The Finnish case
By: Galán Vázquez
Tags: Extraterrestrial Life, Aliens, Uap, UFO, Ufology

Authorized opinions

The case of Imjärvi is the classic event that has acquired an important resonance, because of the investigative zeal of a person who has applied will and intelligence in the treatment. Sven Olof Fredrikson within his means exhaustively used all the opportunities that chance offered him to claim the case, eagerly seeking the authoritative opinion of technicians in disciplines that he did not master. He interviewed Dr. Pauli Kajanoja, requesting his professional opinion on the possible reasons for the pathologies offered by Heinonen and Viljo. Even from Sweden he continued in contact with the aforementioned Dr., always looking for possible clues that would lead to definitive consequences.

“I think the two men have received a very strong shock. The picture it presents is very real and it is beyond doubt that it is not a conscientious fraud. Viljo’s face is red and puffy. Heinonen suffers from a very complex syndrome and not exactly of a psychological type only…, although some symptoms can obviously be hysterical in nature. However, they are not hysterical subjects. Their traumatization is overwhelmingly evident… they are absent, empty. During the first visit made on January 7, they spoke brokenly, with a manifest nervousness, almost meaningless ”. “The real existence of the event provoking the shock is unquestionable. Now there are countless symptoms that can be explained simply as caused by shock; for example, the same decrease in blood pressure, or their headaches, vomiting, etc … even this vague feeling of “feeling bad” “without our checking means giving a specific and determined pathology. It is very curious that the two individuals have a completely parallel picture of symptoms and that it also looks so much like the classic picture of a strong exposure to a source of radioactivity. I could not measure it due to the lack of accountants in the hospital, but I doubt very much that the problem is simply a radioactive overdose, because the pathological picture that can be triggered in this eventuality is never generated so suddenly. The same dark-colored urine is somewhat disconcerting and difficult to explain, unless we admit that it was blood, which on the other hand should be due to lesions that I have not found in my scans.”

“The reality is that it is very difficult to diagnose with any certainty the type of ailment that the two men suffered. So much so that I preferred not to prescribe anything special to avoid major ills. I thought the best thing to do was to focus on tranquilizers, as the most effective therapy for her mental state. “

Sven Olof Fredriksson obtained from Chalmers High School in Gothenburg, an official opinion on the analyzes on soil samples from the site of the UFO observation. The document he received read like this …;

Atomic Chemistry Department

Investigation in three samples of traces of bioactivity

1st Test

With EMI — Monitor

No reaction of type

No reaction of type

2nd Test

Metan ratio count (2-pi)

Negative result

3rd Test

Made on a sample of water from melted snow from the place of observation

Negative result.

There are some opinions of Matti Tuuri professor of electronics at the University of Helsinki. After studying the case dossier, he opined:

“The possibility that Heinonen and Viljo were exposed to an electric shock cannot be ruled out. The two men agree that the light was white and dazzling, so it must be ruled out that it is ultraviolet radiation, which always has a bluish tinge. On the other hand, this type of radiation does not pass through clothing. If the radiation absorbed by the witnesses has passed through it, it must have been a shorter and higher frequency type of wave, such as Ravos X. In addition, the symptoms presented by Heinonen and Viljo are classic of an “overdose” .

These opinions were disseminated through the press, who tried to explain the Imjärvi case, misrepresenting its criteria and providing ready-made solutions. What seems to have deserved the most favor and attention was… “that it was surely a high voltage load”.

The High Voltage Institute of the University of Uppsala was contacted, receiving the following communication, formulated by Professor Stig Lundquist.

“According to our studies, the phenomenon that occurred in Imjärvi has nothing to do with ball lightning or any other type of electrostatic charge in the atmosphere. We are not aware of any natural phenomenon that can produce the effects indicated in the documentation submitted.

Other testimonies of the observation

The observation of Heinonen and Viljo is supported by the testimony of two more people, who from different points of the area were able to observe strange phenomena over the Imjärvi forest.

She is the wife of a farmer who lives in Paistjärvi, 15 km from Imjärvi. Ms. Alna Siitari stated that on the same day and at the same time, when she was going to the stable to examine her cattle, she saw a strange light in the aforementioned direction.

Also from the small village of Paaso, 10 km north of Imjärvi, the son of a family of lumberjacks, who at that time had left his house for domestic work, observed a rare luminous phenomenon towards the South. The observation was dated January 7, 4:45 p.m.

We want to mention the judgment of honesty that both Heinonen and Viljo have in the town where they reside, transcribing the words of a farmer, Matti Haapaniemi, 46, a resident of the town and a member of the Town Council.

“Many people have laughed at this story,” he said, “but I think that one should not laugh. I’ve known Aarno and Esko since they were boys and I believe in them. They are both calm and also abstemious. I am completely sure that your story is true.

We have one last observation to highlight, although it occurred a year earlier. Exactly in February 1969 and around eleven at night.

