The True Story of the Worlds First Documented Alien Abduction: The Dress Analysis
On the morning of September 20, 1961, Betty removed the blue acetate sheath dress that she had worn on the drive home from Canada, folded it, and placed it in the back of her closet. It was a new dress that had never been laundered, and she had worn it only one other day during the trip. She recalled that she had handled the dress in this manner be- cause it was torn and required mending before she could wear it again. For some unknown reason, Betty then forgot about her dress, and did not retrieve it from her closet until the spring of 1964 (her accounts vary from “a few days later” to “during the hypnosis”; her memoirs indicate that the dress was recovered in 1964). She explained that she remembered the dress only after her amnesia had been lifted by Dr. Simon. She returned home and retrieved it from her closet. It was then that she noticed that it was coated with a pink, powdery substance. Puzzled, she examined the rest of her clothing, but found that only the blue dress had been damaged.
Betty initially placed the dress in her trash receptacle, but then re- thought her action and decided to hang it on her clothesline. The pink powdery substance blew away, but the dress was badly stained, especially along the hem, around the sleeves, and along the top of the bodice. As Betty examined the dress, she noticed that a section of the stitching in the hem had ripped, causing it to hang down, and the lining on the right side of the dress was torn from waist to hemline. Additionally, the dress lining was torn from the bottom of the center back zipper to just above the hem stitching. She remembered the difficulty that her captor experienced as he attempted to open her zipper, and found a 2-inch tear in the stitching along the top right side. On the left side of the upper zipper was a 1-inch tear in the thick zipper fabric, separating the metal teeth from the fabric. This fabric is extremely durable and almost impossible to tear through human strength. Betty thought that the dress evidence might be significant to her case, so she decided to hang the dress in her closet.
In 1977 Betty met Leonard Stringfield, director of public relations at Dubois Chemicals in Cincinnati, Ohio. He offered to have an elemental analysis done on samples from the dress by the chemistry department at the University of Cincinnati (the university had not been apprised of the dress’s history or ownership). Betty received a letter from Stringfield dated August 30, 1977 regarding the elemental analysis of the powder. It stated that the x-ray fluorescence test revealed sulfur, sodium, chlorides (possible trace evidence), and silicon (possible trace evidence). The spectroscopic emission test dis- covered large amounts of sodium, aluminum, iron, and magnesium on the fabric. There were also small amounts of manganese, calcium, and silicon. He commented, “The powder substance is strange in relation to its inorganic elemental content. It appears to be high in undetermined organic hydrocarbons.”
On May 11, 1978, the chemist wrote the following report regarding additional testing that he had conducted on Betty’s dress swatches:
- Direct analysis by x-ray fluorescence shows no difference in elemental composition of the front and back samples.
- One-inch squares, from each the front and back, were digested with a concentrated nitric acid-sulfuric acid mixture. The resulting solutions were analyzed by emission spectroscopy (a much more sensitive test than test 1). Traces of copper, calcium, silicon, magnesium, and iron were found, but were essentially the same on both front and back samples. Betty’s dress, showing torn lining and zipper. Courtesy of Kathleen Marden.
- Several methods, which normally bleach or discolor cloth dyes, were tried in an attempt to duplicate the color change observed on the dress. These were (a) chlorine bleach (both wet and dry), (b) acid treatment, (c) base treatment, (d) ultraviolet light (one day exposure), and (e) sunlamp (one day exposure). None of these produced any effect similar to the color change observed. The closest was acid treatment, which bleached it white, but not red. This is interesting, even though it is not a negative result. It shows that whatever the reaction was, it was not the usual discoloration reactions that I know. It is too bad that the white [actually pink] powder was not saved because it had to fall into certain chemical classifications and we probably could have found out what it was.
In 1980, a mainstream scientist whose identity must remain anonymous obtained an analysis on Betty’s dress. He reported that “the dress fragment was absolutely clean, containing no pollen or spore micro- organic material.” Other researchers agree that the material is most likely biological.
BP-Amoco analytical chemist Phyllis Budinger, M.S., became interested in Betty’s dress after she read articles about the Hill abduction in the September 2001 issue of the MUFON journal. She has 35 years industrial experience in chemical analysis, specializing in troubleshooting and problem-solving. She contacted Kathy regarding the possibility of obtaining dress samples for chemical analysis. Betty, who was initially reluctant to part with additional dress swaths, accepted Budinger’s proposal and eventually contributed five fabric swaths for analysis. Budinger conducted extensive tests on the dress from November of 2001 through October of 2003. Numerous surface infrared spectra were acquired from every square centimeter of the front and back surfaces of all fabric swaths and on particulate materials on two swaths. Solvent extraction using hexane followed by water was also conducted, as well as microscopic analysis.
Budinger concluded that the stained areas were coated with a biologically derived material of mostly protein and a small amount of natural oil. This protein biologically attacked the fiber and dye in the stained samples of Betty’s dress, resulting in discoloration and a looser fiber structure. The evidence shows that this did not derive from Betty’s bodily emissions, but came from an external source. The stained area’s pH level revealed a higher acid content than did the control fabric sample. She also found microscopic debris materials such as house dust, pet hair, and assorted clothing fibers that one would expect to find on a dress that had hung in a closet for nearly 40 years. There is indication that the biological sub- stance originally contained moisture. This moisture, Budinger speculates, served as a nutrient for a natural biological growth. Infrared spectral analysis provided evidence for the presence of foreign materials on the swaths consistent with protein-type materials. These materials apparently permeated the exterior surface of the stained swaths, but caused less damage to the interior surface of the dress fabric, indicating that it originated from an outside source.
