UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 1 Christianity Online The Truth is Out There From: RSchatte@aol.com [Rebecca] Date: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 14:33:37 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 03:23:42 -0400 Subject: Christianity Online The Truth is Out There The Truth is Out There The X-Files gives us tons of paranormal thrills anc chills. But where is this roller-coaster ride taking us? by Chris Lutes A ghostly figure of a young woman appears before FBI agent Dana Scully. A look of terror crosses the agent's face as she stares at the creepy image. Suddenly the figure vanishes. Scully is left to wrestle with what she thinks she just saw. Welcome to the bizarre world of The X-Files. During each episode of this popular TV series, fans of psychic-weirdness follow FBI agents Dana Scully and Fox Mulder as they track down something straight from a supermarket tabloid. From buggy-eyed aliens to monstrous genetic mutants to demon-possessed computers, the show seeks to curdle our blood through spooky special effects, as it strives to baffle our beliefs about what's real. The popularity of the series has generated tons of X-Files paraphernalia, including novels, magazines, videos, posters, game cards, shirts, hats and even statues of X-Files creatures. And die-hard fans--known as "X-Philes"--are anticipating a movie based on the series. No doubt about it, the weekly drama, now entering its fifth season, is very hot. Why X-Mania? So what draws 20 million viewers to this off-beat show? Well, let's start with those two hip FBI agents assigned to check out "paranormal activity." There's Scully, the hard-nosed, you-gotta-prove-it skeptic. Then there's Mulder, Scully's total "dramatic opposite." Believing his sister was abducted by aliens when she was a child, Mulder is open to the unseen and the unreal. When Scully couldn't make sense of one bizarre event, Mulder deadpanned, "Might we not turn to the fantastic for an explanation?" Along with the drawing power of the series' two stars, there's also the thrill of a "good heart-pumping jolt," says Brian Lowery in Trust No One: The X-Files, the official guide to the series' third season. More than that, though, says Lowery, viewers are undoubtedly fascinated by the idea that "the world is stranger than we know, and more mysterious than we want to believe." Yes, the series masterfully feeds our inner longing to believe there's something very real beyond this world. Just check out the UFO poster on Mulder's wall that reads: "I want to believe." Over and over, the show exploits our desire to believe the unbelievable. >From Entertainment to Supernatural Trouble Many would say The X-Files is simply an hour of harmless entertainment each week. And they'd add that the plots are straight from the lively and macabre imagination of the series' creator. After all, who could possibly believe in alien autopsies, a sewer-dwelling monster mutant and a teen who zaps his adversaries with lightning bolts? Yet amid all the imaginative and unreal stories are hints of the reality of a supernatural world. But unfortunately, the supernatural presented in The X-Fil es most often deals with dark, evil and occult themes--things the Bible warns us to avoid: "Let no one be found among you," says the writer of Deuteronomy, "... who practices divination or sorcery, who interprets omens, engages in witchcraft, or casts spells, or who is a medium or spiritist or who consults the dead." Messing around with the "dark side" of the supernatural is far from harmless. In his best-selling book, People of the Lie, psychiatrist M. Scott Peck claims there is a strong tie between demon possession and involvement in the occult: "It seems clear from the literature on possession that the majority of cases have had involvement with the occult." Obviously, demon possession is the extreme. But let it serve as an important warning: An unhealthy obsession with anything that deals with Satan and the occult is asking for supernatural trouble. The Real Truth "The Truth is Out There," says the popular X-Files slogan. And if we really want to find the truth, we can't go wrong searching for it in the Book of Truth--the Bible. Talk about bizarre! Whoa. We don't have to look to Scully and Mulder to discover some wild and occasionally eerie happenings that we know have taken place, like: One incredible sighting. In the first chapter of Ezekiel, the writer reveals this awesome "sighting": "I looked, and I saw a windstorm coming out of the north--an immense cloud with flashing lightning and surrounded by brilliant light. The center of the fire looked like glowing metal, and in the fire was what looked like four living creatures. In appearance their form was that of a man, but each of them had four faces and four wings. Their legs were straight; their feet were like those of a calf and gleamed like burnished bronze" (verses 4-7). Throughout the chapter, the writer offers detail after detail of what he saw. And what did he see? Well, this was no UFO. It was a very identifiable and awesome sighting of God's glory: "This was the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the Lord. When I saw it, I fell facedown, and I heard the voice of one speaking" (verse 28). It's important to point out that supernatural events from God don't happen just for the fun of it; there's always a purpose or reason behind them. In Ezekiel's case, the "vision" served to call the prophet to carrying out a very difficult task. A king gets a psychic reading. OK, get ready for this one. It's really weird. Seeking advice about his future, King Saul contacts the local "psychic network." Let's just say it was a very bad move that only made matters much worse for the king. Check out the whole story in 1 Samuel 28. One big-time demon possession. In various places in the New Testament, we find frightening stories of people who've been possessed by demons. One of the wildest appears in Mark 5:1-20. Here we find a naked, demon-possessed guy who lives in a graveyard. Taken over by a whole mess of evil spirits, the "demoniac" breaks free from iron chains and spends a lot of time screaming and slicing himself bloody with sharp rocks. But there is a happy end. Jesus comes along and chases the demons into a herd of pigs. The dead live! The Gospels record several cases of individuals rising from the dead. In one situation, Jesus actually has some people open the stone door of a friend's mausoleum. Obviously, everybody is expecting to be blown away by the stench and sight of their decomposing friend. But Jesus steps in and orders the dead man to come to life. The man obeys. For the whole story, see John 11:1-44. Then, of course, there is the most amazing and important supernatural event of all history--the resurrection of Jesus Christ. X-ing out Fear As we look into the supernatural events of the Bible, we find something we won't find in The X-Files: Hope. Typically, each X-Files episode ends with an eerie feeling that all is not right with the world. In fact, according to The X-Files, the world is an unsettling place; we're only seconds away from the next horrible and unexplainable experience. Obviously, these kinds of endings are quite intentional. After all, Mulder's "death" in last seasons spellbinding finale "forces" viewers to return to this fall's season premiere. Along with building the suspense, the show's eerie storylines leave a feeling that, in the end, all is hopeless. The mysteries of the world are to be feared. Not so with the Bible. Oh, there are some really scary supernatural happenings in there. But in the end, we are not left with a feeling of hopelessness and dread. We are left with the reality that a powerful and loving God is very much in control of both the natural and supernatural worlds. He will conquer evil. He will give never-ending life to those who are his people. Here's what John sees as a great and wonderful ending to world history (Revelation 21:1-5): "Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away ... I saw the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, comingdown out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride beautifully dressed for her husband. And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, 'Now the dwelling of God is with men, and he will live with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God. He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away.' "He who is seated on the throne said, 'I am making everything new!' Then he said [to me], 'Write this down, for these words are trustworthy and true.'" Yes, the truth is not only out there, but it is a truth packed with hope. It is the everlasting truth found in God's Word--the Bible. Tune in to this Truth regularly for a supernatural experience. Make the Most of X-Mania With the popularity of TV series like The X-Files, you may get some cool opportunities to share the real side of the supernatural with your non-Christian friends. When TV shows, movies, novels and magazines that deal with the supernatural come up in conversation, you can: Pass on some cool novels. Christian authors have written some thrilling novels about the supernatural, such as: This Present Darkness and Piercing the Darkness by Frank Peretti. Angels and demons duke it out in these best-sellers. And while not about angelicconflict, Peretti's Prophet and Oath also give an imaginative "glimpse" into God's unseen world. C.S. Lewis' sci-fi trilogy: Out of the Silent Planet, Perelandra and ThatHideous Strength. These classic fantasies explore the reality of good and evil as they affirm God's eternal, unchanging truth. All Hallows' Eve by Charles Williams. The cosmic consequences of both good and evil choices drive the spellbinding plot of this supernatural thriller. Be a great listener. If your friends are into programs like The X-Files, they probably love talking about it. So let them, and avoid making quick "judgment calls." During your conversation, find out why they are interested in shows about the supernatural. Tell some true stories. The main article, "The Truth Is Out There," lists several Bible passages that show how the supernatural has broken into the natural world. Tell them about these and other exciting stories that come from the Bible. And let them know that from beginning to end, God's Word is a SUPERnatural book. Go a step further. If your friends show interest in the Bible's take on the supernatural, start a Bible study based on the passages listed in "The Truth Is Out There." Include other passages, too, especially those about Jesus' miracles. Or study one of the Gospels, looking specifically at the supernatural acts performed by Jesus. If you or your friend get confused about anything, ask your pastor or youth pastor to join in your conversations. Obviously, any study you do needs to serve as more than just a fun look into the supernatural. It needs to help your friends see they can be changed supernaturally. So eventually, you'll want to share passages about the need for a relationship with Christ, like John 3, Acts 9 and Ephesians 1:17-2:9. Copyright (c) 1997 by the author or Christianity Today, Inc./Campus Life magazine. For reprint information call 630-260-6200 or e-mail <A HREF="mailto: cledit@aol.com">cledit@aol.com</A> September/October 1997. Page 32 7C2mh7C20327818
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 1 Charles Fort and UFOs From: legion@werple.net.au [John Stepkowski] Date: Wed, 1 Oct 1997 06:45:32 +3400 (EST) Fwd Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 04:06:32 -0400 Subject: Charles Fort and UFOs Hi All; Just a small (not very) commercial intrusion that may be of interest to some list members. Limited copies of _Charles Fort, The Fortean Society & Unidentified Flying Objects_, are now available. (114 pp.) Written and self-published by noted UFO historian Loren Gross, this is a gem of a book. Subtitled "A survey of the unidentified flying object mystery from August, 1895, to August, 1947," it contains a detailed historical overview of UFOs/UAPs with an emphasis on Charles Fort and other Fortean luminaries such as Tiffany Thayer, Theodore Dreiser, and R. DeWitt Miller. If you've ever read any of Loren Gross's richly detailed volumes of _UFOs: A History_, you'll know what to expect from his work on Fort and UFOs. Copies are just (US)$6.00 (including p&h), and available from: Jan Aldrich P. O. Box 391 Canterbury, CT 06331 U.S.A If you'd like further information, feel free to e-mail Jan at: jan@cyberzone.net, or contact me directly. We now return you to our regularly scheduled mailing list... Thank you. - John -- PROJECT 1947 http://www.iufog.org/project1947/
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 1 Re: Greenwood's UFO Surve From: jan@cyberzone.net (Jan Aldrich) Date: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 15:37:39 -0700 Fwd Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 04:58:31 -0400 Subject: Re: Greenwood's UFO Surve Since I have asked others to fill this out, here are my answers to the survey. If you don't agree or if you have better answers, don't bother arguing with me. Fill out your survey and send it to Greenwood. Thank you. Jan Aldrich Jan Aldrich wrote: > > Greetings List Members > > Barry Greenwood would like to do an survey of knowledgeable > UFO researchers. > > If you wish, you may post your answers to this list, or send > them to me, or answer anonymously by mailing your > questionaire to: > > CAUS > P. O. Box 176 > Stoneham, MA 02180 > > You may simply answer yes or no, or include a few words or > long essay with your opinions. It will be of great interest > to see if there is a common consensus on the important UFO > cases. > > Please indicate what E-Mail list you are on: All > > Project 1947 Currently Encounters UFO Updates > Other list (please indicate list) > > [Other lists, please feel free to cross-post.] > > Questions: > > I. Please list the ten most important UFO cases. Please > list cases by date and location. If you wish, you may also > tell why they are important. > First, as I told Barry, I do not agree with this type of argument that we have a few cases that establish something. I do not see ufology as turning on any "critical evidence." I believe that the preponderance of evidence indicate something unusual is going on. The biggest mistake Roy Craig made ever made was to advise Condon not to look at McDonald's Top 20 Evidential Cases. "If we shot these down, he will just bring us 20 more." Exactly, it is called science. What Craig turned down was the best conservation measures for the project's limited time and resources. Instead of having to look through huge amounts of raw to find possible interesting material, here was a first rate physical scientist who was handing the Condon committee on a silver platter the data the needed to deal with the problem. Craig's quick-reaction investigation team idea was excellent, the early warning network was good, the field equipment kit was excellent. His execution of field investigations was poor. Why? They had no filter to decide which cases were worth a special trip and which should be ignored. Craig's rather lame argue that you might miss a good case is hogwash. You set up certain criteria that a case has to meet before you conduct a field investigation. Sure you may miss some good ones. You must constantly re-adjust your citeria from experience factors. If you read Craig's book, you will see that this has not occurred to him in the last almost 30 years. The 4602d Air Intelligence Service Squadron files are full of cases that were easy to explain. Just calculate the location of Venus, or check with the local weather station for balloon releases. When they did get an amazing case, instead of investigating, they wrote it off as overactive imagination or psychological. Good cases are rare. Scientists and other who have to plow through a whelter of IFO could easily conclude there is nothing there. I personally worked on a particle physics experiment. Over 95% of the events were thrown out because they had no meaningful information or if they had particle events, they were not relevant to the study. No one came and said the experiment was flawed because most of the data was useless. It wasn't even mentioned. This was an experiment under controled conditions. How much data can you expect to be relevant when the raw data comes from chance observations?!? But the obsession of the USAF, CIA, MOD, Battelle, and numerous scientists with the percent of unexplained from small nonrepresentative samples is completely ridiculous. I didn't do too well with statistic, but I can say this: that kind of reasoning is off the wall and has nothing at all to do with science. That said, here are my ten important cases not in order of priority: 1. August 1947, Twin Fall, ID, Trees were swaying as the object passed over them. One of several of the same kind of cases in less than a five month period. Hynek's explanation of "atmospheric eddy" is laughable. The Battelle scientists evaluated it as unknown. Hynek in his re-evaluation of USAF cases disgarded his explanation. The FBI gave the main witness a good recommendation. Unknown to the investigators was that the witness was well-known in the Northwest. Two other newspapers outside of Idaho vouched for the main witness' integrity. > 2. July 10, 1947 Newfoundland, the cloud-cleaver. This may have been a meteor as Hynek suggested, but it was one that should have been brought to the attention of the scientific community. There are photographs of this phenomenon. > 3. The twin sightings of Oloron College and Gaillac, France represent a truly strange and rare phenomenon. The phenomenon continues to this day as The UFO Evidence, Volume II will hopefully demonstrate. Keyhoe had some original accounts of these twin sightings in his papers. 4. The Leveland series. Maybe this is a something that shows up once every ten years as a rare natural phenomenon or maybe it was something even more unique. Menzel, Keyhoe, Hynek and USAF were not helpful here at all. Except for Hynek each talked about their particular belief system before they even investigated the phenomenon. Hynek's request to the Air Science Division Review again, did not did not recognize that anything unusual was happening. He talked of "mass suggestion" a cause of ignition stops. Loren Gross has shown that there was an increase in sightings starting before Levelland, but Hynek talked about the flood of sightings after (and caused by) Levelland. There were many more sightings (unknown to the USAF and the UFO organizations) in the newspapers and especially more car-stalling accounts that exist only in the old newspapers files. The USAF should have tried to gather double the troublesome 500 cases. They might have got a hint of what was going on. > 4. Gulf of Mexico, December 1952. The Air Force throw everything in as answers to this case except the kitchen sink. This is indeed an unusual case. A Canadian radar expert after reading Keyhoe's version, wrote to the Air Force to ask if such a fantastic event had indeed occurred. Keyhoe's melodramatic version had made him doubtful. > 5. Leominster, Massachusetts, 8 March 1967, EME, close approach, physiological effects. > 6. Socorro, New Mexico, April 1964. Hynek was only allowed to check this one case. There were a series of similar cases within a short time and not too distant from Socorro... > 7. Nemingha, NSW, Australia, March 22,1976, EME, trace, light engulfment. > 8. Atlanta, Missouri, 4 March 1969 EME and other effects. > 9. Minneapolis, MN. Oct 10-11, 1951, General Mills scientists. > 10. Shag Harbor. Whatever this was, it is a good mystery. > > II. Considering what has been done in the last 50 years, > and the situation today, what should be the next step for > ufology? Unfortunately, scientific ufology about reached its peak in late 1960s and early 1970s as far as scientific investigations. There was a recovery in the mid-1980s. There were also some good guidelines laid down. That effort collapsed, also. It seems now ufology is constantly attracted to the highest strangeness and most sensationalized cases. Some UFO advocates now sound like lawyers. They use of rhetorical tricks, obfuscation, and appeals to emotions. Fine for a court of law. Cicero may have been able to use his skills in the law courts to get guilty murders off, however these skills have no use in scientific inquiry. Courts are not a place to search for truth. Courts are arena of controlled conflict where by social contract everyone agrees to abide by the results right or wrong. Once a ufologist starts saying, "you can't disprove this." Red flags should go up. That should be the end of the argument. It is the person making the claim that has to prove the contentions. James, Ed, and especially myself have been sucked into this silly game of trying to prove a negative. The argument that the skeptics behave in the same way has no weight here. (BTW Many skeptics behave honorably and are even sympathetically.) I don't care about skeptics. I am trying to reform ufology not skepticism. Ufologists should have a very critical and skeptical attitude toward evidence. Otherwise, we get the emotional near feeding frenzy we find on the web when someone reports NLs. Ufologists should not need skeptics or others to "keep them honest." I think that CE II cases are the key to obtain good solid evidence. However, realistically, investigations of such cases are not easy. Considering where we are today, CE II cases are probably the best entree to more scientific information and improved understanding. Dr. James McDonald thought that radar cases were the most important evidence. Unfortunately, the only radar catatlogs I know of are The UFO Evidence and the Condon report. Most radar cases are woefully inadequate, missing a lot of important information. Ufology is a philosophy of science problem. The Condon committee, in its early meeting recognized this. Their debates on this are very interesting. This question has never been adequately addressed. How do you study things that seem to be involve chance observation of a transient nature. Hard, but not impossible. Scientists who say they can't are like generals who can't mount operations in the face of the enemy. To paraphase Churchill concerning the Mulberries: "Don't tell me all the reasons it can't be done, just go and do it." > III. Government involvement in the UFO problem. > > 1. Is there a government cover up or foul up? > > Cover-up > > Foul up I agree with James McDonald there is a foul-up and to a certain extent a cover up of a foul up. Saying that, McDonald had a list of 100 "obfuscation cases" which indicated cover up. However, the cover up idea has grown. First, if we only got the Project Blue Book files that would prove the existance of high level knowledge about UFOs. Then, the CIA were the ones. However, sections in the OSI of the CIA handed the UFO problem back and forth to one another and they didn't want to do anything with it. Government agencies have not been forthcoming with information and have constantly been very non-cooperative and in many cases have lied about their records on the subject. I have been on the inside and have sympathy for the pressures of the military requirements. However, if you have time and money to occupy people full time in looking for Roswell records, you have the time and money too follow the FOIA requirements or great rid of the whole thing and put everything out there. > > Other (please specify) > > 2. To what exent is/are the government(s) involved: > > A. United States (everyone may answer this > question): > > Major involvement > > Minor involvement There is always a national security implication to things in the skies. At other times there may have been a major involvement. > Not Interested > > B. If you are not a US resident, indicate country > and government involvement: > > Major involvement > > Minor involvement > > Not interested > > IV. Abduction phenomenon. > > 1. Is the abduction phenomenon part of the UFO problem? > > Yes > > No > > Cannot determine at this time I am unsure on this. I think investigations of these things are important and may lead to interesting findings. However, I do not think this should at this time be the center of ufological attention. > 2. Is the study of the abductions important to > understanding the ufo problem? Unfortunately, the investigators of the abduction phenomena are generally part of the problem and not part of the solution. Dr. Bullard is the most credible and he is not a case investigator per se. A lot of investigators who are more circumspect are probably doing better work. I am appalled by comments like, "you can throw a rock and you will hit an abductee," "do 'they' ask about me?" > Yes > > No > > Do not know Research is important. Again, the UFORC's approach is probably the best if you feel something is happening here. > > V. Paranormal phenomena > > 1. Is the UFO phenomenon related to paranormal phenomena > such as psi, ghost, fortean phenomena, etc.? > > Yes > > No NO! I am surprised that scientist like Vallee proceeded down this road. This debate had already taken place in the 19th century. Huxley pretty well laid out the ground rules. There were phenomena and divine [or paranormal, if you wish] manifestations. Science is concerned with phenomena, the divine [read also paranormal] may be very interesting, but it is outside what is being looked at. (A gross oversimplification of Huxley's cogent and elegant arguments.) Phenomena are in the physical world, and we can try to understand and measure them. The others are outside the relam of understanding or study by the methods of science. (Now, maybe psi is a mental phenomenon, and if so, it could be studied. But if Uri Geller can't bend certain spoons. but can bend others, then something is wrong here.) > > Cannot determine at this time > > 2. Should the study of the paranormal be part of UFO > studies? > > Yes > > No No, it is a big distraction to the study of the problem. > > Do not know > > IV. The probably answer(s) to the UFO phenomenon is/are [you > may choose more than one--if so, please indicate order of > importance by "1st, 2nd, etc"]: > > Extraterrestial I am unhappy that the word "UFOs" now equals ET space ships.... It should mean unidentified flying objects....just that. > Parallel universe > > Time travelers > > Little understood natural phenomenon/phenomena 2d. Almost certainly there is something to this. When I first saw ball-lightning, the scientific consensus was that it did not exist. It would be useful to look at UFO reports for "once in a decade/50 year/century phenomena." It is stupid not to look. (But to a certain extent with all the foolishness associated with the phenomenon it is understandable.) > > Secret man-made phenomenon > > Misidentification of man-made and natural phenomena 3d I am not thinking about raw data here which contains the majority of IFOs, but after filtering IFOs out, these will still exist. > Psycho-sociological phenomenon/phenomena This area, for sure, is important! I am appalled by American ufology's obsessions with abductions and crashed saucers. I am equally appalled with the European's obsession with the psycho-sociological explanation. Americans don't give this area enough weight. European have ridden this like a hobby horse. It is time to dismount from the theories and beliefs and collect and compile better data. > Occult phenomenon/phenomena This a post-modern world....every idea and opinion is equal to any other idea and opinion.... No, we need to make a break here and try to define the limits of ufology. These things are outside. > > Other (please specify) > > Cannot determine at this time 1st. This is the same way I felt in 1959. I have seen nothing that has changed by mind. > As you can see, this is not a survey that can be done in > five minutes. Please take your time. > > Thank you, the results will be posted to the lists and in > JUST CAUSE. -- Jan Aldrich Project 1947 http://www.iufog.org/project1947/
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 1 Re: ACC From: RGates8254@aol.com [Robert Gates] Date: Wed, 1 Oct 1997 00:32:11 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 11:14:35 -0400 Subject: Re: ACC In a message dated 97-09-26 22:47:52 EDT, you write: > Subj: UFO UpDate: ACC > Date: 97-09-26 22:47:52 EDT > From: updates@globalserve.net (UFO UpDates - Toronto) > To: updates@globalserve.net > From: fergus@ukraine.corp.mot.com > Date: Fri, 26 Sep 1997 18:55:10 -0500 (CDT) > To: updates@globalserve.net > Subject: ACC > I've just spent a few moments trying to figure out why they keep > making these weird pronouncemnts about the alien origins of the > transistor. This is stuff that anyone with access to a good > technical library can easily disprove by looking up the original > articles. > So here are allegations by some un-named "whistleblower" some > 50 years after the fact. But they pop up just a month after > similar allegations in a book by Col. Philip Corso. Yet it is > claimed they have never heard of Corso or his book. It is just > a coincidence that this information is coming out at exactly the > same time, after not being mentioned at all for 50 years. > Then, more wild-eyed allegations are made. Motorola is just a > front for AT&T. UNIX was invented by aliens, too. > Are they just nuts, or could this be a deliberate disinformation > campaign, with the intention of being exposed or disproved and > thus discrediting similar claims such as Corso's? > I guess we'll just have to sit around and see what happens. > -George Fergus Actually George (big grin at this point) the reason why the UFO crashed at Roswell was because their Windows based computer operating system had a catastrophic system error which resulted in immediate shut down of its system, hence the ship crashed. Naturally when the military culled the wreckage they found the computer, and after they rebooted it (accidently of course) they discovered that it came up as "Aliensoft Windows Advanced Operating System version 2.99. Naturally they waited until the 70s to release this technological marvel on the unsuspecting public, so by random selection they found a drop out named Bill and now you know the rest of the story. Geez, now I am starting to sound like American Computer, you know Corsoish!!! Cheers, Robert
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 1 Re: Questions for abductees From: Peregrine Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith] Date: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 21:59:01 -0400 Fwd Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 11:08:56 -0400 Subject: Re: Questions for abductees The Duke of Mendoza presents his compliments. >Date: Mon, 29 Sep 1997 21:16:50 -0700 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Skye Turell <turel33@west.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Questions for abductees >>From: "R.Bull" <RAB@cadcentre.co.uk> [Rob Bull] >>To: "'UFO UpDates'" <updates@globalserve.net> >>Subject: Questions for abductees >>Date: Mon, 29 Sep 97 15:41:00 BST >>I'm not sure I accept the literal reality of abduction accounts, >>but are there 'standard questions' I should be asking this lady >>to determine if her experience is consistent with a classic >>abduction report? >If you don't "accept the literal reality of abduction accounts," then >perhaps you should hand the case over to someone who can be more >open-minded/objective. Can someone please explain to me how the implied opposite of *not* accepting the literal reality of abduction reports, which is to say, believing that abductions are real physical events, is supposed to be "open-minded" or "objective"? Given that Rob Bull actually says (there it is: read it) that he's "not sure" that abductions are real, one wonders just how open a mind is being called for here. Open enough for the brains to fall out, presumably. But let's not leave it at that. Let's be really reeely picky and consign poor old Rob to the ufological flames entirely. For does he not, when you read what he says carefully, say he's not sure that even the *reports* - let alone the events they purport to describe - may not be literally real? But somehow I don't think that's what he meant either. >You *should not* be trying to determine "if her experience is consistent >with classic abduction report[s]." You should be trying to determine >what *her experience* was. Now with that I do agree. And one place to start is the annals of so-unhelpfully-called "abnormal psychology", not the folklore that calls itself "abduction research". At any rate try to eliminate every other possible explanation before plumping for the least probable. Yours &c Ponderosa D. Melonfield Corn Pone Search for other documents from or mentioning: 101653.2205 | turel33 |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 1 Re: Witness Anonymity From: Peregrine Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith] Date: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 21:53:10 -0400 Fwd Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 11:07:20 -0400 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity The Duke of Mendoza presents his compliments. >From: clark@canby.mn.frontiercomm.net [Jerome Clark] >Date: Mon, 22 Sep 1997 15:52:33 PDT >To: updates@globalserve.net >Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: A New Question about Witness Anonymity I have been staring at this message every so often over the last eight days trying to figure out what it is supposed to convey. >Sorry, Duke, but anybody who would accuse a skeptic of being >"witty" need only read Phil (Ufology Is Tantamount to Communism) >Klass, when the just-named thinks he's being so, to be disabused >of this strange notion. Unca Phil has all the wit of a particularly >unfunny 11-year-old. Very odd. Phil Klass is not funny (although I find him riotous, but there again I do enjoy irony; most of us who went to English boarding schools had a well-developed sense thereof by the age of 11), ergo all skeptics are, so to speak, witless? Is that what it means? Or does it mean that blood sports in ufology are okay as long as the hounds are baying only at skeptics over 70 years old? Very odd indeed. Phil Klass thinks - or once said - ufology is tantamount to communism. Interesting comparison if you're intrigued by secular alternatives to religion. Maybe Phil didn't mean that. Maybe quoting people out of context is not always illuminating. Maybe John Mack meant something very profound when he said (to Jerry Clark, indeed - I think) that "Anti-communism is a form of racism". Maybe we can all agree, on the data presented by these two luminaries, that ufology is a form of anti-racism? That would be the first positive statement the field has made since Allen Hynek suggested that some UFOs that some people saw somewhere once were "swamp gas", and meant it. On the other hand, where are all the black ufologists? Odder and odder, really. Why does Phil Klass get a bashing when I am merely wondering aloud why Mrs Linda Cortibaloni thinks being witty is tantamount to being wicked? Why does Phil Klass get dumped with ad hominem contumely when not only is his name not mentioned in my post but my post did mention that Mr B. Hopkins persistently mentioned Mrs Linda Corsairbanana's real name - or one of them - in a public forum, albeit one slightly more distant from Manhattan than Albuquerque (or wherever) where Linda Cuddlytarantula first tasted the sweet wine of public adulation? > >If we can no longer promise a witness anonymity because > >down the line somebody may decree that he or she doesn't deserve > >it, then let me be the first to urge that no UFO witnesses desiring > >privacy step forward ever again. >Of course the sentence ought to have opened "If we can no longer >promise to honor...." Satisfied? Absolutely. Everyone's mind, like John Renbourne's, when they "lay down at night, just tryin' to take some rest" may get "to wanderin' like those wild geese in the West". I don't entirely agree with the sentiment, but if the news from San Marino is correct (and I know some who say it surely is, and there are weirder rumors yet now afoot from elsewhere), then Mr B. Hopkins is the last man you should trust with your real name. Did Crazy George have a point after all? I look forward to the customary deafening silence on this, of course. Yours &c Palindrome D. Monotone Monkey Catcher PS: Jerry, what *is* the story on Terry O'Leary of Larson fame?
