The Varginha UFO

[John J.]

- Lemurs do not exist in Brazil.

Nor do animal-human chimeras or Resident Evil-type creatures, which are entirely fictional.

The difference is, lemurs exist, but chimeras and Resident Evil creatures do not. Resident Evil has the same evidential value for escaped bio-engineered monsters as Underworld has for vampires and werewolves.

Imported monkeys or chimpanzees would require quarantine records, veterinary teams, transport manifests... there is zero evidence of anything in that regard.

That is a reasonable argument for it being unlikely that the young women saw a large non-human primate.
But people have kept Chimpanzees as pets (Michael Jackson), and some people have illegally kept exotic animals (including apes, big cats) as pets without the appropriate paperwork or veterinary support.

I don't think it's likely the girls saw a monkey or ape. But it is vastly less likely that they saw a chimera or the result of a flawed human cloning attempt (which must have taken place several years earlier than 1996).
There is no serious evidence for cloned humans or human-animal chimeras, anywhere, ever; and we're 30 years after the Varginha events.

Both chimeras and cloned humans are popular in science fiction (which I like), but they are not features of the real world in 2026, and weren't in 1996.

Edited to add: The concept of human cloning would have been brought to a wider readership than SF fans/ people interested in science in 1976, and then to cinema-goers in 1978, by Ira Levin's The Boys from Brazil

Wikipedia, "The Boys from Brazil (novel)" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Boys_from_Brazil_(novel); the film starred Gregory Peck, Laurence Olivier and James Mason and is quite well-known.

 

[FatPhil]

Edited to add: The concept of human cloning would have been brought to a wider readership than SF fans/ people interested in science in 1976, and then to cinema-goers in 1978, by Ira Levin's The Boys from Brazil

Dostoevsky's short /The Double/, from 180 years ago? I find it hard to believe there's nothing in the classics too, but I'm not particularly well read in the classics.

 

[John J.]

Dostoevsky's short /The Double/, from 180 years ago? I find it hard to believe there's nothing in the classics too, but I'm not particularly well read in the classics.

I was thinking about technological cloning, raised by Perene, not so much coincidental "doubles" or doppelgangers. If the person/ creature described by the three Varginha girls was a double of someone/ something, the original person/ creature would be near-identical, so why invoke a double?
Perene was proposing that the person/ creature seen might be the result of a human cloning experiment gone wrong (I think).

The Boys from Brazil wasn't the first fiction to mention artificial cloning, but it might have been one of the earliest well-known, non-SF stories to do so (and, as a nice coincidence, it's set in Brazil).

But it's implausible that an experiment to artificially clone a human took place in the 1980s: if the Varginha description is reliable, and is of a human, the approximate size and proportions- the girls didn't mention child-like proportions- then the individual would have to be several years old: Human cloning might be a possible technology now or in the near future, accelerated human cloning (producing an adult, or a very rapidly growing/ maturing child) is not, though it is common in science fiction (comic book character Judge Dredd is an accelerated clone).

The first reliable evidence of cloning of a primate that I've found is this paper describing the 1996 cloning of Rhesus monkeys by nuclear transfer at the Primate Research Centre in Oregon,
"Rhesus Monkeys Produced by Nuclear Transfer", Li Meng , John J. Ely , Richard L. Stouffer , Don P. Wolf, Biology of Reproduction 57 (2) 1997
https://academic.oup.com/biolreprod...4/2760985?redirectedFrom=fulltext&login=false (abstract only).

The rhesus macaque named Tetra was produced by embryo splitting, not nuclear transfer, in 1999 (Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetra_(monkey)). Embryo splitting is a simpler technique than nuclear transfer, but the resulting organisms might be considered artificially-caused twins more than what we generally think of as clones (siblings originating from a single split embryo are genetically identical to each other, not one of the parents).

 

[BoulderRiver]

You're gonna love this:

A REQUEST FOR RESPECT FOR UFOLOGISTS

In 2021—the year we all made the absolute best decisions of our lives—I watched eight documentaries about the government's role in concealing extraterrestrial life. ALIEN AUTOPSY: FACT OR FICTION?, REVEALING BIGFOOT'S ALIEN TIES, etc. Top-tier material. And I quickly discovered that these documentaries fall into two major categories: the mediocre ones, which focus on the ET, and the excellent ones, which focus on the ufologist.

The ones that focus on the ET are always the same. Small town. Some old man's testimony. An old lady saw the creature but didn't take a photo; it looked like this and that, skinny, no nose. Then the Army showed up and took it away.

Now, the ufologist-focused ones? Every ufologist is special in their own way. There's the guy from DREAMLAND (1996), who flies over a US military base to peek from above and see if there are ETs hiding there, concluding—based solely on the fact that the base scrambled an F-16 to tail him—that there are definitely ETs hiding there. There's the woman from ALIEN AUTOPSY: FACT OR FICTION? (1995), who guarantees her father witnessed a flying saucer crash, and not a weather balloon, because her father wouldn't have gotten that hyped just to see a balloon. "He wasn't the type to get excited for no reason." Then there's the guy from MYSTERIES OF THE GODS (1976), who asks what led the ancient Egyptians to depict various deities with wings if airplanes didn't exist yet. Must be aliens!

When the dyed-hair Italian ufologist appeared in THE VARGINHA MYSTERY (2026), I paused the documentary, grabbed a beer from the fridge, took off my bra, and stretched out on the sofa. What a blessing! There is no one better to testify in an interplanetary investigation than a man who leaves the house every day wearing the exact same outfit, like a cartoon character. Vitório Pacaccini (a hell of a name, by the way) is the one who deserves to be in front of the camera, not those three girls who actually saw the ET. Screw them! I want two hours of this guy forming sentences never before conceived in human history. I want to see him interviewed by a pop-culture troll, or by Elminster. I want to know his thoughts on the current government.

Now, imagine my disappointment upon discovering that, faced with this gold mine, the "serious" journalists at Globo opted to DEBUNK the ufologist with LOGIC and FACTS!

What is this obsession journalists have with the truth?
So what if the guy bribed a witness or two? So what? I don't give a damn whether an ET passed through Varginha or not. A photo of an ET in the newspaper would spark the same emotion in me as the discovery of a new species of frog. What interests me—and interests every Brazilian who isn't a total bore—is watching a con artist practicing his craft. It's the human angle. THAT is real journalism, not running around saying the ufologist is wrong. Of course he's wrong! It's his job to be wrong!

