The Varginha UFO
- Thread starter RTM
- Start date
Perene
Member
This GloboPlay (GLOBO = the most watched brazilian channel, that is the name of their streaming service) documentary can be found on Youtube (if they haven't claimed), with titles like these: "O MISTÉRIO DE VARGINHA | DOC COMPLETO 2026". It has 2h13m as far as I know. I think with the auto-generated portuguese subtitles it would be possible to translate what they are saying.
I haven't looked into the whole thing, still, from the bits I saw, it's easy to get the "gist" of it.
Basically it all boils down to a bunch of people making wildish claims without a single shred of evidence (from multiple strange creatures), some smartasses (profiting from ignorants that love to hear such stories) to this date asserting there is a tape (or more than one) that would show the thing (even though they haven't even seen it), that a few people died after direct contact with the creature, that our military is lying and/or cooperating with the U.S., the mayor says there was something back then but wasn't allowed access...
Plus, some people claiming it wasn't just the alien(s), it had UFO sightings...
I may be inclined to believe the girls (based on the TV interviews aired not even a month after the fact), but, whatever it was they saw, the "Powers that Be" hid or destroyed all the evidence. It's funny how every single UFO conspiracy ends up like this.
Recently I was talking about the 2004 Nimitz case (with David Fravor and others), and it can't be a coincidence how almost all of these UFO reports always follow the same script. Another cover-up, outlandish stories about exotic-tech/aliens (in this case, just the drone, not the beings), some of them recounting and adding details that contradict the main witnesses (Kevin Day and his barrel roll maneuver from a "Tic-Tac" object, or the guy from the FOIA request that said Kurth saw the Tic-Tac).
Discussing such events is a waste of time. There is no debunking. Remind me why "hearsay" and "anecdotal evidence" matter? Both are useless if we can't back these with any evidence whatsoever.
Hi there, first post!
I just listened to the latest Area52 podcast with James Fox, in which he discusses the new circumstances and developments. When I first heard about this case years ago, I was immediately convinced that this was probably the best UFO/alien case ever.
The more I have researched and examined it myself, the more I am beginning to feel that it may (unfortunately) be a big hoax after all.
Prove me wrong.
I just listened to the latest Area52 podcast with James Fox, in which he discusses the new circumstances and developments. When I first heard about this case years ago, I was immediately convinced that this was probably the best UFO/alien case ever.
The more I have researched and examined it myself, the more I am beginning to feel that it may (unfortunately) be a big hoax after all.
Prove me wrong.
Smythe Bacchus
Senior Member
I wonder what James Fox thinks of this. He planned to return to Varginha to continue to gather more testimonies for the alleged UFO and alien stories.
"Moment of Contact: New Revelations of Alien Encounters", by James Fox, was released 20 Dec 2025 (2h 2m). It adds some new interview footage to the original 18 Oct 2022 release (1h 47m).
Source: TMDBExternal Quote:
This is a 3 hour discussion with Jesse Michels. The first half is mostly on Varginha, with various clips sprinkled throughout.
Timestamp 46:29: Clip of Dr Ítalo Venturelli
Source: https://youtu.be/hBrfe4hFuM0?t=2809
External Quote:
Despite my incredulity, to me, James Fox appears genuinely sincere throughout. There are also some digressions in the beginning, i.e. Roswell, Phoenix Lights (+bonus Men In Black story), and Calvine UFO cases which are par for the course.
TImestamp 06:09 - Varginha alleged UFO crash site
Timestamp 58:27 - Varginha girls' encounter location
I don't know much about the details of Varginha. Forgive me if there is nothing new here, but I can see how people could be easily sucked into the rabbit hole if this is all they get to see.
BoulderRiver
Senior Member
I can no longer defend the idea that he was duped or con'd, I think he is intentionally omitting.
His main brazilian consultant is Marco Leal, which knows all the stuff I already spoke here in the thread. He is just selling his thing.
The Jesse Michels interview is so fucking terrible.
James makes the worst expert ever; he got several facts wrong, and then added his own spice and details on top of it.
Focusing specifically on the doctors, which most people claim to be the strongest evidence;
James Fox incorrectly states that Dr. Armando Fortunato performed the autopsy on the deceased officer; That is incorrect. The forensic doctor who performed and signed the autopsy is Dr. José da Frota Vasconcelos. You can see the autopsy report here:
Source: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1aD13tP_eYDsA2L-Rjr-WVRicgHy9xlsk/view
Police Officer Marco Eli Chereze, suffering from fever and abdominal pain on February 12th, was taken to the emergency room at the Hospital Regional de Varginha, where Doctor Armando Martins Pinto Fortunato examined him. Dr. Fortunato admitted the patient but transferred him to Bom Pastor Hospital, where he believed Chereze would receive better treatment due to the hospital's newer equipment and additional staff. Fortunato did not stay with Chereze for Long.
James Fox also edits the opinion of Dr Janini, which can be better understood in this interview: https://ufo.com.br/exclusivo-medico-janini-varginha/
One of the most important things that is often overlooked, is that the Forensic Report received by Vasconcelos and Janini was incorrect; A small cut near his armpit, caused by a cyst removal operation performed under poor conditions on February 7th at Bom Pastor Hospital by Lieutenant-Doctor Robson Ferreira de Melo, was not present in the records provided to the Forensic Office; making Dr. Vasconcelos and Dr. Janini unaware of the nature of such wound. As stated in the autopsy report, the forensic doctors then discarded the primary hypothesis of a hospital-acquired infection and proposed a secondary hypothesis of infection via skin lesion. The autopsy then considered said surgery scar as a superficial lesion of unknown origin, which was responsible for the Staphylococcus scheleiferi bacteria to spread. Here is the full quotation of Janini, translated into English:
There is no way this detail was absent by error - I believe James Fox intentionally omitted it.
James Fox also incorrectly states that it was a strange bacterium that was not seen before nor since, and "advanced bacteria that no bacteria on earth does", which is 100% bullshit; The autopsy report of Marco Eli Chereze concludes that his cause of death was due to complications arising from a bacterial infection by known pathogens. Specifically, pneumonia caused by Enterobacter aerogenes and sepsis resulting from Staphylococcus schleiferi. Janini confirms this by saying, "I found the story of the infection very special. A bacterium that, through laboratory diagnosis, is a bacterium of a certain simplicity."
Venturelli initially posted a chronicle featuring an ET in a Chess Forum during the 2010s, probably around 2015. It is named "the Universal", you can read a copy here: https://gersonperes.com.br/ver/artigo/auniversal/
Then, in 2023, He stated that the creature was on a silver gurney/stretcher, which he presumed to be in a morgue. He also stated that he saw this recording on the colleague's computer, also stating that the colleague showed this film to several people, including the colleague's wife, parents, and son (all of whom deny having seen anything, even providing hard drives and notebooks of the deceased for forensic analysis). In the full-length 2023 interview that can be seen on Marco Leal and João Marcelo's YouTube channel, Dr. Italo describes the occasion and what he saw on the screen. He states at 2:40 that this colleague would like his opinion on a procedure he had done, "placed a valve, etc", referencing that this younger doctor had done a heart procedure - something uncommon, as the colleague was a neurosurgeon. He states at 6:35 that he can't say if it was a hoax, because he was shown "there and then". He states at 9:35 that the video was on the doctor's computer at the hospital. He states that the creature had a waterdrop shape, and had a white sheet covering his lower half - he also states that the creature was moving. Do you know what this describes almost exactly? The scene at 1h11m of the movie Roswell: UFO Cover Up, from 1994. You can watch it here
In the new 2025 James Fox Doc, Venturelli states he was on duty at the ICU of Regional Hospital. James Fox does his best not to translate into English what his interpreter is stating: "He saw the creature in bed, while he watched the video of the surgery that was performed on him". She places her hands as someone would handle a big screen. Venturelli states the creature the creature's torso was half covered. The description remains the same as before, but he also states that the calmness was as if the creature communicated "I'm well" from his expression, without any distress. After 3 to 4 minutes of interaction, the military came in and took the being.
In the TV Globo's 2026 docuseries, the Neurosurgeon states arriving at the hospital and being requested by his colleague to give an opinion on a procedure. The colleague then produced a handheld camera with a screen and a numbered keyboard by its side. Venturelli states seeing on that display what appeared to be a child, which his colleague was stitching. "What is this?" Venturelli asked, upon which the colleague replied, "It's right here!", and pointed towards the side of the room. Venturelli claims the alien was there. "White, tear-shaped cranium, Lilac colored eyes, also tear-shaped." He states the colleague initially stated having placed a valve, but over time, the colleague told he had only sutured a wound. Dr Venturelli states that the video was shown by his colleague to everybody. The colleague, Marcos Vinicus, is visible doing the procedure – meaning that someone else recorded it. These accounts suggest a few things that would not be ideal or common. For instance, a video camera in such a setting would be egregious.
These accounts suggest a few things that would not be ideal or common.
For instance, 2025 states to be in the ICU; having a videocamera in such a setting would be egregious.
Last edited:
joao_lucas
New Member
This is not the original autopsy report, but a document mada by Dr. Janini. In the original one you can see it was signed by Armando Fortunato and Dr. Vasconcelos.
Any ways, both bacteria are terrestrial in origin and are known to cause nosocomic infections. There's no need to invoke an alien contamination.
joao_lucas
New Member
We have videos with subtitles in João Marcelo's YT channel.
Let me first provide the context, to complement what you said.
There are three main military witnesses in the case. Military Witness 1 (now known to be firefighter Robson Oliveira); Military Witness 2 (a Corporal from the Army Sergeants School, ESA); and Military Witness 3 (a soldier, also from ESA). In 1996, all three gave anonymous testimonies.