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 1 Re: New Phoenix UFOs From: xalium@netwrx.net (Tom King) Date: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 18:10:55 EST Fwd Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 11:02:59 -0400 Subject: Re: New Phoenix UFOs >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: xalium@netwrx.net (Tom King) >Subject: New Phoenix UFOs >Date: Sun, 28 Sep 1997 16:01:22 EST >At about 2:30 on September 28, 1997 I saw a flashing silver >object in the sky. After a few seconds of watching it, I realized >I've seen and videotaped these strange objects in the past. I ran >inside and a grabbed a still camera and asked my brother Rob to >come out and videotape this thing. >It appeared to be 5 to 10 thousand feet in the sky at a NW >direction from my vantage point. I was using a Cannon T-50 with >1000 speed film. It had a 500mm telephoto lens, and a 3X adapter >attached to it. After I was able to see it thru the camera, I >thought this thing is silver and possibly metallic. It was >flashing on and off. I call these objects "blinkers" I have no >idea what they are but they blink on and off. I was able to snap >4 pictures of the object. Rob was unable to record it on video, >due to the poor resolution of the color viewfinder. >After I shot 4 pictures of it. I ran inside and grabbed an arm >full of tripods. I came out and set them up. After we mounted the >cameras the object was gone. We saw it for a total of 4 minutes. >Tom King, Skywatcher >Arizona Skywatch director >AZ Skywatch http://personal.netwrx.net/xalium/skywatch/skywatch.htm >OVNI Chapterhouse at http://personal.netwrx.net/xalium/ufovideo.htm Within 5 minutes after I took pictures of the blinker. Mike DeVarennes called and I told him what just happened and asked him to go outside and look around. I then hung up and went outside and saw two other objects. Today I recieved this email from him. ...after I got off the phone with you I shot a few seconds of a blinker from my apt ...by the time I got my tripod ready it had disapeared. Also last week I kept seeing this white cylindrical deal kept appearing and disappearing and was able to catch a sec of it, evrytime I would zoom in the $#%#% would fade out ...mabe your tv will show better detail. (((((?))))) Mike D. Tom King, Skywatcher Arizona Skywatch director AZ Skywatch http://personal.netwrx.net/xalium/skywatch/skywatch.htm OVNI Chapterhouse at http://personal.netwrx.net/xalium/ufovideo.htm
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 1 Re: ACC Roswell Web tale coming upart? From: RGates8254@aol.com [Robert Gates] Date: Wed, 1 Oct 1997 01:14:19 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 11:16:38 -0400 Subject: Re: ACC Roswell Web tale coming upart? Should the ACC Roswell tale (admitted by them to be rumor and gossip that was posted on the Web) come apart --as it appears to after Stig and others e-mail address investigations, I wonder if the people who gave this tale lots of credence, i.e. Art Bell, Linda Howe will admit just as vocally that it was phoney. Cheers, Robert
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 1 Re: Questions for abductees From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 1997 01:43:41 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 11:21:41 -0400 Subject: Re: Questions for abductees >Date: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 08:03:11 -0700 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Skye Turell <turel33@west.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Questions for abductees >>Date: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 01:36:18 -0500 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Questions for abductees >>>From: "R.Bull" <RAB@cadcentre.co.uk> [Rob Bull] >>>To: "'UFO UpDates'" <updates@globalserve.net> >>>Subject: Questions for abductees >>>Date: Mon, 29 Sep 97 15:41:00 BST >>You may want to check out a copy of Dave Jacobs book, "Secret >>Lives" for a listing of commonly reported phenomena or, you can >>e-mail me and I'll send you a copy of the 52 question diagnostic >>(that is also available on the web.) Hello Skye, hi All, Skye responds, >John, the reason I objected before to this line of attack (so to speak) is >that you do *not* want to have a standardized abduction scenario at your >side while you are investigating a case. You will automatically find >yourself categorizing details by the established way of looking at things, >thereby missing the opportunity to understand *new* information and >perceptions. I come from a human services background Skye, my primary concern is always for the individual and only secondarily to research. I agree, there is a certain amount of 'perpetuation' of certain details that takes place but the need to assure the individual that they are not 'going crazy' or 'unique' far outwieghs any negative arguements against it as far as I'm concerned. The fact remains that hundreds (maybe thousands) of individuals have been having unexplainable experiences all of their lives and as it turns out, many of these unusual recollections are shared by others. The first reaction I had (and a great many have) to the discovery that these experiences may be tied to UFO's and their occupants was to immediately question my sanity. That's not a fun place to be in. When an individual is in such a state of self doubt it is tremendously comforting to know that you are not alone, (that very same knowledge is also discomforting as well but that's another conversation) and that others too are experiencing/reporting the very same phenomena. That's where I'm coming from when I provide the kind of information that I did for Rob. I am thinking of that poor soul on the other end of these e-mails who -may be- suffering quietly in her head troubled and tormented by self doubt. If she _is_ having similar experiences what better way to find out than by comparing notes with the reports of many abductees. If she's not, then she'll know right away whether she should begin exploring other explanations or avenues. My only concern is for the ladys well being, research, if it happens, is secondary. Whether some are comfortable with it or not there _are_ many 'standard' features that are associated with abduction. The pattern that is associated with abduction is fairly narrow and specific. You either are, or you aren't having similar experiences. It is not as 'grey' (no pun intended) an area as some would think. Information such as I provided has a two-fold advantage as I see it. It helps in terms of diagnostics and it can provide some immediate relief to those who are questioning their own sanity. You guys can argue "protocols" and "standardization" and "research methods" I just wanted to tend to the lady. If I broke any rules or stepped on any toes it was unintentional. I have been working closely with a large number of people who find themselves in that same boat. I have become sensitive to the needs of those in the full throes of first discovery (making the connection between their memories and experiences and UFO's and abduction) that I have come to react like an old prize fighter. Rob rang the 'bell' and I jumped into my stance and headed into the ring. <G> No matter that it may turn out to be a false alarm, the important thing is to respond when it's a human being on the other end. 'People' must be attended to first, we can debate 'concepts' later. >Many abductees have vehemently objected to this kind of approach in the >past, and we will continue to do so! I agree Skye, a lot of stereotypes and such can have been created and continue to be perpetuated but like I said, I was only thinking of the lady. I'm not a 'researcher' I don't respond like one. I _am_ a 'human' and one that is highly skilled at working with folks in crisis situations, I responded to a humans need. I hope that the material I provided to Rob proves helpful, whether it's "the right thing to have done" or not in terms of research protocols _under these circumstances_ is a secondary matter (to me) as I have stated. Peace, John Velez, Eye yam 1 - 2 John Velez jvif@spacelab.net
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 1 Sighting of 'Something' From: stenger@spindle.net [Sharolyn Stenger] Date: Wed, 1 Oct 1997 00:01:37 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 11:19:46 -0400 Subject: Sighting of 'Something' Okay. I MAY have had a UFO sighting this evening, 9/30/97, at about 7:32 pm. My husband and I were in the car, less than a mile from home here in Arlington, Texas. A very big, bright, single light was moving rapidly toward the west. (We were traveling east.) I watched it for a few seconds while we sat at a traffic light. It appeared to be fairly low in the sky, less than 1000 feet, I'd say, and from my vantage point was about the size of a half dollar held at arm's length. If we had been a half mile further east I think it would have been directly over us. Suddenly it was just gone! I stared at the spot where it had been, expecting to see a plane that had banked around for airport approach, thereby aiming its landing light another direction, but there was NO airplane or anything. It just vanished. There is still enough natural light at 7:30 on a clear evening here to see aircraft with or without lights. We live very close to the Arlington Municipal Airport and see lots of traffic in and out of it. The big bright light I saw did not belong to one of the light aircraft from that airport. Now that I think about it, if it had been airplane landing lights, wouldn't there have been two? This was a single light. Whenever I am outdoors I always scan the sky for anything unusual, but I don't really expect to see anything but airplanes and heli- copters. The airspace over our house is Holding Pattern Central for DFW airport. I had supposed UFOs would stay away from such a busy airport. (Yes, John Velez. I keep forgetting that New York City, though smaller than Texas, does have busier airports. <G>) Sharolyn
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 1 Re: New Phoenix UFOs From: xalium@netwrx.net (Tom King) Date: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 23:48:29 EST Fwd Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 11:38:37 -0400 Subject: Re: New Phoenix UFOs >From: "Clark Hathaway" <earthwrk@doitnow.com> >To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: New Phoenix UFOs >Date: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 10:31:32 -0700 >> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >> >>From: xalium@netwrx.net (Tom King) >> >>Subject: New Phoenix UFOs >> >>Date: Sun, 28 Sep 1997 16:01:22 EST >> >Tommy, if anything comes out on the photos that you took, could >> >you please post a copy here to the list so I (all of us) can >> >check it out? >> >John Velez >> I have gotten the pictures back. I shot the rest of the roll off on black >> military helicopters flying around today. I just reviewed the video shot on Saturday Sept, 27. It was shot by Mike DeVarennes just after I got off the phone with him. What maybe a first for us, he seemed to videotape exactly what I saw, photographed, and reported to him. His video was shot around 10-20 minutes after my sighting. His video looks exactly like what we saw on that day. This object would have had to moved over his area around the same altitude in the sky near the same time to tape it in this fashion. Mike's footage lasts about 1 minute on tape, he lost the object as he tried to get a tripod out to put his camera on. On his tape it shows a blinking white object in the sky. Its blinking in a pattern of 1/30 of a second. Highlighted on and off in just frames. Soon afterwords it turns halfway black, looking like a Hockey Puck. It continues to flash a white/silver to black pattern over and over. Mike does a final zoom on 24x digital towards the end of the video. During this part a "Meir" looking disc is seen in several frames. After watching several hours of Mike's previous footage and becoming accustumed to the look and out of focus effect of his camera. This part of his footage does not appear to be a optical or out a focus effect. Also noted in his footage is the blinking effect captured on a zoom lens. In just a single frame this object appears to be very luminous. Then it darkens, then luminous in just frames. These are things we have never seen in the hours of balloon footage we have. Its simply impossible for a silver balloon to flip over in 1/30 of a second consistantly like this. This object a appears to be moving during the videotaping. I will post one still image tomorrow to this list. The rest will be posted on the OVNI Chapterhouse/ Phoenix UFO sight on Saturday night. A new flap has just started. Tom King, Skywatcher Arizona Skywatch director AZ Skywatch http://personal.netwrx.net/xalium/skywatch/skywatch.htm OVNI Chapterhouse at http://personal.netwrx.net/xalium/ufovideo.htm
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 1 Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words From: stenger@spindle.net [Sharolyn Stenger] Date: Wed, 1 Oct 1997 00:40:34 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 11:35:34 -0400 Subject: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words >From: c549597@showme.missouri.edu [Barbara Becker] >Date: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 09:47:38 -0500 >X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Win95; I) >To: ufo updates <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words >What happened to my critics? Steve, Don, Roger et al? I thought we >were going to have a good discussion. Do you not understand the >law? Or does your silence indicate agreement? >BB I'm not Steve, Don or Roger, but I do have an opinion about the Gulf Breeze photographs. In the beginning of the Gulf Breeze flap it was reported that the "Ed" who photographed the craft did not want his identity known. We've already had volumes of discussion here about witness anonymity. I understood his reticence then and was certainly not surprised when Barbara reported that he may have submitted photos to the newspaper under assumed names. It would seem to me that the only people who would have a gripe or grounds for a suit against Ed would be Bob and Jane. I don't care if the pictures carried the caption, "photographed by Little Lord Fauntleroy." The miraculous thing here is the photographic evidence of something unexplained in the skies or hovering over the roads in Gulf Breeze, Florida! Now, if you have some kind of proof that the photos taken by Ed, Bob, Dick, Jane, or Spot are fakes, trot it out. Thanks, Sharolyn - but I will admit I have participated in chatrooms using the aliases "Lady" or "Ladybug". So sue me.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 1 Re: ACC: Shulman & Schwartz are same person? From: Chris Penrose <penrose@sfc.keio.ac.jp> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 97 16:49:58 +0900 Fwd Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 11:40:25 -0400 Subject: Re: ACC: Shulman & Schwartz are same person? >Date: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 05:23:36 -0400 (EDT) >From: UFO Joe Daniels <ufojoe@cron-2.mco.on.ca> >To: UFO Updates <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: ACC: Shulman & Schwartz are same person? >I don't know if this is any help because I have not been folowing the >thread on ACC but I have the address of a representative from ACC that >is using the mail system at ix.netcom.com: (From Four11) Internic returns similar information, including the age of the domainname: mkultra% whois -h rs.internic.net compamerica.com American Computer Company (COMPAMERICA-DOM) 6 Commerce Drive Suite # 2000 Cranford, NJ 07016 USA Domain Name: COMPAMERICA.COM Administrative Contact: Shulman, Jack (JS1830) nicolai_tesla@MSN.COM 908-272-3330 Technical Contact, Zone Contact: Saxton, Jeffrey Mark (JS155) jeffs@SYSTEMV.COM 408-556-0440 (FAX) 408-556-0667 Billing Contact: Saxton, Jeffrey Mark (JS155) jeffs@SYSTEMV.COM 408-556-0440 (FAX) 408-556-0667 Record last updated on 14-Nov-95. Record created on 14-Nov-95. Database last updated on 30-Sep-97 05:07:43 EDT. Domain servers in listed order: NS1.SYSTEMV.COM 206.214.38.13 SYSV1.SYSTEMV.COM 199.35.37.2 The InterNIC Registration Services Host contains ONLY Internet Information (Networks, ASN's, Domains, and POC's). Please use the whois server at nic.ddn.mil for MILNET Information. Search for other documents from or mentioning: penrose | ufojoe |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 1 Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com> Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 07:27:38 -0400 Fwd Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 11:43:55 -0400 Subject: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words >From: c549597@showme.missouri.edu [Barbara Becker] >Date: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 09:47:38 -0500 >To: ufo updates <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words >What happened to my critics? Steve, Don, Roger et al? I thought we >were going to have a good discussion. Do you not understand the >law? Or does your silence indicate agreement? >BB Barbara- I understand law from a practical perspective, but wouldn't want to get into a legal discourse without seeking advice. I posted your paper to several Usenet groups, but it didn't make too much of an impression as of yet. But don't take that as a negative, since they're so busy screaming at each other that most probably didn't take time to notice it. I have just received a response from Bruce that I'll post later today. BTW, my criticism was in the delay in your putting your article up for discussion, not with the fact that you have an opinion, or evidence to present, on the subject. I guess this time, you'll have to have some patience. Steve
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 1 Re: Alfred's Odd Ode #186 From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com> Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 07:17:40 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 12:30:42 -0400 Subject: Re: Alfred's Odd Ode #186 Apology to MW #186 (For October 1, 1997) A year ago I sent a pulse; it's now so far from here=85 A whispered little signal perhaps too faint for us to hear. A small twelve lines of quatrain in a heartfelt, honest style -- Away some five point eight five nine, times ten to the twelfth, odd miles. Six trillion miles it now has flown in inky coal black space! Who knows what stuff it passed right by, in heedless headlong race. The comets of antiquity breathing star stuff as they die; Their tales growing longer as they use our sun to fry? I can hope for gainful contact as the sphere grows ever larger. It quadruples as the radius of it doubles with my ardor. Four times the space encompassed at around this time next year. One year from now and if things change=85a feeling I won't fear. One year from now, with damaged children, teaching long division. I only hope I'm there to teach without my own attrition. It could be that by that time they've found a way to listen, And understood, they seek me out to tell me what I'm missing. Just what we need, a space man's visit, to put the world on notice. We're not alone, we're being watched -- from way back they can quote us. Names are named, actions tallied, the hard facts on a list. A few have had their way too long -- they're likely to get pissed. And still my message hurries at the solemn speed of light. It is swimming passed near asteroids like a dolphin of the night. Composed of cryptic pulses and some thinking I hold valid, It lifts its eyes with questions, and it understands the squalid. A vibration in the ether, it's as true as bursting suns. It's for ending all the ignorance that has had us on the run. It's for holding up its end, and taking on 'the man'. For a truer view of that which is, we had better understand! It swims with other messages of different kinds of stripe. In Tom Van Flandren's ether it eschews the common tripe. It hooks and jabs, the gloves come off -- it goes right for the throat. It needles and it bickers, and it tries to get your goat. The rage you feel at my expression is just a ratio of degrees. It's pride before a fall, mayhap, when you skin your knobby knees. A measure of your rage is sure and well within your sight. The degree to which you're pissed, perhaps=85 the degree to which I'm right? And it's not being right that I say is the issue. And maybe you see me eye dabbing with tissue. But fairness is lacking in what we must trust. Our synergy is lost; we can't parry; we can't thrust! Our species devolves, and we lose some more light. We wallow in excess, we are gelded with spite. We lose the proud gains of a billion year history! We return to our caves, eating tree bark in misery. This is true while single men could turn it all around. This is true while naked wealth is laying on the ground! This is true as cosmic signals inflate their globes in space, This remains whatever happens to our dust mote, petty race. Lehmberg@snowhill.com On a CB rig -- "breaker breaker" -- a year almost to the day -- twelve lines on a lark that still rush outward at the speed of light, time forever frozen for it -- 5. 859 x 10 ^12 miles (almost 6 trillion miles) away in an expanding bubble. The volume of it quadruples every time the radius doubles=85whatever could have heard it? I don't think space has the sterility that some would have for it, do you? Other expressions I have made on the radio include, "Cease fire," and "This is chalk two, I need rockets in the tree line, now." This was back in a simpler, darker time when I was trying to sound like Chuck Yeager, and had dreams of being an astronaut=85 =85Current dream is to be the first poet in space -- <heavy sigh> I do hereby volunteer. <A-heh> (Maybe if Bill coughs up that billion=85) -- Explore the Alien View? http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/arecibo/46/ "I cleave the heavens, and soar to the infinite. What others see from afar, I leave far behind me." - Giordano Bruno, while burning at the fundamentalist's stake, and now a bubble of expanding expression. =B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1= =B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1= =B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1 Government or Social Harassment REPORT - Presently, "ZERO" Personal HARASSMENT; however, the harassment index is infinite for each of us. Consider the pollution of the ether waves where I've made my own contribution?
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 1 Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words From: "Roger R. Prokic" <rprokic@ibm.net> Date: Wed, 01 Oct 97 05:37:30 Fwd Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 11:44:56 -0400 Subject: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words >From: c549597@showme.missouri.edu >Date: Mon, 29 Sep 1997 10:19:00 -0500 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words >Also, I want you to explain to me why, if Ed Walters could >use both a 35mm and a "Hot Shot" cameras, why he >continued to use the Polaroid Colorpak? Especially >since a 35mm would produce better pictures. Why would >he feel it necessary to conceal his ability to use other >cameras? The only important question should be "Aside from all these things you point out, is there any reason to believe that the photos of the Gulf Breeze UFO that Ed took is not of a real UFO.. in other words is there any evidence that the photos are of a hoax"? I don't believe I've yet heard that the photos are not legit... Roger R. Prokic Telecommunications Engineer Lockheed Martin Astronautics Denver, Colorado USA
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 1 Re: Phoenix Sightings Update From: "WHITE" <mjawhite@digitaldune.net> [John White] Date: Wed, 1 Oct 1997 06:55:05 -0700 Fwd Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 13:27:11 -0400 Subject: Re: Phoenix Sightings Update > From: William.Hamilton@pcsmail.pcshs.com > Date: Tuesday, 30 September 1997 10:02am MT > To: updates@globalserve.net > Subject: Phoenix Sightings Update To Bill, who gave us--- > PHOENIX SIGHTINGS UPDATE Thank you for the update. Flight record info on A-10s would seem to rule out the most probable source of any flare argument. That's good news because it brings us closer to the "impossible" which is left when all the "possibles" are eliminated. It was this event reported by you which brought up for me the whole UFO debate. Although my thinking was decidedly noncomittal (even skeptical) at the outset, it is becoming more evident to me that events such as the Phoenix event cannot be explained by resort to begging the question with the pronouncment: "Well, since we can't explain it, it must be some natural phenomenon we don't understand." Thoughts on the possible 'MIB' encounter: Anyone knocking on doors while wearing a black suit in Phoenix during the summer has an obvious mental disorder and is, no doubt, dangerous to others, and is best avoided. Curtis did the right thing in giving up the video tape. Even though tapes can be erased, manipulated, tweaked, and any number of interesting other things, Curtis should be asked to write down what he saw, because memories fade. Thank you, again, for the update. John White mjawhite@digitaldune.net Search for other documents from or mentioning: mjawhite |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 1 Re: The Nature of 'Alien Abductions'? From: "R.Bull" <RAB@cadcentre.co.uk> [Robert Bull] Date: Wed, 01 Oct 97 14:55:00 BST Fwd Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 13:31:42 -0400 Subject: Re: The Nature of 'Alien Abductions'? " ..... preserving and improving their race, on the one hand by carrying off human children..... to become united with them, and on the other hand by obtaining the milk and fostering care of human mothers for their own offspring." Is this Budd Hopkins talking about Debie Tomey (as she was then, aka Kathie Davies) in "Intruders", 1988 ? No, look in Hartland, Edwin Sydney, 'The Science of Fairy Tales' (London, 1891).* (And yes, I've read 'Intruders', and David Jacobs, and John Mack, I mean you have to be open-minded about these things.....) *Quote from Harpur, Patrick, 'Daimonic Reality' (London, 1995). Should be compulsory reading for all 'ufologists'.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 1 Ed Walters, the Model and Tommy Smith From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com> Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 10:25:37 -0400 Fwd Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 13:43:56 -0400 Subject: Ed Walters, the Model and Tommy Smith As long as we're discussing Gulf Breeze, you may want to visit http://www.skiesare.demon.co.uk/ah-ewmod.htm
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 1 Re: Questions for abductees From: rfsignal@sprynet.com Date: Wed, 1 Oct 1997 07:06:21 -0700 Fwd Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 13:36:04 -0400 Subject: Re: Questions for abductees >Date: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 08:03:11 -0700 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Skye Turell <turel33@west.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Questions for abductees >>Date: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 01:36:18 -0500 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Questions for abductees >>>From: "R.Bull" <RAB@cadcentre.co.uk> [Rob Bull] >>>To: "'UFO UpDates'" <updates@globalserve.net> >>>Subject: Questions for abductees >>>Date: Mon, 29 Sep 97 15:41:00 BST >>You may want to check out a copy of Dave Jacobs book, "Secret >>Lives" for a listing of commonly reported phenomena or, you can How many times have ordinary people broken out of the shell of their lives to scream that there is something different, something so strange and incomprehensible that it defies explanation? Well, that is exactly what is going on with abductees, contactees, and so on. So, in the great order of things, please explain how this process comes about. I, for one, have my own book of stories to tell. And, if I think you are willing to listen, I will talk or type about my experiences. Whether or not you are judgemental about the dialogue is a matter that I personally am not concerned with. I can make many extrordinary claims, say all kinds of things, with only my memories to back me up as proof. And, I make mistakes, sometimes by accident, sometimes on purpose, in the retelling of my stories. Are those mistakes of any concequence to me? No. But the very literal accuracy demanded by serious investigators, is missing. It is this excuse that anyone can use to believe or not to believe what the content of my dialogue contains in certain generalizations and specifics. I suppose that is the trouble with witnesses of any kind, especially if it concerns 'unnatural' or 'extraterrestial' in any way. I am no different than thousands of other mundane, normal, humans who have had something go bump in their lives. It isn't the sort of thing that happens only in the night, or in the day, or in the town of Oswego. It is a series of stories, experiences and so on of those thousands of people that do have generalizations that are not always evident. So, for anyone to question and mock the honest and personal recountings, is failing to respect the sincerity of the very human person. Do you not see beyond the lies and hoaxes that are told? Do you discount a story because you personally cannot understand the verity of its extrordinary content, or perhaps, discover a slight inaccuracy of details? Does this very act actually nullify the experience of the abductee or contactee? Yeah, right! UFOs are the soap operas of the century. All of the ghosts have been banished, all of the creatures of the world have been found, catalogued and set on a course of controlled extermination. So what's new? Why, UFOs of course. Who believes? Who doesn't believe? Set your lines and live for your lives, the stories will astound you. Be that as it may, let me raise a first point. All of the abductions start with children. By the time those children grow up, their lives are so set that there is no way their courses can be altered. So, how do you think you appear in the eyes of those children? Take care for now, Cathy Johnson Search for other documents from or mentioning: rfsignal | turel33 |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 1 Recovering 'Memory' is Banned by Psychiatrists From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 1997 12:43:33 -0700 Fwd Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 13:50:35 -0400 Subject: Recovering 'Memory' is Banned by Psychiatrists In light of the discussions of recovered memories, this may be of interest: ---- The following article by Celia Hall, Medical Editor of The (London) Daily Telegraph appeared today, October 1, 1997, page 6: Recovering Memory is Banned by Psychiatrists A ban on using any method to recover memories of child abuse has been imposed on members of the Royal College of Psychiatrists. They face a series of sanctions if they persist in using the controversial techniques to treat their patients. The publication of professional guidelines comes after months of internal arguments over details contained in a report on recovered memory which will not now be published until next year. Psychiatrists who continue to use methods to unearth memories of past sexual abuse would ultimately face being reported to the General Medical Council for professional misconduct. The RCP regulates the training of psychiatrists and admits doctors to its membership. Sanctions would include removing training status from senior psychiatrists, removing doctors from membership and reporting psychiatrists to the GMC, said Prof Sydney Brandon, a fellow the college and convenor of the report, Reported Recovered Memories of Child Sexual Abuse. When the specialist sections of the royal college failed to agree on the full report, commissioned in 1994, it was agreed that guidelines taken from it would be published instead. The agreed guidelines published today have become college policy. When the report is published next year, it will not be as a college document but as a paper signed by individual authors. Nonetheless the guidelines are firmly against the practice of "recovering memory" because of concerns that the techniques employed can give rise to strongly-held false memories and lead to false accusations. So-called false memory syndrome has led to adults making uncorroborated reports of childhood sexual abuse by fathers and other people years after the alleged events. The royal college guidelines say there is no evidence that recovered memory techniques can reveal memory of real events or accurately elaborate factual information about past experiences. The guidelines say that psychiatrists should resist "vigorously" moves by adult patients to report allegations or suspicions to the authorities. Telling the police of "spontaneous reports" by children or adolescents of recent or current allegations is mandatory, psychiatrists are reminded. Prof Brandon said yesterday: "It is the aim of this report [the guidelines] to provide our members and fellows with balanced and practical guidance with a view to promoting good practice. "We clearly came to the conclusion that it is possible in the intense relationship that can develop between a therapist and a patient to produce entirely false memory." Dr Sheilagh Davies, chairman of the college's Faculty of Psychotherapy, one of the sections unhappy with the original report, said: "Events in people's lives do trigger memories. In therapy, memories can arise which it is impossible to corroborate. The guidelines take a common sense approach". ------ Mark Cashman, creator of The Temporal Doorway at http://www.geocities.com/~mcashman - Original digital art, writing, and UFO research - Author of SF novels available at... http://www.infohaus.com/access/by-seller/The_Temporal_Doorway_Storefront ------
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 1 Re: ACC: Surprising New Development From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 1997 17:34:55 +0200 (MET DST) Fwd Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 13:45:33 -0400 Subject: Re: ACC: Surprising New Development >Date: Sun, 28 Sep 1997 15:54:36 +0900 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Wes Thomas <west@sonic.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: ACC: Surprising New Development >Ciao, kiddies. Keep playing, the Bell will sound very soon, and you can >all go home, school will soon be out! Better prey that the boogie man isn't >outside, just down around the next corner, waiting for you to come biking by, >and SMASH, BAM, BOOM... Game Over! >Such is the nature of your lives. >[END OF FORWARD FROM acsa@ix.netcom.com] >Is "Bob Wolf" also an experiment? And who is the mysterious "consultant" >and has a trusted investigator actually met with him personally and verified >his background? >What's amazing to me about the bizarre ACC story is why anybody takes >an anonymous "consultant" and posts from an unknown person seriously. >It's a revealing commentary on gullibility and lack of critical thinking >in the UFO community. >- Wes Thomas Wes, A little belated response to this post you sent to save this thread from being derailed. The posts about ACC's consultant simply reported that, according to people from ACC, this man had said such and such, and then such and such. Again, ACCORDING TO PEOPLE FROM ACC. Btw. anonymity in Ufology is nothing new and I think you should know that. But never mind, someday I'll write a book titled 'One million ways to kill a UFO Case'. According to my notes this will become entry 283,471. __________________________________________ / Met vriendelijke groet/Best wishes \ Henny van der Pluijm hvdp@worldonline.nl Technology Pages http://www.worldonline.nl/~hvdp \______________________________________/
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 1 Re: Questions for abductees From: clark@canby.mn.frontiercomm.net [Jerome Clark] Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 11:32:01 PDT Fwd Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 13:48:50 -0400 Subject: Re: Questions for abductees > Date: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 21:59:01 -0400 > From: Peregrine Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith] > Subject: Re: Questions for abductees > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > The Duke of Mendoza presents his compliments. > >Date: Mon, 29 Sep 1997 21:16:50 -0700 > >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > >From: Skye Turell <turel33@west.net> > >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Questions for abductees > >>From: "R.Bull" <RAB@cadcentre.co.uk> [Rob Bull] > >>To: "'UFO UpDates'" <updates@globalserve.net> > >>Subject: Questions for abductees > >>Date: Mon, 29 Sep 97 15:41:00 BST > >You *should not* be trying to determine "if her experience is consistent > >with classic abduction report[s]." You should be trying to determine > >what *her experience* was. > Now with that I do agree. And one place to start is the annals of > so-unhelpfully-called "abnormal psychology", not the folklore that > calls itself "abduction research". At any rate try to eliminate every > other possible explanation before plumping for the least probable. > Yours &c > Ponderosa D. Melonfield > Corn Pone Duke, et al., Does anybody, including yourself, know the meaning of the phrase "the folklore that calls itself `abduction research'"? All of us, including the undersigned (as you kindly reminded me recently), are capable of writing (and thinking) in haste, and I daresay you are doing so here. There is folklore about abductions, but the experience of abduction is not "folklore," as you yourself imply when you suggest that "abnormal psychology" is the be-all and end-all of the question. You are too intellectually sophisticated, I should think, to use "folklore" and "nonsense" as if the two were interchangeable, for another thing. Labeling "abduction research," whatever else can be said against or for it, "folklore" is to mischaracterize the nature of both, or to find meanings for these words not immediately apparent to the rest of us. All you are saying, I guess, is that you don't like people to research abductions and come to conclusions about them you don't like. It is foolish, in any event, to seek to medicalize all anomalous experience, and I really don't see what "abnormal psychology" has to tell us about the more puzzling abduction cases. Some marginal ones, perhaps. For a splendid critique of the limitations of the ab-psych approach, see Stuart Appelle's "The Abduction Experience: A Critical Evaluation of Theory and Evidence," JUFOS 6 (1995/1996), pp. 29-78, or David J. Hufford's The Terror That Comes in the Night (University of Pennsylvania Press, 1982). Declaring "abnormal psychology" every time we hear something we don't like is the functional equivalent of shouting "shut up." Emotionally satisfying, no doubt, but not intellectually productive. Jerry Clark Search for other documents from or mentioning: clark | 101653.2205 |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 1 The sky over Roswell From: Ted Viens <drtedv@smart1.net> Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 12:18:46 -0700 Fwd Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 14:05:34 -0400 Subject: The sky over Roswell 5th July 1997 Roswell, New Mexico. The Roswell Alien Crash Street Circus and Road Show was winding down for another day. Realizing that this Pauper's Pilgrimage to EBE Nirvana would have to find shelter for the night, I drove my brother and myself to my selected rest stop for a restful overnight sleep in my '81 Toyota Corolla. This was a quiet spot some 8,000 feet up the northern side of El Capitan near the base of the telco microwave towers. The primitive dirt road is maintained some two thirds of the way up. The final third is nothing more than a rut hacked into the mountainside where reasonable men are expected to pass only in utility trucks. But then the skills of driving my street cars up the abandoned logging trails deep in the Green Mountains late in my adolescence cheerfully broke from their slumber. Carefully navigating the washed out gullies and the prominent rock ridges, crawling slowly up the mountainside, I eventually pulled the compact car to a stop at the short spur that goes to the towers. My expectations were small and mundane. I wanted to gaze at the clear night sky and the Milky Way so hard to see from the heart of Houston. I made sure to arrive at the crest by sunset so that I would be there through the prime visible satellite viewing time of from sunset to nightfall some hour or so later. I brought my shortwave portable so that I could experience the rare pleasure of shortwave listening in a quiet signal environment. The possiblility of seeing any Unexplainable Aerial Phenomenon struggled to rise to a casual thought. The early night was cloudless and the view of the starry skies was as rewarding as could be expected. As the sun dropped below the horizon, casual glances through the unobstructed northern sky failed to catch the slow glittering sweep of any passing satellite. Local commuter flights into the Roswell airfield passed nearly at eye level. The passengers could almost be seen in the dimly lit cabins. Regional flights passed at twice the altitude. And twice again as high, a cross country flight could be seen. The telltale blinking flight lights always betraying the source. My interest in shortwave listening suffered from the effects of only getting a few hours sleep in the past thirty six. Not to mention the irony of thinking that a microwave relay station would be a quiet radio environment. So, why, do you ask, have I dragged you through all this dialogue? Prime satellite viewing time had passed uneventfully. The sky had become deep black from east to west. Sitting on the concrete foundation of the microwave tower, I again glanced straight up when, at the zenith, I finally saw a light moving in the sky. It resembled closely the brightest stars in size and brilliance. It passed from directly overhead to the eastern horizon undiminished and unswerving in about a minutes time. Ho-hum you say. Hum, I thought. So many plausible common explanations, so little to cause notice of the event. But then I thought some more. It remained bright to the horizon. If it was lit by the sun, it would have passed into the earth's penumbra at thirty to forty degrees above the horizon and blinked out suddenly. This object must have been self illuminated. It continued to appear like a bright star. It was either very small, very far away or both. In barely a minute, it went from overhead to the horizon. This kept nibbling at my curiosity. Could it be a satellite? The higher a satellite, the slower its apparent motion. What would be the shortest time that a satellite could move from the zenith to the horizon? This would have to be a satellite in a low orbit risking decay and destruction. Somewhat more secure would be a satellite in an oblong orbit passing at its perigee. I fired up Micro Orbiter 3.0 and searched through the master satellite list for the satellite that would be expected to pass overhead the fastest. Today, 30 September 1997, it would be the satellite named 1997054C. Moving the observer to the perigee, computing the overhead passes, I discovered that the shortest time for a pass above 80 degrees elevation was still six minutes forty seconds. It would take over three minutes to go from overhead to the horizon. The light in the night sky passing over the Roswell festivities could not possibly be a satellite. What then? Ahhhh, what about the SR71? I grabbed the calculator, pen and paper. The SR71 passes 16 miles above us at 2,250 miles per hour. Sketching the path of the SR71 over the earth, cranking out some trig on the calc and out pops a path of over 700 miles from horizon to horizon. Mashing some more numbers and we learn that it would take nearly twenty minutes to do this or some ten minutes for an SR71 to do what my light in the sky did in about one. Scratch off the SR71. My flying light is becoming curiouser and curiouser. We have learned that it must be self illuminated. It glows brightly in the earth's shadow. It cannot be a satellite. It crosses the heaven at least twice as quickly as any satellite can. It cannot be any known spy plane. It moves ten times as fast as the SR71. Could it be some unkown military aerial technology? Houston can be a wonderful place to be during a nightime rentry of the Shuttle. That is, if the sky is clear and if the rentry path passes overhead. Houston is about three quarters of the way along the rentry. Grasping at foggy memories, here the Shuttle is slowing from 8,000 to 6,000 mph and dropping from thirty to fifteen miles high. Even at these speeds, it takes four minutes to travel from horizon to horizon or still twice as long from overhead to the skyline as the light over Roswell. Most memorable is the ionization trail that follows the Shuttle. It is a glittering tube half as wide as your thumbnail at armslength. It lingers in the upper atmosphere. As the Shuttle drops below the skyline of downtown Houston, the ionization trail is only beginning to fade from the western horizon. An ionization trail is a purely mechanical phenomenon. Any aircraft faster than mach 5 or so passes through the air so quickly it literally beats electrons off of the molecules. As they recombine, a glow is given off. The light over Roswell left no trail at all. If suborbital, it would have been travelling above mach 10. It is safe for us to deduce that it was travelling above the upper atmosphere or truly some exotic technology. Isn't science wonderful. My observation of a distant light moving in a straight line high in the night sky over the Roswell Alien Crash Street Circus and Road Show seemed at casual glance so easily dismissable. Ah, but bring in the simple tools of hard science and things become perplexing. The object was self illuminated. It passed from zenith to horizon in less than a minute. If in space, it was violating the rules of orbital mechanics much to the distress of Kepler and Newton. If in the atmosphere, it was exceeding the limits of any known or imagined earth aircraft or technology. Its movement only showed it to be a powered flight beyond the limits of known science. What could it be? Beats the pants off me... A light passes in the sky over Roswell, New Mexico. Simple science eliminates the possibility of any known technology. Could it have been a commemorative flight? I cannot demonstrate what it might have been. I can only rule out what it cannot be. Perhaps other easily dismissed distant lights moving in the night sky should be investigated more carefully under the scrutiny of hard science. A footnote. Satellite 1997054C appears to be an interstage section of the launch of a group of Iridium global cellular phone satellites. It will soon decay and come burning to ground. A quick study of the NORAD two line element set of satellites reveals that for every Iridium launch, two or three sections will come flaming to earth in the following weeks. Iridium and other low earth orbit communication satellite launches will take place almost monthly for the next few years. UFO reporting services should prepare for an unprecedent rise in crash and burn reports for a while. copyright 1997 any publication proposals warmly received... (will be ot of contact for the next few days.) Bye... Ted..