Phyllis Budinger conducted an analysis of the hexane and water ex- tracts from three stained dress swaths and one control swath. Compared to the hexane extracts, the stained materials produced significantly more water soluble material than the control. Also, for both solvent extractions, less material was extracted from the control sample compared to the stained samples. The trace levels of hexane extracts contained natural oil. The more abundant water extracts were most interesting; they primarily contained low molecular weight protein degradation products.
When agitated, the discolored swaths produced foam, which suggested the presence of substances with detergent-type properties (not soap). The degraded protein products with highly polar functional groups would do this. The control sample did not foam—the small amount of material extracted from the control was probably not enough to generate foaming. All four extracts fluoresced under ultraviolet light. Although the dry dress fabric did not emit an odor, a “putrid” odor was noted in the water used for the soluble extracts of the stained samples. This odor reminded the researcher of the odor resulting from a bacterial attack on water bottoms from fuel service tanks. In all, the chemical analysis supported Betty’s account of the event.
Budinger has offered several speculations regarding the origin of the pink powdery substance and discoloration on Betty’s dress. Betty noted a foul odor in the craft’s interior that she could not identify, although it somewhat resembled marigolds. It is possible that the captor’s respiratory emissions and natural oily eliminations were deposited on Betty’s dress upon contact. Betty recalled that her captors grasped her tightly around the sleeves of her dress as they escorted her to the craft. This would account for the heavy pink discoloration on the dress sleeves and the upper portion of the bodice. The dress fabric at the top of the zipper is also stained where an occupant struggled to remove Betty’s dress, causing tearing. There is also discoloration on the hem area of the dress that could have resulted from contact with the occupants when Betty violently resisted being taken aboard the craft. The right dress sleeve was totally permeated with the biological material on the side where the dress lining was torn from waist to hem, indicating that her captor may have affected a tighter grip around Betty’s arm during her struggle. As an alternate explanation, Budinger speculated that some of the material may have transferred from the top of the dress to the skirt when Betty folded it and placed it in her closet. She further speculates that the slightly acidic moist substance on the dress, deposited by the cap- tors, served as a nutrient for a natural biological growth of bacteria, mold, or mildew. This natural biological growth left a pink powdery residue and discolored the dress.
Phyllis Budinger enlisted the expertise of noted biochemists who con- ducted DNA analysis on the fabric samples. Additionally, a blood sample was obtained from Betty. The analysis found three DNA deposits of note: The first was alpha-proteobacterium from the upper left sleeve of Betty’s dress. This is bacteria found in soils and water, and could have been deposited on the dress sleeve when it was thrown in a heap on the craft’s floor during Betty’s physical examination. The second DNA sample was taken from the dress front and could have been a human, mouse, or cow fragment, but not from Betty. The third, taken from the upper sleeve underarm was human, and of probable African extract. It seems logical to speculate that Barney had escorted Betty at sometime during the week- end and his DNA became deposited on her dress. No unidentifiable DNA samples were found on the stained swaths. Therefore, the researchers could not confirm DNA evidence from other than Earthly sources.
Additional bioassay tests were conducted by the Pinelandia Biophysics Laboratory of Michigan. Preliminary experiments were conducted to determine whether or not the pink-stained dress fabric would induce a higher degree of energy in water than the blue unstained sample. It did.
Next, the water in which the dress samples had been soaked was applied to wheat seed on moist paper disks in petri dishes. The researchers observed that the water from the stained sample germinated the wheat seed at an unusually fast rate. At the end of seven days they were significantly larger than the control sample from Betty’s blue dress swath. An additional experiment used three samples: a plain water control sample, water obtained by soaking the pink-stained fabric, and water obtained by soaking the blue control fabric. The seeds germinated at the same rate in the plain water and the blue water. However, the pink-stained fabric water caused the seedlings to develop at a significantly faster rate than the controls. The researchers noted that it is extremely difficult to alter seedling development in plants.
The scientific analyses on the pink discolored and blue control swaths taken from the dress that Betty Hill wore on the evening of September 19–20, 1961, have produced some very interesting results. They seem to point to the presence of an anomalous biological substance that has permanently altered the physical characteristics of Betty’s dress. Considering the dress’s history, there is no valid reason for it to be covered with biological material. It seems to be an indirect result of her UFO encounter. Additionally, the extensive damage to the zipper, hem, and lining indicate that Betty’s dress underwent extreme stress during a period of missing time following a close encounter with an anomalous craft and its occupants. Betty reported that her abductors touched her on the sleeve area and zipper area where there is the greatest concentration of pink discoloration. This fact lends credence to her account. It could not have been caused by perspiration because it was concentrated on the outside of the dress. These factors, taken together, also indicate that Betty could not have intentionally damaged the dress for testing. Some of these later tests were not even in existence when the dress was originally analyzed.