Firefighter Robson recorded his testimony on February 16, after the first report about the case aired on Fantástico, one of the highest-rated television programs in the country, a status it still holds today.
Military Witness 2 recorded his testimony on May 4, a long time after the alleged events of January. Military Witness 3 recorded his testimony on May 21; Military Witness 2 was present during that recording.
When firefighter Robson was later contacted by investigator João Marcelo, he stated that everything had been manipulated and that it did not correspond to reality. He also said that after his death, João would be free to publish his audio recording.
Here is a video where you can hear Robson saying everything was manipulated:
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J0DgPqKV1Z0
Military Witness 2 is exactly the same person referred to as "Military X" in James Fox's Moment of Contact. Military Witness 3 remains anonymous, although ufologists know who he is.
In the new documentary produced by Globo Network, Military Witnesses 1 and 2 once again give anonymous testimonies. Once again, we know that they are, in fact, the same individuals from 1996.
Military Witness 3 denies everything and claims that the entire story was a staged narrative. According to him, it was all invented by ufologist Vitório Pacaccini. He also claims that Military Witness 2 / "X" was paid to record his testimony, and that he himself was also offered money, but was never paid.
Here is the video where Witness 3 tells the truth:
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cwyPyNg96j8
In addition to Military Witness 3, soldier Ricardo de Melo, who knows Military Witness 2, stated that in a conversation between them, Military Witness 2 confessed that he had received money to record the testimony, and that had he known the extent of the media impact, he would have asked for more.
Here is De Melo in the documentary:
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VU7OZSUv9ZY
But it does not stop there. In the city of Três Corações, Mr. Carlos owned a restaurant where Military Witness 2 frequently had lunch and dinner. They became friends. One day, after rumors about the alien began circulating, Military Witness 2 told Mr. Carlos that the story was true and told him about the alien, but warned that if Carlos told anyone else, he would deny everything and claim that Carlos was crazy.
Carlos, perhaps out of innocence, asked whether he would not like to tell the story to a ufologist, who could arrange payment for him. And who would that ufologist be? Vitório Pacaccini.
The testimonies of De Melo and Mr. Carlos are also present in the documentary The Mystery of Varginha (O Mistério de Varginha), which aired from January 6 to 8. It is a journalistic production by Globo Network, the largest television network in Brazil and one of the largest in the world.
BoulderRiver
Senior Member
You're correct;
This is not the full autopsy report, but it is the document that allowed ufologists to seed doubt of an alien infection.
I wouldn't know why Armando Fortunato would sign it; he handled the patient over to a completely different hospital.
Where can we see the original?
Martha Tavares holds a 1996 copy of this report in Moment of Contact; when she appears, you can see the exact same information on the ferst page - albeit with a different layout of graphics.
Excellent contribution to the thread!
I just wanted to point out a minor dating error; Pacaccini claims meeting Robson a day prior of meeting Ubirajara in Varginha. Ubirajara and Pacaccini state they met each other on Feb 16th. However, Pacaccini also shares in his book that on the very day he started investigating the case, he received a phone call from a trusted informant offering insider information, and they decided to meet that night. The "researcher" states he began his investigation on Feb 14th, so there's some murky detail of when this encounter really occurred, according to its own author.
I know this is super minor, but pointing out these inconsistencies builds up how unreliable Pacaccini is.
Last edited:
joao_lucas
New Member
I can tell you for sure the error is Pacaccini's. The audio-tape was recorded February 16. I noticed this discrepancy as well.
Rick Robson
Active Member
What Dr. Janini says in his manuscript on the last page (page 7) is worth mentioning indeed. He starts it telling that during his over sixty years of experience in pathology, he got surprised with level of virulence and gravity of the infection.
At the end of that manuscript he made another important point which surprises me that yet nobody cared to make publicly available what further investigation was done and the final results of it. Dr. Janini states that even though that bateria had revealed similitudes with the aforementioned known bacteria, it seems to be equiped with mechanisms that surpasses our comprehension.
BoulderRiver
Senior Member
Janini stated in an interview: 'I prepared an autopsy report for the soldier. It begins by stating that fragments of organs, liver, heart, lung, and brain were sent to me, as well as secretions for bacteriological study. In conclusion, we admit that Chereze may have suffered a small, superficial skin lesion on the upper limb.'
We can conclude that Dr. Janini's impressions are based on the absence of crucial information regarding the surgery to remove the cyst. As the doctor himself notes in his report, the primary hypothesis would be a hospital-acquired infection rather than a common injury.
That would be very surprising, because Pacaccini and Ubirajara both state having met for the first time on the afternoon of February 16th. That's why I believe the tape was recorded on either 14th, or 15th
joao_lucas
New Member
Btw, although Vasconcelos signed this document, Armando Fortunato was the one responsible for the autopsy.
joao_lucas
New Member
Well, João Marcelo posted part of Robson's audio. It is said there that it was recorded february 16. I questioned JM about this discrepancy yesterday, and he told me it was recorded on 16th. I may be wrong, but I believe Marco A. Petit says the same in his book "Varginha: toda a verdade revelada", and he says he has a copy of the audio.
Perene
Member
Would it be possible to link Staphylococcus schleiferi to monkeys or just dogs/cats?
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l-YO7jzs24E
I read this theory on Reddit the aliens (more than one? or just that described by the girls) could have been a monkey, and have been thinking which ones would fit at least some of the traits described. The OWL type? It has prominent eyes.
The Venezuelan Red Howler (see video above)? They don't fit other aspects of the thing, though (especially the size).
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l-YO7jzs24E
I read this theory on Reddit the aliens (more than one? or just that described by the girls) could have been a monkey, and have been thinking which ones would fit at least some of the traits described. The OWL type? It has prominent eyes.
The Venezuelan Red Howler (see video above)? They don't fit other aspects of the thing, though (especially the size).
John J.
Senior Member.
I don't know. Staphylococcus might be common in monkeys, and is found in many mammals, but different species of mammals tend to host different species of staph (though there's considerable overlap, and zoonotic staph infections- from animals to humans- do occur).
"Staphylococcus" (Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Staphylococcus) has a section, "Host Range", that describes this. The information may be incomplete, it describes S. schleiferi as being specific to humans; other sources say it is common in dogs, cats, e.g.
"Molecular Characterization and Clinical Relevance of Taxonomic Reassignment of Staphylococcus schleiferi Subspecies into Two Separate Species, Staphylococcus schleiferi and Staphylococcus coagulans", Soe Yu Naing, Birgitta Duim, Els M. Broens et al., 2023, Microbiology Spectrum 11 (2) https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/spectrum.04670-22External Quote:
Researchers examining 60 monkeys (20 of each of 3 species) at a breeding colony in Brazil found 9 different species of Staphylococcus
(but not S. schleiferi, which might be significant).
Every animal had been colonised, two individuals carried two species of staph.
"Staphylococcus nasal colonization in three species of non-human primates", Juliana Georg da Silva, Glenda Culuchi, Cristiane Pinheiro Pestana et al., 2023, Brazilian Journal of Microbiology 54 (2), https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10072810/
Maybe the fact that the monkeys were living in confinement meant that the spread of Staphylococcus was greater than it might be in the wild.
Higher rates of colonisation are found in groups of humans living in close proximity or with shared facilities.
It seems Brazilian dogs often carry S. schleiferi. Of 289 dogs checked at a veterinary clinic, 166 carried staph., and
-so about 1 in 4 dogs seen at the clinic carried schleiferi.External Quote:
The researchers are concerned that methicillin-resistant staphylococcus (MRS) might be present amongst domestic animals and that this might be a hidden hazard to humans. (Many people will have heard of MRSA, MRS aureus, which can be a serious problem in healthcare settings).
"Dogs as reservoir of methicillin resistant coagulase negative staphylococci strains – A possible neglected risk", Izabel Mello Teixeira, Eliane de Oliveira Ferreira, Bruno de Araújo Penna, 2019, Microbial Pathogenesis 135 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S088240101930703XExternal Quote:
"Diversity and Antimicrobial Resistance of Staphylococci Isolated from Healthy Dogs and Cats in Southern Brazil", 2025, found 2.9% of healthy dogs and cats carried MRS schleiferi, https://www.mdpi.com/2036-7481/16/11/231
Methicillin-resistant strains are considered most dangerous, but non-MR staph infections can also kill if antibiotic therapy is delayed or incorrect.
S. schleiferi infections are relatively rare in humans (compared to S. aureus) but are known, and can be serious:
Bacteremia can lead to septicaemia. Septicaemia due to Staphylococcus schleiferi has been identified as the cause of MP Marco Eli Cherese's death.External Quote:
There isn't any real reason to link Cherese's illness with the three young women's claims.
He had had a recent surgical procedure.
In addition to possible infection via the surgical site, it is (or was) not uncommon for patients having quite minor procedures to have a venous cannula in place for IV hydration, induction of anaesthesia, administration of analgesia/ antibiotics/ other drugs or to aid the taking of "routine" bloods samples. IV cannulas are a known infection risk (accounting for many "device infections" mentioned above) and many healthcare settings now try to limit their use more than was the case in the past.
Sadly, broadly healthy, robust people having quite minor surgical procedures (or receiving IV fluids/ meds for other reasons) have died from hospital-acquired infections.
S. schleiferi is similar in many ways to other Staphylococcus species, but at that time was rarely identified as the cause of infections in humans.
Methicillin-resistant S. schleiferi is rarer than methicillin-susceptible S. schleiferi; if that's what Cherese had then its resistance to antibiotics might have been puzzling. (I don't know Portuguese or its idioms, but to English speakers "...surpasses our comprehension" might sound more like something out of a science fiction B-movie than something a medical doctor would say).
