Claims: Physical Evidence of Steve Michalak's Falcon Lake UFO Incident

[Rory]

this part is flat out wrong, if we read that paragraph as prior to the UFO incident [it's different] from their own source link:

fixed

 

[JMartJr]

In general, you can expect it to take between 1-3 weeks to make moonshine, as the mash must ferment and the distillation process must be continued until the final shine is safe for consumption.

https://homebrewadvice.com › how-to-make-moonshine

 

[NorCal Dave]

He succinctly wrote: "Gloves, goggles, burns, smell of sulfur – knocked off his feet by copper still."

Maybe. First of all, let's look at what the hobby distiller said (bold by me):

A distinct smell of sulfur/sulfide and vulcanized rubber overlays the fine malt aroma.

While he does say "distinct" he also says it overlays the malt aroma. To clarify, I'm someone that never misses a distillery tour anywhere I visit, though I can neither confirm nor deny that I may occasionally dabble in some home alchemy with a still. So, the smell of sulfur may not be an overpowering note that can coat Michalak's clothes and make him smell bad.

The other people on the forum point out that the sulfur smell often come from problems with fermentation, so he should have noticed it before he attempted to distill his product.

Fermentation can produce hydrogen sulphide, it stinks of rotten eggs, burnt rubber and sulfur. During fermentation, so-called thioalcohols can be formed, in which an oxygen atom is replaced by a sulfur atom (or so).

https://www.schnapsbrennen.at/discussion/beitrag/raetselhafter-schwefelgeruch-im-destillat/

In distillation, subtlety is key. Making the "cuts" as the alcohol comes off the still is all about the small differences in smell and taste as is the finished product. The hobby guy on the forum can still smell the malt, or smells of the original mash, it's just that the sulfur is overlaying it. So, I would imagine if he spilled it all over himself, he would just smell like alcohol, not really sulfur.

This is a standard, though mini version, of a pot still on the left, that allows the heated vapor to go into the "worm" on the right, where the vapor goes through the small copper pipe that is submerged in cold water, thus condensing it. As for the silver vegetable steamer, I'm not sure what it's for, other than maybe as a strainer. After a mash (if it's grains) or wine (if it's fruits) has been fermented, it is strained before entering the pot still. It appears that the strainer/steamer would fit on top of the bottom 1/2 of the still and act as a rough strainer. In that case it would NOT be in the still when it is heated and therefore wouldn't be hot enough to burn someone.

Key points: A distillery still has perforated plates. And the pattern on Michalak's torso was the only real mystery to me.

Sometimes, they have perforated plates. Those types of plates are often found in column or reflux stills. For home hobby distillers, these are often called "flute" stills. Each of the round glass windows in the flute below has a perforated "bubbler plate":

The bubbler plates sometimes look like this 2" version:

But more often like this 8" one:

More importantly, perforated bubbler plates are used in much more sophisticated and expensive set ups, often to get create very high ABVs (Alcohol By Volume). Anything distilled to 95% ABV is vodka. It's supposed to be odorless and tasteless, other than the alcohol.

A backwoods moonshine still, is often cobbled together with whatever is handy, but resembles a classic pot still. No plates. These turn out product that is between 50% and maybe 70% ABV.

It's possible that Mill had some sort of homemade column/flute still out in the woods AND that he happened to have a very sulfur tainted mash that he decided to run through it anyways when it happened to blow up on him. Sounds like a stretch, though moonshining could have been involved in some way.

In general, you can expect it to take between 1-3 weeks to make moonshine, as the mash must ferment and the distillation process must be continued until the final shine is safe for consumption.
https://homebrewadvice.com › how-to-make-moonshine

As noted, that includes the fermentation process, which can take 3-8 days or so depending on temps, yeast and what's being fermented. Once the mash is fermented, it can be run through a still in 3-8 hours depending on amounts, longer if one has to build a wood fire first. Most simple pot stills require 2 passes, a stripping run and a spirit run, to get something in the 60%-80% ABV.

So, assuming Michalak had already fermented his mash, he could have headed up to his "claim" to distill a bit of "shine" over the weekend.

 

[NorCal Dave]

P. S.: This is my first post on Metabunk. Please forgive me if I am not familiar with the forum software right away.

If you're having trouble getting it to work right, PM me. Took me a while too.

 

[FatPhil]

https://homebrewadvice.com › how-to-make-moonshine

Nah, we've had Turboyeast for decades

What is Turbo Yeast?
Jun 26, 2018 11:36:13 AM Published in Liquors 6702 Views.

A turbo yeast is nothing like an ordinary pack of wine or beer yeast. In fact, it is not very good at fermenting beer or wine, it is usually far to fast and brutal for this, leaving nothing of the desired flavours and bouques in your brew if you try. Instead the turbo yeast is designed for the fastest and most reliable fermentation of a pure sugar/water mix, into pure alcohol.

...

Turbo yeast come in many flavours today. The typical groups are
Moderate alcohol turbo yeast - fast

Turbo's in this group are Alcotec 6 (3 day fermentation), Alcotec 48 (which does it in 48 hours, hence the name). The alcohol level is usually around 14% by volume. This is the result of full fermentation of 6 kgs of sugar in 25 litres final volume (the rest being water).High alcohol turbo yeast - slower

...

