The Ariel School, Zimbabwe UFO sighting - has it ever been debunked?

I recently learned that prior to Mack's interviews some of the children were shown a "tape" about UFOs and aliens which contains references to "UFOs kidnapping farmers."

I wonder what it was. One researcher I consulted suggested it could have been Visitors from Space: The Evidence (1992) and that the farmer reference relates to the famous Antonio Vilas-Boas case.

I wonder if there are other candidates?
 
Last edited:
I recently learned that prior to Mack's interviews some of the children were shown a "tape" about UFOs and aliens which contains references to "UFOs kidnapping farmers."

About 18 months ago I was contacted by a family member of a couple of the Ariel kids after one of them passed away, which was causing the other to relive the trauma. She wanted to show him my website "to help him understand that this is more PTSD than reality".

She was angry about how the whole thing was handled, especially that the children were shown a film about aliens:

External Quote:
One fact that might be of interest to your readers is that the school decided to play Sci-Fi movies that portrayed aliens, after the event. This further traumatized the kids, as they became fearful they would be taken away. It's one of their most fearful memories.
I asked her why the school did that, especially since the head master seemed skeptical of the whole thing. She replied:

External Quote:
As for the scary movies, it's a fact that never seems to be talked about, but it is one of the most traumatic parts of the event from the first-hand accounts. And it's been a consistent detail from all accounts over the years.

What I hear is that they played the movies as follow up to the event. To help the kids deal with it. They never played such movies beforehand... From my understanding of the timeline, it would have certainly influenced the kids understanding before they spoke to John Mack.

It's hard not to wonder what the Headmaster was up to!
 
I asked her why the school did that, especially since the head master seemed skeptical of the whole thing.

My impression might be subjective, but I'm not sure I'd describe the headmaster (Mr Colin Mackie) as skeptical.

Maybe he didn't know what to make of the children's accounts (from a minority of those present), but he did allow- and presumably facilitate- access to his pupils for Celia Hind and John Mack. Mack, a Harvard psychiatrist, was already a controversial figure for his belief in the reality of alien abductions and his use of hypnosis to investigate such claims.

External Quote:
In May 1994, the Dean of Harvard Medical School, Daniel C. Tosteson, appointed a committee of peers to confidentially review Mack's clinical care and clinical investigation of the people who had shared their alien encounters with him (some of their cases were written of in Mack's 1994 book Abduction).
Wikipedia, John E. Mack https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_E._Mack*

In early 1994, before the Ariel events, Mack's Abduction: Human Encounters with Aliens was published; a review in New Scientist said
External Quote:
...the Pulitzer jury won't be out long on Abduction: Human Encounters with Aliens, which could rank as one of the most credulous books ever written, primarily because there is so little in the way of follow-up investigation and physical corroboration.
https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg14219203-800-review-space-age-shamans-or-shysters/, New Scientist 1920, 9 April 1994, Dennis Stacy
(The same review also covers Jim Schnabel's Dark White: Aliens, Abductions, and the UFO Obsession, which also describes Mack's UFO-related work; the author is sceptical of Mack's claims and suggests possible more mundane reasons for abduction accounts.)

Mr Mackie presumably thought Hind and Mack were UFO experts, which might imply he thought there was an established field of study that had experts- Hind, more importantly Mack- who could shed light upon what had reportedly happened. Why else allow them access to the children at the school?

Quick off-topic muse;
She was angry about how the whole thing was handled, especially that the children were shown a film about aliens:
External Quote:
One fact that might be of interest to your readers is that the school decided to play Sci-Fi movies that portrayed aliens, after the event. This further traumatized the kids, as they became fearful they would be taken away. It's one of their most fearful memories.
Coincidentally, a couple of days ago I watched a review of 1984 docudrama Threads on YouTube. Threads attempted to realistically portray the effects of nuclear war. It was low budget, but horrific and deeply disturbing. Bleak in the extreme, parts of it are hard to forget.
A couple of YouTube commenters said they were shown the film in school at age 10 (IIRC), and were (understandably) upset.
I couldn't help think, "What were the teachers thinking?" Threads is a serious piece of work, but imposing it on young children seems cruel to me.
I guess many teachers want to share what they think is important, but sometimes they misjudge things. I expect the Ariel teachers thought they were being helpful in some way.