Wikipedia, Staphylococcus schleiferi, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Staphylococcus_schleiferiExternal Quote:
Even if the Polícia Militar were involved in looking for an alien as a result of the girls' claims, which might be unlikely, why would they detain a monkey? (it's possible that hypothetical searchers might mistakenly pursue a monkey, but as soon as you can see it's a monkey...)
It's more likely Cherese had contact with a dog or cat, or perhaps one of the doctors or nurses attending him had been colonised or briefly contaminated by schleiferi from a dog or cat. We'll probably never know.
BoulderRiver
Senior Member
I stand corrected, it appears you are right - what a fucking shit show. Not just because of the weird signing, but also because
Not only does this case has 3 people that have the "Fortunato" name, but two of them are also named "Armando Fortunato", AND ALL THREE OF THEM ARE MEDICAL DOCTORS
In fact, Fortunato Filho, the Forensic doctor, wrote this two days ago in a local paper;
He proceeds to validate random gossip in the lore and misinformation
Certainly more plausible than an Alien, but not even close to what they stated having seen.
It was the size of a man, and the eyes were too big. The first drawing made, before UFOlogists contaminated the case, is this;
The most likely explanation is that they indeed saw Mudinho, the mentally and physically impaired man who lived just next door.
It is possible that he was taking a bucket bath outside by the lot, for reasons unknown. The dirt in the region is ferriferous; it has a deep, oxidative red that stains the hem of trousers and sticks to skin. If he were crouched in the brush near the wall without shirt on, his presence would be unexpected, and his form distorted by their exhustion, anxiety, stress, and the low vegetation. To a mind primed by the local lore of red-eyed, horned devils, and the visceral fear of a local assailant, Mudinho's silhouette might not have been seen as a vulnerable known neighbor, but as the "something evil" that the girls' terror-stricken perception was already prepared to find. It is widely known and reported that in the cruel alchemy of a panic attack, a familiar face can become a monstrous mask, and a local tragedy can be rebranded as an extraterrestrial mystery.
Last edited:
Perene
Member
Of all the things I have heard about this case so far, that explanation is the least plausible, and the girls deny every single time. Then, there's this guy that "revealed" things 3 decades later:
https://g1.globo.com/fantastico/not...s-repercussao-do-caso-do-et-de-varginha.ghtml
https://g1.globo.com/fantastico/not...o-inedito-e-segue-sem-conclusao-oficial.ghtml
"Mudinho" was one of the hypothesis that were later hinted by the military (which, again, cannot be trusted - whatever the situation, remember they are scumbags and full of shit, it doesn't matter the country), and is now ridiculed as being untrue, the same about a dwarf couple.
I don't take seriously most things from this, and most people that add their contribution to the event. However, the consensus is that something really was not OK back then. Doesn't have to involve aliens, though. Maybe a biological experiment?
BoulderRiver
Senior Member
The Varginha incident is built primarily on the fragile architecture of human memory, sometimes resting upon the accounts of more than sixty individuals who claim to have glimpsed the incredible. Before navigating this labyrinth of sightings, it is necessary to recognize the inherent aspect of such reports. A testimony is a shared ritual between two participants, consisting of the witness who narrates a subjective experience and the interviewer who records it. In this exchange, the truth is hard to measure. Some accounts achieve a level of objective reality when anchored by robust physical evidence such as photographs or tangible artifacts, yet these remain unfortunately absent throughout this incident. Several testimonies collapse under the weight of their own contradictions or reveal themselves as fabrications born of bad faith. In these instances, the lure of fame, financial gain, or the desire to tether one's name to a popular legend corrupts the narrative. Sometimes, a lie is told simply for the whim of getting away with it.
Perhaps most common of all are the accounts given in good faith, but distorted by the frames of perception. A witness may honestly recount an experience that has been warped by external stressors or internal biases, leading them to present a flawed version of reality that is truthful to their consciousness. In these cases, the witness often blurs the line between a raw event and an interpretive conclusion. It becomes the essential duty of any investigator to distinguish between what was actually seen, what could have been seen, and the narrative labels applied by a mind struggling to make sense of the uncanny. Without this forensic separation, the resulting story is not a record of truth, but a collection of conclusions shaped by the very mystery they seek to explain.
Five months after the sun had set on that January 20th afternoon, the girls were interrogated by Harvard psychiatrist John Mack and psychologist Gilda Moura, who searched for the fissures that might reveal a hoax. What they found instead was an objective sincerity so absolute that Mack famously claimed he would resign his academic credentials if the women were ever proven to be lying. In the silence of separate rooms, their stories never wavered, and their independent descriptions of the entity remained remarkably consistent. This unity of vision survived even tests of synchronicity, like when each woman individually described a color using different terminology, but separately pointed to the same brown object to illustrate the creature's skin, as if the image were etched into a real, shared experience. For thirty years, after hundreds of interviews given to journalists from all over the world, these women consistently hold their accounts; Even after excruciating social pressure and ridicule, dispelling any doubt that what they tell is anything but HONEST.
These subjects have passed the ultimate test of integrity: the rejection of financial gain in the face of poverty. The refusal of the bribery attempt in 1996, combined with the lack of subsequent monetization of their story, establishes them as highly ethical subjects. They are not "grifters." They did not lie for money, they did not lie for fame, and each of them raised a family, and when the dust finally settled, were eventually able to hold steady employment. The subjects exhibit the behavioral signature of Post-Traumatic Stress, not deceit. Their reactions (crying, trembling, avoidance, displacement) are consistent with individuals who have experienced a shattering ontological shock. The "emotional bond" reported by them suggests a deep psychological processing of the event that transcends simple fear, hinting at what they believed to be a genuine interaction. All four women possess no history of fraud, no record of mental instability, and no evidence of financial enrichment from the event. They are, by all investigative metrics, ordinary women who believe, with traumatic certainty, that they encountered a biological entity of unknown origin on January 20, 1996.
However, the absence of bad faith is not a confirmation of external reality. While no evidence [or belief, in my case] of deception by these women exists, the human mind remains a fragile instrument prone to the alchemies of error and suggestion. Sincerity cannot bridge the gap left by a fleeting ten-second observation, nor can it guarantee that the heart has not mistaken a tragedy for a demon. The earnest girls may have told their story with the honesty of a prayer, but in the heat of a Varginha evening, even the most faithful witness can be deceived by the phantoms of their own perception.
The weight of a day's work in Brazilian summer can do strange things to the mind, especially when that heat is paired with emotional distress in a little-known skeletal landscape. In that specific corner of Jardim Andere, resided the family of Luiz Antônio de Paula, a man known to his neighbors as "Mudinho". Living directly across from the vacant lot where the girls froze in terror, "Mutey" existed in a world of silent, rhythmic routines that involved smoking, playing with rocks, and inspecting insects. He is a frequent, quiet presence in the neighborhood, often seen crouched for hours, his hands working the soil or his arms clutching his knees in a rocking motion that mirrored the exact posture the witnesses would later describe.
If he were crouched in the brush near the wall without a shirt on, his presence would be unexpected, and his form distorted by the low vegetation. To a mind primed by the local lore of red-eyed, horned devils and the visceral fear of a local assailant, Mudinho's silhouette might not have been seen as a vulnerable, known neighbor, but as the "something evil" that the girls' terror-stricken perception was already prepared to find. It is widely known and reported that in the cruel alchemy of a panic attack, a familiar face can become a monstrous mask, and a local tragedy can be rebranded as an extraterrestrial mystery.
That physical fatigue after a day's work in humid, hot conditions and a long walk home under a scorching sun can be exhausting to anyone, possibly leading to dehydration as well. These conditions, summed with the close emotional ties the women had, the perceived isolation of walking home through a desert part of town, and stress from the possible threat of a maniac, increase susceptibility for a psychological phenomenon such as Folie à deux, or Shared Delusional Disorder. This rare psychiatric syndrome suggests a delusional belief (and accompanying hallucinations) which is transmitted from one "primary" individual to one or more "secondary" individuals in close association.
When scrutinized from a scientific point of view, the sighting is best explained as a sincerely experienced, stress‐induced perceptual episode shaped by environmental fatigue, cultural fears, and expected cognitive biases, potentially amplified by a shared psychogenic reaction among three closely bonded girls. A highly trained psychologist could validly report that the witnesses honestly believed they saw something terrifying—without necessarily validating the creature's objective existence. Clinical endorsement of sincerity does not equate to endorsement of external reality; perception of reality is unreliable and prone to unintentional, subconscious narratives, with psychologists often distinguishing between "experiential truth" and "veridical truth".
Now, zoom out to reveal another inconvenient truth: the locale of the sighting by the girls is the same patch of land that was Zé Gomes' São Domingos Farm. In narrative terms, that's a dramatic coincidence. In sociological terms, it is also a textbook case of priming: people enter an event with a stock of images and metaphors already loaded (such as red eyes, horns, and demons), and those images shape what they notice, how they remember it, and how they recount it later.
So, where does this leave us?
Varginha's mythic landscape made specific details feel believable. Fantástico's display of Ray Santilli's video, accompanied by serious commentary, created a scene that allowed people to consider aliens as a plausible reality. The girls' sighting provided a powerful focal point. Local storytellers, the media, and self-appointed investigators took care of the rest.
Ann K
Senior Member.
I begin to understand your attitude. You've just told us in blunt terms that you're prejudiced against one group, and it's not a great leap to wonder if you harbor a similar attitude toward others. You've scornfully dismissed the posts of every other participant on this thread, and disregard any interpretation but your own.
Please, I beg of you, open your mind to other interpretations. There are a good many highly intelligent people in Metabunk with opinions worth reading.