Speciality turbo yeast - hyper fast, hyper clean

We have the Alcotec 24 - makes moderate alcohol in only 24 hours, it is the most extreme fermentation you have ever seen. There are also a few "super clean" fermenting yeasts such as the Alcotec VodkaStar and the Alcotec Triple Still.

-- https://www.brewuk.co.uk/faq/what-is-turbo-yeast.html

 

[JMartJr]

Nah, we've had Turboyeast for decades

But is it universally used? Or do some traditionalists prefer doing it the old fashioned way like daddy taught 'em? If nothing else, it would seem to deprive one of the peaceful weeks of vacation out in the woods, away from trouble and strife. (Of course one COULD stay out for weeks and use your newfangled yeast to make multiple batches, maybe...)

That said, I have no dog in the fight of what he might have been doing out there, other than still believing his time frame not totally inconsistent with some shining, possibly with attendant hunting and spitting and whittling and generally enjoying the some time off.

 

[Charlie Wiser]

Old thread but I wanted to add this: The photo of the grid of dots on Michalak's stomach is always used to illustrate his original burns but it appeared in a newspaper article in Jan 1968 where he claimed the burn marks had recurred. Hence no singed hair.

Winnipeg Free Press, Jan 17, 1968

Obviously it does not match the location of the grid on the undershirt - which actually shows the grid of dots on the BACK of the shirt, not the chest:

His original burns are the blotchy ones on his chest and upper abdomen - that photo was taken 2 or 3 days after the incident probably by the UFO researcher who visited him at home. It appears in Michalak's self-published book (late 1967), in which there is no mention of him suffering a grid of dot pattern of burns and no photo of it.

So, his self-published book came out in Nov or Dec 1967, and in Jan 1968 he's in the paper because his burns are back... presumably he called the reporter with that update, whereupon the article was written, the famous dot-photo photo taken.

 

[NorCal Dave]

Old thread but I wanted to add this:

I'll add more, like a plug for your website.

Seriously, if anyone on Metabunk wants a real good run through on the timeline of this case and how what were told is not what really happened, check out Charlie Wiser's own page threedollarkit.weebly.com.

In addition, there is a great run through on the Travis Walton Fire in the Sky case and the Ariel schoolyard case.

I'm currently reading through her work on the Ariel case and it's everything I love about Metabunk. Contrasting what the children said on video versus what the investigators said they said.

 

[Charlie Wiser]

I'll add more, like a plug for your website.

Hehe thanks. I have a much longer article on Michalak's case that I'll replace the existing one with, at some point, as my website only focuses on the burns and what we could charitably call the photo mix-up. Chris Rutkowski has been the main investigator and knew the family since the 70s. His 1994 report for JUFOS as well as his 2017 book (cowritten with Stan Michalak, the son) caption the grid-dot-burn pattern as "taken a few days after his encounter" and "shortly after the incident" respectively.

The latter book includes the full text of Michalak's 1967 booklet but no images, so the blotchy-burns photo doesn't appear anywhere in that book (or in the 1994 report).

I've been unable to reconcile the discrepancy with Chris. I don't know when the blotchy-burns photo first (re)surfaced but it was donated to the U of Manitoba Library Special Collections around 2019 along with the shirt which is on display with a red RCMP label even though to my knowledge it was never in RCMP's possession. (Photos in the right case are of Michalak and the site.)

 

[Charlie Wiser]

On a different note - while I have no doubt this case was hoaxed in every respect (other than perhaps the initial burns, which may have been accidental), I do wonder why he described two UFOs, only one of which landed. In those early days of UFO encounters, I imagine those with an interest in the subject who wanted to hoax their own sighting would have copied off each other. So what story was Michalak copying? Because otherwise I don't know why he'd add the second, superfluous, UFO.

 

[deirdre]

His original burns are the blotchy ones on his chest and upper abdomen - that photo was taken 2 or 3 days after the incident probably by the UFO researcher who visited him at home.

ouch. the hospital shaved him all around and Over his burns?
i mean that could be like when people lose their eyebrows in a flash fire, but the doctor said the holes in his undershirt matched the burned areas on his chest. so the whole shirt didnt catch.

and he said he had a proper shirt over his tshirt. weirdness.

 

[Charlie Wiser]

the doctor said the holes in his undershirt matched the burned areas on his chest. so the whole shirt didnt catch.

The doctor wrote in his 1968 report for APRO that he "observed the burnt undershirt which had holes with charred (or blackened) edges corresponding to the site of the burn."

Note the grid pattern on the undershirt is not holes with blackened edges - merely surface marks. So what the doctor is referring to here must be the other burns on the shirt - the huge holes on the chest (in the photo the shirt has been cut open so you need to imagine it back in one piece) which do indeed match Michalak's burned chest.

His description of Michalak's burns also match the blotchy burns photo - no mention of a grid of dots which would obviously be worth remarking on: "numerous reddish, slightly irregular, oval-shaped, slightly raised lesions" on Michalak's "lower sternal and upper abdominal region… especially to the left of the midline… consistent with a first-degree burn."

and he said he had a proper shirt over his tshirt. weirdness.