Matti Komtulainer, 16, resident of Imjärvi, experienced a remarkable case in his own words, about 100 meters from the place where the events occurred in the January 1970 observation. Matti says:

“I had been visiting a friend’s house and was coming back skiing through the forest. It was a dark night, with clouds. Suddenly the forest was illuminated and a very strong light crossed over the top of the trees, penetrating the forest. The fright was so great that I threw myself on the snow thinking that something was thrown at me. It disappeared very quickly and without the slightest noise. Nothing like this had ever happened to me. The light was so intense that it was like looking at the sun. It was heading from south to north. The strange light looked like a giant welding flame.”

Summary

The Imjärvi case is undoubtedly “a beautiful Case”, where the appreciation of a number of classic strangeness of the UFO phenomenon has been combined with a neat treatment by the pollsters. We could only wish that instead of chance having chosen a lumberjack and a farmer for this event, it had been someone with scientific knowledge.

Perhaps an analyst and scientist from the Stanling Project with a sufficiently technological piece of equipment in the trunk of the car and the fortitude to manipulate all the detection equipment correctly.

However, I am very much afraid, and I speak with knowledge of the facts, that the scope achieved by our technology can offer us little more than enlightening, other than more or less well-argued conjectures. An electromagnetic record of a signal with coding overtones, apart from being a valid testimony only for those of us who already believe in the UFO, hardly serves for anything other than to stimulate us to find prompt answers. And in the end, it is as valid as the testimony of some individuals who, between traumatized and excited, tell us the details of an unusual encounter on a winter sunset. Because the cold register of a glisando of frequencies can clarify little to us, if we do not know with a certain depth the essence and nature of the phenomenon we are dealing with.

It is really depressing not knowing how to interpret, for example, the fact that a specific light with the appearance of a solid materialization, turns into a flickering flame …, or that this luminous jet serves as a support for the exit and escape of an anthropomorphic being that it volatilizes before the astonished gaze of the witnesses.

We know that this case, like many … or like all, is loaded with subjectivities, engendered by the unusual, the traumatization and the lack of words to define the indefinable, but nevertheless we also know that the UFO has crossed the threshold of the chimera, to show itself as something coherent with itself and according to a level of intelligence of the observer. The pathology engendered in young Finns is something more than the footprint left in the snow by the “abominable” or the fleeting glow of the lake monster’s wet back, the experience, luck would have chosen a Physics teacher with a team from the Nees. It is the proof that something floats over our world, and that from meeting to meeting it shapes our awareness of its unquestionable presence. On the other hand, at the heart of the Imjärvi case we recognize patterns that are familiar to us over time, and that despite their strangeness, we have to accept them as an inherent fact of the phenomenon.

What to say, for example, of the obsession of Heinonen, who is afraid of meeting his dear friend Viljo to whom he attributes a bellicose attitude towards him? We believe that there is a certain parallelism between this fear, and the obsessive resonance of Javier Bosque (case of June 1972 -Logroño — SPAIN) who suffers from the affective concern of “MEASURE TIME”, while the sound instruction of the UFO, on its transistor. Or in the bellicose ferments of the sleeping mountaineers of the case of ‘’ Coma de Vaca ”(November 1967- Catalonia — Spain) who wake up from their physiological sleep with an inexplicable frenzy and irrational aggressiveness.

What to say about the impression of the beam of light, which comes to appear to the witnesses as “something solid”, such are its characteristics? Let us remember the impression of Santos Nicolás, Guijo de Granadilla’s teacher, in the sighting of the Gabriel y Galán Swamp, that his first impression when he saw the UFO stopped two hundred meters from the ground, believes that the rays of light released by the low structure of the mill, they are solid appendages in contact with the ground. (September 1970 Cáceres — SPAIN). And so many other cases recorded across our globe, in which witnesses report the enormous resemblance of specific beams of light, as something consistent of a corporeal nature.

What can we say about the psychosomatic picture that Heinonen and Viljo adduce, puzzling the doctors who visited them? Or what to think of a clear syndrome of exposure to radiation of nuclear origin, while on the other hand our devices are unable to detect any ionizing particle? Faced with such patent evidence, we have to be inclined to think that it is our technology and our devices that are insufficient to detect a type of energy, unusual in our known world. Because in addition to recognizing in good logic, that the residual energies that emanate from the UFO are similar to those obtained by man in his search in the field of the forces of nature, we know that something important escapes us, since we know the behavior of these powers in freedom, and we are aware that radiation requires a long time to manifest itself and create a pathogenic picture, as it needs after long periods to be decontaminated.

Would it be fair to disparage the testimony of two simple people, for the simple fact that they tell us “incredible things”, ignoring a wide range of certainties, and the unanimous opinion of their fellow citizens who assure faultless conduct and honesty tested on Aarno Heinonen and Esko Viljo?

!! Obviously, if we did, we would not be fair !!