Rick Robson
Active Member
I'd really like you clarify where you are trying to get at, but here's Dr. Janini's own words in the Portuguese language, from his manuscript's final sentence:
"... parece estar dotada de mecanismos que ultrapassam nossa compreensão"
If you can find a better translation than mine I'm all ears to it.
John J.
Senior Member.
As said, I don't understand Portuguese or its idioms. Janini's phrasing might seem perfectly normal to Portuguese speakers.
The English translation provided, "...surpasses our comprehension", sounds to me like a line from an old SF movie more than a comment by a medic describing staphylococcus or a staph infection, but it's no big deal.
Absolutely no criticism of your translation was intended. I was curious about Janini's choice of phrase.
Perene
Member
Don't attribute to everyone (and from what I can see, most users here do this often) a fragile memory, as if Alzheimer was kicking in and most involved were incompetent enough to tell a man from a bizarre creature, a regular flying object from a "thing" that is doing the same, yet showing fantastic behavior.
In many cases there is a regular explanation, sure. We have our biases and I don't think our eyes are as good as the ones from eagles. For some of the stories, there isn't a conclusion. And that's OK. Science doesn't explain everything.
Doesn't mean you should insert your own narrative to justify what happened. Accept we don't know what they did exactly (and probably never will)...
If you think memory is an issue, then dismiss all future accounts and only focuse on the ones (the girls are just part of it) made less than a month AFTER THE FACT, back in 1996. To think they would tell the "creature" had horns, big eyes, etc. and confuse it with a regular human, is what I consider being ridiculous. It would be better to tell everyone's lying than posting so much nonsense.
- Just because we can't fathom that aliens from outer space exist, have exotic tech, etc. doesn't mean it's impossible. To think that is the same as looking inside a cup of water (taken from a beach), not finding anything in it, and making a guess (by doing so, dismissing all the water this PLANET holds, from all oceans). That is not a good conclusion, if we are being honest.
Being skeptical this case involved aliens doesn't mean we need to accept the moronic explanations that were given by the military (as far as I know, the "Mudinho" was one of the reasons given by them).
Judging our reality by our current metrics/understanding (including the laws of physics) doesn't mean we automatically close our minds to the possibility of something beyond our limited imagination. By rejecting 100% the possibility of being wrong (because the situation does not fit what WE know) or something shady has happened, we are not being smart.
I wouldn't even go as far as saying we are being stupid by acting like that. There's another adjective that fits that person, and if you thought it was "skeptical", you are wrong.
That's being an atheist.
What makes you think people that deny the chances of anything I mentioned could be true, are in any way different than religious zealots? So, never say never. I don't spend 2 minutes of my day thinking unicorns exist, but if someone says they do, I'd like to not dismiss that 100%. Of course, as I always point out, "hearsay" and "anecdotal evidence" are not enough to justify taking it seriously.
Of course, if you adopt my way of thinking, you will be accused of embracing the supernatural. Nothing could be further from the truth. This entire Varginha case doesn't even have to be about ALIENS or DEMONS. 100 years ago, if I told all the technology we have now (and it's so commonplace) would be a reality, not violating the known laws of physics, anyone would call me a lunatic, or perhaps a wizard. Didn't someone said "any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic"?
The next time we try to dismiss the "incredible", we can do so by not acting so dumb. Accept for a second the outlandish theory, and try to refute it by asking more about it. NEVER BY REJECTING IT 1 second after listening to it.
You know how I can tell if someone is WISE or just a SMARTASS? The wise would never accept the answers (given to him) without making 10 further questions. Because the questions always matter a trillion times more than all the explanations about anything. The minute we stop questioning, we cease to learn. If not about the case, more about human nature, and how myths are created/spread.
I agree that not everyone is trying to make a buck or becoming famous, to fuel the myth, being a grifter (most UFO enthusiasts are), but you seem to think, somehow, that the human species is made of confused people, that can't differentiate fact from fiction. So if multiple witnesses said the military did something shady that day in 1996, you prefer to invent a reason to justify them being the dirtbags they are.
No, they very likely did SOMETHING bad in that context.
If what these girls were saying was the whole story, then this thing would not have been influential to this date.
I like to take the opportunity to examine what ONE ufologist tried to tell about the VARGINHA case. Mr. Edison BoaVentura, which (if I am not mistaken) has a book about it.
That man seems to be adding a lot of lies under stories that have some possible truths / unexplained events. Good evidence for 98% of what he says, I don't think we will one day see it. I'll discuss one important quote from him, soon.
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PnhtFaAL3D0
The text below is a quick translation I made from his summary of the case.
++++++++++++
- The downing (it was shot down) by the NORAD by/of a spacecraft (cigar-shaped), seen by Eurico/Oralina de Freitas, and before this craft crashed, it's assumed the beings inside it left from a hole in the back, when it was already losing altitude in the rural area of "Eloi Mendes". The "beings" took refuge in the woods near "Jardim Andere", where the creatures were first sighted by a few witnesses. The case became famous due to the 3 girls (Liliane and Valquíria, sisters, and Valquíria, friend). These 3 saw a creature crouching in the vacant lot. It was brown, with red eyes, had some bumps on its head.
- NORAD used Star Wars–style laser weapons to shoot the craft on January 19, from a satellite. Projected into the UFO, so it shoot down. Then, the U.S. government, their military, which had a dedicated phone line at the brazilian COMAE (Aerospace Operations Command), at the time called "CONDABRA", called to BRAZIL and said "Look, there's an object we shoot down falling over there, at specific latitude and longitude coordinates, send a few people in there".
- There wasn't an air base near Varginha / Eloi Mendes, capable of providing this rescue. So, the brazilian AIR FORCE got involved in the logistics scheme, providing helicopters, aircraft for transporting the American military personnel who arrived on Brazil Jan 20th, 1996, in a C-17, a warplane. They landed at the Viracopos Airport, in São Paulo/Campinas, and there were already some choppers waiting to bring the U.S. military to Varginha.
- It was Marcos Feres who told this story, a former air-traffic controller. Pedro Daum, a former military (from Air Force) said there was some logistics operation on these days (January 20, 21 and 22). Since no Air Force personnel was there, they told the Brazilian Army to capture the creatures, since multiple were loose. At 15 km (9 miles) of Varginha there's the "ESA" (Brazilian Army Non-Commissioned Officer Academy), in "Três Corações" (known as the brazilian soccer Pelé birthplace). ESA deployed a platoon to capture the creatures. At the afternoon of January 20th, two operations were executed, one creature alive and another dead, inside the woods of "Jardim Andere".
- However, the 1st capture was not done by the ARMY, but the Varginha Fire Department. Why? Because people that were waking up that morning of Jan 20th saw a creature in a ravine in Jardim Andere, and back then they didn't have many houses. Saw a strange creature, called the Fire Department, because it's the firefighters that deal with wild animals. The Fire Dept went using gloves and a NET, captured the being and took it away. They put it in a box. They noticed it made a strange buzzing sound, didn't know exactly what it was. Then at the same time two trucks from the ARMY, a soldier came along, probably a sergeant, and said "We will take it from here". The firefighter said they had to make a phone call to a superior, they did and it was authorized to bring the "crate" to the ARMY. That one was ALIVE, and probably went to "ESA".
- At night, another creature was taken, by Marco Eli Chereze. Along with corporal Eric Lopes, driving. They ran over one of those creatures in Jardim Andere, after the rain. It rained in the afternoon, however the 3 girls saw the thing in the vacant lot BEFORE the rainstorm. The ARMY tried to tell it was the "MUTE" (Luís), a citizen that is alive to this date, and who has mental problems. They tried to blame him, because sometimes he is crouching down, picking up cigarette stuff from the ground. But the mute guy, Luís, was in a gym at the moment the girls saw the creature. In the "military police investigation" the Army conducted, they said it was the MUTE guy dirty from the mud, due to the rain. The problem is it wasn't even raining when this happened, and the "MUTE" wasn't there at that precise moment. We have witnesses who saw him in another location.
- Another lie from the ARMY, a cover-up of what happened. Some creatures were captured, some were taken to the Regional Hospital (from Varginha). One of them, due to equipment issues, was relocated to the HUMANITAS hospital, that is further away from the center of Varginha (city). This was made easier because the director of the Regional Hospital (and HUMANITAS) were the same guy, Adilson Usier Leite.
- One of those creatures ended up dying (in HUMANITAS). A convoy was formed to remove it from there, and take it to "ESA". At "ESA", the military personnel were summoned by LT COL Olímpio Vanderlei Santos, I mean, the enlisted, LT Tiberius, Sergeant Pedrosa, Corporal Vassalo... Correction, I think Vassalo didn't go, soldiers Cirilo and De Mello, same. Captain Ramirez was also called, then LT COL Olímpio Vanderlei Santos said: "You participated in a top-secret mission, I'm counting on your discretion, and tomorrow at 4 o-clock, be here, so we can continue it".
- What exactly was that mission? Pick up the trucks, with the crates, the creatures (alive and dead), and bring to UNICAMP (São Paulo University). This was done, and the soldiers instructed if they wanted to sleep at the facility of ESA, they could, or go home, since they lived nearby. At the agreed time, they were there, with the convoy to UNICAMP. Didn't go directly there, stopped by "SPSEX", changed drivers (local ones, from CAMPINAS city), and took the cargo to BADAN PALHARES and his crew. In there, they decided to put the dead creature in the HC to make the necropsy, while one that was alive stayed at the IFCH (Faculty of Philosophy, Languages and Human Sciences), it was the one in the best condition. Another, which was injured, they brought to advanced pathology.