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 1 Re: Witness Anonymity From: clark@canby.mn.frontiercomm.net [Jerome Clark] Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 12:22:50 PDT Fwd Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 14:15:06 -0400 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity > Date: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 21:53:10 -0400 > From: Peregrine Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith] > Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > The Duke of Mendoza presents his compliments. > >From: clark@canby.mn.frontiercomm.net [Jerome Clark] > >Date: Mon, 22 Sep 1997 15:52:33 PDT > >To: updates@globalserve.net > >Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: A New Question about Witness Anonymity > I have been staring at this message every so often over the > last eight days trying to figure out what it is supposed to convey. > >Sorry, Duke, but anybody who would accuse a skeptic of being > >"witty" need only read Phil (Ufology Is Tantamount to Communism) > >Klass, when the just-named thinks he's being so, to be disabused > >of this strange notion. Unca Phil has all the wit of a particularly > >unfunny 11-year-old. > Very odd. Phil Klass is not funny (although I find him riotous, but > there again I do enjoy irony; most of us who went to English boarding > schools had a well-developed sense thereof by the age of 11), ergo > all skeptics are, so to speak, witless? Is that what it means? Or > does it mean that blood sports in ufology are okay as long as the > hounds are baying only at skeptics over 70 years old? Huh? I do agree with you, though: Unca Phil is indeed "riotous." > Very odd indeed. Phil Klass thinks - or once said - ufology is > tantamount to communism. Interesting comparison if you're intrigued > by secular alternatives to religion. Maybe Phil didn't mean that. > Maybe quoting people out of context is not always illuminating. Maybe > John Mack meant something very profound when he said (to Jerry Clark, > indeed - I think) that "Anti-communism is a form of racism". Maybe > we can all agree, on the data presented by these two luminaries, that > ufology is a form of anti-racism? That would be the first positive > statement the field has made since Allen Hynek suggested that some UFOs > that some people saw somewhere once were "swamp gas", and meant it. > On the other hand, where are all the black ufologists? What? The only thing I can add here, of no particular interest to anyone, is that Mack made his strange observation in the context of a complaint about a column by neoconservative pundit Charles Krauthammer, who'd savaged Mack for expressing the above-quoted idiocy. Perhaps of more interest is my "Big (Space) Brothers" (IUR, March/April 1994) wherein I discuss Mack's leftish/anti-anti-Communist/multiculturalist politics and their apparent relationship to his idiosyncratic reading of the abduction phenomenon. > Odder and odder, really. Why does Phil Klass get a bashing when I am > merely wondering aloud why Mrs Linda Cortibaloni thinks being witty > is tantamount to being wicked? Why does Phil Klass get dumped with > ad hominem contumely when not only is his name not mentioned in my > post but my post did mention that Mr B. Hopkins persistently mentioned > Mrs Linda Corsairbanana's real name - or one of them - in a public > forum, albeit one slightly more distant from Manhattan than Albuquerque (or > wherever) where Linda Cuddlytarantula first tasted the sweet wine > of public adulation? Where does Linda Cortile object to witticism as a general principle? What evidence is there that skeptics -- with the honorable exception of you, of course, if that is what you are -- are especially witty? What evidence is there that UFO proponents and witnesses object to humor? (I seem to recall your and my sharing lots of laughs together. Correct me if these are false memories. I have many other memories, confabulated or otherwise, of laughs with colleagues, not the least of them the now routinely demonized Budd Hopkins. What any of this has to do with anything is beyond me, but you did bring up the subject.) Why is it ad hominem to note Klass' equation of ufologists with Communists and Nazis and not ad hominem for Klass so to equate? Why does the phrase "selective outrage" come to mind? Have you any evidence, by the way, that Klass is averse to "the sweet wine of public adulation"? And if he isn't (as I suspect), so what? Some people love the spotlight. Others shrink from same. It's a personal characteristic, not a character flaw, and tells us nothing particularly interesting about either Klass or Cortile. C'mon, my friend. > > >If we can no longer promise a witness anonymity because > > >down the line somebody may decree that he or she doesn't deserve > > >it, then let me be the first to urge that no UFO witnesses desiring > > >privacy step forward ever again. > >Of course the sentence ought to have opened "If we can no longer > >promise to honor...." Satisfied? > Absolutely. Everyone's mind, like John Renbourne's, when they "lay > down at night, just tryin' to take some rest" may get "to wanderin' > like those wild geese in the West". I don't entirely agree with the > sentiment, but if the news from San Marino is correct (and I know > some who say it surely is, and there are weirder rumors yet now > afoot from elsewhere), then Mr B. Hopkins is the last man you should > trust with your real name. Did Crazy George have a point after all? No. By the way, as surely you know, the blues verse you quote is a floating folk lyric, long predating John Renbourn (no "e"). > I look forward to the customary deafening silence on this, of course. Stunned, not merely customary, silence. Of course. > PS: Jerry, what *is* the story on Terry O'Leary of Larson fame? What story? I wish there were one. He's always been the missing testimony (except as gleaned from the brief telephone interview to which he consented) in the case. At the time I wrote up the original article (in UFO Report long ago), I gave him the pseudonym "Larry Mahoney" for reasons that escape me. Writing the story again nearly two decades later, I decided to use his real name. Cheers, Jerry Clark
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 1 Re: Christianity Online The Truth is Out There From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@ucs.orst.edu> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 1997 10:23:42 -0700 (PDT) Fwd Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 14:18:55 -0400 Subject: Re: Christianity Online The Truth is Out There > From: RSchatte@aol.com [Rebecca] > Date: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 14:33:37 -0400 (EDT) > To: updates@globalserve.net > Subject: Christianity Online "The Truth is Out There > The Truth is Out There > The X-Files gives us tons of paranormal thrills anc chills. But > where is this roller-coaster ride taking us? > by Chris Lutes > [...] > Yet amid all the imaginative and unreal stories are hints of the reality of a > supernatural world. But unfortunately, the supernatural presented in The X-Fil > es most often deals with dark, evil and occult themes--things the Bible warns > us to avoid: > "Let no one be found among you," says the writer of Deuteronomy, "... who > practices divination or sorcery, who interprets omens, engages in witchcraft, > or casts spells, or who is a medium or spiritist or who consults the dead." > Messing around with the "dark side" of the supernatural is far from harmless. > In his best-selling book, People of the Lie, psychiatrist M. Scott Peck > claims there is a strong tie between demon possession and involvement in the > occult: > [...] > One incredible sighting. In the first chapter of Ezekiel, the writer reveals > this awesome "sighting": > "I looked, and I saw a windstorm coming out of the north--an immense cloud > with flashing lightning and surrounded by brilliant light. The center of the > fire looked like glowing metal, and in the fire was what looked like four > living creatures. In appearance their form was that of a man, but each of > them had four faces and four wings. Their legs were straight; their feet were > like those of a calf and gleamed like burnished bronze" (verses 4-7). > Throughout the chapter, the writer offers detail after detail of what he saw. > And what did he see? Well, this was no UFO. It was a very identifiable and > awesome sighting of God's glory: > "This was the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the Lord. When I saw > it, I fell facedown, and I heard the voice of one speaking" (verse 28). > [...] Hello All, This posting by Rebecca may at first seem offensive or irrelevant for this List. But on second thought, it reminds us that our views on the UFO phenomenon are heavily colored by our particular religious or philosophical beliefs, or lack of them. If each us on the list had an honest summary of their religious/philosophical beliefs archived in some auxiliary file associated with UFO Updates, then from time to time we could each look up the other's belief system to see where they're coming from. But as stated, that's an impossible IF. It would seem that Rebecca S. is in considerable or strong support of the views of the article's writer, Chris Lutes. If so, this implies either a belief in the devil or a disbelief in the paranormal events involved in UFO abductions/contacts, or both. That is, aliens who communicate via mental telepathy, who can levitate themselves and their victims, who can pass through material walls, etc., are then to be dismissed as fictions of the imagination or of some psychological disease, or else to be attributed to the works of the devil. Obviously, one's beliefs on such matters will be of overriding importance in coming to any decision on the validity of the witness's experiences and supportive evidence. Similarly, if one is either a Jew or a Christian with strong acceptance of the Old Testament, he/she will not likely wish to make a link between "pillars of fire," "pillars of cloud," "sky chariots," being carried "up by a whirlwind into heaven" ... and UFOs. That's because it would mean that the God of the Hebrew Scriptures had only been an ET -- one with the title of El -- and had not been true God, which would be a great blasphemy. This is not withstanding the books by Barry Downing, Joe Lewels and others on the topic. And so a ufologist with such beliefs may well not be interested in investigating UFO cases that date back into previous centuries. He/she may then not even be willing to look into UFO cases involving sightings of, or interactions with, aliens. Similarly, even a strictly New Testament Christian will not likely wish to give any credence to witnesses who report having had an out-of-body experience connected with a UFO-entity, or to having been informed of reality of reincarnation and thus talking like a New Ager. This is despite numerous books on case studies of the latter topic by Ian Stevenson and by numerous hypno-therapists. Such beliefs could even lead one to question the reality of the resurrection as opposed to the possibility of survival of the crucifixion -- a great heresy for Christians. And so such ufologists may be incapable of exploring some UFO abductions in depth. So I see a lot of relevance for ufology in Rebecca's posting. Jim Deardorff
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 2 Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words From: c549597@showme.missouri.edu [Barbara Becker] Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 13:17:18 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 02 Oct 1997 09:50:05 -0400 Subject: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > From: stenger@spindle.net [Sharolyn Stenger] > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words > Date: Wed, 1 Oct 1997 00:40:34 -0500 > >From: c549597@showme.missouri.edu [Barbara Becker] > >Date: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 09:47:38 -0500 > >X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Win95; I) > >To: ufo updates <updates@globalserve.net> > >Subject: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words > >What happened to my critics? Steve, Don, Roger et al? I thought we > >were going to have a good discussion. Do you not understand the > >law? Or does your silence indicate agreement? > >BB > I'm not Steve, Don or Roger, but I do have an opinion about the Gulf > Breeze photographs. > In the beginning of the Gulf Breeze flap it was reported that the "Ed" > who photographed the craft did not want his identity known. We've > already had volumes of discussion here about witness anonymity. I > understood his reticence then and was certainly not surprised when > Barbara reported that he may have submitted photos to the newspaper > under assumed names. When the Believer Bill photogrpah was submitted, Walters identitiy was known. All he had to say was , "Gee whiz folks, I took this photo with my trusty Hot Shot, LOOK, it looks just like the ones I took with the Colorpak. Go figure." > It would seem to me that the only people who would have a gripe or > grounds for a suit against Ed would be Bob and Jane. I don't care > if the pictures carried the caption, "photographed by Little Lord > Fauntleroy." The miraculous thing here is the photographic evidence > of something unexplained in the skies or hovering over the roads in > Gulf Breeze, Florida! Now, if you have some kind of proof that the > photos taken by Ed, Bob, Dick, Jane, or Spot are fakes, trot it out. 1) Ed Walters copyrighted photographs allegedly taken by someone else. That at the least would make him a thief. 2) Ed Walters copyrighted photographs taken by himself. That at the least makes him a liar. Pick one. BB
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 2 Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words From: c549597@showme.missouri.edu [Barbara Becker] Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 13:21:06 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 02 Oct 1997 09:50:12 -0400 Subject: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words > Date: Wed, 01 Oct 97 05:37:30 > From: "Roger R. Prokic" <rprokic@ibm.net> > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words > >From: c549597@showme.missouri.edu > >Date: Mon, 29 Sep 1997 10:19:00 -0500 > >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words > >Also, I want you to explain to me why, if Ed Walters could > >use both a 35mm and a "Hot Shot" cameras, why he > >continued to use the Polaroid Colorpak? Especially > >since a 35mm would produce better pictures. Why would > >he feel it necessary to conceal his ability to use other > >cameras? > The only important question should be "Aside from all these > things you point out, is there any reason to believe that the > photos of the Gulf Breeze UFO that Ed took is not of a real UFO.. > in other words is there any evidence that the photos are of a > hoax"? > Yes, Independent (that means he looked at the photos WITHOUT an agenda) photoanalyst Wm. Hyzer, however his report was disregarded by MUFON. BB
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 2 Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words From: c549597@showme.missouri.edu [Barbara Becker] Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 13:26:45 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 02 Oct 1997 09:49:50 -0400 Subject: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words > Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 07:27:38 -0400 > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com> > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words > >From: c549597@showme.missouri.edu [Barbara Becker] > >Date: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 09:47:38 -0500 > >To: ufo updates <updates@globalserve.net> > >Subject: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words > >What happened to my critics? Steve, Don, Roger et al? I thought we > >were going to have a good discussion. Do you not understand the > >law? Or does your silence indicate agreement? > >BB > Barbara- > I understand law from a practical perspective, but wouldn't want > to get into a legal discourse without seeking advice. I have given you the law and a website. If anyone wants to understand completely what I have said the information is there. snip > I have just received a response from Bruce that I'll post later > today. Bruce has a computer, why doesnt he post his own message? Are you going to run interrence for him forever? BB
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 2 Re: Christianity Online The Truth is Out There From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 1997 20:05:25 +0100 Fwd Date: Thu, 02 Oct 1997 10:07:09 -0400 Subject: Re: Christianity Online The Truth is Out There >Date: Wed, 1 Oct 1997 10:23:42 -0700 (PDT) >From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@ucs.orst.edu> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Christianity Online The Truth is Out There >> From: RSchatte@aol.com [Rebecca] >> Date: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 14:33:37 -0400 (EDT) >> To: updates@globalserve.net >> Subject: Christianity Online "The Truth is Out There >> The Truth is Out There >> The X-Files gives us tons of paranormal thrills anc chills. But >Hello All, >This posting by Rebecca may at first seem offensive or irrelevant for this >List. But on second thought, it reminds us that our views on the UFO >phenomenon are heavily colored by our particular religious or >philosophical beliefs, or lack of them. If each us on the list had an >honest summary of their religious/philosophical beliefs archived in some >auxiliary file associated with UFO Updates, then from time to time we >could each look up the other's belief system to see where they're coming >from. But as stated, that's an impossible IF. Hello Jim The world is full of IF's. >It would seem that Rebecca S. is in considerable or strong support of the >views of the article's writer, Chris Lutes. If so, this implies either a >belief in the devil or a disbelief in the paranormal events involved in >UFO abductions/contacts, or both. That is, aliens who communicate via >mental telepathy, who can levitate themselves and their victims, who can >pass through material walls, etc., are then to be dismissed as fictions of >the imagination or of some psychological disease, or else to be attributed >to the works of the devil. Obviously, one's beliefs on such matters will >be of overriding importance in coming to any decision on the validity of >the witness's experiences and supportive evidence. >Similarly, if one is either a Jew or a Christian with strong acceptance of >the Old Testament, he/she will not likely wish to make a link between >"pillars of fire," "pillars of cloud," "sky chariots," being carried "up >by a whirlwind into heaven" ... and UFOs. That's because it would mean >that the God of the Hebrew Scriptures had only been an ET -- one with the >title of El -- and had not been true God, which would be a great >blasphemy. This is not withstanding the books by Barry Downing, Joe >Lewels and others on the topic. And so a ufologist with such beliefs may >well not be interested in investigating UFO cases that date back into >previous centuries. He/she may then not even be willing to look into UFO >cases involving sightings of, or interactions with, aliens. >Similarly, even a strictly New Testament Christian will not likely wish to >give any credence to witnesses who report having had an out-of-body >experience connected with a UFO-entity, or to having been informed of >reality of reincarnation and thus talking like a New Ager. This is >despite numerous books on case studies of the latter topic by Ian >Stevenson and by numerous hypno-therapists. Such beliefs could even lead >one to question the reality of the resurrection as opposed to the >possibility of survival of the crucifixion -- a great heresy for >Christians. And so such ufologists may be incapable of exploring some UFO >abductions in depth. I disagree, I myself am a "born-again" Christian and I am also a UFO researcher. I do see where you are coming from but my viewpoint is different from the one that you project. I have always said,"where in the bible does it say that God _only_ created life here on Earth? It does'nt. As for other phenomenom, if you read the scriptures quoted you will find that the bible is indeed full of stories far more "way out" than most of the "true tales" that we hear of today. >So I see a lot of relevance for ufology in Rebecca's posting. So do I but when I read it, and reread it I could'nt think of something immideately to say so I thought that I would stew on it untill something more than a gut reaction crept to the surface of my brain. >Jim Deardorff Finally to believe in God means automatic acceptance that the devil exists. BUT as to his form...... There are things in the universe billions of years older than our human race. They are vast, they are timeless. If they are aware of us at all we are of no more consequence to them as ants are to us. Sean Jones http://www.tedric.demon.co.uk/ http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Zone/1745/Index.htm Search for other documents from or mentioning: tedric | deardorj |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 2 Re: Christianity Online The Truth is Out There From: XianneKei@aol.com [Rebecca Schatte] Date: Wed, 1 Oct 1997 16:39:08 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Thu, 02 Oct 1997 10:11:31 -0400 Subject: Re: Christianity Online The Truth is Out There >Date: Wed, 1 Oct 1997 10:23:42 -0700 (PDT) >From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@ucs.orst.edu> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Christianity Online The Truth is Out There > It would seem that Rebecca S. is in considerable or strong support of the > views of the article's writer, Chris Lutes. If just by posting something implies that someone supports it. . . well, then I'll quit posting. RSchatte and XianneKei are one in the same. It's a mail management thing. When I forward articles to this list, please don't infer that I support them, because I may not. Articles I forward to this list are for people to read, enjoy, think about or delete. If I have a commentary on them, I'll post it. For the record, I have no idea what I believe in. Consider me agnostic on all things religious and ufological. Rebecca
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 2 Re: The sky over Roswell From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@cc.UManitoba.CA> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 1997 15:33:19 -0500 (CDT) Fwd Date: Thu, 02 Oct 1997 10:17:00 -0400 Subject: Re: The sky over Roswell > Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 12:18:46 -0700 > From: Ted Viens <drtedv@smart1.net> > To: updates@globalserve.net > Subject: The sky over Roswell > 5th July 1997 Roswell, New Mexico. The Roswell Alien Crash Street Circus > and Road Show was winding down for another day. Realizing that this > The early night was cloudless and the view of the starry skies was as > rewarding as could be expected. As the sun dropped below the horizon, > casual glances through the unobstructed northern sky failed to catch the > slow glittering sweep of any passing satellite. Local commuter flights > into the Roswell airfield passed nearly at eye level. The passengers > could almost be seen in the dimly lit cabins. Regional flights passed at > twice the altitude. And twice again as high, a cross country flight > could be seen. The telltale blinking flight lights always betraying the > source. My interest in shortwave listening suffered from the effects of > black from east to west. Sitting on the concrete foundation of the > microwave tower, I again glanced straight up when, at the zenith, I > finally saw a light moving in the sky. It resembled closely the > brightest stars in size and brilliance. It passed from directly overhead > to the eastern horizon undiminished and unswerving in about a minutes > Ho-hum you say. Hum, I thought. So many plausible common explanations, > Isn't science wonderful. My observation of a distant light moving in a > straight line high in the night sky over the Roswell Alien Crash Street > Circus and Road Show seemed at casual glance so easily dismissable. Ah, > but bring in the simple tools of hard science and things become > perplexing. The object was self illuminated. It passed from zenith to > horizon in less than a minute. If in space, it was violating the rules > of orbital mechanics much to the distress of Kepler and Newton. If in > the atmosphere, it was exceeding the limits of any known or imagined > earth aircraft or technology. Its movement only showed it to be a > powered flight beyond the limits of known science. What could it be? > Beats the pants off me... Let me get this straight. You saw a simple NL passing overhead and you used a satellite emphemeris program to rule out any satellites. You calculated velocities and transit times of an aircraft. You judged its luminosity and motion to be unlike anything easily determinable. Therefore, a "scientific" analysis shows that the seemingly-explainable object may in fact be "beyond the limits of known science." This reminds me of the investigator who said: "I know everything there is to know about anything, therefore I am an expert." Put your pants back on. :) Could it be that out in the western desert, there are test flights of military (terrestrial) aircraft with characteristics unknown to you? Could there have been missing data or a glitch in the satellite emphemeris, as has been found by some satellite observers on other occasions? Just because *you* cannot identify it does *not* mean it is an alien spaceship, as you imply. That's why serious researchers have a category called "Unidentified," in which to put observations of objects without a simple explanation. Yours was an excellent exercise and shows how complicated UFO investigation really is, requiring a lot of time and effort even for the most simple cases. You are to be commended for your thoughtful approach, but to suggest the UFO was therefore a non-terrestrial or unconventional phenomenon isn't *quite* warranted. It might have been wiser and more scientific just to concede it was "unexplained." > A light passes in the sky over Roswell, New Mexico. Simple science > eliminates the possibility of any known technology. Could it have been a > commemorative flight? I cannot demonstrate what it might have been. I > can only rule out what it cannot be. Perhaps other easily dismissed > distant lights moving in the night sky should be investigated more > carefully under the scrutiny of hard science. No, I would not agree with the timbre of that last line. This implies that dismissal of simple NLs is unwarranted, which may not be true. If a person reports to me a NL seen in the vicinity of an airport, and said UFO "hovers" while slowly moving off without showing any clearly-visible wing lights, it is *still* most likely that the object is an aircraft. This would be the case *even if* the witness is "familiar" with aircraft. Mistakes and misinterpretations occur. Or, if a witness reports an "aircraft on fire, crashing in the field a few miles away," it's more than likely a bolide, regardless of how close the UFO "appeared." This type of reduction (as well as deduction) is gained only through many years experience in UFO report investigation. "Simple science" may have eliminated the possibility of any known technology, but I would offer that you don't know *all* the technology out there. Further, "less simple science" may be able to identify the object, given enough time and resources. Great essay, BTW! This is a must-read for all UFO investigators! -- Chris Rutkowski - rutkows@cc.umanitoba.ca (and now, also: Chris.Rutkowski@UMAlumni.mb.ca) University of Manitoba - Winnipeg, Canada Search for other documents from or mentioning: rutkows | drtedv |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 2 Ufosearch, ACC, Bell Labs and Roswell From: Stuart & Toni Livesey <livesey@trump.net.au> Date: Thu, 02 Oct 1997 08:53:36 +1000 Fwd Date: Thu, 02 Oct 1997 10:39:39 -0400 Subject: Ufosearch, ACC, Bell Labs and Roswell G'day List, I know that there are some people on the list who now automatically hit the delete key as soon as they see a subject that mentions ACC and that is unfortunate because this seems to be one subject where members of the list have really worked at investigating the subject. In the past many topics have degenerated into slanging matches but this time the postings on this subject, in the most part, have been objective. Certainly the possibility of misinformation has been raised, and so it should, we should take nothing at face value these days. As an aside it is interesting to see that the debunkers have been fairly quiet - I wonder what the implications of that are. However, that is not what I want to raise now. What I want to do is take a slightly different look at the ACC claims in the light of some suggestions that Val Germann has made and also in the light of what we know happened around Bell Labs site in the late 1940s and onwards. From there I want to raise a question that has been bugging me since the ACC claims were raised. Firstly, Ufosearch has suggested that Roswell could have been staged so that it appeared as though alien technology just fell into the government's hands rather than being passed to us as part of some sort of treaty. As Val Germann points out, there is nothing concrete that we can point to that would support this point of view but it certainly has a lot of circumstantial evidence to support it. Secondly ACC claims that our technology was seeded by aliens through the Roswell incident and out of that seeding came the intergrated circuit and all that flowed from it. Again there is nothing concrete to support that suggestion but once again there is some circumstantial evidence that could support it. Thirdly there is the claim that this technology was passed to Bell Labs who worked on it at their site in New Jersey, once again there is no direct concrete evidence that this happened BUT ..... there is a bit of information in the ACC claim that can and has been confirmed. ACC states that the Bell Labs in the Watchung Mountains in New Jersey was defended by anti-missile batteries. That is true although originally it was anti-aircraft batteries that were situated around the Bell Labs site. What did Bell Labs have that was worth the expense of such defenses? Did other civilian sites have such defences? Finally lets go back to Ufosearch, Val Germann suggests that one of the reasons it is possible that Roswell was staged is because no attempt was made by the aliens to recover their technology. If we take into account what has happened since Roswell then, on the balance of probabilities, this suggestion carries a lot of weight. So, to the question. If we assume all the above points as being factual then what was the threat that the Government needed to defend Bell Labs agains? Who were defences supposed to deter? Stuart
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 2 Best UFO Video on the Planet From: xalium@netwrx.net (Tom King) Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 17:07:25 EST Fwd Date: Thu, 02 Oct 1997 10:52:33 -0400 Subject: Best UFO Video on the Planet August 6, 1997 will be a day going down in UFO history. A UFO was sighted and videotaped and is mindblowing. The video was shot in the Mexico City area in broad daylight. What you see on the tape is a set of large apartment complexes. A flying saucer is hovering just a few hundred feet over the ground of this city. The saucer wobbles in the video, then darts to the right quickly. Moves behind one of the complexes, then emerges over the top of it. It then proceeds behind another complex but never comes out the other side. It simply vanished. The tape lastes under 30 seconds and probably will be a bigger contraversy than the "Alien Autopsy"! The disc appears to be around 1 mile away and over 50 feet in diameter. Its not a little white dot on video or a hockey puck. This is right in your face video, its really shocking. I would compare it to the Paul Villa photos of the disc. Its a really large image on the video. So far every person who has seen it was floored to say the least. It has an effect on you, almost like witnessing the actual sighting. It also reminds me of the "plamsa" craft videotaped by Carlos Diaz. The details of the saucer are this: It rotates clockwise around 1 revolution per second. There is a dome on top and a black hole on the bottom. There what appears to be windows or lights rotating on it. Sometimes different colors are seen on it. The most impressive thing about it is the wobbling. There also other independant witness, other than the cameraman. Its the piece of evidence UFOlogy has been waiting for since in the invention of the videocamera. It now puts us at a point where the only way to top this video would be to tape one land and see some aliens get out. The video is now being checked for any signs of a hoax. So far none have surfaced yet. If it is a hoax, Industrial Light and Magic would be the suspects. I can't express enough about how awesome this footage is. If you never get the chance in your life to see a UFO up close, then this is the next best thing. Jamie Maussan was sent the footage and is now being analyized by Village Labs and Lee Elders. They're all in Phoenix now investigating it. It will air soon on tv, and you'll probably see it more than the Rodney King beating. This is going to really throw UFOs back into the headlines. Tom King, Skywatcher Arizona Skywatch director AZ Skywatch http://personal.netwrx.net/xalium/skywatch/skywatch.htm OVNI Chapterhouse at http://personal.netwrx.net/xalium/ufovideo.htm
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 2 Maccabee rebuttal From: c549597@showme.missouri.edu Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 19:19:57 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 02 Oct 1997 11:59:17 -0400 Subject: Maccabee rebuttal Steve, I have no problem debating with Bruce (Hi Bruce), however I think he should post to the list like everyone else and not go through you. Barbara
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 2 CURRENT-ENCOUNTERS: Filer's File #39 From: George Filer <Majorstar@AOL.COM> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 1997 19:40:52 -0400 Fwd Date: Thu, 02 Oct 1997 11:39:25 -0400 Subject: CURRENT-ENCOUNTERS: Filer's File #39 Filer's Files #39 MUFON Skywatch Investigations From George A. Filer: MUFON Eastern Director 2 October 1997 Majorstar@aol.com (609) 654-0020 There continues to be signs and indications of heavy UFO activity. . RHODE ISLAND On 26 September 1997, a bizarre, triangular object was sighted over Providence, RI, at 0140 hours. by the occupants of approximately six vehicles, all of which stopped to view the event. The witnesses were standing on an overpass that crosses Highway 10, and they watched it for approximately 10 minutes. The object had three very bright, white lights, arranged in a triangular pattern, together with approximately five smaller, dimmer lights arranged in a straight line on the ventral side of the object. The object appeared to the one witness who telephoned the National UFO Reporting Center, to slowly rotate during the 10 minutes, or so, that he estimates he witnessed it, at which time it began to rise vertically, and then accelerated very rapidly until it disappeared in the night sky. Some of the witnesses urged others to say nothing about the incident, lest they not be believed, and then criticized. Peter Davenport contacted the Providence Journal Bulletin (newspaper) [(401) 277-7303] to inform their staff of the sighting report, but one staff member stated that they had received no calls or reports of the event. A senior member of the staff apprised Davenport that they "did not place much credibility in those (UFO) reports, and therefore, they did not investigate them." Thanks to ---Peter B. Davenport, Director National UFO Reporting Center director@ufocenter.com NEW YORK On Tuesday, September 16, 1997, at 9:12 p.m., Mr. and Mrs. Ian W. were walking to their neighborhood market in the vicinity of West 23rd Street and 7th Avenue in lower Manhattan, New York City, when they saw an unusual display in the sky. "It was a beautiful warm evening here in New York City," Ian reported. "As we approached the corner. I looked ahead and saw (Boeing) 747 slowly cross New York's West Side. The reason we stared is because it was flying 'very' low, appearing very large in the sky with all its landing lights on." "Looking northwest, we stopped at the corner of West 23rd and Seventh Avenue and watched the plane slowly cross the city and bank slightly to the southeast. It was at this time that out of the corner of our eyes, directly to our right (northeast) we spied a large green object passing over the city." "This object appeared to be oval-shaped. It was flying higher than the 747 and was moving at an incredible rate of speed. We could not determine the altitude but the object looked large--about the size of a quarter held at arm's length." The couple described the object as "round...with a white center and a glowing green oval-shaped halo." It was "higher than the 747 but not 'that' much higher." (Many thanks to Jane S. Derry and Thanks to UFO Roundup #37, editor Joe Trainor for forwarding this report.) NEW JERSEY Last week, we reported MUFON Investigator, Dr. Bruce Cornet reported video taping a possible missile attack on a commercial jetliner over Sea Bright, NJ on 12 August 1997. Sea Bright is located on the northeastern coast of the Atlantic Ocean near Sandy Hook and twenty miles south of JF Kennedy International Airport. MUFON investigator and pilot, Bob Durant reports that the Canarsie approach to Runway's 13 Left and Right at Kennedy fly over or near Sea Bright/Sandy Hook at an altitude of 3,000 feet. This approach to JFK is near the Canarsie Airport in Brooklyn. Bruce caught an exciting eight frames of the possible missile or UFO attack on video. The missile was video taped descending toward the airliner flying at a lower altitude and glowing. Bob Durant also points out that Major Fred Meyer, an Air National Guard helicopter pilot was flying in plain view of TWA Flight 800 departing from Kennedy, when it exploded. In an interview with Aviation Week Magazine the Major stated, "Almost due south (of the helicopter) there was a hard white light like burning pyrotechnics, in level flight. I was trying to figure out what it was. It was the wrong color for flares. It struck an object coming from the right (TWA 800) and made it explode." Later he stated, He did not know what the projectile was or where it came from, but is convinced he saw an ordnance explosion near the plane. This description of the missile seems similar to Bruce's video. In the first frame, the UFO or missile appears to be glowing at the top of the frame and heading down toward the aircraft. The second frame shows a brilliant flash around the missile. In the third frame, the missile appears to be on fire. The forth frame shows the missile smoking and turning sideways. This frame shows a definite cigar or missile shaped object. Fortunately this airliner was not damaged. I frequently spend the weekend at the New Jersey shore about thirty miles south of Sandy Hook. Almost nightly there are numerous ships moving along the coast. On several occasions I observed low flying aircraft above these ships. Although, I did not observe an actual launch of an aircraft from the ships this could have occurred. Helicopters, vertical takeoff aircraft, ultralights or missiles could be launched from these ships or coastal airfields. Both myself and the Coast Guard have also received several reports of aircraft flying without lights in the nearby coastal areas. First, this is a violation of flying rules, second this is a dangerous practice, lastly the craft must have an ulterior motive for flying with no lights. One possibility is that the observed craft are being flown by terrorists and carry missiles or EMP weapons. Terrorists knowing the departure and approach routes from JFK Airport could easily fly to a higher altitude and wait for an unsuspecting aircraft to come into range. Some 150 witnesses claim to have seen a missile like object intercept TWA Flight 800. I also received the following e-mail from investigator Ron Hannivig. Best Viable Theory: >>> TWA Flight 800 was only at 14,000 feet when it exploded. A near miss of a powerful device using electrical discharges might cause an electrical surge large enough to ignite the fumes in the empty center fuel tank aboard the 747. The device may be designed not to explode in a standard high explosive mode, which would leave easily recognizable chemical traces, but to use high voltage electrical pulses. At the time of the TWA disaster several witnesses reported seeing a missile like object approach the 747 on a level trajectory Ron states: "Going upon what we are aware of . . . and what the government is currently telling us, your simple and concise assessment last week appears to be right on track." My military background was in demolitions (Special Forces trained in 1962,served in South Vietnam in early 1963 with a "A" Team from the 7th). It would be interesting to know if those probes located inside the center fuel tank of the 747 could actually act as detonators - if, or when they receive a sudden surge of high wattage . . . as would be the likely case in being hit with an electromagnetic "slug". Off hand, I would suspect that they could function as detonators - given their general overall design . . . and compact assembly. Their critical placement . . . and amount of fumes within the center fuel tank would be ideal conditions for inciting an explosion. Furthermore, with all of the wiring in a Jumbo Jet - an electromagnetic "slug" passing through the fuselage would have produced an enormous and spontaneous amount of electrical energy seeking their shortest and least lines of resistance - i.e., those probes. Ron further states: Radar documentation also indicates a return - or energy "slug" was reported to have flown a loop around the target. This was, of course . . . an extremely bizarre account - and one which cannot be easily explained away. However, such a bizarre maneuver could have incited a massive electrical charge within the wiring of the aircraft - as would normally occur in a field and coil effect . . . of an electrical generator/dynamo. Thanks to Ron Hannivig, Simpson PA USA - 18407 GEORGIA Case97/03/01: John Thompson, the GA State Director continues to uncover excellent cases. A photo taken in late February or early March has been analyzed by Jeff Saino, MUFON's photo analyst and is believed to be real. This analysis confirms other experts opinions of the daytime shot of a tubular UFO flying at an angle. The witness originally saw two UFOs as if they "were meeting each other." Their orientation was like an upside down V in the sky but the point of the V, of course, did not meet. They traveled at all times at this 30-45 degree angle. The UFO on west side shot off like "a bullet" according to main witness. Then "came back like a bullet" to fly formation with the other identical UFO. Then, the UFO departed to the south at same high speed. At this point the remaining UFO started moving ENE or NE at about 50-60 mph. Photo was taken when it was at its closest to the camera (at 80 degrees, almost overhead) while looking directly east. The LaGrange witness described the UFO as looking like a "fuse with its middle between its ends all shiny." The photo shows a tubular object with a stripe in the middle going around it vertically much like slicing through a tube of cookie dough. Indeed, that would be the best way to describe it: Like a Betty Crocker's tube of cookie dough with a stripe going around its middle. The witnesses do not remember seeing any stripe. Estimate of real size is sixty feet, about the length of three cars. Elevation was less than a mile. The UFO was about a half a mile away. Clear skies, no wind. Photos were taken from the only negative as I watched at Bowen's photography. The negative clearly shows the UFO when using a magnifying glass. Experts have unofficially analyzed the negative and said definitely no plane or balloon. Witness has excellent reputation. Check with National Weather Service in Birmingham, Peachtree City (GA) and Eglin Air Force base in Florida revealed that it was not one of their balloons. They use standard 600 gram balloons only. These balloons are four by six feet growing to house size in course of less than two hours before they burst. The balloons have strings, parachute, and instruments underneath that can usually be seen at low altitude. Also Peachtree said, most National Weather balloons are launched at 7 AM and 7 PM. None would last to 1-2 PM when photo was taken. Generally they can go in ideal jet streams up to several hundred miles away before falling to ground. Several other witnesses confirm observing the UFOs. Moving at high speeds. SWISSAIR SAYS UFO NEARLY HIT JET ZURICH, Switzerland (AP) -- An unidentified, wingless object traveling at high speed passed dangerously close to a Swissair jetliner between Philadelphia and Boston, the airline said Friday. The pilot and copilot gave U.S. investigators different descriptions of the object that passed about 50 yards from the Boeing 747 after it had taken off from Philadelphia on Aug. 9, said the airline. The pilot told the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board that the object as long and wingless, but the copilot said it was more spherical, Swissair spokesman Erwin Schaerer said. The incident took place at 23,000 feet. The plane's final destination was Zurich. A second AP announcement stated: And what was it? It probably was a weather balloon, NTSB spokesman Pat Cariseo said Friday. (The sighting) does not lead us to believe that was something self-propelled,'' Cariseo added. Copyright 1997. Associated Press. 