*After the investigation's conclusion, Mack was allowed to continue researching whatever he wished, although censured for methodological errors. He had received very substantial legal support from well-wishers.
External Quote:
His professional reputation, however, was severely damaged. "He's not taken seriously by his colleagues anymore", Arnold Relman, Emeritus Professor at Harvard Medical School, told the Los Angeles Times in 2001. Mack also faced fierce criticism from outside the academic community: journalist Donna Bassett posed as a so-called abductee, and made public details of a session during which Mack apparently believed her story of being kidnapped by aliens during the Cuban missile crisis, and witnessing a conference between Khrushchev and Kennedy held aboard a spaceship.
The Lancet, vol. 380 is. 9848, "The psychiatrist who wanted to believe", Niall Boyce 29 September 2012 https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(12)61655-9/fulltext
 
He had received very substantial legal support from well-wishers
Including financial support from Robert Bigelow who also supported MUFON > Cynthia Hind.

Edit: Bigelow funded the famous Roper Poll that concluded that millions of Americans had likely been abducted by aliens. He financially supported MUFON and was regularly thanked in it's back pages. He also financially supported Mack's group Program for Extraordinary Research (PEER) at Harvard.
 
Last edited:
@Giddierone
Thanks for the link. I watched from 17 minutes on, and his attitude toward what he calls "the phenomenon" seems to be the classic argument from incredulity. Mack takes the position that since no other physical explanation was forthcoming that explained everything, they (the abductees) must have been telling the truth. It seems an odd claim for a psychiatrist to make, considering the many strange things that go on within the human mind.
 
It says it does but I can't find it anywhere. I'm on an iPad, so I don't know if that makes a difference.
maybe in Files?
1778192326194.png
 
Just pointing out that almost every week now there is a new lazy AI generated YouTube video about the Ariel School case. Nearly all of them repeat the core claims, many of which have been debunked.
Here's a prime example. In fact this one goes to extreme lengths to describe things that never happened ("teachers rushed outside to find 62 children staring at nothing," "psychiatrists tested them for weeks" etc) and uses comic book zombie imagery. It's total bunk, and I think is part of a wider trend of "content creators" muddying the waters because it's easy to do and gets online attention.

Source: https://youtu.be/Ky3_H9kxp1Q?si=HTpoHcZECEh8CHKC
 
I expect the Ariel teachers thought they were being helpful in some way.
Perhaps the teachers were hoping some cheesy old sci-fi movies would convince the children that aliens are just ordinary people in funny costumes.

"The psychiatrist who wanted to believe"
This title must have been inspired by the "I want to believe" slogan of the iconic X-Files prop poster. This is my interpretation of the underlying theme:

1780316421308.png

Credit to @jdog for the image canvas.
 
Here's a prime example. In fact this one goes to extreme lengths to describe things that never happened ("teachers rushed outside to find 62 children staring at nothing," "psychiatrists tested them for weeks" etc) and uses comic book zombie imagery. It's total bunk, and I think is part of a wider trend of "content creators" muddying the waters because it's easy to do and gets online attention.

Source: https://youtu.be/Ky3_H9kxp1Q?si=HTpoHcZECEh8CHKC


I give up. Not even the title is accurate.
 
I give up. Not even the title is accurate.

Please don't give up!

I think it's strange that a minority of people who believe unusual claims are perfectly happy to significantly exaggerate them, or make statements that even a few minutes research would show to be false ("62 kids drew identical aliens", "...every child in the playground", "Teachers rushed outside..."
Strange, and saddening, but unfortunately no longer surprising.

Your (@Charlie Wiser's) work on the topic, along with others (@Giddierone, others here) provide accessible evidence that these inflated claims just aren't true. This might be of use to a few who see videos like this and decide to check things out for themselves.
Depressingly I guess there will be many who are happy to believe what they're told if it conforms to their pre-existing beliefs or predilections.
And some of them, rather annoyingly, might accuse more sceptical people of not being open-minded enough.
 
I give up. Not even the title is accurate.
The sheer hype, the overblown claim of the video is enough to make some people insist on watching it ...and enough to make me mistrust it right from the start. That would be true, I think, even if I had no previous information about the event. Is there a basic difference between the minds of the credulous and the minds of the skeptical?
 
The sheer hype, the overblown claim of the video ... Is there a basic difference between the minds of the credulous and the minds of the skeptical?
This appears to be just another clickbait video from a generic farming account. There may not even be a human mind behind the content production at all...


Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPTPro/comments/169i2na/i_made_a_fully_automated_youtube_channel_with/

Social media is already descending into a cesspit of clickbait mis/dis information, and bots. The ever expanding abuse will surely accelerate this decline. It is the predicted endpoint of dead internet theory. What may have originated as a satire is fast becoming a reality.
 
Just when I thought I'd read everything about Ariel School I came across a Nation of Islam scholar Wesley Muhammad (ph.D) and his "revisionist" take on the event and how it's deliberately "misremembered". It seems his thesis is something about the aliens not being correctly represented as black and how ufologists acting in cahoots steered the narrative away from black figures to grey aliens.