- 3 were separated, so 3 were sent to Campinas/SP. But today we can prove there were 5. And one military told me they sent 6 to the United States. We have witness saying it saw 10 creatures near the railway line, from "pasture of Grandpa's", Jardim Andere (there was a railway line underneath). Multiple creatures loose, some escaped through the Rio Verde, some were probably rescued...
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Just the NORAD bit is ridiculous.
It does not have, and is not known to use, anything like Star Wars-style laser weapons to shoot objects down.
Because it's not a weapons system. It is a command-and-control organization. Its core mission is detection, tracking, identification, and coordination of responses to aerospace and maritime threats to North America. It does not "pull the trigger" on anything. It uses sensors and then tasks other military units (USAF, USN, US Army, Canadian Forces) to respond.
Also, "Star Wars–style" lasers are unrealistic. The concept fails due to physics:
- Required power would be enormous (megawatts to gigawatts)
- Beam dispersion in the atmosphere limits range
- Power generation, cooling, and targeting precision are major constraints
- Energy weapons scale poorly against fast, hardened targets
Even space-based lasers (a popular Cold War idea) were abandoned because they were technically impractical and strategically vulnerable.
We didn't need to analyze fully the Varginha case according to him to recognize one (and possibly more) key explanation is already bogus and doesn't help with his credibility (or the person that made that up).
A few things that are odd, and that bit we can all agree, that were told by the Globo's recent DOC, are:
- Badan Palhares admiting he received a phone call about something that would be brought from Varginha. He says it never came. But why the mysterious call?
https://g1.globo.com/sp/campinas-re...steriosa-mas-afirma-nao-chegou-ate-hoje.ghtml
I'll translate most of what it says:
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
"ET of Varginha at Unicamp? Thirty years later, forensic expert recalls mysterious phone call but says: 'It has never arrived to this day'"
Identified as being responsible for analyzing the creature in a secret laboratory in Campinas, Badan Palhares recalls a phone call saying that the Army would bring "material coming from Varginha." The account was shown this Wednesday (7) in the second episode of the documentary series "The Mystery of Varginha."
The mystery surrounding the ET of Varginha does not involve only the city in southern Minas Gerais. Thirty years ago, ufologists claimed that the creatures were taken by an Army convoy to a supposed secret laboratory built underground at the State University of Campinas (Unicamp), where they would have been analyzed by the forensic pathologist Badan Palhares.
One of the most prominent figures at Unicamp at the time, Fortunato Antônio Badan Palhares spoke with the documentary team of "The Mystery of Varginha," aired this Wednesday (7) on TV Globo.
Badan Palhares says he received a mysterious phone call in January 1996, but guarantees that the alleged ET never arrived in the interior of the state of São Paulo.
"I remember receiving a phone call in which, strangely, I was informed not to leave the laboratory because a team from the Brazilian Army was bringing there some material coming from Varginha, and that it was material important for carrying out complete exhumation work. And that material has never arrived to this day," says Badan.
At the time head of Unicamp's Department of Legal Medicine, Badan Palhares was nationally known for his involvement in famous cases, such as the murder of PC Farias and the examination of remains of people who disappeared during the military dictatorship.
Asked about who made the call, Badan says he has "no idea," stating only that he was told it came from the Public Security Secretariat. When asked whether the subject of the call indicated that it involved an extraterrestrial being, he is emphatic in saying that he does not recall that.
For Badan Palhares, the story of the ET of Varginha would only have credibility in one way.
"Talking is easy, but showing, demonstrating—that is impracticable when it doesn't exist. I only believe in what I see and can put my hands on."
Secret laboratory at Unicamp?
Ufologist Ubirajara Rodrigues says that at the time the information gathered was that the creature captured in Varginha would have left the city hospital and been taken to the Army Sergeants School (ESA) in Três Corações (MG), and from there transferred by convoy to Campinas, where it would have been delivered to Unicamp.
Ubirajara and fellow ufologist Vitório Pacaccini held a press conference in 1996 stating that the investigation of the case had revealed the existence of a secret laboratory built underground at Unicamp.
"On January 23, two creatures, two bodies, arrived at Unicamp, exactly in these restricted-access facilities," said Ubirajara in recordings from the time.
On the same occasion, Vitório reinforced that the alleged ET would have been analyzed in Campinas. "This secret laboratory at the Institute of Biology exists, and the possibility was raised that one of the creatures was examined in this laboratory," he said.
The issue of sending the ET to the supposed secret laboratory at Unicamp made newspaper headlines at the time. A report by EPTV, however, showed that at the indicated location there was only a machine room, with power cables and hot-water pipes supplying the University Hospital (HC).
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
If these people (the military) told me the sky during the day looks blue, I would doubt their statements and still go outside to check if that's correct. That's how much I trust any of them.
I have the same prejudice against the military as much as they have against us, regular folks. What these people always do, is to try to hide their actions. You know that's their M.O.. Sadly, that only helps in giving credence to these UFO stories.
And why do I say that? Because I didn't notice such behaviour only in the Varginha case. They did the same in the 2004 Nimitz one, and also hid evidence in countless other situations. Doesn't have to involve aliens, they do it naturally, and if you interview them, you'll hear they also do to themselves.
Is it just the aliens, their exotic tech, of the aliens have been controlling them, to do their bidding?
It may be nothing for ALL UFO CASES.
The problem is that by doing what they do, they contribute to bury the truth about what can be a regular event and spread these myths. I consider such acts despicable, especially considering the budget invested in their dirty work. They were supposed to protect the population.
Another famous case from BRAZIL happened in 1977, when the residents of a local Amazon jungle village had numerous UFOs attack them, some described to have "sucked their blood". The Brazilian military spent months investigating and documenting the objects under Operation Saucer (or "Operação Prato").
Many suspect that the Brazilian Air Force was trying to cover up something big.
The victims from OPERATION SAUCER were not from the major cities, so they couldn't have been in any way knowledgeable about many things we do, especially back then. This case was documented and it's perhaps stronger than Varginha's. However, if you do some research about it, you'll see the justice courts decided for it to remain in secrecy... FOREVER. So no "FOIA" (equivalent) request that can be fully responded, with them handing over all the data asked.
And all that due to some breach in the law preventing the military from doing so (if they refuse to cooperate), or help the "victims" privacy (you know, some BS they invent to not release it).
Did I say I was 100% certain there were aliens involved in all those cases? Uh... no. Perhaps it was a military experiment that flew there in 1977 and went wrong, causing some health problems. Could very well be.
Perhaps the Varginha case is about some sort of biological experiment that went wrong? What is more likely, something depicted in Resident Evil (videogame) that escaped and they had to contain it, perhaps a human clone-hybrid, or maybe an exotic animal that resembles the creature they describe...?
Or an ALIEN from OUTER SPACE?
The odds are in favor of my RE theory or an exotic animal. Because if it's an alien, how do they find us in the 1st place? Were they lost or planning to hide somewhere? Did they open a portal to come here? Did they spend 1000 years travelling to empty space, at the speed of light or faster, to reach us? Or were never expecting to come here and stumbled on Earth?
There are 50 questions that follow the "alien" theory, and much less if you insert an exotic animal (or multiple brown monkeys that escaped).
Why do you think the military are forthcoming in any way? They never, never acted with any transparency.
Last edited:
Rick Robson
Active Member
I can understand your point now, you know I'm Brasilian like Dr. Janini and his choice of terms doesn't sound to me the way it sounded to you, albeit coming from a renowned doctor in Brasil with more than sixty years of experience in pathology.
BoulderRiver
Senior Member
While I understand your frustration, you may be misinterpreting me.
Memory is, by definition, something that is falsifiable, suggestible, and moldable.
This isn't a commentary on the intelligence of the witnesses, far from it - It is a fundamental biological reality of how the human brain processes information; And this process is heavily affected by trauma and high-stress events.
You may also be confusing probability with certainty.
I said that the most likely, probable, plausible explanation was indeed an experience with Mr. Luiz Antônio de Paula. As Ubirajara states on pg.40 of his book, "Luizinho" ("Mudinho") lives in that exact vicinity, not more than 15meters away from the site of the sighting. The military wasn't the first entity that claimed the women saw Luiz, a man who is known to remain in the same crouched position as the women saw the creature; It is also important to put in perspective that the first sketch seen below was done before the witnesses were influenced by the ufologists;
Source: https://imgur.com/wkfW8LV
Source: https://imgur.com/kHPH9d4
Source: https://imgur.com/XBbSMt7
Note: When pressed to suggest a size, they stated that judging by the "thing's" position, it resembled the length of someone who would be around 5'2" in height.
Regarding your points about Edson Boaventura, it is important to clarify that Edson is merely a voice reading of Vitório Pacaccini. Nearly every detail Edson has publicized about Varginha (from the NORAD intervention to the specifics of UNICAMP) was originally stated or """discovered""" by Pacaccini. Even the stupid idea of a "Pavilhão 18" underneath UNICAMP is an obvious ripoff of the infamous Hangar 18 of Ufological lore.
The narrative is so riddled with contradictions that I can quote the exact source of its fragmentation. Pacaccini gave a private lecture to Stanton Friedman and Graham Birdsall in early June 1996, which was recorded and is available on youtuve. The source for the information he shared in this meeting is revealed in his book to be an Air Traffic controller he met in July 1996 - quite the time traveler!
Last edited:
Rick Robson
Active Member
I don't know what you are talking about here. And you misquoted me, it was not me who replied what you quoted there. Please have the kindness of editing and correcting your post, thank you.
BoulderRiver
Senior Member
My apologies, I meant to quote Perene 
I will just use this opportunity to comment on your post, referring to Janini's handwritten commentary made in
Janini was launching his autobiography "Sala, traga-me um cadáver" in 2021.