26-Sep-1997 12:48 EDT REF5556 All Rights Reserved. Note: Weather balloons make very useful excuses for anything in the air without wings. I doubt that balloons launched at 7 AM would still be airborne at 12:48 PM.. WASHINGTON D.C. Sept. 24 (UPI) -- Americans should sleep soundly at night with no fears of an alien abduction - because the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff certainly does. General. John Shalikashvili made his revelation during a question-and-answer session at the National Press Club today. After responding to questions about pressing issues such as Bosnia, military down-sizing and sexual misconduct scandals, the Clinton administration's top military advisor fielded one from deep out of left field. The question, read by a moderator, asked Shalikashvili if the United States had been truthful about threats the country faces from aliens traveling in unidentified flying objects. It claimed a recent survey showed a sizable percentage of Americans fear abduction by aliens. That prompted Shalikashvili, who came to the United States as a teen, to quip, "Am I the alien they're talking about?" On a slightly more serious note, he said he believes U.S. military officials have been completely forthcoming about extraterrestrials. Some people believe the government has covered up evidence that a flying saucer crashed in New Mexico 50 years ago, but Shalikashvili, who retires next week, said no evidence exists. He concluded, "I sleep well at night without the fear an alien being is going to capture me." Note: General Shalikashvili and I attended Bradley University at the same time. Despite my invitation, he has kindly refused to participate in a debate with me regarding UFOs. OHIO On Wednesday, September 23, 1997, at 7:45 p.m., five children playing on University Lane in Batavia, Ohio (population 1,896), approximately 10 miles east of Cincinnati spotted a UFO crossing the sky from west to east. Dovey, age 11, described the object as "reddish-orange and very bright." Her friends, Jerry and Brandon, both age 10, said "black things were sticking out of the object." At about the same time, Susan D., age 36, of Afton, Ohio was driving east on Route 32, intent on meeting her husband in nearby Williamsburg (population 1,952). As she pulled into the parking lot, "the object was seen in the open sky, visible above the trees." It "was about 100 feet (33 meters) above the tree line in the vicinity of East Fork Lake." During their drive home to Afton, Susan and her husband had the UFO in view for 10 minutes. She said it "resembled a lit candle with a glow around it," and it "disappeared from view behind trees to the south of our location, which was in the vicinity of East Fork Lake." Back in Williamsburg, Susan's daughter, Chrissy, age 17, and boyfriend Mike spied the UFO around 8:30 p.m. They "saw it for about one minute" and described it as "a big, big white-colored light. An airplane beside it would look like a big dot. It was about as big as a baseball held at arm's length and flew along at treetop level." Thanks to Tri-States Advocates for Scientific Knowledge (T.A.S.K.) and Kenneth Young for these reports.) UNITED KINGDOM 'Victor J Kean of Project Flying Triangles (FTs)' showing a steady rise in FT reports: Others FTs %Flying Triangles 1942-1951 676 32 4.5% 1952-1961 1245 77 5.8% 1962-1971 972 216 18.2% 1972-1981 577 174 23.2% 1982-1991 648 326 53.8% As a result of the formation of 'Project FT' which requested FT reports *only* from some 30 UFO Groups (Mainly UK). In 1992 there were 62 FTs reported. In 1993, there were 196 FT reports, in 1994 they increased to 310, with a five fold increase in 1995 to 1749 reports. In 1996, there were 956 reports. These records are incomplete and additional data is still being received. Our general impression is that FTs now account for between 90 - 95% of all current UFO reports. Since our earliest FT data of FTs described as "black with three white lights at its apexes and with a red central light underneath, hovering silently or moving very slowly at a low height." are from the year 1960 we feel safe in excluding U.S. 'stealth' aircraft. Thanks to Victor J.Kean Project FT. Note: This steady rise in reports suggests solid objects with predictable operations implying possible secret government aircraft. The FTs generally hover over five English nuclear power plants. This activity suggests the FTs monitor or use the plants production of electricity, radiation and or neutrinos for fuel indicating true UFOs. ENGLAND On September 21, 1997, J Miles reports I saw up to 30 VERY high altitude items flying a fantastic speed, from the ground, at Camberely, in Surrey, England. The last time I saw this sort of stuff was when I was at Area 51. This was a rare crystal clear night, without much glare from London. I saw multiple "shooting stars" following each other, in many different directions, in a matter of a few minutes. Then a super fast low altitude item, fly by. I understand some kind of Scalar Atom Bomb sized air burst was noted some where near the US, recently. Regards, Miles J, se miles@kiss1037.demon.co.uk We're going to Pine Bush, NY this Thursday and Friday for a skywatch. We're meeting at the Comfort Inn in Newburgh at 5:00 PM on Thursday, 2 October. Your invited.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 2 Re: Questions for abductees From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 1997 12:05:45 -0400 Fwd Date: Thu, 02 Oct 1997 11:43:09 -0400 Subject: Re: Questions for abductees Rob Bull asks what questions to ask an abductee. > From: "R.Bull" <RAB@cadcentre.co.uk> [Rob Bull] > To: "'UFO UpDates'" <updates@globalserve.net> > Subject: Questions for abductees > Date: Mon, 29 Sep 97 15:41:00 BST > Hi everyone > I have a lady in the UK who has given me details of a 'bedroom > visitation' that she has had (not recently) which seems to bear > the characteristics of a classic 'bedroom abduction'. (One tall > figure, three small ones; husband in a deep sleep next to her, > she unable to wake him; puncture and other marks on her skin the > next day; other skin marks appearing later after 'restless' > nights.) > I'm not sure I accept the literal reality of abduction accounts, > but are there 'standard questions' I should be asking this lady > to determine if her experience is consistent with a classic > abduction report? Rob, You really don't want to go fishing for standard abduction details. Obviously, you might only prompt this woman. It helps, though, that you yourself don't seem to know what details to expect. I'd suggest you do the following: 1. Ask for the story in as much detail as possible. First just ask her to tell it, remembering everything that she can. 2. After she does this, ask her to elaborate on each part. Be relaxed about it, so she doesn't feel she ought to be remembering more than she does. And of course don't use any language or suggest any details that weren't in her original telling. For instance, if she saw the beings by her bed, you might ask her what they were doing. If she says they took her out of her bed, you might ask her how. Did they physically hold her? If she says she remembers being outside her window, you might ask her how she got there. If she doesn't remember -- and this is a good general technique to use in any similar situation -- you might suggest a number of alternatives. Did she walk? Did they carry her? Suggest very commonplace alternatives, so if she thinks she remembers something extraordinary -- that she was floated through the wall, or teleported outside, or carried in a force field -- those details will emerge without you suggesting them in any way. Budd Hopkins, when he questions abductees, always does this. He suggests only the most mundane possibilities, and in fact tries to lead witnesses away from the standard accounts. If your apparent abductee says she remembers being in a different place, don't ask her if it was the aliens' UFO! Just ask her to describe it. If she remembers the beings doing something, try to get details. If she mentions them using any implements or tools, try to get a description. Likewise if she remembers seeing any insignia, symbols, or writing. Try to get her to draw them. But -- I know this is getting to be a tiresome refrain! -- never suggest that she might have seen any such things. 3. Ask her about past experiences. Don't suggest that she may have had this experience, or one like it, before. Just ask her if there's anything in her past life, starting with her earliest memories, that seems unusual, or difficult to explain. If she tells you some past stories that involve members of her family or friends, ask if she has ever spoken to the other people involved about the incidents. Ask if you can speak to them. (It's VERY unlikely that she'll answer yes!) 4. You should gently discourage her from reading any abduction literature until she's told you everything. Don't make a fuss about it, though. It's natural for abductees to want to inform themselves, and their personal needs have to come before the needs of science. It might be better, too, if you don't read any abduction literature before you've debriefed her thoroughly. 5. I strongly urge you to pick a few key parts of the story, or key details, and then find a way to ask her about these several times. Do it casually -- try not to make her feel that she's being grilled, or that you don't believe her. There are two reasons why it's important to hear as much of the story as possible more than once. First, it's a check on whether she embellishes her account at all. Second, abductees typically have trouble remembering accurate details of their abuction experiences (whether physically real or not). Often, if their attention is directed back to some portion of the story, they remember more clearly. This last point is, in my experience, one of the most poorly understood parts of abduction research. Here's an example of how and why it's done. Let's say you ask this woman how tall the beings were. She answers "Oh, they were very tall." You ask her -- essential in all abduction investigations -- why she thinks this. She thinks a moment and says, "Well, they were looking down at me." Don't leave it there! Ask her where she was when they were looking down. She may well respond, "I was lying in my bed." At which point it becomes clear that the beings really weren't very tall. A classic example from Budd Hopkins' archives: A woman tells him she was driving at night, and had to stop because an owl was blocking the road. Budd asks her what the owl was doing. She answers: "It was standing in the middle of the road. It stood in front of my car when I stopped, and looked at me through the windshield." Here there's obviously something to explore. Owls aren't big enough to stand in the road and look at the driver of a car. So Budd asks: "Well, how tall was the owl?" The woman thinks and says, "But this doesn't make any sense. The owl must have been over five feet tall to have its head level with mine." This had never occured to her before. She then is able to examine her recollections more carefully, and ask herself whether an owl is really what she saw. Notice that Budd doesn't point out the contradiction explicitly, or lead her in suggesting what the owl might have been. He simply asks a question that stimulates the abductee to do these things. This is the techn ique all abduction investigators ought to use. Good luck in asking questions of this experiencer! I'll be curious to know what you come up with. Greg Sandow
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 2 Re: Questions for abductees From: Skye Turell <turel33@west.net> Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 19:13:22 -0700 Fwd Date: Thu, 02 Oct 1997 18:45:15 -0400 Subject: Re: Questions for abductees >Date: Wed, 1 Oct 1997 01:43:41 -0500 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Questions for abductees >>Date: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 08:03:11 -0700 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >>From: Skye Turell <turel33@west.net> >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Questions for abductees >>>Date: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 01:36:18 -0500 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >>>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Questions for abductees >>>>From: "R.Bull" <RAB@cadcentre.co.uk> [Rob Bull] >>>>To: "'UFO UpDates'" <updates@globalserve.net> >>>>Subject: Questions for abductees >>>>Date: Mon, 29 Sep 97 15:41:00 BST John, OK, now I see where you are coming from. Still/but... > but >the need to assure the individual that they are not 'going crazy' or >'unique' far outwieghs any negative arguements against it as far as I'm concerned. The fact remains that hundreds (maybe thousands) of individuals have been having unexplainable experiences all of their lives...The first reaction I had (and a great many have) to the discovery that these experiences may be tied to UFO's and their occupants was to immediately question my sanity. That's not a fun place to be in. When an individual is in such a state of self doubt it is tremendously comforting to know that you are not alone, John, I'm an experiencer too, and I've been through "The Process" (whatever that is...I'm not sure anyone's defined it very well and it may vary from person to person). While I was lucky enough to have other experiencers in my life when I went through the early stages of this process, one thing that drove *me* crazy was the fact that my experiences didn't always fit the mold. Some weren't Greys...some involved other things, some involved Greys but not in the usual scenario. Had I gone through this process after most of the abduction literature had been published, rather than before, I would have been even more confused. I'm not alone in this. Most of the Grey abductees I know (and that's plenty), are having other kinds of encounters too. If we are exposed to the textbook abduction at this juncture, then we're likely to disown those other experiences. Some of those experiences may, in the long run, be even more important than the Grey ones. I do know that acceptance of the experience, a belief in one's own perceptions, even while understanding that some of those perceptions might be "manufactured," this is the essence of "the process." To be exposed to other people's experiences prematurely invites a sort of glossing-over of one's own unique experience. A key component of "The Process" has to be discovery. And this idea has been shunted aside in all the abduction literature. There is something really miraculous taking place here -- whatever you think the alien's agenda. This process of discovery is one of the main benefits of the experience, I would say (I know some would argue that the experience is too sinister to contain this opportunity, but I would disagree <g>). I would not trade the good luck that I came to many realizations, memories and whatnot and only later discovered that many other people had similar experiences and feelings. This was the best of all possible scenarios. I was able to sort out my own self first, but *then* feel that support/camraderie that comes from the shared experience. (I've never done hypnosis for these experiences, which some of the well-known researchers would say automatically disqualifies me from understanding anything about what has occured -- something that burns me no end, I can assure you...) >If she >_is_ having similar experiences what better way to find out than by >comparing notes with the reports of many abductees. If she's not, then she'll know right away whether she should begin exploring other >explanations or avenues. NO!!!!!!!!!!!! This is exactly what I was warning about, John. Her *dissimilar* experiences may be quite valid! You are assuming that because she doesn't experience the typical scenario in some/many respects, that she hasn't experienced what she reports she has. She is likely, if she's like everyone else I know, to have "anomalous" experiences, even within the realm of abduction. DO NOT encourage her to disown this. This will result in a loss of self-esteem, a mistrust of her own perceptions, and will be exactly the worst thing that can occur. Anyone working with this person, if they have any kind of social work background and even if they don't, should be able to determine if the abductee is suffering a psychotic break -- that would be apparent from her daily behavior and would not be confined to a single episode, like an abduction. Having elimanated that possibility, I'm not sure what others there are. (I know some would argue mind control experiments, neurological effects like sleep paralysis, human/military abduction...and I won't get into *that* argument here.) That leaves the single possibility that she has, in fact, had an anomalous experience (although it is most unhelpful to consider it that, for all the obvious reasons). So, let her live with that awhile. I'm not saying don't have her talk to other abductees...perhaps that's a good idea. Just keep her away from the researchers, is all I'm saying. ;-) > The pattern that is >associated with abduction is fairly narrow and specific. You either are, or you aren't having similar experiences. We'd have to quibble a lot about the definitions of "specific" and "similar." And, alas, you'd have to define "abduction." This sounds absurd, I know, but I've found myself onboard a craft/inside an installation under conditions that might not be correctly termed, "abduction." At least, I don't. John, to sum up here, I do feel for the newbie abductee...I've been there. I think the main thing is to allow them to talk, give them a forum to explore and digest, draw them out further if possible -- just like a good psychologist would do. But this is a far cry from having other abductees or "The Textbook" inform them of exactly what has occurred, and in what order. Let them discover for themselves and then everyone will learn. Skye Turell <turel33@west.net>
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 3 Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words From: "Roger R. Prokic" <rprokic@ibm.net> Date: Thu, 02 Oct 97 06:33:45 Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 00:21:22 -0400 Subject: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words >From: c549597@showme.missouri.edu [Barbara Becker] >Date: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 09:47:38 -0500 >To: ufo updates <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words >What happened to my critics? Steve, Don, Roger et al? >I thought we were going to have a good discussion. Do >you not understand the law? Or does your silence >indicate agreement? Barbara, put aside your pride of knowledge for law... Do yoou really think everyone follows copyright laws? I don't think so. The law is there.. but most educated people don't even know what the law really means. I'm sure you don't dispute that. So, aside from the law, why would the pictures from Believer Bill and the other person you mention be considered a hoax? That is the real question... Roger
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 3 Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words From: BOB SHELL <76750.2717@compuserve.com> Date: Thu, 2 Oct 1997 11:42:25 -0400 Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 00:35:26 -0400 Subject: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words >From: c549597@showme.missouri.edu [Barbara Becker] >Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 13:21:06 -0500 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words >Yes, Independent (that means he looked at the photos WITHOUT >an agenda) photoanalyst Wm. Hyzer, however his report was disregarded by >MUFON. Barbara, That's not strictly true. I know Bill Hyzer (is that spelled right??) and know that he thinks all UFO photos are a bunch of hooey. So you can't really say he didn't have an agenda. Bob
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 3 Re: Questions for abductees From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 1997 20:09:12 -0400 Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 00:23:07 -0400 Subject: Re: Questions for abductees My dear friend Ponderosa writes: > From: Peregrine Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter > Brookesmith] > Subject: Re: Questions for abductees > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > And one place to start is the annals of > so-unhelpfully-called "abnormal psychology", not the folklore that > calls itself "abduction research". At any rate try to eliminate > every other possible explanation before plumping for the least > probable. But Petrus...how do we know that abduction by aliens is improbable? After all, we have no factual data about the existence of intelligent alien life, its distribution in our universe, its capabilities, actions, needs, or hobbies. Any belief that alien visits here are improbable is simply a prejudice. (As would be the belief that they're likely or inevitable.) Allow me to predict, in closing, that any rebuttal you make will prove to be based on circular reasoning. With my usual smile, Greg Sandow
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 3 Re: Christianity Online The Truth is Out There From: "WHITE" <mjawhite@digitaldune.net> [John White] Date: Thu, 2 Oct 1997 07:36:45 -0700 Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 00:26:50 -0400 Subject: Re: Christianity Online The Truth is Out There > Date: Wed, 1 Oct 1997 10:23:42 -0700 (PDT) > From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@ucs.orst.edu> > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Christianity Online The Truth is Out There > > From: RSchatte@aol.com [Rebecca] > > Date: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 14:33:37 -0400 (EDT) > > To: updates@globalserve.net > > Subject: Christianity Online "The Truth is Out There > > The Truth is Out There > > The X-Files gives us tons of paranormal thrills anc chills. But > > where is this roller-coaster ride taking us? > > by Chris Lutes > > [...] > > Yet amid all the imaginative and unreal stories are hints of the reality of a > > supernatural world. But unfortunately, the supernatural presented in The X-Fil > > es most often deals with dark, evil and occult themes--things the Bible warns > > us to avoid: [snip of Jim Deardorf's initial insights into the "lutes" post] > Similarly, even a strictly New Testament Christian will not likely wish to > give any credence to witnesses who report having had an out-of-body > experience connected with a UFO-entity, [snip] > Such beliefs could even lead > one to question the reality of the resurrection as opposed to the > possibility of survival of the crucifixion -- a great heresy for > Christians. And so such ufologists may be incapable of exploring some UFO > abductions in depth. > > So I see a lot of relevance for ufology in Rebecca's posting. > > Jim Deardorff To Jim, Rebecca, List and all: First, thank you, Rebecca, for the "Lutes" post; second, thank you, Jim, for your insights on it. There is a lot of relevance for ufology in most sacred writings. Our Western cultural heritage embraces, in the main, the Tanakh, the Apocrypha and the New Testament, which are brought together under Christian belief systems. There is much wisdom in all sacred writings; so long as the context is kept in mind. Out of context, the "wisdom" can become somewhat strained, if not downright harmful. "Preceded by perception are mental states, For them is perception supreme, From perception have they sprung. If, with perception polluted, one speaks or acts, Thence suffering follows As a wheel the draught ox's foot." This sacred writing is ascribed to the teachings of Gotama Buddha during the sixth century B.C.E. "Sacred Writings--Buddhism, The Dhammapada," Edited by Jaroslav Pelikan (1987--1992), pg 13. It begins the text of the Dhammapada. And a wise beginning it is. To whatever religious/scientific/agnostic/? belief system we subscribe, this tells us to keep a clear and open mind (it tells us a lot of other things, too, but keeping a clear and open mind is its main point.) Imagine: a "sacred" writing which starts itself off by warning its readers to keep and clear and open mind. Makes you think---Corso, ACC, Barbara B., Linda C., John V., Phoenix (March 13), Fergus, Stig, and so many others, practicing, and, yes, sometimes struggling with, the precepts of a 2600 year old warning---all trying to keep a clear and open mind, challenging the chaff, seeking clarity. "Commendable is the taming Of mind, which is hard to hold down, Nimble, alighting wherever it wants. Mind subdued brings ease. . . They who will restrain the mind, Far-ranging, roaming alone, Incorporeal, lying ahiding--- They are released from Mara's bonds." (cite from same as before, pg. 18) Thanks again, Jim, Rebecca, for putting the context back into the subject. John White mjawhite@digitaldune.net
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 3 Re: Rescue chopper encounter From: rossdowe <rossdowe@hotmail.com> Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 01:21:45 +1000 Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 00:34:31 -0400 Subject: Re: Rescue chopper encounter On Sunday morning 0030Hrs The crew of LSL Westpac Bank, Search and Rescue chopper encountered some odd lights up above the chopper during an emergency flight. The pilot of LSL said that the "orange illuminations beamed lights at the chopper, and they lighted us up like a candle". However a second event cause some concern from Brisbane's flight control centre on the 1st Oct at 10.40pm. Pilot Wayne Fisher said to flight control " that a large light, illuminated the chopper, it lighted up the area around the chopper and no where else, and stated that the light seemed to come from behind and above us". The crew consisted of 4 personnel including the on duty Doctor, they all said that they were frightened by the event. Ross Dowe from Australia's National UFO Hotline in Melbourne (some 1100 miles away from the event) said "we had monitored the transmission and I can advise that we have been placed on an alert statis ". Information is currently flowing into the centre and it appears that her has been a third event in the Lismore area on Monday 29th Oct 4.30am. A pilot from our National broadcaster ABC News service sighted a large black object flying over the Lismore area, it was flying about 30,000 feet, heading east from the west on 110 degs. The huge black object left behind the biggest trail he had ever seen, he added that it was bigger than 10 747's" and had a speed beyond that of something of that size". The National UFO Hotline wishes to hear from anyone who feels that they could help in uncovering the causes of these events. Phone Ph 190 224 3529 Ipp PO Box 1286 Narre Warren Vic 3805 EMail ippoz@hotmail.com Web page http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Vault/1177/index.htm
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 3 UK.UFO.NW irc guest - Stanton T. Friedman From: United Kingdom UFO Network <ufo@holodeck.demon.co.uk> Date: Thu, 2 Oct 1997 18:44:04 +0000 Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 00:53:37 -0400 Subject: UK.UFO.NW irc guest - Stanton T. Friedman UNITED KINGDOM UFO NETWORK Saturday 4th October 1997 Special Guest - Stanton T. Friedman UK.UFO.NW are very proud to announce that Stanton T. Friedman will be answering your questions live in a moderated meeting taking place on the uk.ufo.nw IRC channel. Stanton T. Friedman: Nuclear Physicist and UFO researcher. Original investigator of the Roswell incident. Author of UFO books and over 70 UFO papers. A highly respected investigator. Connecting instructions and world times are below. The meeting will commence live at the following world times. This is not a definitive list. Times will vary depending on your part of the world. United Kingdom: 11pm Auckland: 10am (Sunday) Beijing: 6am (Sunday) Berlin: Midnight Cairo: 1am (Sunday) Colorado Springs: 4pm Hong Kong: 6am (Sunday) Jo'Burg: Midnight Las Vegas: 3pm Los Angeles: 3pm Moscow: 2am (Sunday) New Delhi: 4am (Sunday) New Orleans: 5pm New York: 6pm Paris: Midnight Perth: 7am (Sunday) Rio De Janeiro: 7pm Riyadh: 1am (Sunday) Rome: Midnight Singapore: 6am (Sunday) Sydney: 9am (Sunday) Tel Aviv: 1am (Sunday) Tokyo: 7am (Sunday) If you are using one of the dedicated IRC programs such as the excellent MIRC available free from: http://www.mirc.co.uk/index.html enter one of the below irc server addresses into your program. The nearer the server to your location the faster the connection. If one fails then try another. London.UK.EU.UltraNET.Org Belgrade.YU.EU.UltraNet.org Kalemegdan.YU.EU.UltraNet.org Singidunum.YU.EU.UltraNet.org Bor.YU.EU.UltraNet.org Zemun.YU.EU.UltraNet.org Channels.UltraNET.Org Uppsala.SE.EU.UltraNET.Org Hardanger.NO.EU.UltraNET.Org Uworld.UltraNET.Org Bergen.NO.EU.UltraNET.Org Neuilly.FR.EU.UltraNET.Org Hofors.SE.EU.UltraNET.Org Mons.BE.EU.UltraNET.Org Atlanta.GA.US.Ultranet.org Johnson-City.TN.US.UltraNet.Org Cleveland.OH.US.UltraNET.Org Once you are connected to a server join channel: #UFO You can also use your java compatible web browser to join in the meeting such as: Netscape 3 ++ or MS Internet Explorer 4 ++ By going to any of the below www addresses you will be automatically connected to the uk.ufo.nw IRC #UFO channel. All you have to do is supply a nickname when prompted. http://www.holodeck.demon.co.uk/ultrachat.html http://www.maygale.org/07/eyesonly http://www.geocities/Area51/Cavern/2646 http://www.tedric.demon.co.uk/ultrachat.htm http://www.ultranet.org/webchat/ufo.html http://web.ukonline.co.uk/colin.light/ultrachat.htm http://web.ukonline.co.uk/phil.light http://www.ufo.grid9.net/ufo.html http://www.us.ultranet.org/webchat/ufo.html http://www.no.ultranet.org/webchat/ufo.html http://crowman.demon.co.uk/ultrachat.html -------------------------- ufo@holodeck.demon.co.uk United Kingdom UFO Network http://www.holodeck.demon.co.uk --------------------------
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 3 Re: Christianity Online The Truth is Out There From: Jakes Louw <louwje@telkom.co.za> Date: Thu, 02 Oct 1997 16:43:47 +0200 Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 00:28:14 -0400 Subject: Re: Christianity Online The Truth is Out There >Date: Wed, 1 Oct 1997 10:23:42 -0700 (PDT) >From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@ucs.orst.edu> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Christianity Online The Truth is Out There and > From: RSchatte@aol.com [Rebecca] > Date: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 14:33:37 -0400 (EDT) > To: updates@globalserve.net > Subject: Christianity Online "The Truth is Out There > The Truth is Out There > The X-Files gives us tons of paranormal thrills anc chills. But > where is this roller-coaster ride taking us? > by Chris Lutes Just to add my 5c worth..... We are assuming then that all practicers of Eastern Religion are demon worshippers, as these religions don't fall into the Christian model? Isn't this message against basic human rights? Aren't some of the events portrayed in the Bible basically tales of possession and/or of the paranormal? Should we then not read the Bible, in case we are possessed? Are all devout Hebrews destined to Hell because they do not believe the Messiah has come, but who otherwise follow all the tenets of the Ten Commandments and the teachings of the Torah? This mail is on the verge of being too fundamental. In that, it echoes Ufology, because this too has its "followers" who jump down certain paths and refuse to listen to the "Alien View". Cheers Jakes E. Louw louwje@telkom.co.za +27 12 311-2668 082 923 6144 Search for other documents from or mentioning: louwje | deardorj |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 3 Re: Ufosearch, ACC, Bell Labs and Roswell From: Don Ledger <dledger@istar.ca> Date: Thu, 02 Oct 1997 14:22:34 +0100 Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 00:37:36 -0400 Subject: Re: Ufosearch, ACC, Bell Labs and Roswell > Date: Thu, 02 Oct 1997 08:53:36 +1000 > To: updates@globalserve.net > From: Stuart & Toni Livesey <livesey@trump.net.au> > Subject: Ufosearch, ACC, Bell Labs and Roswell > G'day List, > > I know that there are some people on the list who now > automatically hit the delete key as soon as they....deleted. Except for this short reply..you got that right. Don ledger
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 3 Re: Best UFO Video on the Planet From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@ucs.orst.edu> Date: Thu, 2 Oct 1997 09:54:45 -0700 (PDT) Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 00:46:01 -0400 Subject: Re: Best UFO Video on the Planet > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > From: xalium@netwrx.net (Tom King) > Subject: Best UFO video on the planet > Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 17:07:25 EST > August 6, 1997 will be a day going down in UFO history. A UFO was sighted > and videotaped and is mindblowing. > [...] > The video is now being checked for any signs of a hoax. So far none have > surfaced yet. If it is a hoax, Industrial Light and Magic would be the > suspects. I can't express enough about how awesome this footage is. If you > never get the chance in your life to see a UFO up close, then this is the > next best thing. > Jamie Maussan was sent the footage and is now being analyized by Village > Labs and Lee Elders. They're all in Phoenix now investigating it. > It will air soon on tv, and you'll probably see it more than the Rodney King > beating. This is going to really throw UFOs back into the headlines. I hope you're right, Tom, that we'll all get a chance to view the video segment. But I have grave doubts that it will air on any of the major networks, and suspect that I'll need to view it on the Sci-Fi channel or such. Didn't I see a recent quote here that went: "The stronger the evidence, the more violent the debunking"? It's quite true. No doubt the debunking will set in if one needs to purchase a video from Lee Elders of Genesis III to view it, since he will charge a certain amount of money for it, shame on him. And if Village Labs is analyzing it, that will be held against it even though Dilettoso seems to have been correct that flares could not have explained any of the Phoenix lights last March even if their timing had been consistent with the air exercises, if the latter had been in the proper geographic location. Jim Deardorff
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 3 Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words From: "Serge Salvaille" <sergesa@connectmmic.net> Date: Thu, 02 Oct 1997 13:42:53 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 00:51:37 -0400 Subject: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words Dear Barbara [Becker], I have been following this thread since the beginning. Needless to say that you made a point regarding Ed Walters. I doubt though this should have any influence on the debate: information as such is relevant only to the spectators, not the debaters. You have mentioned... >Yes, Independent (that means he looked at the photos WITHOUT >an agenda) photoanalyst Wm. Hyzer, however his report was disregarded by >MUFON. Any way to get our hands on this document ? Serge Salvaille, system programmer
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 3 Re: Best UFO Video on the Planet From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> Date: Thu, 2 Oct 1997 12:05:02 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 00:36:23 -0400 Subject: Re: Best UFO Video on the Planet >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: xalium@netwrx.net (Tom King) >Subject: Best UFO video on the planet >Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 17:07:25 EST > August 6, 1997 will be a day going down in UFO history. A UFO was sighted >and videotaped and is mindblowing. > >The video was shot in the Mexico City area in broad daylight. What you see >on the tape is a set of large apartment complexes. A flying saucer is >hovering just a few hundred feet over the ground of this city. The saucer >wobbles in the video, then darts to the right quickly. Moves behind one of >the complexes, then emerges over the top of it. It then proceeds behind >another complex but never comes out the other side. It simply vanished. > >The tape lastes under 30 seconds and probably will be a bigger contraversy >than the "Alien Autopsy"! Hi Tom, hi All, All right, I have attained the proper erection! <G> Tommy, if you have a copy, could you PLEASE post a single frame capture of this thing so that we can all check it out? Exciting news, and about goddam time too! They've been messing with our heads long enough, letting us photograph them at a distance but never close enough to 'nail the coffin shut.' It would be a gratifying thing for me to know that someone finally got the 'close-ups' that we've all been praying for. Hope you can let us see this sucker too. My congrats to Jaime and the Elders for all their persistance and determination. John- No portraits so far, just panaramic shots- Velez John Velez jvif@spacelab.net
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 3 Re: Ufosearch, ACC, Bell Labs and Roswell From: Stuart & Toni Livesey <livesey@trump.net.au> Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 06:50:34 +1000 Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 00:54:46 -0400 Subject: Re: Ufosearch, ACC, Bell Labs and Roswell >Date: Thu, 02 Oct 1997 08:53:36 +1000 >To: updates@globalserve.net >From: Stuart & Toni Livesey <livesey@trump.net.au> >Subject: Ufosearch, ACC, Bell Labs and Roswell G'day List, >So, to the question. If we assume all the above points as being factual >then what was the threat that the Government needed to defend Bell Labs >agains? Who were defences supposed to deter? Before this goes much further I have to plead temporary stupidity. After I sent this posting I came across a copy of Stig's posting to Updates on 9/16/97 that included a copy of the updated ACC site. In that posting ACC asked the same question. I had not read that posting before I sent mine so I had better state right now for the record that I am not employed by ACC, I do not speak for ACC, and I do not use or endorse any ACC products. I'm just a dill who doesn't read everything he receives. :> Stuart
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 3 Re: Ufosearch, ACC, Bell Labs and Roswell From: RGates8254@aol.com [Robert Gates] Date: Thu, 2 Oct 1997 19:26:01 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 01:21:28 -0400 Subject: Re: Ufosearch, ACC, Bell Labs and Roswell >Date: Thu, 02 Oct 1997 08:53:36 +1000 >To: updates@globalserve.net >From: Stuart & Toni Livesey <livesey@trump.net.au> >Subject: Ufosearch, ACC, Bell Labs and Roswell >G'day List, >I know that there are some people on the list who now >automatically hit the delete key as soon as they see a subject >that mentions ACC and that is unfortunate because this seems to >be one subject where members of the list have really worked at >investigating the subject. In the past many topics have >degenerated into slanging matches but this time the postings on >this subject, in the most part, have been objective. One of the reasons people hit the delete key is because ACC and its claims are sounding more like previous claims made by others. For example: Late last fall a man named Lee Shargel, who was billed as a NASA scientest, claimed based upon tales told by people who were absolutly-impeccable-never-wrong, "space scientists" who had told him that on Jan 24th 1997 "ET radio waves would bathe the earth which would begin a new day for mankind." Never happened, but gulliable people were spreading the tale as absolute gospel truth to never be doubted. Last August when the Mars rock annnouncement was made by NASA, all the insiders-never-wroing-intelligence-sources-who-knew-every-last-de tail, claimed that this was the precursor to the "big ET reality announcement by President Clinton BEFORE the November election." Never happened. Not to mention the Yellowbook/10,000 year history of ET dealings with mankind/how Christ was an ET blah blah tale which gained momentum and legs so to speak last year and early this year. This tale was supposed to climax on April 24th 1997 with mass ET landings in the desert SW -- White Sands area in which the ET's would show the world.... blah blah. Keep in mind that the people purveying this tale always claimed that the source was an intelligence-community-insider-who was-never-wrong-about-anything- AND anybody that questioned the story just didn't understand how deep inside the government he was, and why his information was impeccable. Never happened. This dates me but in 1974 people in the UFO community were all lathered up with the tale of: New President Gerald Ford is going to hold a press conference to announce the existance of UFOs/ET. When asked where the info came from it was always some unnamed high level source that was never wrong. Never Happened. What I have just named constitutes the tip of the iceburg in the UFO community over the years on these kind of wild claims and stories. <snip> >Firstly, Ufosearch has suggested that Roswell could have been staged so >that it appeared as though alien technology just fell into the government's >hands rather than being passed to us as part of some sort of treaty. As Val >Germann points out, there is nothing concrete that we can point to that >would support this point of view but it certainly has a lot of >circumstantial evidence to support it. There is also not one drop of hard evidence about the so called alien treaty. Just because a circumstantial evidence case is made about something does not mean that the authors interpretation of the facts is correct. >Secondly ACC claims that our technology was seeded by aliens through the >Roswell incident and out of that seeding came the intergrated circuit and >all that flowed from it. Again there is nothing concrete to support that >suggestion but once again there is some circumstantial evidence that could >support it. Please not ACC is not claiming this but has admitted that they are only passing on the tales/stories told by others who are nameless. In effect they are putting out gossip to folks, admitting its gossip, then everybody has kittens and believes it. >Thirdly there is the claim that this technology was passed to Bell Labs who >worked on it at their site in New Jersey, once again there is no direct >concrete evidence that this happened BUT ..... there is a bit of >information in the ACC claim that can and has been confirmed. ACC states >that the Bell Labs in the Watchung Mountains in New Jersey was defended by >anti-missile batteries. That is true although originally it was >anti-aircraft batteries that were situated around the Bell Labs site. What >did Bell Labs have that was worth the expense of such defenses? Did other >civilian sites have such defences? You are understandbly unaware of the early history of Air Defense in the United States. Hanford, Seattle, Los Angles, Oak Ridge, Chicago, Minneapolis not to mention MANY others had anti-aircraft batteries that were later converted to Nike missile. Bell labs was just as important as Hanford, and the other cities I mentioned. At the time the military was going to put AA in all major cities that they considered targets of the new threat the Soviet Union. Later that plan was scaled back but generally included all the defense plants and air bases to some degree or another. ACC's source was unaware of this also to call them "anti-missile batteries", since anti missile batteries really didn't begin to be tested in the very late 50s, and some limited test deployment in the early 60s. <snip> >So, to the question. If we assume all the above points as being factual >then what was the threat that the Government needed to defend Bell Labs >agains? Who were defences supposed to deter? During the late 40s and early 50s the greates fear the US had was not attack by ET's, but bomber attacks by the Soviet Union. Sarkeroff (developer of the Soviet H-Bomb) said in his Memoirs that had Stalin perceived "ANY" military weakness in the United States, he would of attacked with the intention of destroying us. >Stuart Bottom line is if a wild story or tale is posted on the Web gulliable people will lap it up and defend it to its death. When it dies, they will move on to the next incredible tale, under the notion of "well sooner or later something truthful will come out."