I'll never forget the segment in CAVE OF FORGOTTEN DREAMS (2010), a Herzog documentary about the cave paintings in Chauvet, where he discovers that the archaeologist he's talking to used to be a circus performer and immediately pivots the conversation to focus on that. It's what any decent documentarian would do. If you don't have the nose to realize that the star of your story is the Italian descendant who paints his hair and beard with shoe polish, and not the freaking Varginha ET, then I'm sorry. Maybe the best you can offer the world is indeed a three-episode series on a mainstream streaming service.

To those who, like me, mourned the disrespect shown by the "Garbage Network" to an icon of Brazilian ufology, I recommend the feature film UFO: THE GREATEST STORY EVER DENIED (2006), available on YouTube with auto-captions.

The opening scenes are led by the director himself, Jose Escamilla, revealing a new life form invisible to the human eye—a "flying rod." Is this fact relevant to the rest of the film? No. What follows is a seemingly infinite montage of elderly military men claiming they are, indeed, willing to testify before Congress. When? Why? Besides the point. The last part turns into a sort of thriller, showing who was persecuted and murdered for revealing the US government's lies about aliens, and then the documentary gets distracted and starts talking about the military-industrial complex and alternative fuels, until it spends the final twenty minutes focusing on the poisoning of the man who invented a water-powered buggy.

The recommendation stands; may it serve as a consolation in the absence of quality journalism.

To the Brazilian Army, a request: please continue hiding the evidence of the Varginha ET. It would even be great if a soldier or two came forward saying there's no alien kept in the barracks. The non-cooperation of the Armed Forces is essential to the preservation and encouragement of ufology in our country. I hope the media pays dearly for its crimes against ufologists, and that the national press one day comes to respect science.

 

[Perene]

About the "it was a monkey" argument (and before, I mentioned the brown howler type):

A few of the descriptions certainly match known animals... not all of them combined, of course.

+++++++++++
The military personnel who saw the captured beings, in addition to confirming this description, added that they had only two holes where the nose should be, a very small mouth, a thin, long black tongue, exuded a strong ammonia-like smell from their entire body, and made a buzzing sound through the mouth similar to that of bees.
+++++++++++

The traits to analyze (not considering the rest, which include bulging red eyes, stuff that looked like horns, hands/legs different, brown skin) are:

– Two holes where the nose should be
– A very small mouth
– A thin, long, dark (black) tongue
– A strong ammonia-like body odor
– A buzzing or humming sound produced through the mouth

Taken one by one, none of these traits is extraordinary in the animal kingdom. The problem only appears when one tries to force all of them into a single, known species, especially a primate.

- Starting with the "two holes instead of a nose":

Many mammals do not have a projecting nose like humans. In most mammals, what we visually perceive are simply external nares (nostrils) opening directly into the snout or face. This includes dogs, cats, rodents, bats, and primates. So "two holes where the nose should be" is not diagnostically meaningful. It describes almost any mammal whose nasal bridge is flat or reduced. Many monkeys, especially New World monkeys, already look like this at a glance.

- A very small mouth:

Relative mouth size varies enormously and is heavily affected by viewing angle, fear, dehydration, or partial mouth closure. Several mammals can appear to have a "tiny mouth" when relaxed or stressed. Small-mouthed appearance is common in certain primates, some bats, and even juvenile mammals of many species.

- A thin, long, dark tongue:

This is one of the most common mammalian traits on Earth. Examples include anteaters and tamanduas (extreme cases), bats, many carnivores and primates (chimpanzees, monkeys, lemurs all have dark tongues).

So, not unusual at all. Even humans can have dark tongues under certain conditions.

- A strong ammonia-like smell:

This trait is very well documented in zoology and is probably the most important. Ammonia-like odor is commonly associated with:

- Animals that excrete nitrogen-rich waste
- Animals under extreme stress
- Animals with urine-based chemical signaling
- Infections involving certain bacteria

Many mammals can emit a sharp, ammonia-like odor when frightened or sick. A few primates, rodents, bats, etc.

We need to remember stress alone can drastically alter body odor.

- A buzzing or humming sound from the mouth:

This is also not exotic. Buzzing or humming can be produced by airflow through partially closed lips, vibration of the tongue, nasal obstruction forcing air through the mouth, or respiratory distress. Many animals can make sounds that humans later describe metaphorically as "buzzing", "humming", or "like bees", especially when observers lack a reference point.

So it's reasonable to assume a stressed, sick, injured, or cornered mammal can temporarily display all of these traits simultaneously, regardless of species.

 

[Ann K]

@BoulderRiver

I paused the documentary, grabbed a beer from the fridge, took off my bra, and stretched out on the sofa

Obvious fiction. Everyone knows the bra comes off first.

 

[BoulderRiver]

The traits to analyze (not considering the rest, which include bulging red eyes, stuff that looked like horns, hands/legs different, brown skin) are:

– Two holes where the nose should be
– A very small mouth
– A thin, long, dark (black) tongue
– A strong ammonia-like body odor
– A buzzing or humming sound produced through the mouth
(...)
So it's reasonable to assume a stressed, sick, injured, or cornered mammal can temporarily display all of these traits simultaneously, regardless of species.

ALL of those features were reported by Pacaccini's witnesses, who are all untrustworthy.

1. The girls said they didn't see a nose, nor did Therezinha Clepf. Only the Staged Military says this.
2. The girls also state not being able to see a mouth. After many interactions, they state that if there was one, it was only a slit. This affirmation is made by the staged militarymen.
3. One of Pacaccini's witnesses stated seeing a black tongue being pulled out by tweezers, by a medic in the garage of Hospital Humanitas, a public hospital in 96
4. The girls do not state any odour, nor does Therezinha. Only afterwards of the sighting, a foul odor is reported by Kátia Xavier and the mother of the Da Silva sisters, Luiza da Silva, who did not affirm it to be ammonia nor sulfur, but something worse that didn't smell like anything else she ever experienced.
5. Military #1, The Firefighter Robson Luiz, is the only one who makes this statement. Robson stated in 2019 that he lied in this testimony. His testimony is also greatly exaggerated by Pacaccini and other Ufologists. The full tape is available online and differs significantly from what Pacaccini states in his book and press conferences.