The context of the handwritten text by Jr. João Janini, was a Ufologist visit by Marco Leal, who requested the doctor to add commentary then, 25 years later.
As stated before, and as stated in Dr. João Janini's 1996 report, he did not have the correct information about the patient at the moment of the tissue analysis. Had Janini known that the deceased had undergone a surgical procedure to remove a hidradenitis suppurativa cyst, his opinion on the case would be (as himself coments on the 1996 commentary section) of a Hospital-Acquired Infection.
I will just use this opportunity to comment on your post, referring to Janini's handwritten commentary made in
Janini was launching his autobiography "Sala, traga-me um cadáver" in 2021.
The context of the handwritten text by Jr. João Janini, was a Ufologist visit by Marco Leal, who requested the doctor to add commentary then, 25 years later.
As stated before, and as stated in Dr. João Janini's 1996 report, he did not have the correct information about the patient at the moment of the tissue analysis. Had Janini known that the deceased had undergone a surgical procedure to remove a hidradenitis suppurativa cyst, his opinion on the case would be (as himself coments on the 1996 commentary section) of a Hospital-Acquired Infection.
Last edited:
Perene
Member
Rick: there's a PDF I found an hour ago (LINK HERE) that has some stuff about this case. And it's from back then (1990s).
Looks like there's some passages about a military inquiry. I couldn't help but notice at pages 99, 100... this description of the strange creature saw by the 3 girls:
A being approximately 5'3 ft tall, thin, with shiny dark-brown skin, as if it had been smeared with some kind of cream, with several visible veins; it had two legs with enormous feet and two toes on each, two arms with hands containing three fingers each, longer than those of human beings; the head was enormous, with three bony protrusions—two on the sides and one in the center of the head—with no apparent hair; the eyes were large, blood-red, and bulging outward, like a frog's eyes.
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 strange creature seen by the girls was crouched near the wall of a workshop, among some bushes. At first, they thought it was a statue, but when the creature turned its head, they saw those enormous red eyes. It was neither animal nor human; it was a horrible being. They ran away in terror and only stopped once they reached home. The mother of Liliane and Valquíria, Mrs. Luíza Helena da Silva, 38 years old, together with neighbors, returned to the location and no longer found the strange creature.
There were only two footprints on the ground and a very bad smell. Possibly, with the military conducting a sweep of the woods three blocks away an hour earlier and firing FAL rifle shots, the creature that the three young women saw certainly sensed a risk to its life and fled the forest, hiding among the bushes until it reached the vacant lot. Liliane said that the appearance of the being was frightening.
The "cronology of the facts" from page 99 says January 20th, 1h30 (am) an UFO flew over a farm in Varginha, 5 meters from the ground (?).
- Then, 8h30 am the firefighters received an anonymous call to capture an animal.
- 2 pm, a witness (civilian) notices a strange sight of military moving around in what was likely the 2nd capture of strange creatures.
- 3h30 pm, the 3 girls notice the strange creature.
5 pm, a "rainstorm", and the military police captures a 4th creature.
- January 21st, 1h30 am:
- The captured creature is transferred from the Regional Hospital to HUMANITAS
- Jan 22:
4 pm - ESA trucks start bringing the creatures by taking them from the HUMANITAS hospital.
++++++++++++++++++++
The Globo DOC also mentions said UFO (and I forgot to bring that bit in my previous reply). Were they confused about what they saw, too?
Looks like there's some passages about a military inquiry. I couldn't help but notice at pages 99, 100... this description of the strange creature saw by the 3 girls:
A being approximately 5'3 ft tall, thin, with shiny dark-brown skin, as if it had been smeared with some kind of cream, with several visible veins; it had two legs with enormous feet and two toes on each, two arms with hands containing three fingers each, longer than those of human beings; the head was enormous, with three bony protrusions—two on the sides and one in the center of the head—with no apparent hair; the eyes were large, blood-red, and bulging outward, like a frog's eyes.
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 strange creature seen by the girls was crouched near the wall of a workshop, among some bushes. At first, they thought it was a statue, but when the creature turned its head, they saw those enormous red eyes. It was neither animal nor human; it was a horrible being. They ran away in terror and only stopped once they reached home. The mother of Liliane and Valquíria, Mrs. Luíza Helena da Silva, 38 years old, together with neighbors, returned to the location and no longer found the strange creature.
There were only two footprints on the ground and a very bad smell. Possibly, with the military conducting a sweep of the woods three blocks away an hour earlier and firing FAL rifle shots, the creature that the three young women saw certainly sensed a risk to its life and fled the forest, hiding among the bushes until it reached the vacant lot. Liliane said that the appearance of the being was frightening.
The "cronology of the facts" from page 99 says January 20th, 1h30 (am) an UFO flew over a farm in Varginha, 5 meters from the ground (?).
- Then, 8h30 am the firefighters received an anonymous call to capture an animal.
- 2 pm, a witness (civilian) notices a strange sight of military moving around in what was likely the 2nd capture of strange creatures.
- 3h30 pm, the 3 girls notice the strange creature.
5 pm, a "rainstorm", and the military police captures a 4th creature.
- January 21st, 1h30 am:
- The captured creature is transferred from the Regional Hospital to HUMANITAS
- Jan 22:
4 pm - ESA trucks start bringing the creatures by taking them from the HUMANITAS hospital.
++++++++++++++++++++
The Globo DOC also mentions said UFO (and I forgot to bring that bit in my previous reply). Were they confused about what they saw, too?
Last edited:
BoulderRiver
Senior Member
I highly recommend you read this entire thread.
It would also be very good if you read with attention the IPM you're linking.
What you see between pages 76 and 108 is one of the several attachments to the investigation. This attachment corresponds to the website put online by Ubirajara and Pacaccini with their claims.
Those specific pages you mentioned (page 99, 100) showcase a section of that website where the ufologists laid out their chronology of events according to their narrative, which is highly debated and severely underwhelming, without any evidence of having occurred.
Last edited:
Perene
Member
Just to be clear:
- Why would he crouching become in any way a stressful event? Was he wearing a costume, by any chance? And especially him, considering one of the girls (this is in the GloboPlay DOC) said it knew ever since she was a kid, that attended her father's bar, and walked among others in that same town?
Why couldn't this have been a brown monkey, or any other similar animal, with eyes that draw attention to it? Some monkeys can be brown, right? One that exists, brought to the zoo and escaped? Or, like a said, a "Resident Evil-like" experiment?
The fact this man lived near there, means he is automatically the major suspect?
What kind of deficient reasoning is that? Is that what works as debunking nowadays?
Or was it because he used to crouch? But if you were such creature (alien or monkey), and were scared for whatever reason (not just because you were noticed by others at that exact moment)... how would you behave?
Stand upright? Would you start dancing, too (not in the rain, it was 3 pm and sighting conditions were favorable)? Linking the two things is the most ridiculous explanation I ever heard. That NORAD excuse that the U.S. had to resort to a Star-Wars laser to shoot an alien craft seems more plausible than this.
Of course, that theory it was "Mudinho" (the mute guy) came from the same people that also argued it was a dwarf couple. Right?
That's precisely why I say most people in the military are scum. Everything needs to be a secret for them.
It also doesn't help when you take into consideration all the other parasites besides the military (the grifters... mostly UFOLOGISTS), which invent stuff that never happened (even if something did), such as there is a tape (or more than one) of the alien, that doctor (?) that claims (only now, look at that...
) it saw with his own eyes and could "read his mind" (communicate with him), the forensic pathologist Fortunato Badan Palhares himself, which had his fellow colleague, George Sanguinetti, who, in testimony to the Parliamentary Commission of Inquiry (CPI) on Drug Trafficking in Maceió said he had heard from the former governor of Alagoas, Geraldo Bulhões that Palhares had allegedly received R$ 400,000 (75K dollars in today's money) to falsify the forensic report on the deaths of businessman Paulo César Farias and his girlfriend, Suzana Marcolino ("PC" was very famous back in the 1990s here).None of that helps with taking any of these events seriously (including the UFO sighting that Carlos de Souza (a teacher) said (when he decided to check the crash site) a military officer pointed a gun to his head and told him to mind his business. That was 7 days before January 20.
About that Carlos, he is also in that same DOC, and mentioned in this link:
https://g1.globo.com/mg/sul-de-mina...o-et-de-varginha-descrevem-suposta-nave.ghtml
Which says:
+++++++++++++
Cylindrical, with smoke and the smell of ammonia: how witnesses of the Varginha ET case describe an alleged craft
Accounts were shown this Tuesday (6) in the first episode of the documentary series "The Mystery of Varginha." Witnesses speak of an object the size of a minibus, white smoke, a gradual descent, and also report the presence of military personnel in the southern region of Minas Gerais in 1996.
+++++++++++++
+++++++++++++
A flying saucer or a flying capsule? Testimonies gathered over the course of the investigation into the so-called Varginha ET case describe the alleged craft sighted in southern Minas Gerais in 1996 as a cylindrical object, shrouded in smoke, with visible structural damage and a strong, hard-to-endure odor at the site where residents claim to have seen the object appear and crash.
The accounts—both recent and contemporaneous with the events—appeared in the first episode of the documentary series "The Mystery of Varginha," which aired this Tuesday (6) on TV Globo.
According to ufologists who investigated the case, several people in the region reported seeing luminous objects and unusual movements in the sky days before the alleged ET was sighted by three girls on a vacant lot on the afternoon of January 20, 1996. They further claim that international monitoring systems detected out-of-the-ordinary activity.