That shirt, he claims, was burned into tiny pieces. When he (finally) located the site weeks later he claims he collected all the remnants but I've seen no reports that anyone else ever saw them, and when the authorities went to the site they couldn't find even one scrap left behind.

 

[deirdre]

Note the grid pattern on the undershirt is not holes with blackened edges - merely surface marks. So what the doctor is referring to here must be the other burns on the shirt - the huge holes on the chest (in the photo the shirt has been cut open so you need to imagine it back in one piece) which do indeed match Michalak's burned chest.

yup.

still doesnt explain where all his chest hair went. why would the hospital shave between his pecks for example, there is no burn there and shaving a burn would hurt.
and the ufo grid i dont think, can flash singe hair off your body if it is under two shirts.

i think he made up the grid pattern burns because he didnt have any evidence of a grid causing the initial burn.

 

[Charlie Wiser]

still doesnt explain where all his chest hair went. why would the hospital shave between his pecks for example, there is no burn there and shaving a burn would hurt.
and the ufo grid i dont think, can flash singe hair off your body if it is under two shirts.

I'm not sure what you mean about his chest hair - are you referring to that asymmetrical patch of missing hair in the 1967 photo? This could be where hair was merely singed when he got the rest of the burn. (I think it's likely he rubbed hot ash on his chest, since that's what the highway officer thinks he saw. He refused to show the officer his undershirt, so I also think it's likely all the damage on the undershirt was created when he got back to the hotel, or back home.)

I should reiterate that Michalak isn't the one who mixed up the photos. Prior to 1968 he never mentioned a regular grid of burns on his body as part of the original injury. Then in Jan 1968 he claimed that pattern was the same as the original. To explain why the original photo is blotchy burns, he said the dots would grow and eventually join up. He said this had already happened before in Sep 1967.

So he invented the story that the recurrence was the same as the original, and when Chris Rutkowski got involved I guess he therefore assumed the dot-pattern photo was from the original incident. He suggested the dot pattern is a chemical burn (whereas the burns elsewhere were thermal), to explain why the stomach hair isn't singed. If he can ever accept the dot pattern photo is from Jan 1968, this explanation also works.

i think he made up the grid pattern burns because he didnt have any evidence of a grid causing the initial burn.

I can't 100% parse your sentence but the grid pattern of burns (on his skin) was never part of the story until 1968. So even the idea of producing evidence of burns matching the dots on the shirt didn't exist until 1968.

 

[deirdre]

I think it's likely he rubbed hot ash on his chest, since that's what the highway officer thinks he saw. He refused to show the officer his undershirt, so I also think it's likely all the damage on the undershirt was created when he got back to the hotel, or back home

its possible if he caught his undershirt on fire and patted it out with his hands it could look like ash smeared on his chest. But yea i always wondered what he was wearing on the road, the officer didnt say "a shirtless guy flag me down". and he said "he showed me his burn" which implies the burn was hidden by something.

 

[deirdre]

So even the idea of producing evidence of burns matching the dots on the shirt didn't exist until 1968.

the story was always a grid on the ufo burned him. all sorts of things could have burned him, so the only way to give his story oomph was to produce a grid. (vs everyone just dismissing him saying "yea you were drunk and passed out on the fire" etc.) I think that is the only reason he faked the grid burns later on.

 

[deirdre]

It appears in Michalak's self-published book (late 1967),

can i ask how you know this? i've been looking for it but cant find it anywhere.

 

[Charlie Wiser]

he said "he showed me his burn"

The officer said he was wearing a jacket with no shirt.

Michalak claimed in a TV interview years later that he was bare-chested because it hurt to much to wear his jacket.

 

[deirdre]

The officer said he was wearing a jacket with no shirt.

thanks. i didnt see that in the report i read. thanks.

 

[Charlie Wiser]

can i ask how you know this? i've been looking for it but cant find it anywhere.

The booklet is reproduced as photocopies in the Canadian govt UFO files.

 

[Charlie Wiser]

thanks. i didnt see that in the report i read. thanks.

This is the start of Solotki's report - written 2 weeks after Cpl Davis's Jun 5th report for some reason.

 

[Charlie Wiser]

Link to the booklet - it was published in 1967, no earlier than November.

 

[Charlie Wiser]

Link to the booklet - it was published in 1967, no earlier than November.

The above post has been flagged and I was asked to edit it but there's no edit button. Whatever. I was trying to provide a helpful resource which was essentially requested, and which anyone reading this thread can see the relevance of. I'm not going to upload 40 jpgs here.

 

[Landru]

The above post has been flagged and I was asked to edit it but there's no edit button. Whatever. I was trying to provide a helpful resource which was essentially requested, and which anyone reading this thread can see the relevance of. I'm not going to upload 40 jpgs here.

You can describe briefly what is in the link in accordance with the Posting Guidelines. If it is a response to a request you should have replied to the request so it would be included to provide context.

 

[Charlie Wiser]

You can describe briefly what is in the link in accordance with the Posting Guidelines. If it is a response to a request you should have replied to the request si it would be included ti provide context.

The context of the booklet is abundantly clear.