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 3 Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words From: BOB SHELL <76750.2717@compuserve.com> Date: Thu, 2 Oct 1997 17:34:14 -0400 Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 00:55:56 -0400 Subject: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words >From: c549597@showme.missouri.edu [Barbara Becker] >Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 13:21:06 -0500 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words >Yes, Independent (that means he looked at the photos WITHOUT >an agenda) photoanalyst Wm. Hyzer, however his report was disregarded by >MUFON. Barbara, That's not strictly true. I know Bill Hyzer (is that spelled right??) and know that he thinks all UFO photos are a bunch of hooey. So you can't really say he didn't have an agenda. Bob
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 3 Wang On UFO Statement By Chairman Of Joint Chiefs From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose) Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 01:27:41 +0100 Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 01:24:04 -0400 Subject: Wang On UFO Statement By Chairman Of Joint Chiefs Ed Wang has asked me to forward the e-mail below, received by me on October 2. The statement by the Chairman Of The Joint Chiefs Of Staff was posted on Ufomind's Area 51 Mailing List on September 26 and forwarded by me to various places on the Internet the same day, including the UFO Updates and UFOR mailing lists. See the archive of UFO Updates at http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/1997/sep/m26-011.shtml Ed has told me that he regrets ever having posted the e-mail forwarded by Wes Thomas to UFO Updates, though he was under very heavy and unfair attack on the "In Search Of" list. He is relieved that the e-mail has come out in the open instead of lurking in the background all the time, and happy that the atmosphere has been cleared around his e-mail address. He says that he has a lot of respect for my integrity. Stig Forwarded message follows: Date: Thu, 2 Oct 1997 00:40:30 -0500 (CDT) From: acsa@ix.netcom.com To: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk Subject: RE: General Shalikashvili responds to ACC's Shadowlake Invitation - or does he ? Just like out of a 50's Sci Fi movie! STIG: You may want to pass THIS ONE on to your various communications lists/pages! (I am unable to go post tonight, I've been SUPER SPAMMED again, and can only upload a bit. The PC I am using is messed up). Did ANYONE notice: I understand retiring General John Shalikashvili (former head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff - but my spelling is probably off) was questioned by CNN on the record yesterday, and responded that he "goes to sleep at night without fears that he will wake up in the morning under the control of alien invaders" or words to that ffect... Was this in reply to the Shadowlake Invitation? He also said words to the effect of "There is no evidence that aliens have visited us." which holds a bunch of water... eh (TITANNIC SPLASH! on the floor)? Note this pseudo-spontaneous response. He carefully avoided saying aliens did or didn't visit us. I think his statement is something a General who has reservations about making such a statement would say. Cohen and the other Generals presently in office and subject to Sanctions that could subject them to prosecution were they proven liars in such a public forum by Congress during peace time, made no statement at all at the time. Shalikashvili tried to make the statement seem rather light and amusing, but it came off just a bit on the nervous side... And the press laughter was quite contained. Note the use of the former Head of the Joint Chiefs to issue a statement? Sounds like a familiar tactic, hmmm? Right out of the 1st Book of Military Plausible Denials, I think, and seemed like a "get the guy on the way out to say it, just in case we have to blame somebody for lying... you know: he said it without Authorization from his superiors... Aahh - he was getting old and senile..." etc. ?? How lame. Anyone have any additional information on this strange, yet quite telling event? It doth appear that the mainstream press is all "a-jitter". We're on to something, here, folks -- and its quite big! My hat off to ACC for sending that Shadowlake Invitation to Secretary Cohen. I think we may have just gotten something of an answer, if I have read between the lines, correctly, and second guessed those brilliant public spin doctors over at the Pentagon!! -- Ed Wang
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 3 Follow up on Mexico video From: xalium@netwrx.net (Tom King) Date: Thu, 02 Oct 1997 17:54:34 EST Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 01:25:32 -0400 Subject: Follow up on Mexico video A few more details on the August 6, 1997 video. I made an error in my first report. The disc is seen moving counterclockwise, not clockwise. Jim D. has estimated the size at 36 feet in diameter, or larger. He needs more time to review this video, he has not ruled out a hoax yet. Also we haven't judged it as real. Its intriging, and interesting. So far its holding up to the computer tests. A helicopter towing a saucer shaped blimp is one explantion raised. Although it seems impossible and probably will be ruled out. Due to the wide angle shot, with no helicopters in the scene. Also eyewitnesses reported nothing to this effect. Another explanation raised is a computer generated image (CGI) It doesn't appear to be one, but the copy studied is second generation. The original master would be needed to check the signal strengths to verify this. The boys present who shot the footage, have not been found yet. Although Jaime Maussan, within one day located the exact spot it was shot from. He is very persistant and probably will find the original person responsible for the footage. He has had this footage for less than a week. I determined from watching the video,,(in my opinion) this video was shot on a digital video camera(DVC). I have shot footage with these cameras and recognized a distinct effect in detail, that VHS, 8mm, SVHS, etc.. can't preform. The buildings are about 1 mile away and the edges are very sharp and clear. These camera have a resolution of 500 lines. The original master could really be blown up for far better detail than a vhs copy. I have been asked for copies and to post still images of this sighting. I have no still images or video of it. This is Jamie's and Lee's investigation and case. Its up to them to disseminate the video as they want. If I did have them I won't post them anyway. The case is under investigation and I won't comprimise it in any fashion. I have no idea when they will air this footage. I doubt any tv news stations no of it. They take your material broadcast it, then upload to satellites and every news station rips it off. Then it can't be controlled and could be taken out of context, debunked in a soundbite and written off. This happened at CNN after the MNG released their load of crap on the March 13 sightings. Maybe it will take a couple of weeks or a month to get this on the tube. Or one year if you call the tv show "Sightings". Its either the UFO video smoking gun, or one hell of a hoax. I'll make a few calls and see if a still can be uploaded on the net. Tom King, Skywatcher Arizona Skywatch director AZ Skywatch http://personal.netwrx.net/xalium/skywatch/skywatch.htm OVNI Chapterhouse at http://personal.netwrx.net/xalium/ufovideo.htm
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 3 Re: The sky over Roswell From: "Michael J. Woods" <mike.woods@sympatico.ca> Date: Thu, 2 Oct 1997 17:39:43 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 01:09:42 -0400 Subject: Re: The sky over Roswell >Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 12:18:46 -0700 >From: Ted Viens <drtedv@smart1.net> >To: updates@globalserve.net >Subject: The sky over Roswell >5th July 1997 Roswell, New Mexico. The Roswell Alien Crash Street Circus >and Road Show was winding down for another day. Realizing that this >Pauper's Pilgrimage to EBE Nirvana would have to find shelter for the >night, I drove my brother and myself to my selected rest stop for a >restful overnight sleep in my '81 Toyota Corolla. This was a quiet spot >some 8,000 feet up the northern side of El Capitan near the base of the >telco microwave towers. <<snip>> >The early night was cloudless and the view of the starry skies was as >rewarding as could be expected. As the sun dropped below the horizon, >casual glances through the unobstructed northern sky failed to catch the >slow glittering sweep of any passing satellite. Local commuter flights >into the Roswell airfield passed nearly at eye level. <<snip>> >Prime satellite viewing time had passed uneventfully. The sky had become deep >black from east to west. Sitting on the concrete foundation of the >microwave tower, I again glanced straight up when, at the zenith, I >finally saw a light moving in the sky. <<snip>> Hello all, Just a short note on the above. On the evening of July 5th, 1997, I, my wife Kathy, our cheerful facilitator here, Errol Bruce-Knapp, the enchanting Sue, John Velez and, if I'm not mistaken, the crazy Texas gal Rebecca were all gathered at the pinnacle of dining delight in Roswell, New Mexico known to gourmands everywhere as the Red Lobster. Errol, Sue, Kathy and I had also been there the night before, at around the same time, from around 8pm thru 11pm ish. On the fourth and the fifth there were VIOLENT thunderstorms, complete with lightning strikes, thunderboomers and rain that fell parallel to the ground. On the fifth we definitely left the Red Lobster and found our cars soaking wet, having watched the storm from inside. I guess it was a local problem though, since the post above mentions clear skies etc and no mention of that storm. But starting around 7 in the evening and going on until midnight on July 5th there were serious, heavy thunderclouds above the immediate Roswell area. Any of the above named who remember different please feel free to post a big, Hey-Woods-lay-off-the-recreational-activity-its-burning-out-your-brain notice. Cheers all, Michael J. Woods The truth can STAY out there, send in a good fantasy.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 3 New Jersey Arson At Iron Mountain Archive From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose) Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 04:36:20 +0100 Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 01:51:48 -0400 Subject: New Jersey Arson At Iron Mountain Archive Just received this short comment from Tim after I told him that I had fullfilled his request to forward his e-mail about the arson of government archives at Iron Mountain. I'm sure he won't mind me giving this short quote. The rest of his e-mail is about other UFO stuff: "Thanks..... I hammered many researchers with it back then but nobody paid any attention to it. Alot has been happening in NJ as well as sightings and solar filming." Any comments? Here's Tim's first e-mail: Hi Stig My name Tim Edwards. I filmed a large cigar in Colorado Aug. 27, 1995 and other subsequent Ufos. I have been following your post on ACC. My question is do you think there is anything to this arson at Iron Mountain. I have failed to get any help or consideration from dozens of reseachers on this event. Following are 2 e-mails from John Diturro [computer scientist at West Point and Pine Bush NY ufologist] He did computer work on my footage for the Inside Edition Show. The last one is the article from the Star Ledger Newspaper in NJ that I recieved from another reseacher. Please forward and let me know what you think if you think its important. There has been no feedback whatsoever that this ever made it out of the local newspaper. >>Date: 19 Mar 97 22:32:11 EST >>Forwarded Message >>To: TIM EDWARDS <edwards@rmi.net> >>Tim, I don't know if you heard the news. Someone torched the Iron Mountain >>Storage Facility in South Brunswick NJ. It is a total loss. >>Thats one of the places the Gov't Stores sensitive records (posible connection to >>the GAO investigation into Roswell records). Maybe because the accountant who >>was stationed at Roswell went public last night on Strange Universe saying he >>had to pay the bills for all the equipment used during the cleanup. If there >>were any record to prove that, they are gone now. >>Date: 20 Mar 97 17:33:23 EST >> >>To: TIM EDWARDS <edwards@rmi.net> >>Tim, this was a major facility. It was five buildings( over 100,000 square >>feet). Is was also a total loss. The news said its was deliberatly set. >>This was the first time I ever heard them announce the cause of the fire befor e >it was put out. The whole thing is very suspicious. >>These reports have been forwarded to me from New York by a very respected sourse. This is a very major story. Anybody getting any feedback on news reports or anything. Is a coverup in place already? I'm working on more information. Iron Mountain is one of the main government storage facility for documents in New Jersey. Tim >>From: noah@bw.webex.net >>Date: Sat, 22 Mar 1997 12:42:48 -0500 >>To: Tim Edwards <edwards@rmi.net> >>Subject: Iron Mountain news article >>Tim, (From Noah@bw.webex.net) >>>From the New Jersey paper "The Star Ledger" >>"It was obvious to fire officials that an arsonist had targeted a South >>Brunswick industrial park. And yesterday the third fire in 12 days >>destroyed a 100,000-square foot building that contained 800,000 >>records." >>"Monday's blaze, at a smaller warehouse less than a block away >>containing about 200,000 records, burned for about 30 hours and was >>still smoldering when yesterdays (Wednesday) blaze erupted." >>"Whoever set this fire has a lot of chutzpah because we were >>investigating a fire a block away that was set in the other facility >>only Monday, said township Police Chief Michael D. Paquette." >>"It will be the target of the largest investigation we have ever >>launched, township Fire Marshal Bob Davidson said of the third fire >>since March 7 at records-storage warehouses operated by Iron Mountain >>Inc. of Boston." >>"Iron Mountain has been in business since 1951 and we have never seen >>anything like this before, nor have we ever had anything like this >>before, said Reese, who flew in following Monday's blaze." >>C. Richard Reese is chairman of the board of Iron Mountain Inc. >>"The fire triggered the sprinkler system, officials said, noting the >>warehouse was equipped with state-of the-art fire safety equipment that >>passed a recent inspection. Still the flames spread quickly. >>Investigators have no clues about what materials were used to ignite >>the blaze." >>"Although yesterday's fire was initially contained to the interior of >>the warehouse, flames spread throughout the building by 1 pm, forcing >>the evacuation of all firefighters, who were alerted by a horn. A short >>time later, the roof caved in and the walls buckled. By 8:30 pm., about >>eight large concrete wall panels had crashed to the ground." >>"Reese said new security precautions would go into effect at the >>industrial park until an arrest is made. He declined to state the >>location for temporary archives because of security concerns." >>"We will go to the end of the Earth to find those responsible, he said" >>If Roswell records were inside, he may have to go further than that!!!! >>Noah@bw.webex.net Mon, 29 Sep 1997 23:04:42 -0600 From: edwards@amigo.net (TIM EDWARDS) To: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk Subject: New Jersey Arson at Iron Mountain Mime-Version: 1.0 Search for other documents from or mentioning: stig_agermose | edwards
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 3 Re: Witness Anonymity From: Peregrine Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith] Date: Thu, 2 Oct 1997 21:36:17 -0400 Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 01:39:34 -0400 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity The Duke of Mendoza presents his compliments. >From: clark@canby.mn.frontiercomm.net [Jerome Clark] >Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 12:22:50 PDT >To: updates@globalserve.net >Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity For easy reading, I'm splitting this up into bite-sized bits, graded by my perception of their degree of tedium. Nanny always said keep the best till last, so those easily bored are advised to drag quickly to point 5 toward the end of this post, which is where you'll find the bit that's really relevant to the thread. 1. VERY TEDIOUS BIT INDEED >Where does Linda Cortile object to witticism as a general >principle? Here is the history (which you may have missed). On 5 September 1997 Linda, playing one of her many games (I mean games of the kind amenable to transactional analysis), posed some questions of me, which ended: > 5. Do you think that you're witty? >If your answers to #1 is - Yes, #2 - No, #3 - No, #4 - Yes, #5 - Yes, >And you answered the above questions in that order, then, you're an >official, unethical member of my poop list, which means that you're >a user and a pest. Now, I could be wrong in this; but taking that quotidian risk: in the context, it seemed to me that being classed a user and a pest were very nearly equivalent to expressing doubts about the reality of Linda's case (I won't say claims: the "case", such as it is, is embodied in "Witnessed", which Linda is careful to say is Budd Hopkins's story, not her story). What being, or thinking oneself, witty had to do with it is a mystery only Linda can explain. But there did and does seem to me to be at least the alien embryo of an idea there that expressing a degree of amusement at Linda's case consigns one to her private shitpile. I think it might be hard, tho' not impossible, to endorse the thesis laid out in "Witnessed" and be both witty and amused by it, so the equation of skepticism and joking is not that difficult to make. But the way Linda put it simply made it seem as if she was implying that being witty was sufficient to turn anyone, in her eyes, into a smoaking turd. This itself I find an uproarious notion, indeed one so bizarre I repeat it from time to time in the hope of provoking an exegesis from Mrs Cornipone herself. Silence so far. In the interests of good taste I refrain from hypotheses as to why. 2. PRETTY DAMN TEDIOUS BIT REALLY >What evidence is there that skeptics -- with the honorable >exception of you, of course, if that is what you are -- are >especially witty? What evidence is there that UFO proponents and >witnesses object to humor? O, I am very skeptical. Skeptics "especially" witty? Well, I wouldn't say that, and have enjoyed chuckles with parties on both sides of the somewhat factitious ufological fence. However, skeptics do tend to make better jokes about ufology than "proponents", which broadens the scope of the humor somewhat. Betty Hill takes some beating for sidesplitters about abductionists, though. But for my real take on this (I'm really only spinning this out to be as boring as possible, and if Sam Beckett could make a living at that kind of humor, I reckon I can at least do it as a hobby), see point 3. below. >(I seem to recall your and my sharing >lots of laughs together. Correct me if these are false memories. Not false at all. One of the funniest stories I have ever heard came from your own lips: The Day The Man Who Invented The Perpetual Motion Machine Came Face To Face With The Man From The Patents Office. I mention this merely to underline what I hope is obvious: I am not being personal here. May we long continue to laugh together. And if one of us is in real luck, Debbie Benstead might be there to reward every punchline. 3. QUITE TEDIOUS BUT NOT ENTIRELY IRRELEVANT BIT >Why is it ad >hominem to note Klass' equation of ufologists with Communists and >Nazis and not ad hominem for Klass so to equate? It isn't. Neither, as I uderstand the term, is ad hominem. The ad-hominemery I was - am - bemused by was - is - not Klass's whimsy here (although I still don't know the context), but your hauling Klass in as an example of how all skeptics are not witty. At least, that *is* what this-- >anybody who would accuse a skeptic of being >"witty" need only read Phil (Ufology Is Tantamount to Communism) >Klass, when the just-named thinks he's being so, to be disabused >of this strange notion. Unca Phil has all the wit of a particularly >unfunny 11-year-old. --seems to be saying. Which I thought a strange generalization. And your post seemed to be a thin excuse to clobber ole Phil. And really rather gratuitously, I reckon. If you want to belabor Phil, there are better reasons for doing so. Why, in some instances, I may even be found agreeing with you. For not even I claim that he is perfect, although I do enjoy his jokes, which come out faster and more prolifically than in his writings. Maybe you two should have dinner together sometime. >Have you any evidence, by the way, that Klass is averse to "the sweet >wine of public adulation"? [It] tells us nothing particularly >interesting about either Klass or Cortile. I don't think it tells us much about Klass (I think he is genuine and sincere in his devotion to his version of the truth). I think Linda's interest in attention and let's call it approval is pertinent to her case *as it now stands*, especially in light of her recent writhings, and failure to answer questions, about her famous anonymity. The naughty trio of HS&B may have got a lot of things wrong but I suspect their highlighting the theatrical side of Linda's case may turn out to be a real insight. Only time will tell. I am not pretending to any final answers here, so don't ask me to justify that in detail. A whole lot of other stuff needs to be put together before it could be justified as "evidence". 4. OF INTEREST ONLY TO MUSICOLOGISTS AND THE "E FAIRY" >By the way, as surely you know, the blues verse you quote is a >floating folk lyric, long predating John Renbourn (no "e"). Yes, I did know that, but it is the one verse of that blues that I have heard sung only by John Renbourn(e). Who else has? Renbourne, as spelt on the Pentangle album within reach. Renbourn as spelt in Orbis's 12-volume "The History of Rock", consultant editor yours truly. I had better agree with myself as well as you. Clearly the E Fairy, who steals Es from the middle of my name and puts them on the end of yours, and when that gets boring turns Dennis into Stacey, has been at work here. Beware this dreadful entity, the rest of you. To be cursed by the E Fairy is a terrible thing. Jerry, Dennis and I must have done something awful in a former life to be plagued by this demon. Imagine "Rrol Bruc Knapp". "Donald Kyho". Ad infinitum. It is worse than having a K in your name. At least you can deny being a gubmint agent. You can only get your E back by begging and pleading, and leaving little bowls of milk in your hearth at night. Even if the fairy obliges, the people may not. Aaiiiii! 5. WITNESS ANONYMITY AND STUNNED SILENCE >> PS: Jerry, what *is* the story on Terry O'Leary of Larson fame? >What story? I wish there were one. He's always been the missing >testimony (except as gleaned from the brief telephone interview to >which he consented) in the case. O well, there y'go. I thought that as you *had* used his real name in the "UFO Encyclopedia", perhaps you had been in touch with him in the interim. And may have gleaned more. My turn to be stunned, if not into silence, however, by this: >At the time I wrote up the >original article (in UFO Report long ago), I gave him the >pseudonym "Larry Mahoney" for reasons that escape me. Writing >the story again nearly two decades later, I decided to use his >real name. You also wrote, on 2 September 1997, to this List: >If a UFO witness requests anonymity, it is our ethical responsibility >to guarantee it and protect it. Period. According to the earliest account I have to hand of the Larson case, in "Abducted! Confrontations with Beings from Outer Space", Coral and Jim Lorenzen, Berkley Medallion 1977, "The friend, who was driving, does not wish to be identified, so hereafter we shall refer to him as Larry Mahoney, a pseudonym given him by the investigator." (page 77) "The investigator" would appear to be you. Any comment? Meanwhile, while I'm prepared to protect to the hilt the anonymity of anyone who requests it of me, I still feel it's not a satisfactory arrangement when it comes to cross-checking or re-investigating such a case. The claims in "Witnessed" are so gargantuan that anonymity only weakens it (further); and it makes a bad template for arguing for witness anonymity in general. Linda was either naive or calculating to go to Albuquerque, or possibly just foolhardy. I don't think she is naive. Yours &c Patacake D. Marzipan Sweet Tooth
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 3 Historical Organizatons: CSI-NZ From: jan@cyberzone.net (Jan Aldrich) Date: Thu, 02 Oct 1997 23:11:14 -0700 Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 02:20:54 -0400 Subject: Historical Organizatons: CSI-NZ CIVILIAN SAUCER INVESTIGATION N.Z. (CSI-NZ) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ (Excerpted from History of UFO Organizations in New Zealand by Henry Quast that appeared in "Xenology," #100, Sep-Oct 1975.) Harold Fulton was undoubtedly the driving force behind the C.S.I. organisation. It was formed by RNZAF Sargeant Fulton on 12th October 1952, as a closed organisation associated with personel of the Air Force Base at Whenuapai. Opened to public subscription the following year, membership rapidly increased to some 150 persons within a few months and a little later to some 500 subscribers - early issues of the first publications "Flying Saucers" were reprinted, and sold on Auckland bookstalls. Harold Fulton had been corresponding with his U.S. Air Force counterparts since 1947 when the UFO scene in America was the complete preserve of Airforce personel - some of them had been associated with "Foo-Fighter" activity over Japan and Germany during the closing stages of World War II. CSI organised a nation-wide network of observers and reporters, produced a great deal of written UFO material of high quality and fostered the idea of extraterrestrial intelligence through a lethargic, national press, (things haven't changed much!). "Flying Saucers" presented an open, enthusiastic, and intelligent approach to the subject (the name was changed later on to "Spaceprobe"). It acquired an excellent reputation, and offered a range of differing opinions on UFO topics of the period - much of this material still retains its relevance twenty years afterwards. _Meanwhile_: In 1953, Californian George Adamski and English co-author Desmond Leslie produced a sensational book "Flying Saucers Have Landed". A major UFO flap in the United States and intense public interest in the Adamski/Leslie book amplified the flying saucer into a social phenomenon overnight. Air Force buffs were swamped by the response and officials began to retrench their ideas on UFOs. Associated civilian organisations lost valuable Air Force support (some like Major Donald Keyhoe carried on alone) and Adamski flying saucer fan clubs blossomed throughout America. The Adamski crusade reached New Zealand in 1954. His book sold well here, was serialised in magazines and there were advertisements placed in newspapers inviting interested persons to write to the author in California. In late 1954 the Dickesons pioneered the (Australisian) Adamski Flying Saucer Group, later the Adamski Correspondence Group. At their instigation Adamski agreed to make tapes. These were played over at meetings in Timaru and Christchurch. Tapes were copied and exchanged with Fred Stone, Australia. In June 1955 one tape, "75 Questions And Answers" was transcribed and duplicated for distribution. Tapes originally made for Timaru by Adamski and Desmond Leslie were later distributed world wide by Adamski, from California. Indeed interest from all over the world was sufficiently great to warrant the designation of individuals as group organisers of "Adamski Correspondence Groups". The Adamski Correspondence Groups proved popular and competed for membership with Harold Fulton's C.S.I. Harold Fulton provided a variety of comment on Adamski's ideas and activities from independant sources in America, and appears to have tolerated this kind of interest. Early articles on Adamski seem quite enthusiastic, but such material became more critical as time passed. After Adamski's visit to New Zealand in January - February 1959, he began to openly challenge the Adamski approach, and the coexistence between CSI and Adamski organisations ceased. C.S.I. was put into "recess" in September 1959, prior to Fulton's being posted to Singapore for two years - no-one else seemed prepared to carry on the CSI organisation. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Unfortunately, Mr. Quast's interests seem to revolve around Adamski. Harold Fulton and CSI-NZ involved much more than just this famous contactee. CSI-NZ corresponded with Albert Bender in the US and Edgar Jarrold of the Australian Flying Saucer Bureau in Sydney in the early 1950s. Later, CSI-NZ corresponded with CSI-NY http//www.ufomind.com/ufo/people/c/csi-ny/ After 1957, they had exchanges with NICAP which was support throughout CSI-NZ publications. http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/people/n/nicap/ Harold Fulton became a NICAP adviser and continued as adviser after CSI-NZ folded. Fulton's and CSI-NZ's files survived, and Murray Bott is the custodian. http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/people/m/murray/ -- Jan Aldrich Project 1947 http://www.iufog.org/project1947/ ------------------------ Index: CSI-NZ Index: Harold Fulton
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 3 Mars Chasm Dwarfs Grand Canyon From: TotlResrch@aol.com [Kal K. Korff] Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 03:28:07 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 04:10:41 -0400 Subject: Mars Chasm Dwarfs Grand Canyon Mars Chasm Dwarfs Grand Canyon Scientists say they have discovered a giant chasm on Mars nearly three times deeper than the Grand Canyon, as well as evidence that an ocean bigger than the Pacific may once have existed on the planet. The latest Martian findings come from the Mars Global Surveyor spacecraft, which began orbiting Mars last month in preparation for a 2 1/2-year mapping operation. Meanwhile, the scientist in charge of the Mars Pathfinder mission on the planet's surface, said he believed a communications problem with the craft could be overcome. More information can be found at various NASA and NASA-related web and mirror web sites.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 3 Re: Witness Anonymity From: HONEYBE100@aol.com Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 04:55:30 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 09:54:15 -0400 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity >Date: Thu 2 Oct 1997 21:36:17 -0400 >From: Peregrine Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com (P. Brooksmith) >Subject: Witness Anonymity >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> The Contessa of Ricotta presents her logic: Hello Errol and all: Peter Brooksmith wrote this to Jerry Clark: >On 5 September 1997 Linda, playing one of her many games (I mean >games of the kind amenable to transactional analysis), posed some >questions of me, which ended: >5. Do you think that you're witty? >If your answers to #1 is - Yes, #2 - No, #3 - No, #4 - Yes, #5 - Yes, and >you answered the above questions in that order, then, you're an offical, >unetjhical member of my poop list, which means that you're a user and >a pest. Oh...come off it, Peter!!!! You're just angry because I think you're a user and a pest. You're recent posts have confirmed that!! Yes, you try to be witty, but you're not, when it isn't appropriate. This doesn't mean that I don't enjoy a good sense of humor. You're also annoyed because I am 'not' naive. After all, haven't you tried to to brush some of the blame of what you have done, on Budd Hopkins? If in fact it's true, that Hopkins used my real name in San Marino, I'm sure it was a slip up. But you, Peter, knew exactly what you were doing when you published my photograph and my real name in your book, without asking for my permission. Of course, I would've said 'no" anyway, but your asking would have been "a common courtesy." What you have done, confirms that you are an inconsiderate user and that isn't witty. Your posts ratify that you are a pest too. I haven't replied to your posts because I've been shunning you and I'm glad you're angry...you deserve to feel that way. And by the way, when you become as good a writer and as ethical as Jerry Clark is, your wit will then be funnier. Let's hope for appropriate timing. Truly, Linda Cortile
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 3 Re: John Velez video arrives in Japan From: Penrose Christopher <penrose@sfc.keio.ac.jp> Date: Fri, 3 Oct 97 18:52:27 +0900 Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 10:01:13 -0400 Subject: Re: John Velez video arrives in Japan Hello folks. This is public announcement that I have received and viewed John Velez's video which certainly does seem to depict a flying object of some variety. I will make my analysis and post an opinion in a few days. Though I am not yet ready to post a firm opinion (I don't know that I will be able to), the object thus far is not readily identifiable by me. I will work tonight, using a Silicon Graphics workstation to get some more single frame captures from the video. The video footage itself provides a wealth of information and is quite intriguing. Chris Penrose penrose@sfc.keio.ac.jp
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 3 Re: Christianity Online The Truth is Out There From: Penrose Christopher <penrose@sfc.keio.ac.jp> Date: Fri, 3 Oct 97 18:37:31 +0900 Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 09:59:57 -0400 Subject: Re: Christianity Online The Truth is Out There I find it difficult to be tolerant of "evangelical", or better described as TOTALITARIAN, Christian crusaders. Such people who deny or purposefully marginalize diversity of thought and culture, conduct insensitive brainwashing and cultural eradication I find quite morally reprehensible and considerably evil. The historical record of Christian conduct toward other civilizations is appallingly vile. I will try to be tolerant however, particularly as there are a handful of Christians who actually practice conscientious tolerance themselves. Christians, like everyone else but no more so, deserve a voice on this list. However, I think that the purpose of this list is not specifically intended to be a forum to discuss the rationality of the belief in Christianity. To discuss the existence of God or Satan, whether GOD = SATAN etc., these discussions are perhaps better discussed in more appropriate forums. However, we can acknowledge the possibility that "demonic" possession is a reality. Particularly if a more concrete definition of what "demonic possession" implies is presented by Christian proselytizers. Let me acknowledge demonic possession in the following way. The act of "demonizing", in English, is the simple act of labelling something as "demonic", "evil" or highly undesireable. Because a "demon" is simply an extraordinarily vague "manifestation of evil", it is an extraordinarily effective rhetorical tool for slandering just about any noun, proper or otherwise. Until someone can provide a more concrete example of what a "demon" is, and provide some concrete evidence beyond the pathetic "evidence of faith" that they exist, then we can simply acknowledge that some Christians label evidence of alien presence on Earth as a "demonic" presence out of either some need to deny the reality of this alien presence, or out of a xenophobic fear of it. It is sad and strange that people who believe in the presence of UFOs are treated with far greater intolerance and mockery than people who believe in demons, as there is far greater evidence that unknown objects are whizzing above our heads than the existence of a demon, whatever a demon might be. Christopher Penrose penrose@sfc.keio.ac.jp
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 3 Re: UFO ROUNDUP Volume 2, Number 37 - Scottish From: Graham William Birdsall <106151.1150@compuserve.com> Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 07:17:24 -0400 Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 10:03:58 -0400 Subject: Re: UFO ROUNDUP Volume 2, Number 37 - Scottish >UFO ROUNDUP >Volume 2, Number 37 >September 28, 1997 >Editor: Joseph Trainor >STRANGE LIGHTS SEEN OVER >SCOTLAND'S EAST COAST > On Monday, September 22, 1997, at 11:30 p.m., >people living in Tyne Tees and other communities >along Scotland's eastern shore reported seeing >"bright objects of various sizes, emitting light." > According to Richard Gall, Scotland's director >of Skywatch International, "Lights were observed >shooting across each other, and then witnesses heard >several loud explosions followed by light flashes and a >crackling sound." > One woman reported seeing "what appeared to be >a comet with a red tail." The UFO approached to within >300 meters of her. > Scotland's Rescue Service dispatched a lifeboard, >to reportedly search for survivors and debris from "a >mid-air collision." > Edinburgh University stated that the incident may >have been caused by a bolide, or exploding meteor, >that scattered fiery debris over a wide area. > Craig Lindsey, spokesman for the UK Ministry of >Defence at RAF Kinloss, said the military were >"checking the area" and had begun "an investigation >into these reports." (Many thanks to Richard Gall of >Skywatch International for this story.) This was an extremely interesting event in every sense. We had conflicting statements about the time-frame: Senior scientific officer Alan Pickup of the Royal Observatory in Edinburgh said the object was almost certainly a meteor - up to the size of a suitcase. "It would have been travelling at anything from 10 to 50 miles a second. It is certainly a very rare event. A meteor big enough to be seen in Scotland during daylight has not been seen for some time," said Mr. Pickup. The official Ministry of Defence explanation now offered is that the event can be put down to the re-entry of declining Cosmos 2343 - a satellite which burned up in the atmosphere. I by-passed RAF Kinloss and spoke with one of the flight crew who were scrambled from RAF Boulmer late Monday night. Interestingly, they didn't stand down until between 9.00am - 10.00am the following Tuesday morning. Later that same day, crew from a lifeboat reported "downward lights" coming into the sea... The RAF individual concerned said it was "..real War of the Worlds stuff." We have further quotes of interest, including comments made by Squ. Leader Paul Rayfield, senior operations chief at the early warning ballistic missile facility at RAF Fylingdales, home to the world's most sophisticated radar, in which he states: "The Ministry of Defence are saying the object was Cosmos 2343, but we can't categorically say that this is the case." A feature will appear in our November/December '97 issue of UFO Magazine (on UK newsstands 24 October). * Apologies to those who have tried to reach me over the last couple of weeks, my absence was due to devoting much of my time to the Leeds Conference (19-21 September) and catching up in other areas. Please note that I will be in Brisbane, Australia, between 14-21 October but someone will be here to download messages in my absence. Best regards, Graham W. Birdsall (Editor) UFO Magazine [UK]