An interesting addition is that Therezinha Clepf states seeing a very similar creature at the Zoo on April 21st, but with slighly different features, like the absence of the "horns".

Since she was in the most densely wooded urban part of Varginha, a more grounded hypothesis involving pareidolia is plausible.
The circumstances surrounding Mrs. Therezinha Clepf's experience were ideal for such a misidentification. Both the zoo lights and the porch lights were off. Mrs. Clepf was facing the balcony directly, with her shoulders parallel to the railing, as documented in the books by Ubirajara and Pacaccini and in her various interviews. A digital reconstruction illustrates this perspective:
Source: https://imgur.com/2ktQS69
.

The appearance, behavior, and habitat described are perfectly consistent with those of a Barn Owl (Tyto furcata). The 'golden swimming cap' (which investigator Pacaccini insists on calling a 'helmet') and the eyes shining 'red as car brake lights' (the reflection of the tapetum lucidum catching indirect light from the zoo's restaurant) align with this bird's features. Furthermore, the 'tiny hand' on the railing was likely just the owl's talons. She reported not seeing a body because she observed the bird only from above the guardrail.

Barn Owls exhibit variable phenotypes, and their facial discs can appear darker. On the night of the sighting (April 21, 1996), there was a New Moon, leaving the zoo in total darkness. As a result, the only light sources were indirect light from the nearby restaurant and the glow of Therezinha's cigarette."

With this, only the 2025 version of the creature narrated by Dr. Ítalo Venturelli still remains unsolved

 

[John J.]

A thin, long, dark tongue:

This is one of the most common mammalian traits on Earth. Examples include anteaters and tamanduas (extreme cases), bats, many carnivores and primates (chimpanzees, monkeys, lemurs all have dark tongues).

Chimpanzees.
I don't think anthropoid apes (gorillas, chimps, orangutans) would normally be described as having "a thin, longue, dark tongue" (some photos of orangs and gorillas show a dark tongue, others pink, but the tongues aren't long and thin like an anteater's !)

So it's reasonable to assume a stressed, sick, injured, or cornered mammal can temporarily display all of these traits simultaneously, regardless of species.

I don't know if there might be a translation issue, but that line suggests any mammal (mammal... ...regardless of species) can show all of those traits. This is clearly not right. A blue whale? A koala, or an elephant?

While I appreciate you don't like the Brazilian military (and have some understanding why some people in Brazil might share your views) I don't think it's credible that they could capture an animal and not recognise it as an animal, but instead think it's an extraterrestrial.
In any such scenario it's hard to imagine that a medical doctor or biologist wouldn't be involved at some stage.

There are precedents though, at least in folklore:
People from Hartlepool in England are sometimes teased as "monkey hangers".
The story is, during the Napoleonic wars, a French ship was wrecked off the coast of Hartlepool. The only survivor washed up on the beach was a pet monkey, wearing a specially made French-style uniform.
It was found by some local people, who had never seen a monkey- or a Frenchman. The monkey didn't speak English, so the locals decided it was a French spy, had a "trial" and hanged it.
The story is well-known, the local football club, Hartlepool United F.C., is nicknamed "the Monkey Hangers" and has a mascot (a guy in a monkey suit) called H'Angus the Monkey.
(The story is unlikely to be true, and there are similar tales from other parts of England and Scotland, Wikipedia "Monkey hanger", https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monkey_hanger).

 

[BoulderRiver]

In an interview that went live today, Ítalo Venturelli comments on the sighting again.
No new information, just the confirmation he said in the latest version of his encounter; which is contradictory to what he stated in 2023.


Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4t4n0F5Qajk


By the end, some pictures of Dr Armando and Dr Italo are seen in interview with Jesse Michels

 

[Perene]

While I appreciate you don't like the Brazilian military (and have some understanding why some people in Brazil might share your views) I don't think it's credible that they could capture an animal and not recognise it as an animal, but instead think it's an extraterrestrial. In any such scenario it's hard to imagine that a medical doctor or biologist wouldn't be involved at some stage.

WHAT? If you are trying to concoct an excuse to dismiss this whole thing, you are doing a very poor job, and I mean judging how humans would behave and respond to a similar scenario.

That's not how the world works (or used to), especially a poor city located in Brazil, in the 1990s. We should especially consider it was 30 years ago, so not a very useful period to gather information about anything, especially an unknown "element" inserted in such conditions. It's not like 2026 that I can quickly take a photo and less than a minute later know what it is, or let everyone analyze.

According to the stories surrounding this case (not saying they were true, just revisiting the arguments), they were told to capture the thing regardless of what it was, and said events are all inside the "cover-up" angle. From your response, you seem to think they were unaware of what they were doing it, and it was just another day for them. It doesn't make any sense.

The news reports from 1996 even put a witness (from the hospital?) with her voice and image distorted claiming something was brought in there. Of course, if the military captured the thing and others sent to a hospital or hid it, it's not reasonable to assume Mr. Charles Darwin was waiting for them, to tell what it was.

Whatever is said about a "cover-up" doesn't include ignorance that is an animal, you can say it's only about doing what is told, perhaps receiving a cash incentive or threats, and shut up (oh, and giving it to the United States, which apparently came here to collect it, then there's the "Men in Black" that tried to bribe the girls).

It could have been a foreign monkey species brought in there, for all I know (that no one ever saw, so it may have looked really strange), an alien or the devil (the red eyes and protuberances are the details that are always mentioned at least by the girls), it doesn't matter, hardly many people would be qualified to confirm. Because we know it wasn't your regular animal escaping from the city's zoo. At least that, it's clear (otherwise, why no one said anything until now?).

I'm sure if it was a regular animal, the military would never, years later, end up concluding it was a man the girls knew, and lied to us.

Like I said: even when a UFO story is all bullshit, even when there's an explanation that rules out aliens/exotic creatures and tech, you can bet they will for sure get hysterical like little bitches, and invent a reason to bury the evidence.

That's why these stories will last forever in people's imagination. Because we can't rely on these parasites that like to pretend they care about making us safe, to not do their dirty work, every single time something unusual happens.

All of them have skeletons in their closet. And if dogs are man's best friend, military officers must be loved by ufologists.