Two phenomenal researchers, including one retweeted by Mick West, have left this board because of this nit-picking nonsense by overzealous mods against skeptical users trying to have evidence-based conversations. Congrats for making me the third.

 

[Mendel]

. I'm not going to upload 40 jpgs here

it might be worth uploading the booklet to archive.org, for posterity.
i believe the site will generate a PDF for easy dissemination.

 

[deirdre]

The context of the booklet is abundantly clear.

someone would have to be closely paying attention to our conversation. first its called a book , then you answer my question. and then post something else then post a link to a booklet.

but the reason mods don't let people just post unclear links is because they don't want the conspiracy theorists to do it. Conspiracy theorists just posting random unclear links is a real problem on this site, and people complain when there are double standards (which my signature attests to )

add: they also are supposed to frown on people stating things as if they are fact, but not providing back up evidence. Again, this is because it's too annoying when conspiracy theorists do this. and we should be modeling good analysis techniques.

 

[Nemon]

Link to the booklet - it was published in 1967, no earlier than November.

But this booklet does not show the colour photo as you are stating here (#47):

His original burns are the blotchy ones on his chest and upper abdomen - that photo was taken 2 or 3 days after the incident probably by the UFO researcher who visited him at home. It appears in Michalak's self-published book (late 1967), in which there is no mention of him suffering a grid of dot pattern of burns and no photo of it.

...and the Michalak booklet does show a photo of the shirt with the grid pattern on the cover, doesn't it?


Maybe I got mixed up ...

 

[deirdre]

But this booklet does not show the colour photo as you are stating here (#47):

i saw it. page 21

and the Michalak booklet does show a photo of the shirt with the grid pattern on the cover, doesn't it?

i think she is talking about the photo with the grid pattern on his stomach.

 

[Nemon]

i saw it. page 21
View attachment 56727


i think she is talking about the photo with the grid pattern on his stomach.

Okay, thank you! I did not recognize it from the preview pictures.

i think she is talking about the photo with the grid pattern on his stomach.

I'm a little confused now. I understood that in this version the grid pattern was introduced afterwards - not only as an injury, but also on the undershirt.

 

[Charlie Wiser]

Timeline of the evidence for Michalak's injuries

The reason I'm posting this is because the timeline, specifically the photos, have been mixed up in order to create the narrative that Michalak suffered burns in a grid pattern (matching the UFO exhaust). I am unmixing them.

Documents are from the Canadian UFO files unless otherwise stated. The files can be downloaded in parts here (Archive.org) with parts 17 and 18 containing documents on Michalak's case.

Summary: There is no evidence from medical reports or from Michalak himself that he suffered a grid of burns as a result of the incident. The famous "grid" pattern photo first appeared in 1968 when he claimed the burns reappeared.

What was documented at the time

Constable Solotki, who saw Michalak on the side of the road (after he ran out of the bush), said Michalak wore a jacket over a bare chest, and appeared to have rubbed ash on his chest. (Solotki, G A (Jun 16, 1967). Royal Canadian Mounted Police Report, D Division, Falcon Police Highway Patrol. Stefan Michalak: Report of Unidentified Flying Object, Falcon Beach, Manitoba – 20 MAY 67)

The ER doc who treated Michalak the next day did not mention a grid pattern:

At examination the physician found an area of first degree burns over the upper abdomen, covering an area of 7-8 inches [17-20 cm] and consisting of several round and irregular shaped burns the size of a silver dollar or less.

(This memo is from a doctor writing to the main investigator Bissky, following his discussion with the ER doc.)

A story by Heather Chisvin appeared in the local paper (Winnipeg Tribune) on Monday, after she visisted Michalak at home on Sunday. Chisvin quoted the ER doc as saying there was "nothing unusual about [the burns] at all". The photo with the article shows Michalak with a covered chest, holding up his sketch of the UFO.

The photo shows Michalak wearing a button-down regular shirt, which is very similar or identical to the shirt worn in the blotchy burns photo (below). The timeline indicates these photos were taken on Sunday and Tuesday respectively.

Michalak's son Stan (then 9) would later recall that the above article showed his father's chest with a grid of burns but this is clearly an incorrect memory:

Source: When They Appeared by Stan Michalak and Chris Rutkowski, 2017, chp 3.

Michalak's family doctor Dr Oatway examined him on Monday and talked to RCMP the following day, per Corporal G J Davis's (RCAF) first report, and did not mention a grid of dots on the patient's skin. This report from Oatway includes a second treatment in Sep for an allergic reaction. In neither case does he mention a grid pattern of burns.

In 1968 Oatway wrote a report for APRO where he described:

numerous reddish, slightly irregular, oval-shaped, slightly raised lesions [on Michalak's] lower sternal and upper abdominal region… especially to the left of the midline… consistent with a first-degree burn.

Source: When They Appeared by Stan Michalak and Chris Rutkowski, 2017, chp Physiological Effects.

Irregular burns left of midline does not indicate Oatway saw a regular pattern of dots over Michalak's navel. His description exactly matches the blotchy burns photo.