"Everything indicates, based on information from the military themselves, that the U.S. Air Force attempted to intercept one of these craft. It was hit, lost altitude, and headed toward southern Minas Gerais," said ufologist Vitório Pacaccini.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
"Cigar-shaped," slow descent, and a strong smell
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Among the most detailed testimonies shown in the documentary is that of geography teacher Carlos de Souza, who claims to have seen the craft fall in the early morning hours of January 13, 1996. He says he was on his way to Varginha when he decided to pull over his car.
"I always joke that I'm the Forrest Gump of this story. I was in the right place—or maybe the wrong place—at the right time," he said.
According to him, the object appeared flying low, crossing the sky at an angle.
"It was coming down at an angle of about 30 degrees, slowly, as if it were losing power and altitude. It was like an elongated little cigar, the size of a minibus, between seven and eight meters long, more or less the size of a truck bed. The side was completely torn open and white smoke was coming out," he reported.
Upon reaching the spot where the object allegedly fell, the teacher says he felt an extremely strong odor.
"Imagine a basin of ammonia mixed with rotten eggs. An unbearable smell," he said. According to him, it was necessary to cover his nose with his shirt to endure the stench.
The teacher also reported seeing Army vehicles at the site and says he was prevented from approaching.
"The soldier slapped my hand and told me to leave. Then he put the rifle against my chest and said I had seen too much. I said I wanted to help, but he cocked the rifle and said he wasn't asking, he was ordering," he recounted.
Frightened, he decided to leave the city and only mentioned the episode to his wife some time later. "She said it was better to keep quiet, that we'd be better off that way," he said.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Object like a "submarine" was seen for 40 minutes
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Also part of the investigation are testimonies from caretaker Eurico de Freitas and his wife, Oralina, collected at the time of the events. Eurico said that around 1 a.m. on January 20, 1996, he saw a "smoky" object slowly pass near the house where he lived.
"It was the size of a minibus. When the cattle panicked, we went to the window to see what was happening. At that moment we already saw the object passing here. At a height of about five meters or less, it took 40 minutes to pass from here to the second pasture. At the time, there wasn't even time to think about what it was. I had never seen an object like that, and it was heading toward Varginha," Eurico said at the time.
Oralina compared the shape to a submarine.
"It was like a submarine, smoky. It didn't shine, but it had smoke," she said.
"Why did she say submarine? Because it was cylindrical. In the most rudimentary sense, it was round, cylindrical. It resembled a submarine," said Vitório Pacaccini.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Last edited:
Rick Robson
Active Member
Although we're getting some bit off-topic here, I find worth it to correct a mistake and clarify that when it comes to justice involving influential politicians and high executives in my country, often it all ends up on permanent muddy waters, alas.
It was Congressman Pompeo de Mattos who accused Dr. Fortunato of receiving R$ 400,000 for an expert report and moving large sums of money, raising suspicions about the origin of the funds.
Dr. Fortunato's lawyer, Tereza Dóro, denied the accusations that he charged R$ 400,000 and stated that he would sue the accusers, denying the sale of expert reports and claiming that his work was carried out under court order.
Dr. Fortunato admitted flaws in his report on the PC Farias case, such as "forgetting" Suzana's height and using an outdated technique to collect substances from her hands, although he claimed that these did not compromise the report as a whole.
External Quote:
https://www.migalhas.com.br/quentes...-medicos-legistas-que-atuaram-na-investigacaoExternal Quote:
Last edited:
BoulderRiver
Senior Member
By asking this, I presume you have neither the context of the sighting, nor read the thread, nor read my previous reply.
The context of the sighting matters. They were exhausted from work, possibly dehydrated, and stressed from the warning they received minutes before the sighting. I once again suggest you read the thread.
Not only that, but the fact that he is known for positioning himself in the same way the women describe.
So yes, that's how a high suspicion arises. That's exactly how profiling works.
Does it mean it was him? No.
Does it mean he is a likely candidate? Yes.
It could have been anything, including nothing.
The description the women gave would fit a meter and a half tall, naked primate that sweats.
There is no record of a missing animal at the Zoo. There is no record of a 1,60m monkey on the loose. The spotted creature had no fur nor feathers. Umbrella Corporation is not real.
As stated in the previous post, many people suggested Luiz was the "creature" before the IPM suggestion, in 1997.
One of these people is Ubirajara Franco Rodrigues, the first researcher of the case, who retains this hypothesis as the most possible as well.
Contrary to popular opinion, the military never publicly affirmed that the creature was "a dwarf couple".
As stated before in this thread (that I reiterate, appears you didn't read), the only source of such claim comes from a highly edited sensationalist documentary by Bruce Burgess, that was filmed in late 97 and debuted in 98 - meaning that Major Eduardo Calza (the man who voices "the dwarven couple" line) would have been aware of the resulting IPM that suggested Mudinho to be the cause of the sighting.
I can only conclude from the evidence that Major Calza line is cut midsentence, from Bruce Burgess history and track record of embelishment and sensationalism, that the statement by the serviceman was taken significantly out of context. The same already happened to medical doctors in other documentaries (as this thread exposed)
As I've stated in this thread before, Carlos de Souza has 8 different interviews uploaded on YouTube, and all of them have different details.
He has nine interviews available on YouTube, and all of them contain different details. He mentions in one of these videos that he was motivated to tell his story to ufologists after being ridiculed by his cousins and his brother-in-law during a family gathering for claiming he had already seen a UFO. Another curious point is his claim of being threatened by "Men in Black" followed by him speaking to ufologists only a few months later. The researchers only revealed this contact on the anniversary of the case in January 1997, and yet nothing nefarious ever happened to him.
Regarding the interviews he gave, some are completely contradictory, featuring instances where he denies events he had previously affirmed. The 2022 version even involves abduction, telepathic communication, and alien implants.
Last edited:
Perene
Member
And I once again suggest you watch all videos from days after the event (1996) and every single one (to this date) the 3 girls recorded, confirming it wasn't the MUTE guy and the "creature" had eyes that were red, wide open, "the fingers were long", that they don't know if it was a horn, but there were three bumps on the head...
3 different women can't be exhausted enough to misidentify a human being (that they already knew, not a stranger) for a creature.
Anyone that believes such nonsense must be joking. I don't care if a million other sources have suspected the same thing.
All 3 girls deny this possibility to this day, and frankly, this scenario has zero chance of being true.
Too bad the alien was not standing upright or floating above the ground. Perhaps that explain why many of their spaceships come and go here undetected. When I read some embarrassing posts from this forum, I understand their reluctance in showing themselves to us...
Who could have predicted that a creature in a defensive / withdraw posture, feeling scared, would 3 decades later lead to the conclusion it must have been a random person in that same town (which they knew, again I need to remind myself of this fact)... so everything else from this case must have been invented by that man, too.
Actually, "Mudinho" was not mute, and didn't have mental problems. He was the mastermind behind all of this.
Stop embarrassing yourself. This was EXACTLY what the military has said, in their fake inquiry.
And why would they reach another conclusion?
I wasn't there, too, so I can't vouch for anyone. Why should I believe anything the main witnesses of any of these events were telling me it happened? So far none of them have introduced any relevant evidence/proof of anything.
"Talk is cheap".
No recovered spacecraft (I'll be 90 years old still listening the same thing), in the end there is nothing, no analysis of the "ground" where the events happened (of course that wasn't done back then, why check the spot where the creature was?). One thing we can't deny, every UFO story ends up like this:
It's always the same script, and everyone is tired of it. The only good thing the aliens and the MIB are known for, is in "hiding the truth".
When they decide to reveal themselves (or the humans / hybrids protecting them, and their tech), no one will believe they are real. And for sure, UFO enthusiasts will hate when that day comes.
Their "description" is very telling this couldn't have been a regular person.
If tomorrow someone decides to do something wild like human cloning (or mixing us with an animal), do you think records will be kept? Or some shenanigan with animals only? (that's what I meant by "biological experiment").
What kind of reasoning is that? Human cloning, for example, must be illegal in every country (not claiming it was done, only hinting at a real possibility without invoking aliens, even if it failed), so why admit to anything remotely close to that? To be forever ostracized (if not arrested), or worse, if * real * people were injured or killed...
Especially the military, which, like I said, are known for their secrecy. Did you check the "Operation Prato / Saucer" from 1977? It's a famous UFO case that many say that, for sure, happened (a cover-up).
And there's people saying he was pressed by the same military to keep his mouth shut. I suggest you doubt the validity of the wild claims about this case, and consider the possibility they could be lying, sure, or told something true, however later forced to recant their stories.
Last edited:
BoulderRiver
Senior Member
Perene, your contributions here have devolved into a Gish Gallop.
You are attempting to overwhelm the discussion with a long list of speculative scenarios while ignoring the empirical data already provided.
On a skeptical forum like this, we prioritize the quality of evidence and scientifically backed arguments over the creativity of rhetoric.
Your aggressive language and your habit of calling documented debunking "absurd" suggest that your approach is fueled by emotion rather than a desire for neutral investigation.
If you want to contribute productively, you must focus on providing constructive arguments based on verifiable evidence instead of hiding behind a wall of anecdotes. Repeating unverified claims does not make them more valid. It only makes the signal-to-noise ratio in this thread much worse. We are interested in facts that can be verified, not a cumulative tally of rumors.
As you've stated, "Talk is cheap".
Human face recognition relies on "holistic processing". Seeing the face as a unified whole rather than a collection of parts. This process is extremely fragile. Research shows that simply inverting a face (the "Thatcher Illusion") or changing the lighting direction can completely disrupt holistic processing, forcing the brain to switch to "featural processing"
The Innocence Project has documented numerous cases where victims misidentified attackers who were actually people they knew or had seen before, or conversely, misidentified strangers as people they knew. In the case of State v. Guilbert, a witness misidentified a shooter as a man he knew well, despite the man being innocent.
