this moment. I hope they will sometimes visit me. Thirdphaseofmoon has many contactee stories nowadays. People are not afraid so much anymore, so I feel it is time for disclosure.

a reply to: Suanna

"from Poland as I am here this moment. I hope they will sometimes visit me"

If you can get somewhere pretty isolated like the mountains in Silesia away from large human conurbations, then get yourself a hand operated dynamo torch, go up to a high point in that mountain range, use your 'communicator' by flashing it in a three sequence aiming it towards the north west just above the horizon, one second between each communicating flash................. You might get a big surprise.

Remember the sequence and the one second between each flash. The three flash sequence is the only thing that works........... Two or four five six etc, they will not work. So three flashes, a second between each flash aimed towards the north west just above the horizon

a reply to: JimOberg

Terrific assemblage of data and witness testimony, particularly on the Hawaii case.



I expect more of the same of these "encounters" as more and more equipment is put into orbit and eventually makes its Terrestrial return as a collection of small, discrete brilliant lights in the sky that can be perceived by observers to form a larger pattern.

originally posted by: ufoorbhunter
a reply to: Suanna

"from Poland as I am here this moment. I hope they will sometimes visit me"

If you can get somewhere pretty isolated like the mountains in Silesia away from large human conurbations, then get yourself a hand operated dynamo torch, go up to a high point in that mountain range, use your 'communicator' by flashing it in a three sequence aiming it towards the north west just above the horizon, one second between each communicating flash................. You might get a big surprise.

Remember the sequence and the one second between each flash. The three flash sequence is the only thing that works........... Two or four five six etc, they will not work. So three flashes, a second between each flash aimed towards the north west just above the horizon

Have you tried this yourself? It of interest

a reply to: FinallyAwake

Too right and it works

a reply to: JimOberg

Great post and a reminder to myself that this site actually does have gems of information and insight - thank you.

originally posted by: ufoorbhunter
a reply to: FinallyAwake

Too right and it works

Cool! You got any footage? I'd be interested to see 👍🏼

originally posted by: JimOberg
Here's my report on that event and on her views of it:

satobs.org...
...
And there's no evidence she ever realized her imagined time-warping UFO fleet really was a single old satellite slipping back into the atmosphere to its fiery destruction. Does this calibration cast her reportage of the schoolkids' experience in a different light?

I think it's worth mentioning this from page 8 of that pdf:

Witness interacts with object [per Hind]
• “As [witness] moved towards the boat she could suddenly
see this light in the sky; it looked like a small plane, but
what shook her most of all was that it was coming directly
towards her.
• “She could feel the panic rising and realising that her
flashlight was still on and that she couldn't switch it off
quickly, she was sure that whatever it was, was attracted by
the brilliant light in her hand.
• “lmmediately, she hid it behind her back and watched with
relief as the object turned away and, following the tree-
line, went off along the lake shore.
• “At this stage she could see it was enormous, several times
bigger than a Boeing 747.”

Witnesses do make claims like that when they see unfamiliar objects, but as seen in your second pdf, many eyewitnesses have many misperceptions along these lines, saying that not only is the satellite re-entry a mothership, but also that it's making maneuvers. In this case, when the witnesses flashlight was on, it was headed right toward her, and then when she put the flashlight behind her back, it turned away.

People like to cite these kind of eyewitness reports and say things like "see, this witness proves it couldn't have been a satellite re-entry, because satellite re-entries don't respond to flashlights or make maneuvers like that". At least in the Hawaii case of Oct 24, 2010, we have multiple videos to examine to verify that while the eyewitnesses reported maneuvers, they must have been some kind of illusion because the videos do not show such maneuvers.

My overall study was sparked by the October 24 'Hawaii mothership UFO' which is linked here:

www.astronautix.com...

Great report.

originally posted by: Dimens
Great find, thanks so much for sharing. Still working trough the Powerpoint, so many interesting links.
Don't really see the resemblance to the Zimbabwe school incident, as didn't the aliens actually land there and exited the ufo?
Or maybe i am mixing up encounters as there undoubtedly have been more then one in Zimbabwe.
Zimbabwe school encounter description

The common link is Cynthia Hind getting overly excited and jumping to conclusions she wants to be true, rather than conclusions that actually are true. For example, she tried to claim that all the children saw exactly the same thing, yet you can see her flipping through the drawings the children made showing that what they drew was entirely different. I didn't see a single drawing she flipped through where the "UFO" was "flying", it was always something on the ground, either one saucer, or five saucers. Do you want to tell me that kids seeing the same saucer(s) can't tell if there's one or five of them? Really?