On Tuesday two officers from RCMP interviewed Michalak, who:

showed us the burns on his abdomen and chest and there is a large burn that covers an area approximately 1 foot in diameter… blotchy and with unburned areas inside the burned perimeter area… It resembled an exceptionally severe sunburn in the one spot.

Again, clearly not a regular grid of dots on the stomach.

APRO investigator B. Thompson visited on Tuesday and took the "blotchy burns" photo (evidence of the date of this photo is in the next paragraph):

A poor photocopy of the photo appears in the Canadian government declassified UFO files, labeled as part 17 on Archive.org as part of a Jul 1967 memo. The memo (from the lead govt investigator Bissky) describes the photo as being taken by Thompson. This is evidence that the photo represents the burns Michalak suffered at the time of the incident.

This is my composite of the memo and the photo which appear on contiguous pages of the government file, indicating that the memo is referring to this photo.

Also on Tuesday, presumably at the urging of Thompson, a UFO sighting report was made:

His shirt was burned from the exhaust panels on the outer edge and he required medical treatment for burns on his stomach.

No mention of a grid pattern.

In late 1967 Michalak published a booklet to detail his experience. It does not include any picture or description of a grid of burns on his body. It only includes the blotchy burns photo with this caption:

Large and small pink spots appeared on my chest as a result of burns I received from the heat of the craft.

The text itself describes his injuries like this:

Red marks had appeared where the blast from the craft touched me and burnt my shirt. Some spots were as large as silver dollars

(This proves the marks were of different sizes. A Canadian silver dollar is 1.4", much bigger than the fingernail-sized dots in the grid pattern.)

The hot surface of the craft melted my glove and the heat burned my cap and set on fire my shirt, formed a peculiar burnt pattern on my undershirt.

(Pattern on his undershirt but NOT on his body.)

He twice mentions that his chest was burned, not his stomach:

A doctor examined the burns on my chest...
(caption) Remains of the undershirt found at the site of the landing. Note the peculiar checkerboard pattern created by the heat which also burned my chest.

In Nov 1967, Lou McPhillips (Winnipeg City Policeman and UFO enthusiast) wrote to the Defence Minister, Ontario about various cases including this one. He included the following quote from Michalak:

I was burned from the heat, and I was thrown back. My clothes, shirt & chest were burned.

Again, he was burned on the chest, not the stomach, and he makes no mention of the burns being in a grid pattern.

The famous photo

There is no evidence that anyone saw, or that Michalak claimed, during 1967 that he had a grid pattern of burns on his body. The first time it comes up is in Jan 1968 in the newspaper article "Burns Back, Says Michalak" (Winnipeg Free Press). Michalak was at home on bed rest with what he called a recurrence of burns "identical" to what he suffered in 1967. The photo with the article (actually a series of photos) is the famous one often used to illustrate the case, but these photos did not exist before 1968. The caption makes it clear that the photo was taken for the article, describing Michalak as bedridden. There's no evidence a doctor saw him.

Note:

• If this photo was actually from May 1967, as Chris Rutkowski claims, and reused by the newspaper rather than the staff taking their own photo, it would include a copyright or source.
• The missing patch of chest hair seen in the blotchy burns photo is not present. There's no singed chest hair.
• The hair on his stomach is not singed under the "burns". Chris Rutkowski explains this by saying the grid is actually a chemical burn - despite Michalak and everyone who saw him saying his suffered first degree burns / sunburn.
• The grid pattern and its location doesn't match anything about the descriptions given by various people in May (see above).

Other evidence

As previously discussed in this thread, the grid pattern on the undershirt is on the back, not the front, and doesn't match the size, location, or pattern of the "burns" on Michalak's stomach in the 1968 photo (claimed by Rutkowski to be the 1967 photo). The grid barely goes below the bottom of the armholes. It's nowhere near his stomach even if he was wearing the shirt backwards.

Note the missing squares in the bottom row (unlike the grid on his stomach) and the outline which reminds me of a vintage waffle iron. I haven't found a matching item, but these photos show a handheld waffle iron along with a old electric one that has those corner squares missing. Also note that these fabric burns are very minor and it seems unlikely that the heat which caused this damage could cause much damage at all to the skin underneath it.

The allegedly recurred burn in Jan 1968 matches this vintage brass ashtray pretty well. As I said, there's no evidence he sought medical treatment so we don't know if these are burns or marks made in some other way. In this color photo it's clear Michalak has no other burn damage on his body despite the huge burns on the undershirt that's left ragged holes. There's simply no way this photo comes from 2 days after the incident (and nor did Michalak claim it did).

 

[Charlie Wiser]

Overall timeline for reference

This isn't directly related to the question of the grid-burn vs blotchy-burn photos, just adding for completeness.

Sources:
Davis (RCMP), 26 May 1967 report (cited as Davis May67) DOWNLOAD PDF from Library & Archives Canada
Davis (RCMP), 26 June 1967 report (cited as Davis Jun67) DOWNLOAD PDF from Library & Archives Canada
Bissky (RCAF), 6 June 1967 report (cited as Bissky Jun67)
Bissky (RCAF), 26 June 1967 addendum to report (cited as Bissky Jun67A) - written after Michalak finally found the landing site
Canadian UFO Files vol 17&18 (cited as C-UFO) DOWNLOAD PDFs from Archive.org

FRI (May 19): (Davis Jun67, para 4)
7:15PM: Michalak departs Winnipeg on the bus.