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 3 Re: BWW Media Alert 971003 From: BufoCalvin@aol.com Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 05:11:27 -0700 (PDT) Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 10:05:22 -0400 Subject: Re: BWW Media Alert 971003 Bufo Calvin, P O Box 5231, Walnut Creek, CA 94596 E-mail: BufoCalvin@aol.com Website: http://members.aol.com/bufocalvin ( <A HREF="http://members.aol.com/ BufoCalvin/index.html">BufoCalvin's Home Page</A> ) TAP (The Address Project) Bufo's WEIRD WORLD e-zine Bufo's WEIRD WORLD Media Alert Bufo's WEIRD WORLD Books ( <A HREF="http://members.aol.com/weirdware/books.ht ml">Bufo's WEIRD WORLD Books</A> ) ALL RIGHTS RESERVED (permission is granted to reproduce or redistribute this edition of Bufo's WEIRD WORLD Media Alert provided that attribution is made to http://members.aol.com/bufocalvin. It is good etiquette to check with strangers before you e-mail them something. If you forward this, please make sure it is clear that you are forwarding it). October 3, 1997 Quite a week! THE LEARNING CHANNEL is running an alien week (10:00 PM weeknights), there are repeats of Castle Ghosts episodes, and a chance to see THE MYSTERIOUS ORIGINS OF MAN. On the other hand, I have heard that COULD IT BE A MIRACLE? is no longer producing new episodes. I've had a chance to see LOOKING BEYOND, and I'm sad to report that the rumor mill (I've heard it from a couple of sources, nothing official) says that the financial backers may have pulled out. Doesn't mean it's over yet. Oh, and look for a special episode of STRANGE UNIVERSE in your area this week: includes allegations of the recent Mars landing having been a fake, John Lennon's UFO sighting, etc. Btw, no SIGHTINGS episode Thursday night this week. Having a tough time squeezing this in this week, so back to work! Oh, er, a website update: I've added a bunch of parapsychology videos, the =new= version of Jerome Clark's UFO ENCYCLOPEDIA, and quite a bit more good stuff! It's starting to come together...I'll start promoting it by the end of October, I think. ON-LINE OMNI MAGAZINE (http://www.omnimag.com Omni Magazine ) is back to do real time conferences. The regular night for our kind of stuff is Tuesday 7:00 PM to 8:00 PM Pacific. Antonio Huneeus, columnist for FATE Magazine ( <A HREF=" http://www.llewellyn.com">FATE Magazine</A> ) and author of A STUDY GUIDE TO UFOS, PSYCHIC AND PARANORMAL PHENOMENA IN THE U.S.S.R. ( <A HREF="http://www.a mazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0938294849/bufosweirdworldA/">A Study Guide to Ufos , Psychic and Paranormal Phenomena in the U.S.S.R.</A> ) UK.UFO.NW (tons of irc addresses, the channel is #UFO...you can get there through http://www.holodeck.demon.co.uk/ultrachat.html), 3:00 PM (Pacific), Saturday, Stanton Friedman, UFO proponent, nuclear physicist, MJ-12 defender, Roswell investigator, author of Top Secret/Majic ( <A HREF="http://www.amazon. com/exec/obidos/ISBN=1569247412/bufosweirdworldA/">Top Secret/Majic</A> ),. among others. RADIO AND TELEVISION SYNDICATED RADIO: END OF THE LINE is now SIGHTINGS ON THE RADIO. This has resulted, among other things, in a new website: http://www.sightings.com. SIGHTINGS ON THE RADIO Next week's guests not known (except for Michael Lindemann ...he'll be on at 6:00 PM Wednesday as I write this, but you can check their website on Monday. It can also be heard on your computer. Airtimes: M-F 6-9 PM Pacific (times given here are generally Pacific),. Sunday 8-11 PM Pacific. Archives of earlier shows are also available, so you can hear my previous broadcasts through this site. SYNDICATED TV: LOOKING BEYOND --What I believe to be the Valentich case, where a pilot disappeared during a UFO encounter in Australia; what I'm guessing is religious snake handlers; fire poltergeist; life on Mars; psychic detective (don't know who they are doing, but here's one book by a psychic detective, Nancy Myer ((. <A HREF="htt p://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0312954816/bufosweirdworldA/">Silent Witne ss: The True Story of a Psychic Detective</A> )) ...see also ARTHUR C. CLARKE'S MYSTERIOUS UNIVERSE on Saturday PSI-FACTOR (see http://www.psifactor.com for stations and airdates and other info). This series is supposedly based on real cases. --DONOR (something is mutilating animals, but what is it?) Saturday, October 4 RADIO: THE EDGE OF REALITY, 5:00 PM -8:00 PM Pacific. Also available on Satcom C5, Transponder 23, SEDAT Channel 24. The specific spots have to be considered tentative, and the station in your area may run it tape-delayed. I've found out recently that the one in my area even runs it out of order, running the third hour first! Two guests only this week, each one for 90 minutes, but it sounds like a great show! First is their frequent guest psychic, John Edward. The second guest is arch-skeptic, James (The Amazing) Randi, whose most recent debunking book is An Encyclopedia of Claims, Frauds, and Hoaxes of the Occult and Supernatural : James Randi's Decidedly Skeptical Definitions of Alternate Realities ( <A HREF="http://www. amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0312151195/bufosweirdworldA/">An Encyclopedia of C laims, Frauds, and Hoaxes</A> ). 2:30 PM, THE DISCOVERY CHANNEL, ARTHUR C. CLARKE'S MYSTERIOUS WORLD: PSYCHIC DETECTIVES (see also LOOKING BEYOND) 6:00 PM, THE LEARNING CHANNEL, CASTLE GHOSTS OF SCOTLAND 7:00 PM, THE LEARNING CHANNEL, CASTLE GHOSTS OF IRELAND Sunday, October 5 SYNDICATED RADIO, 7:00 PM, ART BELL'S DREAMLAND: Art interviews Philip Corso, author of THE DAY AFTER ROSWELL ( <A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/I SBN=0671004611/bufosweirdworldA/">The Day After Roswell</A> ) NOTE: This is a replay of the July 6 episode(see website at http://www.artbell.com)(see http://www.artbell.com) LOCAL TELEVISION, KING COUNTY WASHINGTON, CHANNEL 29, 7:00 PM: JOURNEY: Brenda Roberts produces. 11:00 AM, THE SCI-FI CHANNEL, SIGHTINGS (#5063): Illinois haunting; Russian UFO; angels (sorry the details are a sketchy. Check http://www.scifi.com/sightings for more info. It hadn't changed over to this week at "press time") 4:00 PM, THE DISCOVERY CHANNEL, SCI-TREK, PSI-FILES, THE REAL X-FILES (this is quite a good bit on remote viewers...there are many remote viewing books, including REMOTE VIEWING: THE SECRET HISTORY OF AMERICA'S PSYCHIC SPIES ( <A H REF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0440223067/bufosweirdworldA/">Remo te Viewing: the Secret History of America's Psychic Spies</A> ), which is more of an overview 4:00 PM, THE SCI-FI CHANNEL, SIGHTINGS (#5063): Illinois haunting; Russian UFO; angels (sorry the details are a sketchy. Check http://www.scifi.com/sightings for more info. It hadn't changed over to this week at "press time") 6:00 PM, THE DISCOVERY CHANNEL, ARTHUR C. CLARKE'S MYSTERIOUS WORLD: MONSTERS OF THE DEEP 9:00 PM, THE LEARNING CHANNEL, MYSTERIES OF THE MILLENIUM 10:00 PM, THE LEARNING CHANNEL, MYSTERIOUS ORIGINS OF MAN (This is the highly controversial Charlton Heston-hosted show, which has caused some critics to decry the state of science coverage on television) 10:00 PM, THE SCI-FI CHANNEL, SIGHTINGS (#5063): Illinois haunting; Russian UFO; angels (sorry the details are a sketchy. Check http://www.scifi.com/sightings for more info. It hadn't changed over to this week at "press time") Monday, October 6 SYNDICATED TV, MONDAY, STRANGE UNIVERSE: (see website at http://www.strangeuniverse.com (( Strange Universe )) for stations and playtimes in your area.) LOCAL TELEVISION, SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON, 3:00 PM: JOURNEY: Brenda Roberts produces. 12:00 AM, THE LEARNING CHANNEL, MYSTERIES OF THE MILLENIUM 1:00 AM, THE LEARNING CHANNEL, MYSTERIOUS ORIGINS OF MAN (This is the highly controversial Charlton Heston-hosted show, which has caused some critics to decry the state of science coverage on television) 10:01 AM, THE SCI-FI CHANNEL, MYSTERIES, MAGIC, AND MIRACLES (#25) WEREWOLF; CHESSIE (Chesapeake Bay sea serpent); INDIAN BURIAL GROUNDS 6:00 PM, THE LEARNING CHANNEL, ATLANTIS, THE LOST CONTINENT 9:00 PM, THE LEARNING CHANNEL, ATLANTIS, THE LOST CONTINENT 10:00 PM, THE LEARNING CHANNEL, ALIENS WEEK, ALIEN ENCOUNTER (looks like more SETI than UFO) 11:30 PM, NBC, DAVID LETTERMAN, guest Dan Akyroyd (probably plugging PSI FACTOR)...he once gave Letterman a copy of Tim Good's UFO cover-up classic, Above Top Secret ( <A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/ exec/obidos/ISBN=0688092020 /bufosweirdworldA/">Above Top Secret</A> ) on the show, as I recall. Tuesday, October 7 SYNDICATED TV, THE ROSIE O'DONNEL SHOW, Dan Aykroyd (he always talks weird stuff, and is certain to plug PSI FACTOR) SYNDICATED TV, TUESDAY, STRANGE UNIVERSE: (see website at http://www.strangeuniverse.com for stations and playtimes in your area) 1:00 AM, THE LEARNING CHANNEL, ALIENS WEEK, ALIEN ENCOUNTER (looks like more SETI than UFO) 10:01 AM, THE SCI-FI CHANNEL, MYSTERIES, MAGIC AND MIRACLES (#26): TWINS; SAN ANTONIO SPIRITS; SNAKE DANCING 10:00 PM, THE LEARNING CHANNEL, ALIENS WEEK, UFO Wednesday, October 8 SYNDICATED TV, WEDNESDAY, MONTEL WILLIAMS: psychic guest SYNDICATED TV, WEDNESDAY, STRANGE UNIVERSE: (see website at http://www.strangeuniverse.com for stations and playtimes in your area) 1:00 AM, THE LEARNING CHANNEL, ALIENS WEEK, UFO 10:01 AM, THE SCI-FI CHANNEL, MYSTERIES, MAGIC, AND MIRACLES (#27): "Roadside Miracle"; "UFO Encounters"; "Black Dahlia" (a really grotesque Hollywood murder case) 10:00 PM, THE LEARNING CHANNEL, ALIENS WEEK, UFOS AND OTHER CLOSE ENCOUNTERS Thursday, October 9 SYNDICATED TV, THURSDAY, STRANGE UNIVERSE: (see website at http://www.strangeuniverse.com for stations and playtimes in your area) 1:00 AM, THE LEARNING CHANNEL, ALIENS WEEK, UFOS AND OTHER CLOSE ENCOUNTERS 10:01 AM, THE SCI-FI CHANNEL, MAGIC, MYSTERIES AND MIRACLES (#28): "Sporting Chance" (superior athletic performance by physically challenged people); "Pendle Witches"; "Hypnotism": 4:00 PM, THE SCI-FI CHANNEL, SIGHTINGS (#50) 7:00 PM, A&E, THE UNEXPLAINED, 8:00 PM, THE SCI-FI CHANNEL, SIGHTINGS (#50 9:00 PM, THE DISCOVERY CHANNEL, ARTHUR C. CLARKE'S MYSTERIOUS WORLD, 11:00 PM, A&E, THE UNEXPLAINED, NOAH'S FLOOD Friday, October 10 LOCAL RADIO, 8:00 PM (Pacific Time) WGBB 1240 AM, New York: THE JOYCE KELLER SHOW: the host is a psychic who helps callers. Phone number is 516-955-1240 SYNDICATED TV, FRIDAY, STRANGE UNIVERSE: (see website at http://www.strangeuniverse.com for stations and playtimes in your area) 12:00 AM, THE DISCOVERY CHANNEL, ARTHUR C. CLARKE'S MYSTERIOUS WORLD, 10:01 AM, THE SCI-FI CHANNEL, MAGIC, MYSTERIES AND MIRACLES (#29): "Jack The Ripper"; "Communion" (Whitley Strieber's book (( <A HREF="http://www.amazon.co m/exec/obidos/ISBN=0380703882/bufosweirdworldA/">Communion: A True Story</A> , his account of his abduction experiences, and a great read! I'll try and get his other books up on the website soon)); "Curse of the Kennedy's": 6:30 PM, THE LEARNING CHANNEL, REAL HISTORY - MYSTERIES WEEK, THE LOCH NESS MONSTER (my favorite overview of LNM? THE ENIGMA OF LOCH NESS: MAKING SENSE OF A MYSTERY (( <A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0252060318/buf osweirdworldA/">The Enigma of Loch Ness: Making Sense of a Mystery</A> ))) 10:00 PM, THE LEARNING CHANNEL, ALIEN WEEK, CLOSE ENCOUNTERS OF THE FIFTH KIND (abductions) This is Bufo saying, "If =everything= seemed normal, that =would= be weird!" ____________________________ You can stop receiving this from me just by asking (note: it is commonly redistributed, and I can't control you getting it from those sources) by e-mail at BufoCalvin@aol.com. You can also subscribe or unsubscribe to Bufo's WEIRD WORLD (which covers theories and happenings) the same way. Also, please let me know if there is something in the media you think I should cover. Deadline is Tuesday, the week before. _____________________________ **OPUS is the Organization for Paranormal Understanding and Support. I am an Executive Boardmember, and Director of the OPUS Educational Institute. OPUS encourages its officers and Network Associates to express their own opinions: however, it is important to note that I do not speak for OPUS in this piece or others presented under my own name. The new OPUS phone number is (510) 689-4198 ______________________________ Bufo's WEIRD WORLD BOOKS ( <A HREF="http://members.aol.com/weirdware/books.htm l">Bufo's WEIRD WORLD Books</A> ) I'm very excited about this! Some of you know, I ran a bookstore for years, and it has always been a love of mine. I get asked often to recommend books (I do write reviews for several publications) on these topics, and now I can do it and actually give you a source for them at the same time! This is being done in association with Amazon.com, which has an outstanding reputation for the five "S"s of internet shopping: selection, searchability, service, savings, and security. If there is any specific book you want (or topic in which you are interested), let me know and I will do the research and e-mail you a link you can use to check it out more (and order it if you want). I will be linking to books within the Media Alert, to make it more efficient for you. If you click on the link, you will be sent to that title on Amazon. You do =not= have to buy it at that point! You may, but the option is yours.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 3 Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words From: "Serge Salvaille" <sergesa@connectmmic.net> Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 10:15:11 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 10:48:20 -0400 Subject: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words >Date: Thu, 2 Oct 1997 17:34:14 -0400 >From: BOB SHELL <76750.2717@compuserve.com> >Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >>From: c549597@showme.missouri.edu [Barbara Becker] >>Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 13:21:06 -0500 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words >>Yes, Independent (that means he looked at the photos WITHOUT >>an agenda) photoanalyst Wm. Hyzer, however his report was disregarded by >>MUFON. Barbara, Bob My inquiry about Mr. Hyzer's analysis of some Gulf Breeze pictures lead me to the following document: http://www.skiesare.demon.co.uk/b-or-b.htm Titled: 'SYNOPSIS OF WILLIAM G. HYZER'S _THE GULF BREEZE PHOTOGRAPHS: BONA FIDE OR BOGUS?_ (Second edition, March 15, 1992) by Rex and Carol Salisberry' The first lines read: "Late in 1990, Mr. Walter Andrus, International Director of MUFON, requested Mr. William G. Hyzer to undertake a photo analysis of the Walters photos. Mr Andrus made the request at the suggestion of Mr. Jerry Black, who had made the initial contact with Mr. Hyzer. "Mr. Hyzer is a nationally-recognized photogrammetrist, who was honored by an award from the American Academy of Forensic Sciences at their annual meeting in February 1992. Mr. Hyzer was assisted in his analysis of the Walters photos by his son, Dr. James B. Hyzer. Mr. Andrus provided copies of photos , 2, 5, 9, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 36L&R, 37L&R and 38L&R for their work. It is unfortunate that Mr. Andrus could not provide Walters' original photos or at least first-generation copies to Mr. Hyzer for his analysis." I will spare you the rest. I just want to point out that the Hyzer's analysis is an info readily available on the Net. It is worth looking into. What bugs me though (among other things), is... " Mr. Andrus could not provide Walters' original photos or at least first-generation copies to Mr. Hyzer for his analysis" Did Dr. Maccabee get at least first-generation copies for his analysis ? Oh... BTW, the last 2 lines of the cited document read: "ed note: William Hyzer has no particular interest in ufology and should be considered an impartial analyst." Phew, almost forgot to read the label <g>. Serge Salvaille Search for other documents from or mentioning: sergesa | 76750.2717 |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 3 Re: Witness Anonymity From: clark@canby.mn.frontiercomm.net [Jerome Clark] Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 09:52:02 PDT Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 11:16:38 -0400 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity > Date: Thu, 2 Oct 1997 21:36:17 -0400 > From: Peregrine Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith] > Subject: Witness Anonymity > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > The Duke of Mendoza presents his compliments. > >From: clark@canby.mn.frontiercomm.net [Jerome Clark] > >Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 12:22:50 PDT > >To: updates@globalserve.net > >Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity > 1. VERY TEDIOUS BIT INDEED > >Where does Linda Cortile object to witticism as a general > >principle? > Here is the history (which you may have missed). > On 5 September 1997 Linda, playing one of her many games (I mean > games of the kind amenable to transactional analysis), posed some > questions of me, which ended: > > 5. Do you think that you're witty? > >If your answers to #1 is - Yes, #2 - No, #3 - No, #4 - Yes, #5 - Yes, > >And you answered the above questions in that order, then, you're an > >official, unethical member of my poop list, which means that you're > >a user and a pest. > Now, I could be wrong in this; but taking that quotidian risk: in the > context, it seemed to me that being classed a user and a pest were > very nearly equivalent to expressing doubts about the reality of > Linda's case (I won't say claims: the "case", such as it is, is > embodied in "Witnessed", which Linda is careful to say is Budd > Hopkins's story, not her story). What being, or thinking oneself, > witty had to do with it is a mystery only Linda can explain. But > there did and does seem to me to be at least the alien embryo of an > idea there that expressing a degree of amusement at Linda's case > consigns one to her private shitpile. I think it might be hard, tho' > not impossible, to endorse the thesis laid out in "Witnessed" and be > both witty and amused by it, so the equation of skepticism and joking > is not that difficult to make. But the way Linda put it simply made > it seem as if she was implying that being witty was sufficient to > turn anyone, in her eyes, into a smoaking turd. This itself I find an > uproarious notion, indeed one so bizarre I repeat it from time to > time in the hope of provoking an exegesis from Mrs Cornipone herself. > Silence so far. In the interests of good taste I refrain from > hypotheses as to why. Duke, This is a mighty long-winded way of observing that Linda does not like to be made fun of. So she's a human being. What else is new? > 2. PRETTY DAMN TEDIOUS BIT REALLY > >What evidence is there that skeptics -- with the honorable > >exception of you, of course, if that is what you are -- are > >especially witty? What evidence is there that UFO proponents and > >witnesses object to humor? > O, I am very skeptical. Skeptics "especially" witty? Well, I wouldn't > say that, and have enjoyed chuckles with parties on both sides of the > somewhat factitious ufological fence. However, skeptics do tend to > make better jokes about ufology than "proponents", which broadens the > scope of the humor somewhat. Betty Hill takes some beating for > sidesplitters about abductionists, though. But for my real take on > this (I'm really only spinning this out to be as boring as possible, > and if Sam Beckett could make a living at that kind of humor, I reckon > I can at least do it as a hobby), see point 3. below. I am very skeptical, too, and among the phenomena about which I entertain the deepest doubts are self-proclaimed "skeptics," on whose curious and often hilarious ways I have written at length. (See, for example, the revelations about Menzel in my forthcoming book.) My interactions with them are extensive, and I have found militant disbelievers every bit as humorless as (and sometimes more frightening than) true believers. Of course by "skeptics," since you seem to find Klass a paragon of wit and wisdom, I assume you mean debunkers. My friend Marcello Truzzi, who is a skeptic (a doubter), not a debunker (a denier), is one of the funniest people I know. Another of the funniest men I know, by the way, is Budd Hopkins. > 3. QUITE TEDIOUS BUT NOT ENTIRELY IRRELEVANT BIT > >Why is it ad > >hominem to note Klass' equation of ufologists with Communists and > >Nazis and not ad hominem for Klass so to equate? > It isn't. Neither, as I uderstand the term, is ad hominem. The > ad-hominemery I was - am - bemused by was - is - not Klass's whimsy > here (although I still don't know the context), but your hauling > Klass in as an example of how all skeptics are not witty. At least, > that *is* what this-- > >anybody who would accuse a skeptic of being > >"witty" need only read Phil (Ufology Is Tantamount to Communism) > >Klass, when the just-named thinks he's being so, to be disabused > >of this strange notion. Unca Phil has all the wit of a particularly > >unfunny 11-year-old. > --seems to be saying. Which I thought a strange generalization. And > your post seemed to be a thin excuse to clobber ole Phil. And really > rather gratuitously, I reckon. If you want to belabor Phil, there are > better reasons for doing so. Why, in some instances, I may even be > found agreeing with you. For not even I claim that he is perfect, > although I do enjoy his jokes, which come out faster and more > prolifically than in his writings. Maybe you two should have dinner > together sometime. I think I'll pass. I've spent as much time in Klass' company as I hope to ever again, and it wasn't fun. Once he tried, or at least acted as if he were trying, to put out a cigarette in my face, this after a loudly voiced "joke," implying -- in the style of insult favored by 11 year olds of all ages -- that I have same-sex affectional preferences. To the best of my observation, he was not drunk at the time. Yeah, the man is just loads of laughs. I'm glad he's YOUR friend. I'm a little choosier about mine. > >Have you any evidence, by the way, that Klass is averse to "the sweet > >wine of public adulation"? [It] tells us nothing particularly >interesting > about either Klass or Cortile. > I don't think it tells us much about Klass (I think he is genuine > and sincere in his devotion to his version of the truth). I think > Linda's interest in attention and let's call it approval is pertinent > to her case *as it now stands*, especially in light of her recent > writhings, and failure to answer questions, about her famous > anonymity. The naughty trio of HS&B may have got a lot of things > wrong but I suspect their highlighting the theatrical side of Linda's > case may turn out to be a real insight. Only time will tell. I am not > pretending to any final answers here, so don't ask me to justify > that in detail. A whole lot of other stuff needs to be put together > before it could be justified as "evidence". To the "genuine" and "sincere" I would add two other adjectives: "obsessed" and even "nutty." Next to Klass' excesses, about which you continue to maintain a tactful silence, Linda Cortile's alleged "theatrical side" is of no moral consequence whatever. > 4. OF INTEREST ONLY TO MUSICOLOGISTS AND THE "E FAIRY" > >By the way, as surely you know, the blues verse you quote is a > >floating folk lyric, long predating John Renbourn (no "e"). > Yes, I did know that, but it is the one verse of that blues that I have > heard sung only by John Renbourn(e). Who else has? Good question. I've heard the verse numerous names, in any number of rural-blues recordings, but I'll be damned if I can remember one at the moment. I'll get back to you on this one. > Renbourne, as spelt on the Pentangle album within reach. Renbourn as > spelt in Orbis's 12-volume "The History of Rock", consultant editor > yours truly. I had better agree with myself as well as you. > Clearly the E Fairy, who steals Es from the middle of my name and > puts them on the end of yours, and when that gets boring turns Dennis > into Stacey, has been at work here. Beware this dreadful entity, the rest > of you. To be cursed by the E Fairy is a terrible thing. Jerry, > Dennis and I must have done something awful in a former life to be > plagued by this demon. Imagine "Rrol Bruc Knapp". "Donald Kyho". Ad > infinitum. It is worse than having a K in your name. At least you can deny > being a gubmint agent. You can only get your E back by begging > and pleading, and leaving little bowls of milk in your hearth at > night. Even if the fairy obliges, the people may not. Aaiiiii! Ah yes, the "e" fairy. There are some who persist in adding an "e" to my last name, and now some have taken to giving me a middle initial of the same letter (e.g., latest Arcturus catalogue). My middle initial, folks, is not "E.", and in any event I never use the real one, either. Obviously the "e" is being stolen from Brookesmith, often rendered, I note, as a mere Brooksmith. John Renbourn may be a particularly abused victim. Every solo album of his in my possession -- and I've been a Renbournphile for years -- is devoid of a concluding "e." > 5. WITNESS ANONYMITY AND STUNNED SILENCE > >> PS: Jerry, what *is* the story on Terry O'Leary of Larson fame? > >What story? I wish there were one. He's always been the missing > >testimony (except as gleaned from the brief telephone interview to > >which he consented) in the case. > O well, there y'go. I thought that as you *had* used his real name > in the "UFO Encyclopedia", perhaps you had been in touch with him > in the interim. And may have gleaned more. My turn to be stunned, > if not into silence, however, by this: > >At the time I wrote up the > >original article (in UFO Report long ago), I gave him the > >pseudonym "Larry Mahoney" for reasons that escape me. Writing > >the story again nearly two decades later, I decided to use his > >real name. > You also wrote, on 2 September 1997, to this List: > >If a UFO witness requests anonymity, it is our ethical responsibility > >to guarantee it and protect it. Period. > According to the earliest account I have to hand of the Larson case, > in "Abducted! Confrontations with Beings from Outer Space", Coral and > Jim Lorenzen, Berkley Medallion 1977, > "The friend, who was driving, does not wish to be identified, so > hereafter we shall refer to him as Larry Mahoney, a pseudonym given > him by the investigator." (page 77) > "The investigator" would appear to be you. Any comment? "The investigator" is, of course, me. I don't recall O'Leary's asking me to keep his name confidential. I'm certain that if he had, I would have remembered and honored it. The Lorenzens, not always the most accurate reporters, are wrong in suggesting that the witness asked to be anonymous. I do recall that O'Leary expressed intense antipathy to Sandy Larson and her daughter Jackie (even while confirming the UFO incident and the missing time). It is possible that I invented the pseudonym out of consideration for his desire to put as much distance as possible between himself and the Larsons. Remember, all of this was more than 20 years ago. Jerry Clark
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 3 Re: Best UFO Video on the Planet From: William.Hamilton@pcsmail.pcshs.com Date: Friday, 3 October 1997 8:19am MT Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 12:08:46 -0400 Subject: Re: Best UFO Video on the Planet >Date: Thu, 2 Oct 1997 09:54:45 -0700 (PDT) >From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@ucs.orst.edu> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Best UFO Video on the Planet > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > From: xalium@netwrx.net (Tom King) > Subject: Best UFO video on the planet > Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 17:07:25 EST > August 6, 1997 will be a day going down in UFO history. A UFO was > sighted and videotaped and is mindblowing. > [...] > The video is now being checked for any signs of a hoax. So far none >have surfaced yet. If it is a hoax, Industrial Light and Magic would be >the suspects. I can't express enough about how awesome this footage is. >If you never get the chance in your life to see a UFO up close, then >this is the next best thing. > Jamie Maussan was sent the footage and is now being analyized by >Village Labs and Lee Elders. They're all in Phoenix now investigating >it. I have just viewed this video last night at Village Labs. This is impressive footage of a domed flying saucer revolving ccw on its axis and wobbling as it slowly moves to the right of the viewer, then behind a multi-storied building, then emerges over the rooftop of the building, then moves behind a second building where it vanishes from sight. It looks so good that I would say it needs extensive analysis to prove that it wasn't an elaborate hoax. >I hope you're right, Tom, that we'll all get a chance to view the video >segment. But I have grave doubts that it will air on any of the major >networks, and suspect that I'll need to view it on the Sci-Fi channel >or such. Didn't I see a recent quote here that went: "The stronger the >evidence, the more violent the debunking"? It's quite true. Debunking is always a factor in these cases. >No doubt the debunking will set in if one needs to purchase a video >from Lee Elders of Genesis III to view it, since he will charge a >certain amount of money for it, shame on him. And if Village Labs is >analyzing it, that will be held against it even though Dilettoso seems >to have been correct that flares could not have explained any of the >Phoenix lights last March even if their timing had been consistent with >the air exercises, if the latter had been in the proper geographic >location. I am hoping that it will be seen widely if it appears to be authentic footage. We also need the story from the cameraman. Jim Dilettoso does haven't to be the only to analyze the footage, but I think he does a fair job of it from what I have seen and he is willing to show anyone his procedures if they want to level criticism. Sincerely, Bill Hamilton Search for other documents from or mentioning: william.hamilton |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 3 Re: Wang On UFO Statement By Chairman Of Joint From: Loy Pressley <lpressle@webwide.net> Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 04:02:32 -0700 Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 09:58:22 -0400 Subject: Re: Wang On UFO Statement By Chairman Of Joint > From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose) > To: updates@globalserve.net > Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 01:27:41 +0100 > Subject: Fwd: Wang On UFO Statement By Chairman Of Joint Chiefs > Ed Wang has asked me to forward the e-mail below, received by me on > October 2. The statement by the Chairman Of The Joint Chiefs Of Staff > was posted on Ufomind's Area 51 Mailing List on September 26 and > forwarded by me to various places on the Internet the same day, > including the UFO Updates and UFOR mailing lists. <SNIP> > Ed has told me that he regrets ever having posted the e-mail forwarded > by Wes Thomas to UFO Updates, though he was under very heavy and unfair > attack on the "In Search Of" list. Not true! I'm on the ISO list...all that was done on ISO was that he was asked for evidence to back up the claims made on the ACC site. As soon as he was asked for more information, he started throwing accusations around that everyone on the ISO list was attacking him. I can't say whether or not he was attacked off line from the list, but he certainly wasn't attacked on the list! Loy
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 3 Re: Magnetic Anomalies Found on Mars From: RSchatte@aol.com [Rebecca Schatte] Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 12:30:47 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 12:54:22 -0400 Subject: Re: Magnetic Anomalies Found on Mars --------------------- Forwarded message: Subj: Magnetic Anomalies Found on Mars Date: 97-10-03 05:23:42 EDT From: AOL News .c The Associated Press By JOHN ANTCZAK PASADENA, Calif. (AP) - Scientists could gain insight into Mars' history and a record of a long-gone global magnetic field through magnetic anomalies found by the Mars Global Surveyor spacecraft. The discoveries have come even as the spacecraft is in the process of circularizing its long elliptical orbit by the novel technique of aerobraking - dipping into Mars' upper atmosphere to use drag rather than rockets to alter the orbit. The spacecraft has successfully done that nine times so far, Project Scientist Arden Albee told a briefing at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory on Thursday. Mars Global Surveyor had earlier confirmed that Mars, unlike Earth, has very weak global magnetic field. The new discoveries are localized fields coming from areas in the crust - about 30 miles deep - rather than from the planet's center. ``It appears the crust of Mars is strewn with multiple magnetic anomalies,'' said Jack Connerney, a NASA Goddard Space Flight Center scientist who is co-investigator on Global Surveyor's magnetometer/electron reflectometer experiment. The anomalies are also far stronger than those found on Earth, he said. While a compass on Earth might lead you home, a compass on Mars would point in different directions depending on where it is located. ``If you are a Boy Scout on Mars with a compass, you're lost,'' he said. Magnetic anomalies may occur where magma - liquid or molten rock -rose and cooled, recording a magnetic signature of that epoch in a planet's development. Mars Global Surveyor was launched Nov. 7, 1996, from Kennedy Space Center and went into orbit Sept. 11. It is scheduled to begin systematically mapping the planet next spring. AP-NY-10-03-97 0519EDT Copyright 1997 The Associated Press. The information contained in the AP news report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or otherwise distributed without prior written authority of The Associated Press.<FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3> </I></PRE></HTML>
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 3 Re: Witness Anonymity From: BOB SHELL <76750.2717@compuserve.com> Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 12:17:15 -0400 Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 12:52:32 -0400 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity >From: HONEYBE100@aol.com >Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 04:55:30 -0400 (EDT) >To: updates@globalserve.net >Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity Hi Linda, Yes, it is true that Budd used your real name in his presentation in San Marino this year. I was in the audience at the time. Whether it was a slipup, or he just thought it didn't matter in an overseas presentation, I don't know. Budd was somewhat tired at the time, I think. There was no reaction from the audience when he did it, and no indication on his part that he noticed it. I think it passed as an unremarkable event. Bob
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 3 Re: Solved Abduction cases? From: nick@emailme.at.address.below (Nick Humphries) Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 16:31:02 GMT Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 12:59:22 -0400 Subject: Re: Solved Abduction cases? Here's something I've been wondering about for a while now and think some of you may be able to help me with: Have any abduction cases been solved - that is, found to have another explanation other than ET intervention? And if not, why not? ------------------------------------------------------- Nick Humphries, nick@the-den.clara.net, at your service If the Truth is Out There, what's In Here? ------------------------------------------------------- The Your Sinclair Rock'n'Roll Years http://www.the-den.clara.net/ys/cover.htm -------------------------------------------------------
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 3 Re: Christianity Online The Truth is Out There From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 12:43:17 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 13:00:54 -0400 Subject: Re: Christianity Online The Truth is Out There >From: Penrose Christopher <penrose@sfc.keio.ac.jp> >Date: Fri, 3 Oct 97 18:37:31 +0900 >To: updates@globalserve.net >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Christianity Online The Truth is Out There (snip) >It is sad and strange that people who believe in the presence of UFOs >are treated with far greater intolerance and mockery than people who >believe in demons, as there is far greater evidence that unknown >objects are whizzing above our heads than the existence of a demon, >whatever a demon might be. There _is_ far greater evidence that UFO's exist but I don't know Chris, I would be willing to accept Phillip Klass as incontrovertible evidence that demonic possession does exist! <VBG> See you all on "Judgement Day" where,... "The first shall be last, and the last shall be first." (Revelations) Or, as Mick Jagger and the Stones once said, "tables have turned and now it's _your turn to cry." (BTW- Keith Richards face & hair is also really good evidence of possible demonic possession! <G>) John Velez, Scm. BcW. AS. Son of Common Man, and Beloved Child of the Watchers - Alien Spawn John Velez jvif@spacelab.net
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 3 Re: Christianity Online The Truth is Out There From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@ucs.orst.edu> Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 11:48:42 -0700 (PDT) Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 17:19:37 -0400 Subject: Re: Christianity Online The Truth is Out There > From: Penrose Christopher <penrose@sfc.keio.ac.jp> > Date: Fri, 3 Oct 97 18:37:31 +0900 > To: updates@globalserve.net > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Christianity Online The Truth is Out There > [...] > Christians, like everyone else but no more so, deserve a voice on this > list. However, I think that the purpose of this list is not > specifically intended to be a forum to discuss the rationality of the > belief in Christianity. To discuss the existence of God or Satan, > whether GOD = SATAN etc., these discussions are perhaps better > discussed in more appropriate forums. However, we can acknowledge the > possibility that "demonic" possession is a reality. Particularly if a > more concrete definition of what "demonic possession" implies is > presented by Christian proselytizers. [...] > Until someone can provide a more > concrete example of what a "demon" is, and provide some concrete > evidence beyond the pathetic "evidence of faith" that they exist, then > we can simply acknowledge that some Christians label evidence of alien > presence on Earth as a "demonic" presence out of either some need to > deny the reality of this alien presence, or out of a xenophobic fear > of it. [...] Actually, those who have had the curiosity to investigate "demons" do end up with a pretty good idea of what a "demon" is. Results of definitive investigations have been reported by William J. Baldwin, "Research proposal on spirit releasement therapy," in Proc. 1st Int. Conf. on Paranormal Research, Colorado State University, June 1-4, 1989, plus in a later book he wrote about it. Or see Edith Fiore's book _The Unquiet Dead_ (1987), pp. 8-12. Such research finds that a "demon" is just the spirit or soul of a departed person that through confusion or ignorance hasn't yet "gone to the light," but instead has been somehow attracted to attach itself to another spirit (or sometimes to several other spirits) of a living person, to the detriment of the latter's mental & psychic health. So the cure is effected by getting the patient into a hypnotic trance, talking the spirit into going to the light, and then checking later to see if it actually did. In biblical days they didn't know any better than to call them "demons," which now seems appropriate only if you equate ignorance (as of an ignorant spirit) with evil, for which a case can be made. The man we know as Jesus could apparently "drive" out demons without first placing the subject in a trance, though causing all those pigs to drown in that one instance wasn't very nice! One place where this intersects with ufology is when hypnotic regression of a potential UFO experiencer reveals that he/she had been contacted by aliens in a past life, or in some cases apparently *was* then an alien. I think Leo Sprinkle & June Parnell have the largest repository of such cases on record, though John Mack came across it often in _Abduction_, pp. 32, 209, 259... The subject also relates to those abductees whose abductions occurred in an out-of-body state. But as I mentioned earlier, this subject is taboo for serious consideration by most of those who are closely attached to the major Western religions, as well as by those who feel that existence of the spirit is hogwash. Jim Deardorff
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 3 Randle's Response to Kent Jeffrey's 'Defection' From: KRandle993@aol.com [Kevin Randle] Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 15:32:32 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 17:28:30 -0400 Subject: Randle's Response to Kent Jeffrey's 'Defection' Hi all - For those interested in my response to Kent Jeffrey's defection to the dark side, might I suggest http://www.crystalsky.com KRandle
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 3 Re: Solved Abduction cases? From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl> Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 22:51:50 +0200 (MET DST) Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 17:50:03 -0400 Subject: Re: Solved Abduction cases? >From: nick@emailme.at.address.below (Nick Humphries) >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Solved Abduction cases? >Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 16:31:02 GMT >Here's something I've been wondering about for a while now and think some of >you may be able to help me with: > Have any abduction cases been solved - that is, found to have another >explanation other than ET intervention? > And if not, why not? Nick and List, Yes. A Dutch abduction therapist told me that happens from time to time. I hereby take the opportunity to say that I won't be participating in this list for a while, because I will be on prolonged press trip. I'll be back on October 15 and expect 800 e-mails. Bye and till then. __________________________________________ / Met vriendelijke groet/Best wishes \ Henny van der Pluijm hvdp@worldonline.nl Technology Pages http://www.worldonline.nl/~hvdp \______________________________________/
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 3 Re: Solved Abduction cases? From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@cc.UManitoba.CA> Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 15:56:57 -0500 (CDT) Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 17:58:06 -0400 Subject: Re: Solved Abduction cases? > From: nick@emailme.at.address.below (Nick Humphries) > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > Subject: Solved Abduction cases? > Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 16:31:02 GMT > Have any abduction cases been solved - that is, found to have another > explanation other than ET intervention? > And if not, why not? Boy, have *you* opened a can of worms. The short answer is, "It depends who you talk to." The long answer is yes, with some qualifications. In my personal studies of abductees who have come to me for assistance, *some* cases seemed to definitely lend themselves to non-alien explanations *which satisfied both abductee and researcher*. You can imagine that there would be many cases where an abductee would think her experiences were extraterrestrial when the investigator was unsure, as well as cases where the UFO witness would be satisfied with a conventional explanation even though a keen UFO abduction "expert" thought otherwise. There are two cases which immediately come to mind. In the first, "Paul" described a very vivid experience involving aliens and missing time. This case was discussed in some detail and Paul was more than willing to help sort out his memories of the event, seriously looking for "answers." After a long process of investigation, Paul *himself* offered the possible solution that his experience was related to his frequent drug use/abuse while a musician in a rock band, since the "abduction" occurred during a road trip. Given the circumstances, it seems sensible to classify this one as "explained." However, I can hear some pro-alien abductee experts cautioning that *just because* there were rdugs involved, there is no reason to dismiss the possibility that aliens "took advantage" of the situation or "coincidentally" abducted someone in a drugged state. But which would be more probable? The other case is one which I think underscores why I believe UFO investigators should stay out of the field of alien abductions. A woman came to me with a "classic" abduction partial memory (aliens, needles, examinations, discomfort, etc.) but with the added factor that her three-year-old daughter also seemed to have been abducted. The child said that "monsters" were hurting mommy and were "doing bad things" to her. The child was so affected that a psychologist was called in to work with her in easing her fears and night terrors. After many conversations with teh woman in preparation for possible regreesion therapy (with a registered clinical psychologist), the woman hesitantly mentioned that on the day of the abduction "experience", she had made a "breakthrough" with a counsellor in her treatment of trauma related to an incident of date rape, finally allowing memories to openly flow and her emotions to surface. I won't go into great detail here, other than to say that given the circumstances, it seems prudent to believe her "abduction" was related to her emotional trauma of the rape. Could aliens have visited her that night, too? Yes, but which is a more likely solution? Another scenario is where an ardent UFO buff, who, after reading and being exposed to a great deal of media and Internet hype about alien abductions, will "believe" he has had some form of contact himself. How often does this occur? I don't know. I *do* know that some of the abductees/contactees I have worked with have not only displayed symptoms found on the 52-point "abductee checklist" but also many of the symptoms found on indicators of dissociative disorder and the oft-touted "multiple personality disorder." Did the abductees become schizoid *because* of their abductions, or were they like that before? It is my personal view, after having investigated UFO cases for more than 20 years and worked with many abductees since 1988, that *not all people who present themselves as UFO abductees are UFO abductees.* In fact, my *guess* is that the percentage of "real" to "not-real" abductions is probably of the same order as that of UFOs to IFOs: about 5%. The trouble is, I don't see an easy way to separate the wheat from the chaff. But if you approach the subject truly objectively, it's possible to make some headway, with a lot of time and effort. I've read through the wad of material available on the subject, including that published by abductee experts. I don't think the solution is at all simple. -- Chris Rutkowski - rutkows@cc.umanitoba.ca (and now, also: Chris.Rutkowski@UMAlumni.mb.ca) University of Manitoba - Winnipeg, Canada Search for other documents from or mentioning: rutkows | nick |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 3 Re: Witness Anonymity From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net> Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 15:55:18 -0500 (CDT) Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 17:54:10 -0400 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity >Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 12:17:15 -0400 >From: BOB SHELL <76750.2717@compuserve.com> >Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >Hi Linda, >Yes, it is true that Budd used your real name in his presentation >in San Marino this year. I was in the audience at the time. >Whether it was a slipup, or he just thought it didn't matter in >an overseas presentation, I don't know. Budd was somewhat tired >at the time, I think. >There was no reaction from the audience when he did it, and no >indication on his part that he noticed it. I think it passed as >an unremarkable event. >Bob Then I submit that my own inadvertent use of Linda's real last name in a book published in England, for which I received much flak here, be accorded the same status -- that of "an unremarkable event" -- as I, too, was tired. And still am. More recently, there are rumors that Honey Bee is reportedly unhappy with a videotape of her son shown at another out-of-country UFO symposium by parties unnamed here, one in which her son reportedly identifies Javier Perez de Cuellar as the man who gave him the fabulous brass diving helmet. Maybe Our Lady of the Sands could enlighten us further as to her present position on this matter? Maybe she could even tell us who might have been responsible for the distribution of said video? My, what a weird world we do live in! SA Sasquatch
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 3 Re: Magnetic Anomalies Found on Mars From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net> Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 16:54:19 -0700 Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 18:01:26 -0400 Subject: Re: Magnetic Anomalies Found on Mars Rebecca Schatte wrote: > From: RSchatte@aol.com [Rebecca Schatte] > Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 12:30:47 -0400 (EDT) > To: updates@globalserve.net > Subject: Fwd: Magnetic Anomalies Found on Mars > --------------------- > Forwarded message: > Subj: Magnetic Anomalies Found on Mars > Date: 97-10-03 05:23:42 EDT > From: AOL News > .c The Associated Press > By JOHN ANTCZAK > PASADENA, Calif. (AP) - Scientists could gain insight into Mars' > history and a record of a long-gone global magnetic field through > magnetic anomalies found by the Mars Global Surveyor spacecraft. [snip] Interesting. It was a anomaly in the magnetic field of the moon which alerted the scientists to the obelisk left buried there by aliens in _2001, A Space Odyssey_. <g> Terry