I'm not convinced. Then there's the Ariel thread where the OP asks why would kids make up a story like this, and posts some photos of the kids. Then someone with an Emily Bolton e-mail address posts she's one of the kids in those photos, and says they made it up after seeing a UFO documentary the night before:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

I'm one of the kids in these photo's. I remember this well. We made it up - Sorry. By the way there was a documentary on UFO's the night before, more or less everyone had a TV at that stage and for those who didn't it was still a cool story to get in on
I'm in the last photo. You may email me if you like. [email protected]

Here is the last photo in the OP which she claims is her, so it should be possible for her to prove if she's really this same person or not, though older now of course:

Also the drawings are all different, which seems to confirm they made it up! John Mack and Cynthia Hind seem to have conducted a biased investigation and promoted the false story they all said the same thing, but the original drawings the children made clearly show otherwise.

Ariel School UFO landing 1994


This drawing by Tara from 1:16 in the video looks like a human man or woman with dreadlocks, and it's just one humanoid:

This other drawing from 2:02 in the video doesn't show any dreadlock-like hair, and it shows two humanoids instead of one. So no they did not all see the same thing when the number of humanoids drawn isn't even the same, and they don't look the same. By the way both these drawings look rather human to me.

So don't these drawings bust the myth they all saw the same thing? Why does one drawing show only one humanoid and the other drawing shows two humanoids?

Here's a drawing from 3:02 showing what looks like one big silvery object on the ground, and 4 other smaller silvery objects on the ground, all sort of saucer shaped.


So first, none of them look like they are flying, and 5 objects and one humanoid, is this what all the other children described? No, it's not, here's another drawing showing only one object, again on the ground:

That looks more like a RV trailer than a flying saucer to me.

They did not all show the same thing in their drawings though improper questioning methods may have poisoned the investigation when Cynthia Hind and John Mack showed up, but I think the drawings might have been made before those two researchers had a chance to poison the investigation with their bad methods, discussed here along with one of the witnesses telling an impossible story:

25th UFO congress

Vendittelli introduced Emily Trim, who in 1994 was one of the schoolchildren involved in the famous Ariel School 'UFO landing' incident in Zimbabwe. She spoke on "E.T. Contacts and the Ariel School Incident." Her talk was highly emotional. She was crying as she spoke of encountering ETs floating above the ground. She said that she fell to her knees before one such being, whose face kept changing between that of an alien, and that of a lion. She has also had a conversation with a magic butterfly...

You cannot take seriously the account of someone who is in such a highly emotional state, and relates an impossible story.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

Have you ever gone to an elementary school and looked at children's drawings that were supposed to be of the same thing? They all look funky and they all are gonna be different, sometimes wildly different. lol

I guess, in regards to this Emily Bolton person, has there been any corroboration from any of the other children that this was all made up? Or is it just her saying this? Seems probably equally dubious to ignore all the rest of the people involved and take the one person at face value.

originally posted by: jordan77
a reply to: Arbitrageur

Have you ever gone to an elementary school and looked at children's drawings that were supposed to be of the same thing? They all look funky and they all are gonna be different, sometimes wildly different. lol

I guess, in regards to this Emily Bolton person, has there been any corroboration from any of the other children that this was all made up? Or is it just her saying this? Seems probably equally dubious to ignore all the rest of the people involved and take the one person at face value.

If the child saw one saucer, I expect him to draw one saucer. If the child saw five saucers, I expect to see him draw five saucers, maybe 4 or 6 if they have trouble counting but I think most if not all kids involved in that incident can count to 5.

So that's what I'm critiquing, that and the number of humanoids, which only requires counting to 2. Did they see one, or two? Some drawings show one, some drawings show two. Again it's the quantity I'm focusing on more than the details of what the humanoids actually look like. I expect them to be drawn a little differently, but not two of them when there was only one, or not one of them when there was actually two. Do you see the point?

I'm really more focused on the drawings and how they contradict the claim all the kids tell exactly the same story, they don't. I was surprised nobody followed up with Emily Bolton. The OP asked the question, why would this child lie? Then someone claiming to be that child posts and says she lied and he doesn't bother to ask her why she lied? Nobody followed up with her that I know if, or nobody has admitted it when I've asked. The only reason I give her claim any weight at all is it seems consistent with the drawings being contradictory in simple things that the kids shouldn't get wrong, like the number of saucers, or the number of humanoids, since they should all be able to count to 5.