9:15-9:30PM: Michalak arrives at Falcon Lake and checks into motel and reads prospecting books until 11PM.

~8PM: Bar manager claims Michalak drinks 3 beers. [Time discrepancy - manager admitted he may have the time wrong but was certain it was Michalak after meeting him again June 1st, see below.] Michalak will later deny drinking any alcohol.

11PM: Bar manager claims Michalak returns and drinks 2 more beers. Michalak, however, claims he drank coffee. Both agree they speak about prospecting.

11:30PM Michalak returns to his room, reads another half-hour, then sleeps.

SAT (May 20):
6AM approx: Michalak leaves to go prospecting.

Lunchtime: Michalak claims he sees 2 UFOs, one lands and blasts him when it takes off.

3PM: According to Cst Solotki: Michalak flags him down on Highway 1 and excitedly tells him he saw 2 glowing, rotating space ships about 2 miles north of the highway, that he touched one and his hat and shirt got burned. He refuses to show Solotki the shirt in his briefcase, wouldn't let Solotki get near, and "didn't want any publicity". Solotki felt Michalak had a hangover: "His eyes were red and he acted in a very irrational manner." His showed Solotki "marks on his chest and they looked like marks that were caused by rubbing ash onto the skin." (para 1)

Davis May67, para 1

3-4PM: Michalak approaches motel owner saying he needs to see a doctor, she refers him to RCMP.

Later: Michalak tells motel owner he wants to make a collect call to Winnipeg, she refers him to phone booth.

Everyone he approached on that day felt as though he was acting as if he were intoxicated although none... could smell any liquor on him.

Late evening: Michalak returns by bus to Winnipeg. His son meets him and takes him straight to Misericordia Out-Patient Dept (Davis May67, para 4), where the treating doctor did not note anything unusual about the burns (see previous post).

MON (May 22): Dr Oatway treats Michalak and refers him and his undershirt to Dr Gilles at the Winnipeg Cancer Research Clinic to check the burn and the shirt for radioactivity. (Davis May67, para 6)

TUE (May 23): 10:30AM RCMP officers Davis and Zacharias speak to Michalak for 2 hours in the morning. Thompson from APRO is present initially but leaves soon after, taking the burned glove with him (Davis May67, para 2, 7). Davis gets the glove back at some point and hands it over to Bissky (per Bissky Jun67).

Michalak:

showed us the burns on his abdomen and chest and there is a large burn that covers an area approximately 1 foot in diameter… blotchy and with unburned areas inside the burned perimeter area… It resembled an exceptionally severe sunburn in the one spot...
Michalak was very uncomfortable while we were speaking... He seemed somewhat bewildered by everything and was not alert.

(Davis May67, para 4)

He also shows them the burned undershirt: "it smelled like burned electrical wiring or insulation" (Davis May67, para 7)

Michalak explains he didn't want Solotki to get near him because he feared he was radioactive:

he was afraid that he had encountered some radio-active object and he did not want to contaminate anyone else. This is the same reason he gave for not wanting anyone to come near him.

(Davis May67, para 5)

Despite this, Michalak traveled home by bus, visited the ER, and interacted with his family, a reporter, his doctor, the APRO investigator Thompson, and two RCMP officers, before finding out some time after Tuesday that his clothes were not radioactive. During that time he appeared to be suffering from various radioactive contamination-related symptoms (such as claiming weight loss, nausea, and lack of appetite, none of which were medically confirmed). Despite this apparent illness, by Friday the results came back that he was not radioactive.

In the afternoon the officers speak to Dr Oatway. (Davis May67, para 6)

WED (May 24): The officers return and record a 2-hour interview (transcribed in Michalak & Rutkoswki 2017) where Michalak says he previously thought UFO reports were by crackpots. He is eager to go back to the spot but doesn't want the spot publicized because "he claims to have a good nickel strike in the area and does not want it to be common knowledge". (Davis May67, para 5)

THU (May 25): Oatway examines Michalak again and concludes he's not well enough to visit the site. Michalak indicates the approximate location on survey maps. Davis, Zacharias and 7 RCAF officers examine the area by helicopter and on foot. They find an old saw that Michalak had mentioned seeing on his way in to the bush, as well as his discarded shopping bag, but can't find the UFO landing spot. Squadron Leader Bissky (RCAF) is keen to find the spot to check it for radioactivity. (Davis May67, para 8)

FRI (May 26): First report written by Davis (RCMP) (Davis May67) by which time the testing has come back negative, and the shirt and cap are still in the possession of the Clinic (Davis May67, para 6). (Since Michalak showed them the shirt on Tuesday, that must've been before he visited the Clinic for radioactive testing, i.e. he did not yet "know" if he was radioactive while interacting with all those people.)