 

[BoulderRiver]

According to the stories surrounding this case (not saying they were true, just revisiting the arguments), they were told to capture the thing regardless of what it was, and said events are all inside the "cover-up" angle. From your response, you seem to think they were unaware of what they were doing it, and it was just another day for them. It doesn't make any sense.

The problem is that you're believing the mythology when you believe the stories surrounding the case. There was no capture.
Once exposed by the confession of bribery and inducement of the first military account, the entire logical and causal structure of the incident falls. Alongside that, the contents of the tape were kept a secret for so long because of the verifiable inconsistencies it had.

In the end, it really doesn't matter if it was an animal or not; the gossip or the "Devil scare" would die at the sighting of the 3 women, if it wasn't for the escalation by Pacaccini.

Pacaccini is the ufologist who bribed a firefighter to state the existence of a military mission to capture something.
Pacaccini is the person who bribed a soldier and a corporal to state that there was a military convoy at the Hospital.
Pacaccini is the one who created the idea that there was a secret police mission, and the policeman grabbed the alien.
Pacaccini is the champ who went to the policeman's house and convinced his family that he was part of a super-important secret mission.
Pacaccini is the dude who claimed there was NORAD detection of UFOs and American intervention.
Pacaccini is the guy who stated the creature was taken to "Pavilion 18" under unicamp for studies of Dr. Badan Palhares.

This presents all the traces of a Con.
The timid beginning.
The embellishment of the initial story with the bribed militarymen, especially after the ridicule by several TV shows and Newspapers.
The double down when he presented the info about UNICAMP
The Cashout a couple of months later, when he launched his book
A failed attempt at making a movie about it in the early 2000's
The lay low phase, when he simply disappeared from the radar for 20 years after understanding he couldn't milk this anymore.
The double personality he maintains, using his surname Tavares Paes on serious business, but Pacaccini on Varginha talk.
The fact that he only ever """"""investigated""""""" Varginha, no other UFO case.
His current attempts at creating a Movie and a TV Series (he secured initial funding after years of trying)

Paccacini is not an ordinary con artist selling land on the moon. He is a sophisticated "Myth Entrepreneur" who used tools of deception to build a lucrative and socially rewarding alternative reality.

The evolution of the story proposed by Pacaccini unequivocally resembles what a liar or a dishonest individual would do. A true story tends to consolidate and seek factual corroboration over time. Pacaccini's story, on the contrary, became more baroque, more paranoid, and more dependent on "magical evidence" (videos seen only by him) as the original evidence and testimonies were discredited.

 

[NoParty]

...the eyes 'red as car headlights'

Nice post. I realize that Brazil is a whole 'nother country...but no one paused at RED car headlights?

Barn Owls exhibit variable phenotypes, and their facial discs can appear darker. On the night of the sighting (April 21, 1996), there was a New Moon, leaving the zoo in total darkness. As a result, the only light sources were indirect light from the nearby restaurant and the glow of her cigarette."

The idea that the owl was smoking a cigarette, seems to be the most remarkable thing about the Varginha monologues...

 

[BoulderRiver]

Nice post. I realize that Brazil is a whole 'nother country...but no one paused at RED car headlights?

Thanks for spotting that! I meant to say "brake lights"

 

[Perene]

BoulderRiver: Mr. Eric Lopes was the commanding officer driving the car during the capture of one of the beings; the encounter that led to Officer Chereze's death (that's what the UFO enthusiasts claim).

Have you or anyone from this thread addressed why he was not only reluctant to talk about it (nothing happened, right? So why not explain his role?), also threatened to shoot (?) these people from the 2022 documentary "Moment of Contact", by James Fox? They went to his place (there's a clip below).


Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/yl8bnt/a_small_clip_of_witness_intimidation_presented_in/

P.S. I read this guy LOPES is "the last known member of the squad that is alive".

 

[NorCal Dave]

You're gonna love this:

I obviously don't know Brazilian Portuguese writing styles, but I assume this is a bit of a satire? And maybe a bit of social commentary? UFOlogy is all about entertainment, so don't let facts and truth get in the way of that. But maybe not? I say that, as upon reading it the first thing that jumped into my mind was a New York Times article, basic saying Uri Geller wasn't all that bad, in fact he was a better person than all of the doubting skeptics.

A bit OT and it's behind a paywall, but the blog site The Friendly Atheist has some of the good pull quotes:

… Mr. Geller was long shadowed by a handful of professional magicians appalled that someone was fobbing off what they said were expertly finessed magic tricks as acts of telekinesis. Like well-matched heavyweights, they pummeled one another in the '70s and '80s in televised contests that elevated them all.

Mr. Geller ultimately emerged the victor in this war, and proof of his triumph is now on display in the museum: a coffee-table book titled "Bend It Like Geller," which was written by the Australian magician Ben Harris and published in May.

"I mean this in the most respectful way," said Andy Nyman, a magician and actor who a few years ago introduced a lecture by Mr. Geller at the Blackpool Magic Convention, an appearance that cemented this truce. "I think the world is aware that if he's fraudulent, there are bigger lies and bigger frauds out there that are far more damaging."

https://www.friendlyatheist.com/p/why-is-the-new-york-times-glorifying

While @Ben Harris book does follow the history of Geller, it ultimately is a how to DIY spoon bending book explaining the trick(s). Not an endorsement of Geller's supposed Psy powers.

The truth of what happened, or didn't happen, in Varginha isn't nearly as important as the entertaining myth about what happened.

 

[BoulderRiver]

Have you or anyone from this thread addressed why he was not only reluctant to talk about it

We have not discussed why Eric Lopes is reluctant to talk.
I can't really say for sure, because I know very little about him.

What we do know is that, contrary to what was stated in ufology circles for almost 30 years, Lopes was not the informant of the Chereze capture. In fact, all major researchers never talked to Eric Lopes, and none of them suggest that Lopes talked. So it leaves room to wonder:
Who was the author of the story that claims they almost ran over the creature, and why did Pacaccini claim that to the Chereze Family on their first meeting?

From a strictly regulatory and ceremonial standpoint, it would be expected that Private Marco Eli Chereze would drive and Corporal Eric Lopes would command. The reversal of these roles constitutes a procedural anomaly that the Varginha Mythology doesn't even question, because it isn't convenient to the plot.

Eric Lopes could settle everything once and for all if he spoke - but he clearly does not want to engage in the subject.

