(Full Report: “The present report was published in issues 41, pp. 77-88 and 42, pp. 29-43 of the ITC Journal “ )
Conclusions
This report arises from my personal interest in Dr. Anabela Cardoso’s case, as due to my ignorance of the subject I had the rather naive idea that everything could be either a fraud or a misunderstanding.
When I thought of the phenomenon, my initial, confused idea was that the voices received by Dr. Anabela Cardoso originated from the emissions of ham operators. This possibility vanished rapidly when I verified that ham operators have a limited band-width that does not comprise any of the frequencies [described in the text]. Furthermore, there was another doubt – how could the voices hear the questions put by Dr. Anabela Cardoso, and reply to her questions, when she has no radio transmitter?
My fraud hypothesis was based upon the reasoning that there was the possibility that there could be somebody in one of the rooms of the house who could hear the questions put by Dr. Anabela and transmit the replies to her questions through a radio transmitter. This reasoning collapsed quickly when I verified the frequencies that her radios were tuned to, since the use of the latter was forbidden by law to ham operators’ radio emissions. Therefore, it seemed really odd that the institution in charge of the control of the radio-electric spectrum would issue somebody with an emission licence in a frequency reserved for State use, to commit a fraud.
Besides all this data there is still one more element that breaks the logic of the communication as we understand it. The first thing we study in a discipline related to communication is that in such a process there has to be an emitter, who is the person wanting to transmit the message, and a receiver, who is the person in charge of receiving it. In the case of radio communications the emission is realized in such a way that the emitter transmits in a frequency to which everybody who tunes to the emission frequency can listen. Can you imagine that in your homes the radio announcer will reply to your questions?
When the radio communication is produced as radio-listening the communication only acquires sense if the emitter sends the message and the receiver receives it. It is totally impossible for the emitter to reply to questions put by the receiver since the receiver is
technically incapable of transmitting. But this is not my only reason that makes of the direct voices an extraordinary case. Furthermore, the voices jump from one into another frequency within the values cited in Table 1 while they emit the message. This is the same as if a person listening to a radio transmission would hear a sentence of
the radio announcer in a certain frequency and would have to tune into a different frequency to hear the next sentence of the same announcer.
All the above reasons make of this event an extraordinary case from the technical point of view, and they discount the possibility of fraud or misunderstanding. If we add the content of the messages to what has been said we can also reject the human origin of the transmissions unless somebody is able to prove to the contrary.