External Quote:
The Ariel School UFO incident was not a "Grey-alien visitation." It was an encounter with exotic, black-skinned, humanlike figures, three of whom behaved in coordinated but non-threatening ways near a silver, disc-shaped craft.
His "report" is 80 pages or so but there are some pages previewed on his facebook post. Attached here as a PDF.
 

Attachments

Last edited:
The 'bots copying other 'bots.

FWIW the comment field has not been turned off [yet] so it may be worthwhile to insert a link to a debunk of the affair.
 
Possibly -- but is it also possible that the algorithm has noted your engagement, and so is shoveling them at you at a higher rate?
No, I searched for Ariel School. Most of these new videos are probably created using AI tools like Google NotebooLM. All the "creator" has to do is feed it the websites of some researchers and click "make me a script" or "make me an AI voiced podcast" and it'll do the rest.
Also, anything Ariel School - "kids saw aliens" - generates clicks.
 
No, I searched for Ariel School. Most of these new videos are probably created using AI tools like Google NotebooLM. All the "creator" has to do is feed it the websites of some researchers and click "make me a script" or "make me an AI voiced podcast" and it'll do the rest.
Also, anything Ariel School - "kids saw aliens" - generates clicks.
Searching for UFO related events triggers the "UFO BS / AI slop" invasion, been there!
 
Speaking of Ariel School videos on YT:


Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zXc55quMBI4


External Quote:

Have you ever heard the story of the aerial school UFO?
Probably. It's one of the most compelling UFO stories ever told, as is, of course, every UFO story ever told.

Now, if you're not familiar with this one, the summary of it is this. 62 primary school children saw a UFO and an
alien while on their mid morning break at the aerial primary school in Rua, Zimbabwe.
Um, compelling. Now, the part that makes people go, "Wow!" is that 62 kids saw it. They all reported the same thing.
None of them even knew what UFOs were, and they have never changed their story all these years later. What you may not
know, though, is that there is some powerful bullshitery at work here because in actuality, the number of kids
is unknown. They didn't exactly report the same thing. They absolutely and unquestionably did know about UFOs and most of them have changed their story. Some so much that they even admitted that they were lying. And that's fine. They were kids and that's what kids do.
Kids are kids and kids play and kids have imaginations and whatever. That's all fine.

But what I don't think is fine though is how this UFO investigation was conducted. If you take a look through the recorded on camera interviews, you'll notice just how much the MUFON investigator and the Harvard psychiatrist influenced these children's testimonies. And since we have the actual words that came out of their mouths, you'll also notice just how much their reports have been distorted and altered to make the story more compelling. Now, obviously, it's a bit rude to say that uh they intentionally distorted these children's testimonies. So, I'll just say it's irrelevant to me if they did it intentionally or not.

...

In the week leading up to the aerial school alien invasion, students at Ariel had a discussion in one of their general discussion classes about UFO. You got to be [ __ ] kidding me.
[laughter]

No, I am not kidding you, Ghoul. The kids were talking about UFOs that week. But why? Well, because Mean Gene at 9:00 p.m. on Wednesday the 14th of September, 1994, brother UFO mania hit Zimbabwe and was running wild. At 9:00 p.m. on
Wednesday, there was some [ __ ] in the sky flying slowly and silently that looked like a fireball or a comet or a
meteor. Now, a surprising statistic that I discovered recently is that not a large percentage of the world's population are astrophysicists. So, it's pretty normal for people to see things in the sky and not know what they are.

So, as would be expected, a multitude of reports were then made about this fireball or comet or meteor.
...

On to the next day, Thursday the 15th of September, 1994 ... a handful of pupils at Ariel Primary School apparently saw a UFO in the sky. Some of them said that it looked like a pencil or a cigarette
or a circle with a flashing light at one end. Here's what one of the kids said.
Quote, "The day before the spaceship came, my friends and I were sitting in the playground and one of my friends, her name's Emily, she looked up into the sky and she said, "Oh, there's a UFO. It flew along for about a minute or so and then it disappeared."

In case you were wondering, no, this is [laughter] not the actual sighting. The kids didn't actually report this at the time either, and they would only mention this later when talking about the famous sighting, which would only occur the next day. But, as is, of course,
tradition in UFO stories, these reports all got merged together to make something more compelling, which
ironically makes it less compelling when you find that out. Why don't people mention the sighting the day before?



And on from there...

This is part 1 of 3. It is an entertaining recap of the case, drawing heavily on our own @Charlie Wiser. (I noted with a smile the feeling of pride I have when one of Our Own gets cited somewhere! ^_^)

For those sensitive to such things, the language is sometimes a bit salty -- not horribly so, I'd say, but if that bothers you, be aware of it going in.
 
Back
Top