New interview with Travis Walton

travis walton

Here’s the new interview with the most famous UFO abductee Travis Walton. He was abducted back in 1975 while working in in the Apache-Sitgreaves National Forest in Arizona. Almost 40 years later he still sticks to his original story.

He was interviewed by Robert Perala.

Your opinion?
  • Fake (5)
  • Real (56)
  • Not Alien (3)


  1. I have read and heard really very much about this amazing case. I cannot but believe in what Mr Walton and his then companions say (unbelievable as it seems). If I were to ask Mr Walton a question, I would ask him: what, in his opinion, do these humanoids want, why are they here?

  2. Well now listening to that fella you can see them aliens ain’t much on conversation and not a accommodating bunch. Boy howdy them fellas just zap a guy up into their craft and do things to him, don’t offer him a drink or anything to eat. They get finished lookin him over and drop him like a hot potato. Them o’l boys got about as much consideration as o’l freds in laws….

  3. his name above is misspelled. not travil but travis. travis is a complete authentic and upright honest person. the story is real, plain and simple. 40 years carrying a hoax?? , i don’t think so.
    the man should be given due respect and received as an information source and not as anything but.
    god bless travis, keep doing what your doing. doug

  4. of course he’s sticking to his story 40 years later, because it’s true! I hope the questions I wonder about him are in part two. I own that movie (Fire in the Sky) and of course the trip aboard the ufo is embellished and not at all like he describes. it’s been Hollywood’ed up. but it’s a great movie. I’m surprised Mr. Walton isn’t a sick man, or that Men in Black have not come after him.

  5. Everything about Travis is believable, from his body language to the vast amount of detail he remembers. About 13 minutes in, Travis talks about their eyes “boring into him.” He said it was an invasive, threatening feeling but he realized afterwards that wasn’t the case, it was something different. What??? I hope we hear more about that in Part II.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.