I can't really blame him for not talking: I don't see a win around it.
If he comes forward saying "it didn't happen", he turns neighbors into enemies because the city benefits from the mystery. He would be treated unfavourably by the creed of the UFO. If he comes forward and says that it DID happen, he would be asked to prove it — but he can't. The only way to win is not move at all.

I obviously don't know Brazilian Portuguese writing styles, but I assume this is a bit of a satire?

Laurinha Lero is a humorist and chronicler famous for turning the sarcasm to 11.
Her name is a play on words like the attorney "Bob Boblaw".

Laurinha is always giving a voice to those who should have even less of a voice than they already do.

The truth of what happened, or didn't happen, in Varginha isn't nearly as important as the entertaining myth about what happened.

Precisely what most people think about Varginha in Brazil.

 

[Ann K]

UFOlogy is all about entertainment

...which would be funny if everyone saw it as entertainment. But alas, no. A lot of people seem to use it as kind of a "gateway drug" and take it seriously, and once down that rabbit hole they fall prey to all kinds of conspiracies.

 

[NorCal Dave]

...which would be funny if everyone saw it as entertainment. But alas, no. A lot of people seem to use it as kind of a "gateway drug" and take it seriously, and once down that rabbit hole they fall prey to all kinds of conspiracies.

Totally agree. That's part of the problem. There's everything from the full hoaxer/charlatans selling whatever will sell, to the believers who are willing to accept anything, with all types in between. Despite the haranguing of many popular UFOlogist, the skeptics are mostly out in the woods barking at the moon. To paraphrase the title of an Iron Maiden album: "Debunking sells, but who's buying".

Then between the hoaxers, the hypers, the believers and the skeptics is a grey area that many journalists seem to gravitate to. Maybe it's real, maybe it's not? Who knows? Check back after this car commercial and we'll look into it. It's the definition of infotainment, news that's entertaining. Not only does it make for good stories, it has a built in audience, kinda like the NFL desperately trying to work in shots of Taylor Swift at a game because they know her Swifities will tune in and get more eyeballs on the broadcast.

In this environment it's seen as advantages to treat everything from hoaxes to videos of "orbs" as infotainment. The truth of the Varginha UFO is secondary to the story and what it means for the town. As noted before, I went to the McMinnville UFO festival last spring and it was mobbed. The little town of McMinnville was overrun for a weekend because of 2 likely hoaxed photos from the '50s. Nobody wants to hear about how the UFO looks just like a hub-cap from the era or that it's positioned in the photo right where it could be hung from a power line. That's no fun and certainly not entertaining.

Was Geller really bending spoons with his mind? More importantly does it really matter if he was entertaining about it? According to the NYT, it's better to be entertained by a possible magic trick, thinking it might be real Psy, than to have grumpy old skeptics point out the fraud in that entertainment. Or, as a writer for The New Yorker I've quoted repeatedly, expressed it, an hour on the phone with Mick West was "disheartening" as debunking UFOs took away the "solace" so many found in UFOs. And I would argue, the entertainment.

Sorry, I rambled.

 

[BoulderRiver]

I just came across some new information coming from João Marcelo Rios.
João Marcelo is the researcher who identified and located the witness in 2019 and visited him many times during 2021 and 2022.

Robson Luiz Oliveira, the firefighter and first military witness, states he was offered a sum of money to take part in a Documentary about the Varginha Case. At this time, Robson had already denounced his account, stating it was a lie. Robson accepted to appear in the production, was asked to state exactly what he did in 1996, confirming the capture of an alien. He then stated he would do that, but he didn't remember what he stated back then, so they would have to tell him what he said.

James Fox's Moment of Contant was the only production being made at the time.

 

[Perene]

It's a known fact multiple people involved in this case (and very likely others discussed on Metabunk) ask for money to give their accounts. That doesn't mean automatically they are lying, though.

It would be naive (really) to assume they would all do these interviews for free. On the contrary, the entire town profits from these events, not just the clowns (UFO grifters).

(NOTE to the readers: I am not denying someone got paid to lie - I'm saying the ones telling the truth would also love to get some money, after all, this is Brazil we are talking about, not Switzerland).

As for that Eric Lopes guy, if he is really acting like this, I don't think the man is simply full of shit and tired of listening the same story for 3 decades. He could have simply said it's all crap, and deny any involvement.

It's possible (maybe - just maybe...) that he did something unlawful back then, helped with some sort of cover-up, and it's his guilty conscience that prevents him from talking (not to mention his accomplices, he didn't do every single thing alone).

If this case was nothing, the last thing they (the military) should have done is to write in the final conclusion that it was just a man. That just strengthens the narrative that they did something bad and wanted to hide, because they were morons enough to discredit the girls (that mentioned they knew "Mudinho") and everyone else involved.

I guess the only time the military are smart is when they are hiding their own crimes, the aliens and the exotic tech, not while they are opening their mouths.

Whatever happened, I'm sure we will never get any concrete evidence to back anything (including the existence of said creatures).


Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/1g8k9hy/the_varginha_ufo_incident_unraveling_brazils/?show=original

There is a good summary in this Reddit thread.

The UFO bit is something I don't understand. So it was shot (not by NORAD)... ? Does that mean we already knew it was an alien craft? Or they did this because it was doing something against us (humans), or not obeying orders from the military to halt?

Do we have a policy of shooting alien spaceships first, ask questions later? Really?

Where did this "shooting" happened? It must have been in Brazil, right? Or we are going to assume it was in the U.S. and the UFO went to a remote location in Varginha, to crash?

If I were to apply logic to these events, I would also need to ask how did the military knew they were supposed to capture aliens, and not simply OTHER HUMANS from said UFO. Wouldn't this imply it wasn't the first "contact" they had?

Besides, how did these aliens find us, from where they came from? Probably not our solar system, am I correct? Or perhaps they were not shot by NORAD / us, the "ship" got into a little accident, and landed in Varginha.

That can't be the truth, too, otherwise the U.S. would not have got involved so quickly.

This is a major plot hole that makes the rest of the events unlikely.

 

[BoulderRiver]

There is a good summary in this Reddit thread.

I bet you will be surprised when you check the author of that Reddit thread

It would be naive (really) to assume they would all do these interviews for free.