Davis May67, para 6
Davis wrote a second report one month later on Jun 26th (Davis Jun67):

FRI (May 26) cont: Davis had asked a colleague on 25th to enquire at the motel where Michalak stayed regarding his alcohol consumption on May 19 (evening before the incident). Today he learns that the bar manager remembers Michalak because he'd talked extensively about prospecting, and that Michalak had 3 beers at ~8PM, and returned at 11PM for 2 more, but was "not intoxicated" and didn't buy liquor to take out. (Davis Jun67, para 4)

SAT-TUE (May 27-30): The officers see Michalak each day hoping he's

feeling well enough to make the trip with us to Falcon Lake to look for the landing spot of the unidentified flying object. He was not, but drew a map of the terrain on Tuesday which included a flat rock 300x100 feet in size.

(Davis Jun67, para 1)

However, on May 30 it is learned that Michalak did return to Falcon Lake on May 29 with Thompson (APRO), two LIFE reporters, and Dr Craig. "After what Prof. Craig described to S/L Bissky later, as 'going-around-in-circles' type of search, the search was abandoned." (Bissky Jun67, para 7)

LIFE Magazine took color photos of Michalak's burns and undershirt, and of the Falcon Lake area (per SE Hunt who was shown the photos on Jul 26, per his letter dated Sep 13, C-UFO). Therefore it's possible the "blotchy burn" photo is actually from LIFE, meaning it was taken 9 days after the incident, but as previously discussed it was labeled as being taken within 48 hours by Thompson of APRO. Or perhaps Hunt misunderstood the origin of the photos.

Michalak denies drinking the night before, only coffee at the cafe. (He will deny it again after being re-introduced to the bar manager on June 1st, when the manager identifies him with certainty.)

(Davis Jun67, para 4)

The burned undershirt and cap are taken and placed in safekeeping at TCHQ (Bissky Jun67, para 6).

May 31: Davis and Squadron Leader Bissky fly by helicopter over the area, and examine it by foot between noon and almost dark, hoping to find the spot but nothing resembles Michalak's map. Davis visits Michalak that evening and he agrees to come with them on Thursday. (Davis Jun67, para 2)

Jun 1: Davis and Michalak search without success by helicopter, then on foot (while the helicopter search with Bissky continues without them). They cover 3-4 miles of dense bush, starting at the point they'd found the items on the previous search (i.e. so they were in the right area). Nothing resembles Michalak's sketch.

MICHALAK seemed to be wandering aimlessly through the bush and didn't really appear to know where he was going... Throughout the ground search he kept insisting that he was going to be able to find the place and appeared to be quite disgusted with himself that he couldn't find the place.

(Davis Jun67, para 3)

Davis Jun67, para 3

Jun 1 (cont): Dr Oatway's Sep 19 report to the Deputy Base Surgeon mentions Michalak "developed a rash on the chest wall" today that settled in about 3 weeks, but does not indicate he saw or treated Michalak. [C-UFO] Note that Davis does not report Michalak telling him of the rash though they spent the day together. However, Bissky will report that on Jun 26 (almost 4 weeks later), Michalak saw a doctor about a skin condition and was referred to a specialist (see below).

Jun 2: Davis returns to the site again with RCAF personnel and helicopter, going further afield, finding nothing.

Jun 3: Michalak's son calls Bissky asking for the cap and undershirt to be returned, because of Michalak's interview with LIFE Magazine and with Dr Craig. (Bissky Jun67, para 6)

Dr Craig (head of UFO Project at U. Colorado; they received a year's grant from USG to study UFOs) interviews Michalak and is at first impressed with his story (according to Davis who talked to Craig 3 days later), see below.

Jun 4: Dr Craig spends the day with Michalak at Falcon Lake:

[Craig] began to have doubts after taking him to Falcon Lake and seeing how he groped around in the bush and did not seem to know where he was going.

(Davis Jun67, para 5)

Jun 5: Michalak goes back to work and is regaining his health and weight (Davis Jun67, para 10). The cap and undershirt are returned to him. (At a later date they are sent to CFHQ for analysis, per Bissky Jun67, para 6.)

Craig visits Bissky, and:

voiced his doubts as to the authenticity of this report... He, too, indicated his disappointment at Mr. Michalak's apparent lack of directional know-how while searching the bush... Further, it would appear his description of the area to the last party was somewhat different to that given to the RCAF/RCMP search team... Craig also thought that the Michalak family were enjoying the attention they were now obtaining.

(Bissky Jun67, para 8)

Jun 6: Davis & Zacharias talk to Dr Craig who relays the above info.
Michalak tells Bissky he intends to return to locate the site and will notify RCAF and RCMP when he does so. (Bissky Jun67, para 12)

Jun 8: Bissky and RCAF personnel visit the microwave tower at Falcon Lake (1 mile NE of the motel), due to suggestion Michalak climbed it for a better view while prospecting and got burned by electricity. Bissky thinks this is unlikely but found a spot that "quite closely resembled" Michalak's sketch. No shirt remnants were found. (Michalak had claimed his outer shirt was burned to shreds and he discarded it at the site.) Bissky considers the case pending until Michalak can find the spot. (Davis Jun67, para 6)

Davis notes that JB Thompson and APRO "are interested in monetary gain from their investigation of these sightings" per Dr Craig who says they write stories to sell to magazines. (Davis Jun67, para 8)

Davis notes that Michalak is in touch with Bissky and still wants to find the landing site. (Davis Jun67, para 10)

SAT Jun 24: Michalak returns to Falcon Lake with Mr Hart (a "complete stranger" with whom he'd had only one phone call previously and who had offered him use of his cottage). (Bissky Jun67A, paras 1, 4)

SUN Jun 25: Michalak and Hart allegedly locate the site after 11 hours searching. Bissky's report and addendum includes details (see below).