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 3 Re: Solved Abduction cases? From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 20:26:48 +0100 Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 18:03:33 -0400 Subject: Re: Solved Abduction cases? >From: nick@emailme.at.address.below (Nick Humphries) >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Solved Abduction cases? >Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 16:31:02 GMT >Here's something I've been wondering about for a while now and think some of >you may be able to help me with: > Have any abduction cases been solved - that is, found to have another >explanation other than ET intervention? > And if not, why not? Hi Nick, Hi John (Scm) Hi Errol Hi All John Velez will probably correct me on this if I am wrong but I believe that it only becomes a true abduction case when ALL other possibilities have been ruled out. On the other hand a case's that are _suspected_ to be a case of abduction and has another answer found to me ar'nt cases of abduction so I don't call them abductions. IMHO There are things in the universe billions of years older than our human race. They are vast, they are timeless. If they are aware of us at all we are of no more consequence to them as ants are to us. Sean Jones http://www.tedric.demon.co.uk/ http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Zone/1745/Index.htm
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 3 Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words From: wlmss@peg.apc.org [Lawrie Williams] Date: Sat, 4 Oct 1997 09:13:36 +1000 (GMT+1000) Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 19:40:33 -0400 Subject: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words > From: c549597@showme.missouri.edu [Barbara Becker] > Date: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 09:47:38 -0500 > To: ufo updates <updates@globalserve.net> > Subject: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words > What happened to my critics? Steve, Don, Roger et al? I thought we > were going to have a good discussion. Do you not understand the law? > Or does your silence indicate agreement? > BB Barbara Becker says "Ed Walters hoaxed the B&J photos." She is also on record as saying: > 1) Ed Walters copyrighted photographs allegedly taken by someone else. > That at the least would make him a thief. > 2) Ed Walters copyrighted photographs taken by himself. > That at the least makes him a liar. So Ed Walters copyrighted two photos because the people who took them did not want to come forward? Big deal! By no reasoning can that lead to the conclusion that fraud was involved. And she wrote him 4 letters about this! Four letters is certainly not "brief correspondence" like she claims. It is pestering. So where is the human face of Ufology? If anyone is close to Ed & Frances Walters, it would be *very* interesting to hear how they feel about this latest intrusion. Nit-picking "Investigation" of this type puts people off coming forward, so it is counterproductive. In every field there must needs be checks and balances. People serious about Ufology no doubt want to seek out "the truth". But the other side of this coin is that when some self-appointed "investigator" goes out of their way to penetrate the privacy of abductees with petty claims such as above, they inevitibly cause a great many other people to think twice about telling of their experiences. "Witness anonymity" might be one issue, but respect for the ongoing privacy of known abductees is of equal importance. My reaction to Barbara Becker's continuing attack on Ed Walters is one of disgust not just because it is so unfair but also because of the long term damage this kind of smearing does to people's trust in Ufology and Ufologists. Maybe that is her objective. Maybe BB is sincere and just wants to punish Ed Walters for coming forward and sharing his experiences with the world without being as perfect as Barbara herself would have been in the same situation. Or maybe she is insincere and wants information repressed at its source by making it unpleasant for abductees to speak out, thus handicapping serious ongoing ufological investigation. Pick one. Lawrie Williams_______
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 3 Re: Solved Abduction cases? From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 19:34:01 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 19:45:43 -0400 Subject: Re: Solved Abduction cases? >From: nick@emailme.at.address.below (Nick Humphries) >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Solved Abduction cases? >Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 16:31:02 GMT >Here's something I've been wondering about for a while now and think some of >you may be able to help me with: > Have any abduction cases been solved - that is, found to have another >explanation other than ET intervention? > And if not, why not? Hi Nick, hi All, None! Not since Villas-Boas (which predates the Betty and Barney Hill case) have any of the 'modern' abduction cases (at least the public ones) been exposed as pure fraud or an intentionally manufactured hoax, or as anything other than what the abductees claim. There are a million and one 'theories' floating around but not a single concrete -beyond any doubt- anything. *(That's separating out 'contact cases' such as Billy Meier and the 50's contactees whose reports/experiences bear no resemblance to modern abduction accounts.) There is the ever present name calling/character assassination and rock throwing but, _not one case_ where the abductee(s) has been shown up as a complete fake or suffering from something organic or psychological. Or even laboring under a mis-interpretation for that matter! Good point Mr Nick, never occurred to me! <VBG> I'm going to sit back and watch the responses along with you, if you don't mind. And thanks for pointing this out. I've been waiting for someone to come along who can prove to me that what I _clearly remember_ is false or wrong or _different_ somehow from all of the myriad other things that I remember consciously. SOMETHING _is_ happening to us. What that 'something' is, has never been proven or shown to be _anything other_ than what we claim it is, an unsolicited 'alien' intervention into our lives. As for our 'credibilty',... If many of the very same people that have reported abduction were to testify in a court of law on another matter, I wouldn't give you a plug nickel for the life expectancy of the defendant in the case. It is _ONLY_ because the subject is UFO's and 'aliens' that the testimony of thousands of ordinary and perfectly credible people is summarily relegated to the 'looney tune file.' Speaking as an abductee and strictly from the heart: When abductees come forward publicly (for the most part) we're only trying to warn people that something terribly strange/potentially threatening is going on. The very moment that the -full impact of the implications- of abduction sank in, my course was set. I stopped/dropped everything else and threw myself into raising public consciousness with a single minded vengeance that only an 'honest' man can summon. I knew that the highest service that I could ever perform in this life would be to stand up with the others and testify. To tell the simple truth, no matter what, come hell or high water. I also have some very deep humanitarian motivations and feelings connected to my public work. I really believe in -all of those corny values- that they taught us back in grade school. Love of truth, family, and neighbor. Mindless, attention seekers, malcontents, morons, lying opportunists and thieves is what they call us, and _that's_ the compensation that we get for putting our lives, families, jobs and reputations (not to mention balls) on the line. The following is not cynicism or bitterness, just fact. My beloved Cathy (mother trucker) Johnson asked you all (in another thread), "if you ever wondered how the 'children of the Watchers' see _You?" Well, I'll tell you,...(some of you) out there are worth the sacrifice of our very lives, much less putting up with a little name calling, while others simply aren't worth the price (or the skin off my ass as we say in dear old NY <G>) that _WE_ have to pay for telling a _very hard to tell_ and unpopular truth. It is my personal belief that like -all abductees- I'm just a 'Ceremonial Sacrificial Lamb' being offered up by our friends from Frolix 8. It's OK, take anything you want from me. Eat me now,...pay my brethren later! When _your_ 'crowded hour' comes, how will you react? Abadee-abadee-abadee th-that's all folks! <G> John Velez, bleat, bleat John Velez jvif@spacelab.net
The UFO UpDates Archive Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 3 Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net> Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 15:20:15 -0500 (CDT) Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 17:48:18 -0400 Subject: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: "Serge Salvaille" <sergesa@connectmmic.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words >Date: Thu, 02 Oct 1997 13:42:53 -0500 >Dear Barbara [Becker], >You have mentioned... >>Yes, Independent (that means he looked at the photos WITHOUT >>an agenda) photoanalyst Wm. Hyzer, however his report was disregarded by >>MUFON. >Any way to get our hands on this document ? >Serge Salvaille, system programmer The List's wish is my command! Actually, the fact that I've just resigned as editor of the MUFON UFO Journal, effective with the November issue, means that I have a lot of free time on my hands...so I decided to look up the issue with the Hyzer article in it. Imagine my surprise when I picked up a stack of Journals tucked away in the closet and the top issue turned out to be the relevant one. Will synchronicities never cease! For those interested, and with access, the article is the cover story of the July, 1992 issue of the Journal, "The Gulf Breeze Photographs: Bona Fide or Bogus?" by William G. Hyzer, pp. 3-9. The article is copyrighted by the author, who requested written permission to reprint same, so I shan't be scanning and posting it here. Besides, I don't have _that_ much free time. To summarize, however, Hyzer essentially concludes that the famous Polaroid series of pictures released by Walters are hoaxes, specifically double-exposures. To cite but one example, the famous "road shot," Hyzer concluded that reflections from the photographed object should have appeared in the scene reflected on the hood of Ed's pickup, since the background treeline did. Ergo, the object was not physically present at the time the picture was taken. Ed Walters and Bruce Maccabee responded to this apparent "anomaly" by claiming a) the bed of Ed's pickup truck was filled with cinder blocks at the time, thus lowering the rear and raising the front, and b) what's more, Ed had recently dented the hood of said pickup -- you guessed it -- at precisely the point where the otherwise randomly captured reflection would have normally appeared. Touche Dr. Hyzer, and all you other professional photoanalysts out there! (Did anyone ever ask Ed for an insurance claim or a repair receipt? Nah, not that I'm aware of. Given that Ed routinely packed a Polaroid to photograph UFOs, would it have been too much to expect him to snap off a picture of his buckled hood for posterity, if not for his insurance agent? Apparently so.) Barbara's statement that Hyzer's "report was disregarded by MUFON," then, obviously requires some caveats. Since we published his analysis as a feature story, it would seemingly be difficult, if only as a matter of semantics, to defend the point of view that MUFON "disregarded" it. If she means that many within MUFON didn't accept Hyzer's conclusions and trumpet them to the high heavens, then she's more on the mark. But that isn't what she said. My responsibility was to publish the article, which I did, not to go out there and personally twist three or four thousand arms until they all agreed with me. In my own case, no analysis was necessary by anyone. The pictures looked hokey to begin with, and they still do to this day, on their face. Go back and look at them again. Sometimes you don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows. Not when it's blowing that hard, anyway. Dennis
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 3 Re: Solved Abduction cases? From: Skye Turell <turel33@west.net> Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 18:37:37 -0700 Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 22:47:08 -0400 Subject: Re: Solved Abduction cases? >Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 19:34:01 -0500 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Solved Abduction cases? >>From: nick@emailme.at.address.below (Nick Humphries) >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >>Subject: Solved Abduction cases? >>Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 16:31:02 GMT >> Have any abduction cases been solved - that is, found to have another >>explanation other than ET intervention? And if not, why not? >None! Not since Villas-Boas (which predates the Betty and Barney Hill case) >have any of the 'modern' abduction cases (at least the public ones) been >exposed as pure fraud or an intentionally manufactured hoax, or as anything >other than what the abductees claim. There are a million and one 'theories' >floating around but not a single concrete -beyond any doubt- anything. >I've been waiting for someone to come along who can prove to me that what I >_clearly remember_ is false or wrong or _different_ somehow from all of the >myriad other things that I remember consciously. SOMETHING _is_ happening >to us. What that 'something' is, has never been proven or shown to be >_anything other_ than what we claim it is, an unsolicited 'alien' >intervention into our lives. I'll second that, John! I have met only two people (out of more than 100 abductees or maybe-abductees) that I thought probably weren't. But they weren't claiming they were! They were wondering if they were. Those of us who say we are, without qualification, are. How do we know, you might ask? Because we were there! And remember: denial is not a river in Egypt! Skye Turell <turel33@west.net>
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 3 Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com> Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 21:27:01 -0700 Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 22:41:34 -0400 Subject: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words > From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>, on 10/3/97 10:48 AM: > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > From: "Serge Salvaille" <sergesa@connectmmic.net> > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words > Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 10:15:11 -0500 > Barbara, Bob > My inquiry about Mr. Hyzer's analysis of some Gulf Breeze pictures > lead me to the following document: > http://www.skiesare.demon.co.uk/b-or-b.htm I have read this document, and would make a couple of comments: > " Mr. Andrus could not provide Walters' original photos or at > least first-generation copies to Mr. Hyzer for his analysis" > Did Dr. Maccabee get at least first-generation copies for his > analysis ? According to GBS (p 273) Dr. Maccabee made photo copies of the originals during his visit to Gulf Breeze. I would imagine that Mr. Walters maintains possession as well as ownership of the originals, and MUFON would be unable to provide anything more than Dr. Maccabee's copies. Therefore, in order to protect the closest-to-orignal copies in their possession, it would not be surprising that they would not provide those photos, but instead copied. Mr. Hyzer would need to contact Mr. Walters in order to obtain the same quality of copies as used by Dr. Maccabee. This may be especially relevant with regard to the comment on Mr. Hyzer's analysis which reads: "Mr. Hyzer's report indicated that the dark rectangular areas (portholes) in all of the photos analyzed are either slightly lighter or no darker than the scenic backgrounds. This would indicate that the objects are either self-luminous, internally-illuminated, externally-illuminated from the general direction of the camera, or the result of photographic fakery." Which is hardly conclusive. At any rate, Dr. Maccabee's analysis in GBS addresses the point about "double exposures": (p 287) "There are two pictures, however, which provide clear evidence that the simple double exposure method was not used. These are photos 1 and 7. A careful inspection... of the left side of the UFO image in photo 1 shows that the image of the UFO, though brighter than the very dark image of the tree, did not overlap the image of the tree branches... Similarly in Photo 7, the image of a nearby cedar tree cuts off the image of the right side of the UFO: the UFO does not overlap the darker image of the tree." Dr, Maccabee goes on to show how much more difficult it would be to use a double exposure technique that could produce these results. According to Dr. Maccabee in "UFOs are real" (UAR), he has apparently read the Hyzer report and points out that Mr. Hyzer attempted to account for the Photo 1 by reference to a special property of Polaroid film (p 68). However, Dr. Maccabee disputes this by first indicating that Mr. Hyzer is the discoverer of this property, that the property was not discovered until several years after the photos were taken, that the lighting levels at the time of the photos was too great to allow the effect to occur, and that while the effect requires the tree to be the darkest object in the image, it is not. Also in UAR, Dr. Maccabee provides a density analysis of the blue beam from Photo 11, which clearly shows an absence of the additive effect which would be present for a double exposure. In addition, in photos 37L & R (p 292), Dr. Maccabee shows that these photos indicate the distance to the object had to be a minimum of 60', due to occlusion of one stereo image by a tree. However, while providing estimated size figures for 10 (3 in), 20 (6 in) , 30 (9 in) and 300' (7.5'), he does not provide a size for 60', which is (according to my calculation) 1.24 feet. Thus, while 37L & R rule out double exposure, they do not completely rule out a model. A similar photo, analyzed in UAR (Photo 40) is less equivocal as to the size of the object. The object is occluded by a tree at a distance of 60', which is clearly seen in a comparison shot. In this case, the angular size of the object is clearly significantly larger than in 37L & R, thus indicating that, even at a distance of 60', the model would have to be 2-3 times larger (4-7'). However, photos 36L & R, taken at Shoreline park with the SRS, provide a minimum distance of 180 feet, and a maximum of 3,000 feet. At 200 feet (which would be out over the water), the object would be 4.8 feet in diameter. The photos 38L and R further substantiate this, since the SRS was properly calibrated and this was checked against the bridge lights which were at a known distance. This photo was particularly interesting, because it showed two objects, one of which was similar to the object photographed with the MUFON Nimslo sealed stereo camera, and the other of which was one of the typical GBS objects. These photos showed the objects to be 132' and 475' distant, and 2.5' long and 15' tall, respectively. This is especially interesting since the Nimslo photos showed the object photographed to be 2.5-4 feet long at 40-70' distance. Obviously, these characteristics do not rely on the quality of the images, except in a gross sense, and thus could easily be determined from later generation prints. The summary of the report continues: "The report also indicated that the UFOs possessed chameleon-like characteristics. The images of the UFOs are of the same colorations as their scenic backgrounds. This would indicate that the objects are either semi-transparent, color-variable, or the result of photographic fakery." Mr. Hyzer neglects to mention reflective or luminous, either of which could explain differences from color neutrality. My observations in looking at the photos are that they are taken under three types of condition: 1) Total darkness - the vast majority. These appear to be fairly color neutral and show colors like grey, orange and purple and purplish grey. 2) Dawn (one photo of three objects). At least in the GBS images, there are no perceptible color differences between the objects closest and furthest from the dawn light. 3) Twilight (the first photo set). In these images, the object does indeed have a bluish appearance. However, when light-blasted, photo 1 shows the object to have a more neutral color, and the "power ring" is distinctly yellow; this may indicate that the bluish appearance is a function of the low light level and the dominant presence of blue as a result of the twilit conditions. The summary of Mr. Hyzer's report goes on to discuss possible problems with the road shot (Photo 19). The summary raises objections to the photo: 1) The object is not apparently reflected in the hood of the truck. 2) There is a problem with the light underneath the object. The summary also claims that the object is 370 feet from the camera rather than the 185 feet which is cited in GBS. This is strange, since when I recently constructed a computer model of the sighting location, using dimensions and angles from GBS, the result matched the basic appearance of Photo 19, including the apparent size of the power light, its ellipticity and the perspective and placement of the road. 370 feet would not generate the same result. The summary indicates that Mr. Hyzer has performed experiments that contradict Dr. Maccabee's result which found that a dent in the hood of the truck would prevent such a reflection. It is difficult to assess this without specific information, including Mr. Hyzer's methods in attempting to accomodate the dent. However, it is possible to check this possibilty to some extent using the test photo from GBS which is just below the Photo 19 enlargement. The first thing that can be noted is that, assuming the dark area on the hood corresponds to the height of the treeline from the ground, the height of all visible objects will be reduced to 1/3 their apparent unreflected height. In my copy, the reflected treeline is 5-7mm high at the highest point of the treeline. It is about 18mm high unreflected. Thus, the reflected height of the top light of the object, given that the light is 1-2mm tall, would be approx. .3-.6mm, which appears to be on the order of the printed image resolution. However, that assumes that the height decrease is constant. But if the hood were not dented, the reflection would become even thinner as the surface curved down and away. The summary then touches on the "problem" with the light in the road: "Mr. Hyzer also notes that since the UFO is now supposedly 370 feet from the camera and two feet above the surface, there should be a pattern of increased luminance directly beneath the power ring. His photometric analysis did not reveal the increase in luminance as expected. Mr. Hyzer's results therefore indicate that there was no UFO present and that the photo is the product of multiple-exposure camera techniques." The meaning of this is unclear. There is, of course, the obvious and intense increase in brightness on the road beneath the object. A different document complains that the shape of this brightness does not match that of a circular opening projected on a flat road. However, that analysis seems to ignore that the road is clearly not flat, but is domed to what appears to be about 1 foot of additional height in the center. This can be seen by examining the test shot where the road goes into a left hand curve and noting how the centerline follows the road. In addition, the opening is tilted 13 degrees toward the camera. And, finally, other photos of the power ring area show that the luminosity of that area is irregular and sometimes polygonal. > Oh... BTW, the last 2 lines of the cited document read: > "ed note: William Hyzer has no particular interest in ufology and > should be considered an impartial analyst." I am no uncritical fan of the Gulf Breeze photos. There are a number of things which trouble me, including the absence of this configuration in prior cases and the absence of luminosity effects such as those seen in the Beaver Falls photos. And, naturally, my red flags are raised by multiple contact cases, much less a multiple photo case, with what is practically the full panolpy of "modern" ufological phenomena, including abduction. However, there are many Gulf Breeze witnesses and photographers. The disputations of Dr. Maccabee's analysis do not seem sufficiently convincing, especially when those disputations avoid the SRS photos, which provide size and distance information while simultanously multiplying the difficulty of double exposure. Nor does a minor copyright irregularity seem sufficient to imply falsity. ------ Mark Cashman, creator of The Temporal Doorway at http://www.geocities.com/~mcashman - Original digital art, writing, and UFO research - Author of SF novels available at... http://www.infohaus.com/access/by-seller/The_Temporal_Doorway_Storefront ------
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 3 Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com> Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 10:05:19 -0400 Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 23:11:24 -0400 Subject: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words [The following arrived at UpDates with Maccabee's comments appearing as broken lines and visually a mess. As some subscribers are aware, when messages arrive here and don't conform to the Posting Instructions for this List they are returned to sender with the suggestion that they be re-formatted. I returned the message to Steve, who has, as yet, not responded. In view of the fairly intense messaging regarding Gulf Breeze and Walters I've broken my promise to myself and reformatted Maccabee's comments in the post below. I don't think I'll be doing it again. ebk] _______________ >From: c549597@showme.missouri.edu [Barbara Becker] >Date: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 09:47:38 -0500 >To: ufo updates <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words >What happened to my critics? Steve, Don, Roger et al? I thought we >were going to have a good discussion. Do you not understand the >law? Or does your silence indicate agreement? >BB COMMENTARY ON THE BARBARA BECKER'S SEPTEMBER, 1997 DISCUSSION OF THE ED WALTERS/GULF BREEZE SIGHTINGS by Bruce Maccabee Barbara's article is reproduced verbatim except for the notes at the end which are references to copyright law. ..................................................... From: c549597@showme.missouri.edu [Barbara Becker] Date: Sat, 27 Sep 1997 13:36:17 -0500 Subject: 'The Gulf Breeze Paper' ONE PICTURE IS WORTH A THOUSAND WORDS Copyright 1997 Barbara Becker For those not familiar with the Gulf Breeze, Florida (USA) UFO story or one of its most controversial characters, Edward Walters, I will present a brief history. A complete account can be found in The Gulf Breeze Sightings: The Most Astounding Multiple Sightings of UFOs in U.S. History. Ed Walters and Frances Walters. Morrow Publishing, 1990. ------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: The interested reader should also have available the recent book UFOS'S ARE REAL, HERE'S THE PROOF (UARHTP) by Ed Walters and Bruce Maccabee (Avon, 1997) in which there is a discussion of several of the early photos and the difficulty in faking them. Other sightings in Gulf Breeze are described in THE GULF BREEZE SIGHTING (TGBS), which Barbara mentioned, in ABDUCTIONS IN GULF BREEZE (AIGB) by Ed and Frances Walters (Avon, 1994) and in "Gulf Breeze Without Ed" (GBWE), a paper presented at the 1991 MUFON Symposium which concentrates on the hundred or more sightings by other witnesses. It is important to know that many other witnesses reported UFOs flying around Gulf Breeze in the same time frame and, hence, it is possible that others could have photographed them. This applies in particular to "Believer Bill" (discussed below) who claimed to have photographed UFOs at a location that turned out to be just behind Ed's (old) house. ("Jane", described below, claimed her photos were taken long before the Gulf Breeze flap.) ------------------------------------------------ (Barbara continues:) According to Walters, on November 11, 1987, he was at his home in Gulf Breeze, when he looked out of a window and saw a grayish-blue craft hovering just beyond a pine tree in his front yard. He grabbed his Polaroid Colorpak camera and proceeded to take five photographs of the mysterious object. After showing the photos to his wife, Frances, they decided to turn them over to friend and editor of the Gulf Breeze Sentinel Newspaper, Duane Cook. Six days later, on November 17, Ed Walters presented Duane Cook with the five photographs. The first and fifth of this series, along with a letter from the photographer, "Mr. X.", were reproduced in the Sentinel on November 19. Ed Walters claimed he continued to photograph the object(s) until May 1, 1988. It is impossible to know exactly how many photographs Walters actually took. Thirty eight of Walters' photos are used in the book, along with two from allegedly undisclosed sources. This paper will focus on the two other photographs and issues involving them. ------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: Strictly speaking it is "impossible" to know how many pictures Ed took... because he was not being watched 24 hours a day. The reader should not, however, be caught by the implication that he may have taken many more UFO photos. There is no evidence that he took any UFO photos other than what he released in the 1990 book (TGBS) and in the 1997 book (UARHTP). --------------------------------------------------------- (She continues:) The first photographs seemingly corroborating Walters' photos were submitted to the Sentinel on December 3, 1987, accompanied by a letter by an anonymous person, later to be called, "Jane". A second batch of nine photographs was submitted to the Sentinel on December 23, 1987 by a person using the pseudonym of "Believer Bill". One of the nine photos, along with a letter from Bill, was printed in the Sentinel on December 24. These are photos 39 and 40 in the book. What do they have to do with Ed Walters other than they prove his story? Well, actually they dispute his story. ------------------------------------------------ COMMENT: Dispute his story? A statement of her opinion, not fact (see below). ------------------------------------------------ (She continues) During the first week of January 1988 a friend of the Walters' family, Tommy Smith, came forward and stated that he had been involved in Walters' UFO "prank". Smith said that Walters had originally asked him to claim to be the photographer of hoaxed photos and to deliver them to the Sentinel but he refused. Among Smith's other assertions was a claim that the "Believer Bill" and "Jane" photos printed in the Sentinel were actually taken by Walters in cooperation with another friend. ------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: Tommy Smith did not "come forward" publicly until June, 1990. His testimony about Ed faking photos is about as solid as a Swiss Cheese. Ed told the UFO investigators in January 1988 that a young man had shown Ed UFO photos. The young man had told Ed that he was exploding firecrackers in Gulf Breeze when a UFO had appeared and he had photographed it. He asked Ed if he should be go public? Ed pointed out the problems he (Ed) was having with all the publicity ofver his photos and he cautioned against it. The young man did not publicize his sighting and asked for anonymity. Ed respected the young man's wishes and did not tell the UFO investigators the man's name. (Hence there was no investigation of the young man's sighting.) More than 2 years later, in June 1990, after Tommy Smith had gone public with allegations of hoaxing by Ed, Ed stated that the young man was, in fact, Tommy Smith. Ed's testimony was supported by another young friend of Tommy's who told me and other investigators that Tommy had told him, in late 1987, about exploding firecrackers and seeing and photographing a UFO. The person Tommy "came forward" to with his story was his father. According to his father, lawyer Thomas Smith, at a press conference in June, 1990, Tommy told him in late 1987 of a UFO sighting with pictures. According to Thomas Smith, a few days or weeks later Tommy told him the pictures had been faked by Ed. Neither Smith said anything in public about these allegations until June, 1990. At the press conference Mr. Smith was careful to avoid criticizing any of the other Gulf Breeze witnesses, including those who claimed to have seen exactly the same thing that Ed photographed. Tommy's photos were analyzed. Tommy had claimed that Ed had faked them by double exposure methods. However, analysis revealed no evidence of double exposure and, in fact, the photos appeared to be just single exposures, not double exposures as Tommy had indicated. The shape and color of the depicted UFO was consistent with what Ed had photographed. ------------------------------------------------------------- (She continues:) The Gulf Breeze Sightings was published in 1990 and included the following copyright notice and acknowledgment: "Copyright: 1990 by Ed Walters and Frances Walters. Clippings on the page following page 256 reprinted with permission of Pensacola News Journal." Why weren't "Believer Bill" and "Jane" acknowledged as the Pensacola News Journal had been? How could Walters use the "Believer Bill" and "Jane" photos without the permission of the photographers? I wrote to the publisher, William Morrow, and asked them who owned the copyright to the "Believer Bill" and "Jane" photos. They replied, Ed Walters. In order to understand the significance of that admission, it is necessary to learn a little bit about Title 17 of the United States Code - Copyright Act of 1976. The most important thing to remember is that copyright belongs to the original author, in this case the photographer (1), until the copyright expires or is transferred to another partythrough a legal a document called a "transfer agreement" (2). It does not matter if the author is anonymous, or uses a pseudonym, nor does he work need to be registered at the Library of Congress for the copyright to be in effect. However, registration is a safeguard against infringement. Thus, whoever Bill and Jane are they own the copyright to the photos and letters submitted to the Sentinel. Duane Cook used the photos in the newspaper with the permission of Bill and Jane. When they submitted their photos and letters to the Sentinel they gave Cook a nonexclusive license to publish the materials. This means that the copyright owner allows the work to be used in a specific way, with permission, without relinquishing any of their own exclusive rights, or copyright. This allowed Cook to use the materials in the Sentinel or any derivative work in the same series (3). When Cook published the Bill and Jane materials, he actually secured their copyright as part of a collective work, the newspaper (4). Even though Cook had possession of the material objects, the photos and letters, he did not own them, nor did he have the authority to turn them over to a third party for publication (5). There are only two ways that Walters could legally own the copyright. He could have a transfer agreement (6) from Bill and Jane or he could be the photographer. I obtained a copy of his Registration from the Library of Congress in Washington, D.C. USA. Walters copyright registration for the photographs used in The Gulf Breeze Sightings is VAU-164-606, this is public record. It is a two page document, but we will only be concerned with questions 1,2 and 4; the remainder being irrelevant to this discussion. The following is taken from the registration. 1) Title of this work: Gulf Breeze Sightings Nature of this work: Photographs 2) Name of author: Edward Daniel Walters Nature of authorship: Photos taken by Edward Daniel Walters 4) Copyright claimant(s): Edward Walters / POB 715 / Gulf Breeze, Fl. Transfer: N/A The copyright form gives the following instructions for item four: "If the claimant(s) named here in space 4 are different from the author(s) named in space 2, give a brief statement of how the claimant(s)obtained ownership of the copyright". Ed Walters states the he is the author of the work - the photographs - he claims the copyright ownership and there is not a transfer agreement. This can not be misinterpreted. He claims to be the photographer of all photographs used in the Gulf Breeze Sightings which would include the "Believer Bill" and "Jane" photos. I decided to write to Walters and ask him. I began a brief correspondence with him in February of 1997. I wrote four letters, received three replies. The only one of real concern is the one dated March 8, 1997. In it I once again asked Walters if he were the rightful owner of the "Believer Bill" and "Jane" photos he used in The Gulf Breeze Sightings. He replied: Ownership was given me by Cook. The reg. copyrights are recorded w/Lib. of Cong. You are still on NOTICE. Signed, Ed Walters. P.S. next day. My copyright attor. assures me I have ownership. (Also copyrighted with Morrow Publishing. I will not address this further.) SEE YOU IN COURT. Once again Walters' ownership is confirmed. Walters states he owns the copyright to the "Believer Bill" and "Jane" photos and his attorney backs that up. Morrow says he owns the copyright, his attorney says he owns the copyright, and he says he owns the copyright then I think it is clear that Ed Walters owns the copyright. Unfortunately for Walters this admission gives credibility to Tommy Smith's claims that Walters took the Bill and Jane photos. With this in mind, all of Tommy Smith's claims should be reevaluated. ------------------------------------------------------------ COMMENT: Anyone who wishes a detailed analysis of Tommy Smith's claims can request it from brumac@compuserve.com. There is a brief commentary on Tommy's claims at the web site www.skiesare.demon.co.uk. Read the paper entitled Ed Walters, the Model and Tommy Smith". -------------------------------------------------------------------------- >From the copyright evidence it is apparent that Ed Walters created "Believer Bill" and "Jane". He took the photographs, used two different types of cameras, a "Hot Shot" for Bill and a 35 mm for Jane. This demonstrates his ability to use cameras other than the Colorpak and to produce multiple exposures. In addition to the photographs and letters, he fabricated a telephone call from the nonexistent Jane; including a transcript of the make believe conversation as a chapter in his book. It is obvious that Ed Walters is capable of an elaborate and sustained deception. This must at the very minimum cast doubt on everything he has said and done. ---------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: This discussion about the copyright does not prove Ed created the Bill and Jane photos. Hence Barbara's claim that "this demonstrates his ability...." is also not proven. In contradiction to Barbara's conclusion, many other factors in this case indicate that Ed told the truth because many of the photos he took were beyond his capability to fake. <SNIP> (I have deleted Barbara's references 1-6 to documents which discuss copyright law)