The most significant ethical objection is that financial incentives can corrupt the truth. When a journalist offers money for a story, they inadvertently create a market for sensationalism. A witness may feel pressured to embellish their account, exaggerate details, or even fabricate events to ensure they receive payment or to increase the "value" of their information. This undermines the primary goal of journalism, which is to provide the public with an accurate and verified record of events.

Journalism relies on the independence of the reporter. By paying a source, a journalist enters into a business relationship with the person they are supposed to be covering objectively. In the context of legal proceedings, paying a witness is especially perilous. If a witness receives money from a media outlet before testifying in court, their credibility can be easily destroyed during cross-examination. Defense attorneys or prosecutors can argue that the witness's testimony was "bought" or influenced by the desire for profit. In some cases, such payments can even lead to mistrials, contempt, and tampering charges.

The UFO bit is something I don't understand. So it was shot (not by NORAD)... ?

Pacaccini is the one who came up with this.
He states the USA used an energy weapon when the UFO was in high orbit, and after being damaged, it entered the Brazilian Airspace. The Americans then warned CINDACTA that the UFO would crash somewhere in the south of Minas Gerais (a complete fantasy)

 

[JMartJr]

Pacaccini is the one who came up with this.
He states the USA used an energy weapon when the UFO was in high orbit, and after being damaged, it entered the Brazilian Airspace. The Americans then warned CINDACTA that the UFO would crash somewhere in the south of Minas Gerais (a complete fantasy)

It would not be noticeably more a fantasy if it was supposed to crash near Minas Tirith...

 

[Perene]

The most significant ethical objection is that financial incentives can corrupt the truth. When a journalist offers money for a story, they inadvertently create a market for sensationalism. A witness may feel pressured to embellish their account, exaggerate details, or even fabricate events to ensure they receive payment or to increase the "value" of their information. This undermines the primary goal of journalism, which is to provide the public with an accurate and verified record of events.

Journalism relies on the independence of the reporter. By paying a source, a journalist enters into a business relationship with the person they are supposed to be covering objectively. In the context of legal proceedings, paying a witness is especially perilous. If a witness receives money from a media outlet before testifying in court, their credibility can be easily destroyed during cross-examination. Defense attorneys or prosecutors can argue that the witness's testimony was "bought" or influenced by the desire for profit. In some cases, such payments can even lead to mistrials, contempt, and tampering charges.

I know all that (the moral argument)... what I meant was: paying someone in this case might make sense. That is, if said payment/transaction resulted in something useful. It hasn't, sadly, from day one.

Back in 1996, with no internet, most people that watched TV believed anything they were told (no kidding). I remember that lebanese girl who gained worldwide fame for "weeping" crystals of glass (Hasna), the "Alien Autopsy: Fact or Fiction" (1995 "pseudo-documentary")... all those things once showed, would not be questioned the way we do today - AT ALL.

It has been said Vitório Pacaccini paid R$ 5000 back then, for one guy. That would be probably enough to buy a car - in 1996, the Brazilian real had parity with the U.S. dollar. So, US$ 10K in today's money. Did he recover from said investment? Because despite UFO enthusiasts grifting like crazy now, you wouldn't get rich from similar scams/ufology decades ago.

It doesn't make a lot of sense this happened, too, for one particular reason - these people spread their "hearsay" / "anecdotal evidence" (which we all know it's useless without something else to back these up, so they need to give something else worth, a clue that pans out, even if it leads to another dead end after further investigation) with their voices and image distorted. Anonymously (same for one woman at the hospital, check one of the "Fantástico" TV show episodes). So why pay a fortune for an unknown person, when you can do it for free, or much, much less $$$$$$$, with a nobody?

Look at this statement, also from this case:


Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wWAqqBftwpU


That was 2 years ago. We don't know who this old lady is (and she may have good reasons for hiding, not saying this is 100% bogus). So even if what she is saying (that saw the "creature" from a small photo?) turn out to be true, what makes anyone think this story could not have been made up? No one except her can answer. And if there's secrecy surrounding the people involved, why would you believe (for a second) none of them would be threatened to change their versions? People don't hide their faces just because they are shy, and hate fame.

That Youtube channel (from Mr. Edison) relies on this and other "amazing" UFO stories every single day. That's how he makes money.

There's also the "tape" (or "tapes") from the supposed creature, something that has only been discussed since... years ago (I don't remember being mentioned back then), the same for Dr. Italo Venturelli, a neurosurgeon from Regional Hospital, that claims that another physician showed him a video of the Varginha alien, that he saw the thing from close distance...

What relevance these two (the old lady and the doctor) have for this case? None, so why (let's assume someone paid them both) their collaboration would be worth gold? It didn't advance one bit believing the entire case, neither the "debunking".

Now, if we had said tape, and someone anonymously got money for the footage, that would lead us somewhere (or not, as I always point out, such records will always be branded as faked, no matter what or when they were created).

Unless any palpable evidence can be presented, this whole thing is no more credible than Bigfoot (perhaps much less, at least for the latter we had an image).

It doesn't matter, in the end, if they show their identities or not. What they claim it has always been a secret, continues to be one, or it's all a collection of made-up stories, that were spreading like the Corona virus.

 

[John J.]

Back in 1996, with no internet, most people that watched TV believed anything they were told (no kidding).

That's an extraordinary claim. Any evidence for it?
Some of us here were adults in 1996; I was, and I don't know anyone who believed "anything they were told" on TV (if that's taken to mean, in context, everything they were told).
Can't speak for anyone else, but I'd be surprised if many members here in their 40s, 50s or older would agree with your statement.
Many people in Brazil disagreed with the military government (1964-1985) so they probably didn't believe "anything they were told".

...the "Alien Autopsy: Fact or Fiction" (1995 "pseudo-documentary")... all those things once showed, would not be questioned the way we do today - AT ALL.

I don't know about Brazilian TV, but "Alien Autopsy" was questioned by mainstream media elsewhere from the outset.

Alien Autopsy was derided in the media, and was the subject of numerous parodies. In 1995, The X-Files featured alien autopsy footage that the skeptical Agent Scully decries as "even hokier than the one they aired on the Fox network".

Wikipedia, Alien Autopsy (1995 film) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alien_Autopsy_(1995_film)

 

[BoulderRiver]

@entire post

The pragmatic failure you pointed out is actually a direct result of the ethical problem. When money enters the equation, the "utility" of the information is immediately compromised. Even if a palpable piece of evidence like a tape were produced today, the revelation that it was obtained through a high-value payment would lead to immediate and valid accusations of forgery. In a sense, paying for the "truth" often ensures that the result is legally and scientifically useless.