MON Jun 26 (date of Davis's second report): File closed pending Michalak locating the site.

Jun 26:
5PM: Michalak goes to doctor regarding a skin condition, and is referred to a specialist. "Apparently his skin irritations have become worse." (Bissky Jun67A, para 10) Later, Michalak will claim the rash recurs every 3 months but that's not accurate. This is only 5 weeks after the incident.

6PM: Michalak calls Bissky (RCAF) to say he went back to Falcon Lake over the weekend and located the site. (Bissky Jun67A, para 1)

7:30PM: Bissky visits with an RCMP officer. Michalak shows "noticeable surprise" by the RCMP presence despite previously agreeing with Cpl Davis to inform RCMP should he visit Falcon Lake again. (Bissky Jun67A, paras 1-3)

Michalak claims he took ore samples and samples of his burned outer shirt and burned moss from a 15-foot-diameter outline caused by the UFO. He took photos, not yet developed. Bissky, but not the RCMP, is invited into the basement to see the samples. Michalak won't allow Bissky to take a sample for radioactivity analysis, saying they can be checked in the basement "at his [Michalak's] convenience". (Bissky Jun67A, paras 5-7)

Michalak "objected very strongly" to revealing the location until he could "stake his claim", now to be shared with his new partner Mr Hart. "No amount of persuasion or inducement could sway Mr. Michalak into showing the location on a map." (Bissky Jun67A, para 8)

Mr Hart's cursory background check by RCMP reveals:

a shady background with a record of his past activities already registered with the RCMP... [bordering] on possible mental disturbances.

(Bissky Jun67A, para 9)

Regarding the burned undershirt:

one can see that the burned areas do not readily align themselves with the abdominal burns, although by stretching the shirt the areas do align... not too similar to the abdominal burn.

(Bissky Jun67A, para 9)

Jun 27: Samples sent from Canadian Forces HQ to Defence Chemical Biological and Radiation Laboratories for radioactivity analysis: burned undershirt, cap, glove; soil and moss samples, metal tape, and outer shirt remnants collected by Michalak from the site. By Jul 18 the items are with the Crime Detection Laboratory, Ottawa. [C-UFO]

Jul 4: Photos of Michalak's blotchy burns, and burned undershirt and cap, sent with a memo from Bissky to Canadian Forces HQ.

These photos were taken approximately 48 hours after the alleged contact with the object by Mr Michalak.

Source: C-UFO, images are in my previous post. This dates the blotchy-burns photo to the initial injury, not a flare-up months later.

Jul 17: Michalak returns to the landing site with Thompson, encountering torrential rains and high winds. [C-UFO]

Jul 27 or 28: Michalak returns to the landing site with Bissky, RCMP officers, and scientists to measure radiation. Samples are taken. Photos are taken including the outline of a 15-foot-diameter circle on the rock surface swept clean of moss and earth. No particles of his destroyed outer shirt are found. No radiation is detected. Bissky notes a 35-40-foot object could not have descended or ascended without contacting the surrounding trees, but there was no indication of burns or damaged bark. (para 10a)
[C-UFO letter from Bissky to Canadian Forces HQ, dated Sep 1]

Aug 17 to Sep 13: C-UFO includes memos back and forth concerning the radioactivity analyses on the cap, undershirt, metal tape, and yellow glove. Under UV light the soil possibly had radium "equal to approximately 1/3 of that associated with the average wrist watch." The rock and lichen samples had low radiation contamination "not high enough to create a radiation hazard to the general public."

Sep 15: Michalak sees Dr Oatway for "generalized urticaria (erythema and wheals)" (itchy hives) lasting a day, and other allergy symptoms lasting half an hour. "It was not felt this had anything to do with his initial burn." (Oatway's report is dated Sep 19)

Sep 19: Dr Oatway's medical report sent to the Deputy Base Surgeon: he describes the initial burn as "first-degree burns to the upper abdominal wall" and the undershirt "showed burn holes with charred or singed black edges."

Jan 17, 1968: "Burns Back, Says Michalak" article published in Winnipeg Free Press, showing the famous grid of dots on Michalak's stomach.

Jan 25, 1968: Bissky sends Michalak's $1 book and the above article to Canadian Forces HQ. He describes the article's photo as "Mr Michalak as he rested in hospital during his recent attack." (Per the article and caption, Michalak is in fact at home and is not said to have sought medical treatment.)

Apr 3, 1968: Free Press publishes an article on Michalak's encounter and includes the blotchy-burns photo, captioned as: "Burn patterns on Stephen Michalak's chest." Given this paper is publishing the photo without attribution, it probably belongs to Michalak (via Thompson) and not LIFE Magazine. The LIFE photos have never surfaced.

Source: Free Press Apr 3, 1968 via C-UFO