The fact that "3 women" saw the creature is cited as validation. However, in cognitive psychology, a small, cohesive group (a triad) is often less reliable than independent witnesses due to Social Contagion of Memory and Emotional Contagion. As expressed before by themselves, they ran for about 500m, then halted to catch their breath and discuss what they saw. Experiments by Roediger, Meade, and Bergman have extensively mapped the "Social Contagion of Memory." Gabbert et al. found that 71% of witnesses in dyads who discussed an event included erroneous details acquired from their partner.
What I am defending here is not that they saw Mudinho; I am rebutting your false notion that they "Couldn't have mistaken Mudinho."
They are human. Our senses are fallible, our perception is limited, and our minds are suggestible.
Meanwhile, Professor Ubirajara has a career defined by ethics and institutional commitment.
He stands as a model of integrity. As a former president of the BAR Association and current rapporteur for the Ethics and Discipline Tribunal of the BAR in the state, he has dedicated his professional life to safeguarding the standards and honor of the Brazilian legal community. He is a citizen who transitioned from investigative curiosity toward the strict rigor of rational thought, consistently earning the profound respect of his colleagues. In over 30 years as a Law teacher, he has welcomed students into peers, and peers into judges - without a single stain on his curriculum. Dude is a Bastion of lawfulness. To even consider that he was intimidated by the military, when in fact transcripts showcase how Pacaccini "wet his pants" and changed tone, is absurd.
You are attempting to overwhelm the discussion with a long list of speculative scenarios while ignoring the empirical data already provided.
On a skeptical forum like this, we prioritize the quality of evidence and scientifically backed arguments over the creativity of rhetoric.
Your aggressive language and your habit of calling documented debunking "absurd" suggest that your approach is fueled by emotion rather than a desire for neutral investigation.
If you want to contribute productively, you must focus on providing constructive arguments based on verifiable evidence instead of hiding behind a wall of anecdotes. Repeating unverified claims does not make them more valid. It only makes the signal-to-noise ratio in this thread much worse. We are interested in facts that can be verified, not a cumulative tally of rumors.
As you've stated, "Talk is cheap".
A cornerstone of your argument is that the witnesses "already knew" Mudinho. This assumes that face recognition is robust. However, forensic literature is replete with cases of Context-Dependent Prosopagnosia: the failure to recognize familiar faces when they appear out of context.
Human face recognition relies on "holistic processing". Seeing the face as a unified whole rather than a collection of parts. This process is extremely fragile. Research shows that simply inverting a face (the "Thatcher Illusion") or changing the lighting direction can completely disrupt holistic processing, forcing the brain to switch to "featural processing"
The Innocence Project has documented numerous cases where victims misidentified attackers who were actually people they knew or had seen before, or conversely, misidentified strangers as people they knew. In the case of State v. Guilbert, a witness misidentified a shooter as a man he knew well, despite the man being innocent.
The fact that "3 women" saw the creature is cited as validation. However, in cognitive psychology, a small, cohesive group (a triad) is often less reliable than independent witnesses due to Social Contagion of Memory and Emotional Contagion. As expressed before by themselves, they ran for about 500m, then halted to catch their breath and discuss what they saw. Experiments by Roediger, Meade, and Bergman have extensively mapped the "Social Contagion of Memory." Gabbert et al. found that 71% of witnesses in dyads who discussed an event included erroneous details acquired from their partner.
What I am defending here is not that they saw Mudinho; I am rebutting your false notion that they "Couldn't have mistaken Mudinho."
They are human. Our senses are fallible, our perception is limited, and our minds are suggestible.
There are people in your post suggesting that what the women saw could be "something wild like a human clone or animal hybrid, some sort of biological experiment", that was set loose or lost in the most agrarian region of the rural southeast, six months before the first mammal was ever cloned.
Meanwhile, Professor Ubirajara has a career defined by ethics and institutional commitment.
He stands as a model of integrity. As a former president of the BAR Association and current rapporteur for the Ethics and Discipline Tribunal of the BAR in the state, he has dedicated his professional life to safeguarding the standards and honor of the Brazilian legal community. He is a citizen who transitioned from investigative curiosity toward the strict rigor of rational thought, consistently earning the profound respect of his colleagues. In over 30 years as a Law teacher, he has welcomed students into peers, and peers into judges - without a single stain on his curriculum. Dude is a Bastion of lawfulness. To even consider that he was intimidated by the military, when in fact transcripts showcase how Pacaccini "wet his pants" and changed tone, is absurd.
Last edited:
Perene
Member
Uh, no, actually that's 100% on me. I like to think a "Resident Evil" animal (or monster, if you want to call it that) is a much stronger possibility (or a monkey the girls were not used to see, and an exotic one, with prominent eyes and a face that would make them believe they saw horns) rather than an alien that would raise a hundred questions with no satisfactory answers, including (but not limited to): how they detected us in the first place, where they came from, how their spaceship conquered space and remained undetected (where they were planning to go after paying us a visit?), etc.
What has been proposed as a theory in that reddit thread was this (not the same what I wrote before):
+++++++++
Some of that stuff the reddit user wrote are not true:
- That it was raining when the girls saw the "creature". It was said the rainstorm started a couple hours later (5 pm?).
- Lemurs do not exist in Brazil. They are native exclusively to Madagascar (and a few very small nearby islands). They evolved there in isolation and do not occur naturally anywhere in the Americas, including Brazil.
- From the 1940s through the early 1960s, monkeys and chimpanzees were used in early aerospace and biomedical research, mainly by the U.S., Soviet Union and France, briefly. These tests were primarily high-altitude balloon flights, suborbital rocket flights, acceleration and restraint experiments and life-support validation.
By the mid-1960s, this practice had already been largely phased out in favor of instrumented crash dummies and mechanical simulators. Later, human volunteers under controlled conditions.
By the 1990s, the use of live primates in propulsion or crash testing was scientifically unnecessary, politically radioactive and ethically restricted by international protocols. Even biomedical primate testing by that point occurred in contained laboratory environments, not in experimental aircraft or field tests.
Besides, by 1996 aerospace G-force data was already well understood, monkeys provided no new information and any such test would be obsolete and indefensible.
So, no modern propulsion system in the 1990s required live primates.
Military or experimental tests involving classified hardware are also conducted over controlled ranges (Nevada Test Site, White Sands), not over populated foreign cities. And especially not without formal bilateral agreements. Brazil has never acknowledged any such joint test program, and no leaked document, flight log, or declassified program suggests this.
Brazil has no native primates, too, that match 1.5-1.6 m in height (4.9 to 5.2 ft), habitual bipedal posture, hairless or near-hairless body, 3 cranial protrusions, or large forward-facing eyes described as "red" or "lilac".
Imported monkeys or chimpanzees would require quarantine records, veterinary teams, transport manifests... there is zero evidence of anything in that regard.
Last edited:
BoulderRiver
Senior Member
At least we agree that it certainly wasn't a monkey.
NorCal Dave
Senior Member.
Maybe a bit of explanation for us non-Brazilians. It sounds like Fortunato was the admitting physician, possibly in the Emergency room? He recommended Chesere be admitted and then transferred to a different, possibly better equipped, facility. Right? If so, why would he have anything to do with an autopsy? Maybe different in Brazil?
Here in the US, the ER Dr. would take care of a patient while they're in the ER. As soon as they are admitted to the hospital, a different Dr. takes over. If one is transferred to a different hospital, yet another Dr. takes over. If a patient dies, NONE of those Dr.s would have anything to do with an autopsy. It would be handled by a pathologist that is specialized in doing autopsies and is usually the local medical examiner. That is, they are part of local law enforcement, specifically the locally elected Sheriff-Coroner's office.
I don't think an ER Dr would be involved, but maybe different there.
BoulderRiver
Senior Member
Surprisingly, there are THREE individuals named "Fortunato" in this case.
All of them are doctors.
To make matters worse, two of them are named "Armando Fortunato", the other one being the famous Doctor Fortunato Badan Palhares.
Chereze was initially received at the hospital by [Dr. Armando Martins Pinto Fortunato]², and was autopsied by [Dr. Armando Fortunato Filho]³.
The autopsy report was signed by Dr. Vasconcelos, but Fortunato Filho alleges to be the one responsible. This information is corroborated by the most trustworthy source on the case, Ubirajara Franco Rodrigues, on page 315 of his book "O Caso Varginha".
Last edited:
NorCal Dave
Senior Member.
Please learn to use the tools of the forum to avoid misunderstandings like this. I can't tell when you're making glib or silly suggestions, presenting actual theories, paraphrasing others, paraphrasing yourself or actually quoting someone. Your above post looks like this:
This came from Reddit? Where? Is the section in italics supposed to be you paraphrasing what's on Reddit or is it a quote of what's on Reddit? Very confusing, especially given your tendency to create long posts with various subjects.
Please use the External Content tool when you are using direct quotes:
I went and found the reddit post you were using. I copy and paste from the source and then select the pasted section and click the External Content button. Then it will look like this, followed by the source of the content:
External Quote:
Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/z6yzjk/could_the_varginha_creature_have_been_a_monkey/
Now it's clear that I'm quoting a post from Reddit, it's not me talking or paraphrasing, it's direct form Reddit and I gave the source so others can go see it for themselves.
Ann K
Senior Member.
...is almost as fanciful a suggestion as an alien, but (like aliens) what you would "like to think" is immaterial. Where is the evidence for this unknown "resident evil"? Until that's produced, the most probable solution remains the things that we know, not the things we do not know. And one thing we know very well is that perception and memory are extremely fallible.
Mendel
Senior Member.
Resident Evil is a horror computer game/media franchise. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resident_Evil .
Perene was citing it as an example for what a not-Gray alien might look like.
Similar threads