Regarding the specific payment attributed to Vitório Pacaccini, we have to look at the "Return on Investment" differently.
First and foremost, the reward my not be financial. Just like a serial killer does not need a rational reason to murder other than his own internal logic, a bribery attempt to state on national television that a long-held belief to be true is a prize in itself.
Secondly, R$5.000 might seem like a lot, but it also might be very little to someone like Vitório Pacaccini Tavares Paes, one of the heirs to the Tavares Paes dinasty.

Lastly, it may not have been about a direct cash-out in 1996. Instead, those paid testimonies built the foundation of a "lore" that has sustained decades of media appearances, books, and now a movie. The R$ 5,000 wasn't just buying a story; it was buying a permanent mystery that continues to generate value for researchers and content creators today.

Your point about the anonymity of these "nobodies" is also key. There is a specific strategic value in paying a "nobody" to remain anonymous. If a witness is identified, their background can be checked, their movements on the day in question can be verified, and their story can be debunked - as is the case for the militarymen. An anonymous source with a distorted voice is a "perfect" witness because they are unfalsifiable. By paying for anonymous testimony, investigators are essentially paying for a story that can never be proven wrong, which is much more valuable for sustaining a long-term mystery than a story that might be debunked in a week.

The lack of palpable evidence isn't just a coincidence. It is the natural outcome of a system that prioritizes the "market value" of a sensational account over the rigorous, independent verification required by standard journalism. As long as the narrative is driven by paid "insiders" and anonymous tips, it will likely remain, as you suggested, in the realm of folklore rather than fact.

That's an extraordinary claim. Any evidence for it?

I must agree with Perene on that point.
Rede Globo de Televisão is considered to be an unofficial "Ministry of Truth" in the 90s and during the dictatorship.
I highly recommend the British documentary "Beyond Citizen Kane", which explores the network's connection to the Military Dictatorship, their role in the Redemocratization process, and the Monopoly by excellence they held on TV and Journalism from their inception to the late 90s. It wasn't until the internet became a viable platform for alternative views that Rede Globo lost its kingmaker status.

I don't know about Brazilian TV, but "Alien Autopsy" was questioned by mainstream media elsewhere from the outset.

Unfortunately, he's right, and the culprit is the same.
Rede Globo's same show, the Fantástico, was a brazilian Ritual. It still is, to a certain extent. It's a variety show that was watched by 65%+ of TV owners on Sunday night. It has some Hard Journalism and Soft Entertainment on the same 3-hour bracket from 19:30 to 22:30.

In 1986, the skies of Brazil held a sinister invasion that evaded every explanation. Flying throughout the skies of several states, a multitude of shining lights were seen by civilians, pilots, air controllers, and the military. Fantástico's reports on the "Official UFO Night" press conference held by the armed forces displayed how the Brazilian Air Force deployed jets and chased twenty-one lights they could neither catch nor explain. This event dominated the headlines and legitimized Ufology as a valid conversation topic, but it was hardly the first time the Harpies faced unknown objects in the sky. Official documents from the "Operação Prato", an air force investigation on the phenomena that haunted and scarred the Amazon ten years prior, were leaked to the press. They revealed a systematic interest by the Forças Aéreas Brasileiras, and the discomforting belief that the allegations made by the victims of the "vampire lights" were true, not mass delusion.

On 28th of September, 1995, Fantástico had a 40-minute segment analysing Ray Santilli's ET Autopsy video, with serious commentary by experts - including Dr. Badan Palhares, the forensic doctor that exumed the nazi Angel of Death, Dr. Mengele. It was heavily implied by Dr Badan Palhares that the footage was real. To a country like Brazil, that was enough. A few monoths later, three girls in Varginha would consider the possibility given by a ufologist that they could have seen an Alien being.

 

[BoulderRiver]

Sounds really useful. Is that available to view/download somewhere?

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1eycFE5-KAWcWdY1hIsbNXbX7ejg-yXIhsoP0-wbMCPs/edit?tab=t.0

 

[Rick Robson]

It wasn't until the internet became a viable platform for alternative views that Rede Globo lost its kingmaker status.

Wrong, Rede Globo still reigns supreme to this day, with its variety of subversiveness/culture canceling prime time TV novelas and programs at the highest audience levels ever, alas.
Anyway, this discussion serves nothing but derail the topic's subject. After all, when the heck did anybody care to hear "unofficial"/alternative outlets in my country?
I'm moving on.

 

[BoulderRiver]

Anyway, this discussion serves nothing but derail the topic's subject.

On the contrary!
Neglecting the cultural and social landscape upon which the case is built leads to misunderstanding the nuances that allow hoaxes like this one to fester. If it was not for Rede Globo's spotlight, there would be no social contagion, there would be no desires for 15-minutes of fame being fulfilled by a media famished for spectacle, there would be no ever-enlarging mythology by Pacaccini, meaning there would be no Varginha Case.


Remember, this case was huge in 1996/97.
TV Stations and journalists from all over the world came to Varginha. Why did it die, only to be re-heated by James Fox in 2022?
He had all the material; he just needed to curate the narrative as he desired, making the omissions that were not omitted in the 90s.

 

[Rick Robson]

On the contrary!
Neglecting the cultural and social landscape upon which the case is built leads to misunderstanding the nuances that allow hoaxes like this one to fester. If it was not for Rede Globo's spotlight, there would be no social contagion, there would be no desires for 15-minutes of fame being fulfilled by a media famished for spectacle, there would be no ever-enlarging mythology by Pacaccini, meaning there would be no Varginha Case.


Remember, this case was huge in 1996/97.
TV Stations and journalists from all over the world came to Varginha. Why did it die, only to be re-heated by James Fox in 2022?
He had all the material; he just needed to curate the narrative as he desired, making the omissions that were not omitted in the 90s.

Funny how bad actors often end up getting away with it, even when a case is far from being resolved. That's why any thread about cases like this is a total waste of time, I'm definitely done with this whole thing, good bye!

 

[mystry]

There is a press conference in Washington D.C. tomorrow related to this event (or "event") with firsthand witnesses, I read. There is also video footage people are considering such as YouTube clip Is this a real nonhuman being?

