Bauro entity encounter — 1947

José C. Higgins placed this encounter on 23 July 1947 at the Goio-Bang agricultural colony in Paraná, in the region now associated with Luiziana. The familiar “Bauru” label is misleading: that São Paulo city belongs to the publication history, not the recovered event location. Researcher Pablo Villarrubia Mauso located Higgins’s letter in the 5 August 1947 Diário da Tarde of Curitiba and later discussed it alongside the 1954 O Cruzeiro retelling. Finding that publication establishes that the story circulated in 1947, rather than confirming the encounter itself. Higgins said that a hissing sound preceded the descent of a white-grey metallic disc approximately thirty metres across and five metres high, with external tubes, four curved supports and a doorway beneath its rim. His assistants fled; Higgins remained. Three figures about 2.1 metres tall emerged wearing inflated transparent suits and metal backpacks. Through these he described bright, paperlike shirts, shorts and sandals. Their heads were large, round and bald, their legs unusually long, and their large round eyes lacked eyebrows but had eyelashes—a detail contradicted by some later summaries. He also claimed to see similarly appearing figures inside the craft. One visitor carried a metal tube and gestured for him to enter. Higgins refused. A figure drew a central mark and seven surrounding circles, associating “Alamo” with the sun and “Orque” with the seventh circle. Later writers interpreted this as a reference to Uranus; that interpretation does not establish the visitors’ origin. Higgins showed a photograph of his wife, gestured that he would find her, and withdrew behind bushes. He said the figures then jumped and threw large stones before boarding and departing north about half an hour later. Higgins’s letter itself wondered whether the experience had been dream or reality. The checked material supplies no independent testimony from the fleeing assistants confirming the close interaction. This remains a historically early published claim, with the asserted dialogue, anatomy and departure dependent on Higgins’s account.