 

[BoulderRiver]

Fakest footage possible. Bad quality AI-generated imagery.
Textures are moving. The footage is not how a handheld-camera would record. It does not match what is described by the girls.

This opinion is built upon 14 years of CGI expertise, which I am currently bridging with the field of digital and image forensics. I am in the final stages of obtaining my certification in these forensic disciplines and will hold the credential by next semester.

It's important to point out that the dialogue also makes no sense.

 

[John J.]

There is also video footage people are considering such as YouTube clip Is this a real nonhuman being?

Looks like CGI. Would you turn your back on such a strange being just a few metres away like the "soldier" in the clip?
The camouflage glimpsed doesn't look like standard Brazilian issue, certainly not the most common French-inspired "lizard" pattern
("Camopedia" website, Brazil, https://camopedia.org/index.php?title=Brazil) where different colour areas have stragglier edges.

The YouTube source, "The Alien Archive", has a number of extremely dubious clips that appear to use AI/ CGI graphics, often of indifferent quality, like "NATO recovery of an extraterrestrial human, stasis pod, and egg shaped craft from an Antarctic cave",

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gdY1SVYscEA




,

...which is just nonsense. Wheeled vehicles on snow, whole wheels visible (not sunk into snow), perspectives awry (images of individual vehicles almost certainly composited into the images shown), an obsolescent truck (maybe an M35, not e.g. an M1078).
Tracked vehicles distribute the weight much better, and there's no road network in Antarctica. Antarctica is not militarized, but military units equipped to fight in arctic conditions rely on tracked vehicles for mobility over snow and ice.
The alien is actually described (amongst other things) as a Venusian.

Then there's "Alien craft observing 9/11 footage",
(Edited to add, I'm not comfortable about providing direct links to this garbage, but feel the no-click policy sort of obliges it).


Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ThfF10hJogw&list=PLnrKK3E6ITolP4Q9pponY-pyhKxiGWQG8

Obviously no-one watched any footage of the September 11 attacks close enough until "The Alien Archive" noticed that the space brothers were present (and doing sod all to prevent mass murder). I find this intensely distasteful.

And "Photographs of terrestrial reptilians",
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GxzjmfPROfY

(The one of the right doesn't look anything like a photo or halfway decent CGI).
..and there's more.

It's a repository of nonsense. Blatant falsehoods pretending to be facts. A timely reminder of why Metabunk might be useful (and why fact-checking resources are necessary, and well-rounded public education essential).

 

[JMartJr]

The YouTube source, "The Alien Archive", has a number of extremely dubious clips that appear to use AI/ CGI graphics, often of indifferent quality, like "NATO recovery of an extraterrestrial human, stasis pod, and egg shaped craft from an Antarctic cave",

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gdY1SVYscEA

That first video reminds me of this one:
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/ja...art-about-non-human-technology-the-egg.13949/

 

[NorCal Dave]

There is a press conference in Washington D.C. tomorrow related to this event (or "event") with firsthand witnesses, I read.

Source? We always share sources here.

 

[JMartJr]

Source? We always share sources here.

Live here, now, I suppose it will be available "taped" here later...


Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=99hRVeBzTzE

 

[BoulderRiver]

For James Fox and the Research Team

1. "James, your film presents the military capture as a proven fact, largely based on the 'whistleblower' testimonies collected by Vitório Pacaccini. Those testimonies already had several inconsistencies among them, according to military and civilian records. However, the first military witness admitted in 2019 that his entire 1996 account was a lie coerced by Pacaccini. Military #3 also said the same. Furthermore, 'Military X' has been identified as having received direct payments for his account. How can you justify presenting this as a legitimate case for disclosure when the primary evidence has been retracted as a paid fabrication, and WHY DID YOU HIDE such information back in 2022, and continued to do so in 2025?"

For Dr. Armando Fortunato

1. In your previous medical statements and interviews as late as 2023 and 2024, you attributed the death of Officer Marco Eli Chereze to a massive systemic bacterial infection of known pathogens. Given that you have stated these bacteria entered through a surgical wound from a botched, non-sterile drainage of a Hidradenitis cyst, why are you now suggesting this terrestrial infection was of non-human origin?

For Dr. Italo Venturelli

1. The statements regarding the creature are remarkable, but all of them lack any specifics about the procedure performed by Dr Marcos Vinicius. Can you elaborate more precisely on what was done?
2. What happened after those 3 minutes of interaction with the creature? You've stated on interview that you went to see your child patient, but on Moment of Contact Revelations, the narrator claims the military burst in and took the alien being away. What happened there, and why this incongruence of narratives?

For Carlos de Souza

1. In 1996, you stated that you found the alleged crash site already under military control, yet in 2018 and in the Moment of Contact documentary, you claimed the military arrived ten to fifteen minutes after you. Also, in 2018, you categorically state that no gun was pointed at you, but in Moment of Contact, you state that a soldier pointed a rifle directly at your head, threatening a headshot. Why has your account of the military's behavior shifted so significantly over the years?

 

[BoulderRiver]

I watched the Press Conference and the subsequent Q&A.

It was extremely underwhelming.
Might as well have been just a marketing email with the link to buy his documentary.
No new information was provided. No journalist made any inquiry. Ross Coulthart acted as a paid advertiser for the case as he watched claims being stated, only voicing awe, and words like "courageous!"
Did he quit after winning a Pulitzer?

He and others just ate whatever those people stated, without questioning a single bit of their testimonies.
Not a single mention of the contradictions those accounts have?
Just glide over the fact that the main military witnesses have been denounced as being forged by a ufologist? That they all had internal inconsistencies?

Even the autopsy doctor gave a different statement than the one he published a week ago;

Fortunato Filho, the Forensic doctor

This managed to be even below pseudoscience.
We must do better.

 

[Mendel]

I watched the Press Conference and the subsequent Q&A.

Thank you.

Ross Coulthart acted as a paid advertiser for the case

As expected. He has a track record of being credulous.

 

[BoulderRiver]

Worse than credulous, he became gullible.

 

[NorCal Dave]

Worse than credulous, he became gullible.

There's a reason people like Fox and other UFOlogist are regulars on Coulthart's show. It's just free publicity.

This managed to be even below pseudoscience.
We must do better.

Aside from people on forums like this, no one wants better. Unfortunately.