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 3 Re: From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com> Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 10:05:19 -0400 Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 23:04:25 -0400 Subject: Re: [The following arrived at UpDates with Maccabee's comments appearing as broken lines and visually a mess. As some subscribers are aware, when messages arrive here and don't conform to the Posting Instructions for this List they are returned to sender with the suggestion that they be re-formatted. I returned the message to Steve, who has, as yet, not responded. In view of the fairly intense messaging regarding Gulf Breeze and Walters I've broken my promise to myself and reformatted Maccabee's comments in the post below. I don't think I'll be doing it again. ebk] _______________ >From: c549597@showme.missouri.edu [Barbara Becker] >Date: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 09:47:38 -0500 >To: ufo updates <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words >What happened to my critics? Steve, Don, Roger et al? I thought we >were going to have a good discussion. Do you not understand the >law? Or does your silence indicate agreement? >BB COMMENTARY ON THE BARBARA BECKER'S SEPTEMBER, 1997 DISCUSSION OF THE ED WALTERS/GULF BREEZE SIGHTINGS by Bruce Maccabee Barbara's article is reproduced verbatim except for the notes at the end which are references to copyright law. ..................................................... From: c549597@showme.missouri.edu [Barbara Becker] Date: Sat, 27 Sep 1997 13:36:17 -0500 Subject: 'The Gulf Breeze Paper' ONE PICTURE IS WORTH A THOUSAND WORDS Copyright 1997 Barbara Becker For those not familiar with the Gulf Breeze, Florida (USA) UFO story or one of its most controversial characters, Edward Walters, I will present a brief history. A complete account can be found in The Gulf Breeze Sightings: The Most Astounding Multiple Sightings of UFOs in U.S. History. Ed Walters and Frances Walters. Morrow Publishing, 1990. ------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: The interested reader should also have available the recent book UFOS'S ARE REAL, HERE'S THE PROOF (UARHTP) by Ed Walters and Bruce Maccabee (Avon, 1997) in which there is a discussion of several of the early photos and the difficulty in faking them. Other sightings in Gulf Breeze are described in THE GULF BREEZE SIGHTING (TGBS), which Barbara mentioned, in ABDUCTIONS IN GULF BREEZE (AIGB) by Ed and Frances Walters (Avon, 1994) and in "Gulf Breeze Without Ed" (GBWE), a paper presented at the 1991 MUFON Symposium which concentrates on the hundred or more sightings by other witnesses. It is important to know that many other witnesses reported UFOs flying around Gulf Breeze in the same time frame and, hence, it is possible that others could have photographed them. This applies in particular to "Believer Bill" (discussed below) who claimed to have photographed UFOs at a location that turned out to be just behind Ed's (old) house. ("Jane", described below, claimed her photos were taken long before the Gulf Breeze flap.) ------------------------------------------------ (Barbara continues:) According to Walters, on November 11, 1987, he was at his home in Gulf Breeze, when he looked out of a window and saw a grayish-blue craft hovering just beyond a pine tree in his front yard. He grabbed his Polaroid Colorpak camera and proceeded to take five photographs of the mysterious object. After showing the photos to his wife, Frances, they decided to turn them over to friend and editor of the Gulf Breeze Sentinel Newspaper, Duane Cook. Six days later, on November 17, Ed Walters presented Duane Cook with the five photographs. The first and fifth of this series, along with a letter from the photographer, "Mr. X.", were reproduced in the Sentinel on November 19. Ed Walters claimed he continued to photograph the object(s) until May 1, 1988. It is impossible to know exactly how many photographs Walters actually took. Thirty eight of Walters' photos are used in the book, along with two from allegedly undisclosed sources. This paper will focus on the two other photographs and issues involving them. ------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: Strictly speaking it is "impossible" to know how many pictures Ed took... because he was not being watched 24 hours a day. The reader should not, however, be caught by the implication that he may have taken many more UFO photos. There is no evidence that he took any UFO photos other than what he released in the 1990 book (TGBS) and in the 1997 book (UARHTP). --------------------------------------------------------- (She continues:) The first photographs seemingly corroborating Walters' photos were submitted to the Sentinel on December 3, 1987, accompanied by a letter by an anonymous person, later to be called, "Jane". A second batch of nine photographs was submitted to the Sentinel on December 23, 1987 by a person using the pseudonym of "Believer Bill". One of the nine photos, along with a letter from Bill, was printed in the Sentinel on December 24. These are photos 39 and 40 in the book. What do they have to do with Ed Walters other than they prove his story? Well, actually they dispute his story. ------------------------------------------------ COMMENT: Dispute his story? A statement of her opinion, not fact (see below). ------------------------------------------------ (She continues) During the first week of January 1988 a friend of the Walters' family, Tommy Smith, came forward and stated that he had been involved in Walters' UFO "prank". Smith said that Walters had originally asked him to claim to be the photographer of hoaxed photos and to deliver them to the Sentinel but he refused. Among Smith's other assertions was a claim that the "Believer Bill" and "Jane" photos printed in the Sentinel were actually taken by Walters in cooperation with another friend. ------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: Tommy Smith did not "come forward" publicly until June, 1990. His testimony about Ed faking photos is about as solid as a Swiss Cheese. Ed told the UFO investigators in January 1988 that a young man had shown Ed UFO photos. The young man had told Ed that he was exploding firecrackers in Gulf Breeze when a UFO had appeared and he had photographed it. He asked Ed if he should be go public? Ed pointed out the problems he (Ed) was having with all the publicity ofver his photos and he cautioned against it. The young man did not publicize his sighting and asked for anonymity. Ed respected the young man's wishes and did not tell the UFO investigators the man's name. (Hence there was no investigation of the young man's sighting.) More than 2 years later, in June 1990, after Tommy Smith had gone public with allegations of hoaxing by Ed, Ed stated that the young man was, in fact, Tommy Smith. Ed's testimony was supported by another young friend of Tommy's who told me and other investigators that Tommy had told him, in late 1987, about exploding firecrackers and seeing and photographing a UFO. The person Tommy "came forward" to with his story was his father. According to his father, lawyer Thomas Smith, at a press conference in June, 1990, Tommy told him in late 1987 of a UFO sighting with pictures. According to Thomas Smith, a few days or weeks later Tommy told him the pictures had been faked by Ed. Neither Smith said anything in public about these allegations until June, 1990. At the press conference Mr. Smith was careful to avoid criticizing any of the other Gulf Breeze witnesses, including those who claimed to have seen exactly the same thing that Ed photographed. Tommy's photos were analyzed. Tommy had claimed that Ed had faked them by double exposure methods. However, analysis revealed no evidence of double exposure and, in fact, the photos appeared to be just single exposures, not double exposures as Tommy had indicated. The shape and color of the depicted UFO was consistent with what Ed had photographed. ------------------------------------------------------------- (She continues:) The Gulf Breeze Sightings was published in 1990 and included the following copyright notice and acknowledgment: "Copyright: 1990 by Ed Walters and Frances Walters. Clippings on the page following page 256 reprinted with permission of Pensacola News Journal." Why weren't "Believer Bill" and "Jane" acknowledged as the Pensacola News Journal had been? How could Walters use the "Believer Bill" and "Jane" photos without the permission of the photographers? I wrote to the publisher, William Morrow, and asked them who owned the copyright to the "Believer Bill" and "Jane" photos. They replied, Ed Walters. In order to understand the significance of that admission, it is necessary to learn a little bit about Title 17 of the United States Code - Copyright Act of 1976. The most important thing to remember is that copyright belongs to the original author, in this case the photographer (1), until the copyright expires or is transferred to another partythrough a legal a document called a "transfer agreement" (2). It does not matter if the author is anonymous, or uses a pseudonym, nor does he work need to be registered at the Library of Congress for the copyright to be in effect. However, registration is a safeguard against infringement. Thus, whoever Bill and Jane are they own the copyright to the photos and letters submitted to the Sentinel. Duane Cook used the photos in the newspaper with the permission of Bill and Jane. When they submitted their photos and letters to the Sentinel they gave Cook a nonexclusive license to publish the materials. This means that the copyright owner allows the work to be used in a specific way, with permission, without relinquishing any of their own exclusive rights, or copyright. This allowed Cook to use the materials in the Sentinel or any derivative work in the same series (3). When Cook published the Bill and Jane materials, he actually secured their copyright as part of a collective work, the newspaper (4). Even though Cook had possession of the material objects, the photos and letters, he did not own them, nor did he have the authority to turn them over to a third party for publication (5). There are only two ways that Walters could legally own the copyright. He could have a transfer agreement (6) from Bill and Jane or he could be the photographer. I obtained a copy of his Registration from the Library of Congress in Washington, D.C. USA. Walters copyright registration for the photographs used in The Gulf Breeze Sightings is VAU-164-606, this is public record. It is a two page document, but we will only be concerned with questions 1,2 and 4; the remainder being irrelevant to this discussion. The following is taken from the registration. 1) Title of this work: Gulf Breeze Sightings Nature of this work: Photographs 2) Name of author: Edward Daniel Walters Nature of authorship: Photos taken by Edward Daniel Walters 4) Copyright claimant(s): Edward Walters / POB 715 / Gulf Breeze, Fl. Transfer: N/A The copyright form gives the following instructions for item four: "If the claimant(s) named here in space 4 are different from the author(s) named in space 2, give a brief statement of how the claimant(s)obtained ownership of the copyright". Ed Walters states the he is the author of the work - the photographs - he claims the copyright ownership and there is not a transfer agreement. This can not be misinterpreted. He claims to be the photographer of all photographs used in the Gulf Breeze Sightings which would include the "Believer Bill" and "Jane" photos. I decided to write to Walters and ask him. I began a brief correspondence with him in February of 1997. I wrote four letters, received three replies. The only one of real concern is the one dated March 8, 1997. In it I once again asked Walters if he were the rightful owner of the "Believer Bill" and "Jane" photos he used in The Gulf Breeze Sightings. He replied: Ownership was given me by Cook. The reg. copyrights are recorded w/Lib. of Cong. You are still on NOTICE. Signed, Ed Walters. P.S. next day. My copyright attor. assures me I have ownership. (Also copyrighted with Morrow Publishing. I will not address this further.) SEE YOU IN COURT. Once again Walters' ownership is confirmed. Walters states he owns the copyright to the "Believer Bill" and "Jane" photos and his attorney backs that up. Morrow says he owns the copyright, his attorney says he owns the copyright, and he says he owns the copyright then I think it is clear that Ed Walters owns the copyright. Unfortunately for Walters this admission gives credibility to Tommy Smith's claims that Walters took the Bill and Jane photos. With this in mind, all of Tommy Smith's claims should be reevaluated. ------------------------------------------------------------ COMMENT: Anyone who wishes a detailed analysis of Tommy Smith's claims can request it from brumac@compuserve.com. There is a brief commentary on Tommy's claims at the web site www.skiesare.demon.co.uk. Read the paper entitled Ed Walters, the Model and Tommy Smith". -------------------------------------------------------------------------- >From the copyright evidence it is apparent that Ed Walters created "Believer Bill" and "Jane". He took the photographs, used two different types of cameras, a "Hot Shot" for Bill and a 35 mm for Jane. This demonstrates his ability to use cameras other than the Colorpak and to produce multiple exposures. In addition to the photographs and letters, he fabricated a telephone call from the nonexistent Jane; including a transcript of the make believe conversation as a chapter in his book. It is obvious that Ed Walters is capable of an elaborate and sustained deception. This must at the very minimum cast doubt on everything he has said and done. ---------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: This discussion about the copyright does not prove Ed created the Bill and Jane photos. Hence Barbara's claim that "this demonstrates his ability...." is also not proven. In contradiction to Barbara's conclusion, many other factors in this case indicate that Ed told the truth because many of the photos he took were beyond his capability to fake. <SNIP> (I have deleted Barbara's references 1-6 to documents which discuss copyright law)
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 3 Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words From: rfsignal@sprynet.com [Cathy Johnsom] Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 20:14:13 -0700 Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 23:18:10 -0400 Subject: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words Dear Errol and List, >Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 15:20:15 -0500 (CDT) >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >>From: "Serge Salvaille" <sergesa@connectmmic.net> >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words >>Date: Thu, 02 Oct 1997 13:42:53 -0500 >>Dear Barbara [Becker], >>You have mentioned... >>>Yes, Independent (that means he looked at the photos WITHOUT >>>an agenda) photoanalyst Wm. Hyzer, however his report was >>>disregarded by MUFON. <--------snip---------> >To summarize, however, Hyzer essentially concludes that the famous >Polaroid series of pictures released by Walters are hoaxes, >specifically double-exposures. To cite but one example, the famous >"road shot," Hyzer concluded that reflections from the photographed >object should have appeared in the scene reflected on the hood of >Ed's pickup, since the background treeline did. Ergo, the object was >not physically present at the time the picture was taken. Can I ask how a poleroid camera be made to double expose any of its film? And, another point I'd like to ask concerning the hood reflections. If there was nothing else besides the tree line being reflected on the hood, wouldn't it be logical to assume that the object was further away than the treeline, and much larger in size to be visible in the picture at all? I don't know for sure, but I thought I would ask. Take care for now, Cathy Johnson Search for other documents from or mentioning: rfsignal | dstacy |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 3 Greenwood's UFO Survey From: jan@cyberzone.net (Jan Aldrich) Date: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 15:37:39 -0700 Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 23:34:24 -0400 Subject: Greenwood's UFO Survey Since I have asked others to fill this out, here are my answers to the survey. If you don't agree or if you have better answers, don't bother arguing with me. Fill out your survey and send it to Greenwood. Thank you. Jan Aldrich Jan Aldrich wrote: > Greetings List Members > Barry Greenwood would like to do an survey of knowledgeable > UFO researchers. > If you wish, you may post your answers to this list, or send > them to me, or answer anonymously by mailing your > questionaire to: > CAUS > P. O. Box 176 > Stoneham, MA 02180 > You may simply answer yes or no, or include a few words or > long essay with your opinions. It will be of great interest > to see if there is a common consensus on the important UFO > cases. > Please indicate what E-Mail list you are on: All > Project 1947 Currently Encounters UFO Updates > Other list (please indicate list) > [Other lists, please feel free to cross-post.] > Questions: > I. Please list the ten most important UFO cases. Please > list cases by date and location. If you wish, you may also > tell why they are important. First, as I told Barry, I do not agree with this type of argument that we have a few cases that establish something. I do not see ufology as turning on any "critical evidence." I believe that the preponderance of evidence indicate something unusual is going on. The biggest mistake Roy Craig made ever made was to advise Condon not to look at McDonald's Top 20 Evidential Cases. "If we shot these down, he will just bring us 20 more." Exactly, it is called science. What Craig turned down was the best conservation measures for the project's limited time and resources. Instead of having to look through huge amounts of raw to find possible interesting material, here was a first rate physical scientist who was handing the Condon committee on a silver platter the data the needed to deal with the problem. Craig's quick-reaction investigation team idea was excellent, the early warning network was good, the field equipment kit was excellent. His execution of field investigations was poor. Why? They had no filter to decide which cases were worth a special trip and which should be ignored. Craig's rather lame argue that you might miss a good case is hogwash. You set up certain criteria that a case has to meet before you conduct a field investigation. Sure you may miss some good ones. You must constantly re-adjust your citeria from experience factors. If you read Craig's book, you will see that this has not occurred to him in the last almost 30 years. The 4602d Air Intelligence Service Squadron files are full of cases that were easy to explain. Just calculate the location of Venus, or check with the local weather station for balloon releases. When they did get an amazing case, instead of investigating, they wrote it off as overactive imagination or psychological. Good cases are rare. Scientists and other who have to plow through a whelter of IFO could easily conclude there is nothing there. I personally worked on a particle physics experiment. Over 95% of the events were thrown out because they had no meaningful information or if they had particle events, they were not relevant to the study. No one came and said the experiment was flawed because most of the data was useless. It wasn't even mentioned. This was an experiment under controled conditions. How much data can you expect to be relevant when the raw data comes from chance observations?!? But the obsession of the USAF, CIA, MOD, Battelle, and numerous scientists with the percent of unexplained from small nonrepresentative samples is completely ridiculous. I didn't do too well with statistic, but I can say this: that kind of reasoning is off the wall and has nothing at all to do with science. That said, here are my ten important cases not in order of priority: 1. August 1947, Twin Fall, ID, Trees were swaying as the object passed over them. One of several of the same kind of cases in less than a five month period. Hynek's explanation of "atmospheric eddy" is laughable. The Battelle scientists evaluated it as unknown. Hynek in his re-evaluation of USAF cases disgarded his explanation. The FBI gave the main witness a good recommendation. Unknown to the investigators was that the witness was well-known in the Northwest. Two other newspapers outside of Idaho vouched for the main witness' integrity. 2. July 10, 1947 Newfoundland, the cloud-cleaver. This may have been a meteor as Hynek suggested, but it was one that should have been brought to the attention of the scientific community. There are photographs of this phenomenon. 3. The twin sightings of Oloron College and Gaillac, France represent a truly strange and rare phenomenon. The phenomenon continues to this day as The UFO Evidence, Volume II will hopefully demonstrate. Keyhoe had some original accounts of these twin sightings in his papers. 4. The Leveland series. Maybe this is a something that shows up once every ten years as a rare natural phenomenon or maybe it was something even more unique. Menzel, Keyhoe, Hynek and USAF were not helpful here at all. Except for Hynek each talked about their particular belief system before they even investigated the phenomenon. Hynek's request to the Air Science Division Review again, did not did not recognize that anything unusual was happening. He talked of "mass suggestion" a cause of ignition stops. Loren Gross has shown that there was an increase in sightings starting before Levelland, but Hynek talked about the flood of sightings after (and caused by) Levelland. There were many more sightings (unknown to the USAF and the UFO organizations) in the newspapers and especially more car-stalling accounts that exist only in the old newspapers files. The USAF should have tried to gather double the troublesome 500 cases. They might have got a hint of what was going on. > 4. Gulf of Mexico, December 1952. The Air Force throw everything in as answers to this case except the kitchen sink. This is indeed an unusual case. A Canadian radar expert after reading Keyhoe's version, wrote to the Air Force to ask if such a fantastic event had indeed occurred. Keyhoe's melodramatic version had made him doubtful. 5. Leominster, Massachusetts, 8 March 1967, EME, close approach, physiological effects. 6. Socorro, New Mexico, April 1964. Hynek was only allowed to check this one case. There were a series of similar cases within a short time and not too distant from Socorro... 7. Nemingha, NSW, Australia, March 22,1976, EME, trace, light engulfment. 8. Atlanta, Missouri, 4 March 1969 EME and other effects. 9. Minneapolis, MN. Oct 10-11, 1951, General Mills scientists. 10. Shag Harbor. Whatever this was, it is a good mystery. > II. Considering what has been done in the last 50 years, > and the situation today, what should be the next step for > ufology? Unfortunately, scientific ufology about reached its peak in late 1960s and early 1970s as far as scientific investigations. There was a recovery in the mid-1980s. There were also some good guidelines laid down. That effort collapsed, also. It seems now ufology is constantly attracted to the highest strangeness and most sensationalized cases. Some UFO advocates now sound like lawyers. They use of rhetorical tricks, obfuscation, and appeals to emotions. Fine for a court of law. Cicero may have been able to use his skills in the law courts to get guilty murders off, however these skills have no use in scientific inquiry. Courts are not a place to search for truth. Courts are arena of controlled conflict where by social contract everyone agrees to abide by the results right or wrong. Once a ufologist starts saying, "you can't disprove this." Red flags should go up. That should be the end of the argument. It is the person making the claim that has to prove the contentions. James, Ed, and especially myself have been sucked into this silly game of trying to prove a negative. The argument that the skeptics behave in the same way has no weight here. (BTW Many skeptics behave honorably and are even sympathetically.) I don't care about skeptics. I am trying to reform ufology not skepticism. Ufologists should have a very critical and skeptical attitude toward evidence. Otherwise, we get the emotional near feeding frenzy we find on the web when someone reports NLs. Ufologists should not need skeptics or others to "keep them honest." I think that CE II cases are the key to obtain good solid evidence. However, realistically, investigations of such cases are not easy. Considering where we are today, CE II cases are probably the best entree to more scientific information and improved understanding. Dr. James McDonald thought that radar cases were the most important evidence. Unfortunately, the only radar catatlogs I know of are The UFO Evidence and the Condon report. Most radar cases are woefully inadequate, missing a lot of important information. Ufology is a philosophy of science problem. The Condon committee, in its early meeting recognized this. Their debates on this are very interesting. This question has never been adequately addressed. How do you study things that seem to be involve chance observation of a transient nature. Hard, but not impossible. Scientists who say they can't are like generals who can't mount operations in the face of the enemy. To paraphase Churchill concerning the Mulberries: "Don't tell me all the reasons it can't be done, just go and do it." > III. Government involvement in the UFO problem. > 1. Is there a government cover up or foul up? > Cover-up > Foul up I agree with James McDonald there is a foul-up and to a certain extent a cover up of a foul up. Saying that, McDonald had a list of 100 "obfuscation cases" which indicated cover up. However, the cover up idea has grown. First, if we only got the Project Blue Book files that would prove the existance of high level knowledge about UFOs. Then, the CIA were the ones. However, sections in the OSI of the CIA handed the UFO problem back and forth to one another and they didn't want to do anything with it. Government agencies have not been forthcoming with information and have constantly been very non-cooperative and in many cases have lied about their records on the subject. I have been on the inside and have sympathy for the pressures of the military requirements. However, if you have time and money to occupy people full time in looking for Roswell records, you have the time and money too follow the FOIA requirements or great rid of the whole thing and put everything out there. > Other (please specify) > 2. To what exent is/are the government(s) involved: > A. United States (everyone may answer this > question): > Major involvement > Minor involvement There is always a national security implication to things in the skies. At other times there may have been a major involvement. > Not Interested > B. If you are not a US resident, indicate country > and government involvement: > Major involvement > Minor involvement > Not interested > IV. Abduction phenomenon. > 1. Is the abduction phenomenon part of the UFO problem? > Yes > No > Cannot determine at this time I am unsure on this. I think investigations of these things are important and may lead to interesting findings. However, I do not think this should at this time be the center of ufological attention. > 2. Is the study of the abductions important to > understanding the ufo problem? Unfortunately, the investigators of the abduction phenomena are generally part of the problem and not part of the solution. Dr. Bullard is the most credible and he is not a case investigator per se. A lot of investigators who are more circumspect are probably doing better work. I am appalled by comments like, "you can throw a rock and you will hit an abductee," "do 'they' ask about me?" > Yes > No > Do not know Research is important. Again, the UFORC's approach is probably the best if you feel something is happening here. > V. Paranormal phenomena > 1. Is the UFO phenomenon related to paranormal phenomena > such as psi, ghost, fortean phenomena, etc.? > Yes > No NO! I am surprised that scientist like Vallee proceeded down this road. This debate had already taken place in the 19th century. Huxley pretty well laid out the ground rules. There were phenomena and divine [or paranormal, if you wish] manifestations. Science is concerned with phenomena, the divine [read also paranormal] may be very interesting, but it is outside what is being looked at. (A gross oversimplification of Huxley's cogent and elegant arguments.) Phenomena are in the physical world, and we can try to understand and measure them. The others are outside the relam of understanding or study by the methods of science. (Now, maybe psi is a mental phenomenon, and if so, it could be studied. But if Uri Geller can't bend certain spoons. but can bend others, then something is wrong here.) > Cannot determine at this time > 2. Should the study of the paranormal be part of UFO > studies? > Yes > No No, it is a big distraction to the study of the problem. > Do not know > IV. The probably answer(s) to the UFO phenomenon is/are [you > may choose more than one--if so, please indicate order of > importance by "1st, 2nd, etc"]: > Extraterrestial I am unhappy that the word "UFOs" now equals ET space ships.... It should mean unidentified flying objects....just that. > Parallel universe > Time travelers > Little understood natural phenomenon/phenomena 2d. Almost certainly there is something to this. When I first saw ball-lightning, the scientific consensus was that it did not exist. It would be useful to look at UFO reports for "once in a decade/50 year/century phenomena." It is stupid not to look. (But to a certain extent with all the foolishness associated with the phenomenon it is understandable.) > Secret man-made phenomenon > Misidentification of man-made and natural phenomena 3d I am not thinking about raw data here which contains the majority of IFOs, but after filtering IFOs out, these will still exist. > Psycho-sociological phenomenon/phenomena This area, for sure, is important! I am appalled by American ufology's obsessions with abductions and crashed saucers. I am equally appalled with the European's obsession with the psycho-sociological explanation. Americans don't give this area enough weight. European have ridden this like a hobby horse. It is time to dismount from the theories and beliefs and collect and compile better data. > Occult phenomenon/phenomena This a post-modern world....every idea and opinion is equal to any other idea and opinion.... No, we need to make a break here and try to define the limits of ufology. These things are outside. > Other (please specify) > Cannot determine at this time 1st. This is the same way I felt in 1959. I have seen nothing that has changed by mind. > As you can see, this is not a survey that can be done in > five minutes. Please take your time. > Thank you, the results will be posted to the lists and in > JUST CAUSE. -- Jan Aldrich Project 1947 http://www.iufog.org/project1947/
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 4 Re: Witness Anonymity From: HONEYBE100@aol.com Date: Sat, 4 Oct 1997 03:04:48 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 08:16:23 -0400 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity >Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 15:55:18 -0500 (CDT) >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity >Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 12:17:15 -0400 >From: BOB SHELL <76750.2717@compuserve.com> >Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net Bob Shell wrote: >Yes, it is true that Budd used your real name in his presentation >in San Marino this year. I was in the audience at the time. >Whether it was a slipup, or he just thought it didn't matter in an >overseas presentation, I don't know. Budd was somewhat tired >at the time, I think. >There was no reaction from the audience when he did it, and no >indication on his part that he noticed it. I think it passed as an >unremarkable event. Dennis Stacey wrote: >Then I submit that my own inadvertent use of Linda's real last >name in a book published in England, for which I received much flak >here, be accorded the same status - that of "an unremarkable event" > as I, too, was tired. Slipping up verbally and knowingly publishing my real name are two different cases. Whether it was a remarkable or unremarkable event, is irrelevant. Am I to believe that you feel free to use my family name no matter how I feel about it? >More recently, there are rumors that Honey Bee is reportedly un- >happy with a videotape of her son shown at another out-of-country >UFO Symposium by parties unnamed here, one in which her son >reportedly identifies Javier Perez de Cuellar as the man who gave >him the fabulous brass diving helmet. Maybe Our Lady of the Sands >could enlighten us further as to her present position on this matter? >Maybe she could even tel us who might have been responsible for the >distribution of said video? No Dennis...you have it all wrong. This is what has happened: A video tape which was made of my son, relating to the diver's helmet he had received from the "Third Man," was taped for research purposes, only. My son was nine years old. In turn, this video tape was given to a trusted colleague "in strict confidence" for his files, or archives. I found out about two weeks ago that this video tape was sold to a foreign TV show equivalent to our 20/20 or 48 hours and it was also shown here in the U.S. In other words, my younger son's privacy has been sold. I've successfully protected my family's identities all of these years, but all in vain. I saw the tape, and there was my son, full faced. No one contacted me to ask for my permission, nor did I sign a release (which, of course, I wouldn't do). So, FCC laws have been ignored, as well. My son is a minor!! This particular video tape should not have been viewed anywhere. Now my son's little round face is out there. Am I unhappy, Dennis? No. I'm furious and I will get to the bottom of this disgusting event. And when I do, a lot of heads are going to roll. It's one thing for an adult to fight for his/her privacy, but when this happens to a child, especially mine, it's a different matter. It seems to me that, money rules. A little boy was sold out. Linda Cortile
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 4 Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words From: Jean van Gemert <jeanvg@dds.nl> Date: Sat, 4 Oct 1997 13:49:53 +0200 (MET DST) Fwd Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 08:17:45 -0400 Subject: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words >Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 10:05:19 -0400 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com> >Subject: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words >In view of the fairly intense messaging regarding >Gulf Breeze and Walters I've broken my promise >to myself and reformatted Maccabee's comments >in the post below. I don't think I'll be doing >it again. Errol's posting of Maccabee's comments didn't include Maccabee's end comments, which have been included in this version. Apologies to those who hate downloading stuff twice, but I think Bruce's additional remarks are important enough. -- COMMENTARY ON THE BARBARA BECKER'S SEPTEMBER, 1997 DISCUSSION OF THE ED WALTERS/GULF BREEZE SIGHTINGS by Bruce Maccabee Barbara's article is reproduced verbatim except for the notes at the end which are references to copyright law. ..................................................... From: c549597@showme.missouri.edu [Barbara Becker] Date: Sat, 27 Sep 1997 13:36:17 -0500 Subject: 'The Gulf Breeze Paper' ONE PICTURE IS WORTH A THOUSAND WORDS Copyright 1997 Barbara Becker For those not familiar with the Gulf Breeze, Florida (USA) UFO story or one of its most controversial characters, Edward Walters, I will present a brief history. A complete account can be found in The Gulf Breeze Sightings: The Most Astounding Multiple Sightings of UFOs in U.S. History. Ed Walters and Frances Walters. Morrow Publishing, 1990. ------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: The interested reader should also have available the recent book UFOS'S ARE REAL, HERE'S THE PROOF (UARHTP) by Ed Walters and Bruce Maccabee (Avon, 1997) in which there is a discussion of several of the early photos and the difficulty in faking them. Other sightings in Gulf Breeze are described in THE GULF BREEZE SIGHTING (TGBS), which Barbara mentioned, in ABDUCTIONS IN GULF BREEZE (AIGB) by Ed and Frances Walters (Avon, 1994) and in "Gulf Breeze Without Ed" (GBWE), a paper presented at the 1991 MUFON Symposium which concentrates on the hundred or more sightings by other witnesses. It is important to know that many other witnesses reported UFOs flying around Gulf Breeze in the same time frame and, hence, it is possible that others could have photographed them. This applies in particular to "Believer Bill" (discussed below) who claimed to have photographed UFOs at a location that turned out to be just behind Ed's (old) house. ("Jane", described below, claimed her photos were taken long before the Gulf Breeze flap.) ------------------------------------------------ (Barbara continues:) According to Walters, on November 11, 1987, he was at his home in Gulf Breeze, when he looked out of a window and saw a grayish-blue craft hovering just beyond a pine tree in his front yard. He grabbed his Polaroid Colorpak camera and proceeded to take five photographs of the mysterious object. After showing the photos to his wife, Frances, they decided to turn them over to friend and editor of the Gulf Breeze Sentinel Newspaper, Duane Cook. Six days later, on November 17, Ed Walters presented Duane Cook with the five photographs. The first and fifth of this series, along with a letter from the photographer, "Mr. X.", were reproduced in the Sentinel on November 19. Ed Walters claimed he continued to photograph the object(s) until May 1, 1988. It is impossible to know exactly how many photographs Walters actually took. Thirty eight of Walters' photos are used in the book, along with two from allegedly undisclosed sources. This paper will focus on the two other photographs and issues involving them. ------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: Strictly speaking it is "impossible" to know how many pictures Ed took... because he was not being watched 24 hours a day. The reader should not, however, be caught by the implication that he may have taken many more UFO photos. There is no evidence that he took any UFO photos other than what he released in the 1990 book (TGBS) and in the 1997 book (UARHTP). --------------------------------------------------------- (She continues:) The first photographs seemingly corroborating Walters' photos were submitted to the Sentinel on December 3, 1987, accompanied by a letter by an anonymous person, later to be called, "Jane". A second batch of nine photographs was submitted to the Sentinel on December 23, 1987 by a person using the pseudonym of "Believer Bill". One of the nine photos, along with a letter from Bill, was printed in the Sentinel on December 24. These are photos 39 and 40 in the book. What do they have to do with Ed Walters other than they prove his story? Well, actually they dispute his story. ------------------------------------------------ COMMENT: Dispute his story? A statement of her opinion, not fact (see below). ------------------------------------------------ (She continues:) During the first week of January 1988 a friend of the Walters' family, Tommy Smith, came forward and stated that he had been involved in Walters' UFO "prank". Smith said that Walters had originally asked him to claim to be the photographer of hoaxed photos and to deliver them to the Sentinel but he refused. Among Smith's other assertions was a claim that the "Believer Bill" and "Jane" photos printed in the Sentinel were actually taken by Walters in cooperation with another friend. ------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: Tommy Smith did not "come forward" publicly until June, 1990. His testimony about Ed faking photos is about as solid as a Swiss Cheese. Ed told the UFO investigators in January 1988 that a young man had shown Ed UFO photos. The young man had told Ed that he was exploding firecrackers in Gulf Breeze when a UFO had appeared and he had photographed it. He asked Ed if he should be go public? Ed pointed out the problems he (Ed) was having with all the publicity over his photos and he cautioned against it. The young man did not publicize his sighting and asked for anonymity. Ed respected the young man's wishes and did not tell the UFO investigators the man's name. (Hence there was no investigation of the young man's sighting.) More than 2 years later, in June 1990, after Tommy Smith had gone public with allegations of hoaxing by Ed, Ed stated that the young man was, in fact, Tommy Smith. Ed's testimony was supported by another young friend of Tommy's who told me and other investigators that Tommy had told him, in late 1987, about exploding firecrackers and seeing and photographing a UFO. The person Tommy "came forward" to with his story was his father. According to his father, lawyer Thomas Smith, at a press conference in June, 1990, Tommy told him in late 1987 of a UFO sighting with pictures. According to Thomas Smith, a few days or weeks later Tommy told him the pictures had been faked by Ed. Neither Smith said anything in public about these allegations until June, 1990. At the press conference Mr. Smith was careful to avoid criticizing any of the other Gulf Breeze witnesses, including those who claimed to have seen exactly the same thing that Ed photographed. Tommy's photos were analyzed. Tommy had claimed that Ed had faked them by double exposure methods. However, analysis revealed no evidence of double exposure and, in fact, the photos appeared to be just single exposures, not double exposures as Tommy had indicated. The shape and color of the depicted UFO was consistent with what Ed had photographed. ------------------------------------------------------------- (She continues:) The Gulf Breeze Sightings was published in 1990 and included the following copyright notice and acknowledgment: "Copyright: 1990 by Ed Walters and Frances Walters. Clippings on the page following page 256 reprinted with permission of Pensacola News Journal." Why weren't "Believer Bill" and "Jane" acknowledged as the Pensacola News Journal had been? How could Walters use the "Believer Bill" and "Jane" photos without the permission of the photographers? I wrote to the publisher, William Morrow, and asked them who owned the copyright to the "Believer Bill" and "Jane" photos. They replied, Ed Walters. In order to understand the significance of that admission, it is necessary to learn a little bit about Title 17 of the United States Code - Copyright Act of 1976. The most important thing to remember is that copyright belongs to the original author, in this case the photographer (1), until the copyright expires or is transferred to another partythrough a legal a document called a "transfer agreement" (2). It does not matter if the author is anonymous, or uses a pseudonym, nor does he work need to be registered at the Library of Congress for the copyright to be in effect. However, registration is a safeguard against infringement. Thus, whoever Bill and Jane are they own the copyright to the photos and letters submitted to the Sentinel. Duane Cook used the photos in the newspaper with the permission of Bill and Jane. When they submitted their photos and letters to the Sentinel they gave Cook a nonexclusive license to publish the materials. This means that the copyright owner allows the work to be used in a specific way, with permission, without relinquishing any of their own exclusive rights, or copyright. This allowed Cook to use the materials in the Sentinel or any derivative work in the same series (3). When Cook published the Bill and Jane materials, he actually secured their copyright as part of a collective work, the newspaper (4). Even though Cook had possession of the material objects, the photos and letters, he did not own them, nor did he have the authority to turn them over to a third party for publication (5). There are only two ways that Walters could legally own the copyright. He could have a transfer agreement (6) from Bill and Jane or he could be the photographer. I obtained a copy of his Registration from the Library of Congress in Washington, D.C. USA. Walters copyright registration for the photographs used in The Gulf Breeze Sightings is VAU-164-606, this is public record. It is a two page document, but we will only be concerned with questions 1,2 and 4; the remainder being irrelevant to this discussion. The following is taken from the registration. 1) Title of this work: Gulf Breeze Sightings Nature of this work: Photographs 2) Name of author: Edward Daniel Walters Nature of authorship: Photos taken by Edward Daniel Walters 4) Copyright claimant(s): Edward Walters / POB 715 / Gulf Breeze, Fl. Transfer: N/A The copyright form gives the following instructions for item four: "If the claimant(s) named here in space 4 are different from the author(s) named in space 2, give a brief statement of how the claimant(s)obtained ownership of the copyright". Ed Walters states the he is the author of the work - the photographs - he claims the copyright ownership and there is not a transfer agreement. This can not be misinterpreted. He claims to be the photographer of all photographs used in the Gulf Breeze Sightings which would include the "Believer Bill" and "Jane" photos. I decided to write to Walters and ask him. I began a brief correspondence with him in February of 1997. I wrote four letters, received three replies. The only one of real concern is the one dated March 8, 1997. In it I once again asked Walters if he were the rightful owner of the "Believer Bill" and "Jane" photos he used in The Gulf Breeze Sightings. He replied: Ownership was given me by Cook. The reg. copyrights are recorded w/Lib. of Cong. You are still on NOTICE. Signed, Ed Walters. P.S. next day. My copyright attor. assures me I have ownership. (Also copyrighted with Morrow Publishing. I will not address this further.) SEE YOU IN COURT. Once again Walters' ownership is confirmed. Walters states he owns the copyright to the "Believer Bill" and "Jane" photos and his attorney backs that up. Morrow says he owns the copyright, his attorney says he owns the copyright, and he says he owns the copyright then I think it is clear that Ed Walters owns the copyright. Unfortunately for Walters this admission gives credibility to Tommy Smith's claims that Walters took the Bill and Jane photos. With this in mind, all of Tommy Smith's claims should be reevaluated. ------------------------------------------------------------ COMMENT: Anyone who wishes a detailed analysis of Tommy Smith's claims can request it from brumac@compuserve.com. There is a brief commentary on Tommy's claims at the web site www.skiesare. demon.co.uk. Read the paper entitled "Ed Walters, the Model and Tommy Smith". -------------------------------------------------------------------------- >From the copyright evidence it is apparent that Ed Walters created "Believer Bill" and "Jane". He took the photographs, used two different types of cameras, a "Hot Shot" for Bill and a 35 mm for Jane. This demonstrates his ability to use cameras other than the Colorpak and to produce multiple exposures. In addition to the photographs and letters, he fabricated a telephone call from the nonexistent Jane; including a transcript of the make believe conversation as a chapter in his book. It is obvious that Ed Walters is capable of an elaborate and sustained deception. This must at the very minimum cast doubt on everything he has said and done. ---------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: This discussion about the copyright does not prove Ed created the Bill and Jane photos. Hence Barbara's claim that "this demonstrates his ability...." is also not proven. In contradiction to Barbara's conclusion, many other factors in this case indicate that Ed told the truth because many of the photos he took were beyond his capability to fake. <SNIP> (I have deleted Barbara's references 1-6 to documents which discuss copyright law.) ENDING COMMENT: At the time of this writing, Sept. 30, 1997, the book UFOS ARE REAL, HERE'S THE PROOF (Avon, paperback) has been available for 7 months. Within that book are technical arguments which show that Ed's 1987-1988 photos were not faked. The book also includes descriptions of sightings in the last ten years which are even more complex in some ways than the earlier sightings, and these newer sightings were photo- graphed with a Model 600 Polaroid or a 35 mm Canon camea and several were also videotaped. The videos are particularly convincing. Several of these videos, including the "beach video" and the "shadow video" are described in the paper ACCELERATION which can be found on the web site of the National Institute for Discovery Science (NIDS) at www.accessnv.com/nids (click on the "what else" button). Ed is not the only person who has seen UFOs in Gulf Breeze, as every- one knows (including Barbara). There probably have been several hundred (I haven't kept count) sightings there in the last 10 years. TGBS dis- cusses many of the early sightings. A reasonably complete list up to spring 1991 is in the paper GBWE (mentioned above). In that paper I list 93 non-Ed sightings between Nov. 11, 1987 and July 30, 1988 and 82 non-Ed sightings between Aug. 1, 1988 and April 1, 1990. Between April 1 1990 and April 19, 1991 (the last date in the paper) there were 67 sightings, many of which were the "red bubba" type. (A "red bubba" sighting generally involved a single, or sometimes several, red lights moving through the sky which would turn white, flash brightly, and then disappear.) Ed was present at many, but not all, of these, as were dozens of other witnesses. Between November 1990 and July 1992 the Gulf Breeze Research Team (MUFON members in the Gulf Breeze/Pensacola area) logged about 170 sightings of red bubba or rings of light. ( During a ring sighting the witnesses saw a circular or elliptical ring of dis- crete white or red lights. Sometimes a dark body or structure moving with the ring would block out the stars. Sometimes there were other lights associated with the ring.) There were also a few daylight craft sightings. Some of the bubba sightings are described in AIGB and in UARHTP. In UARHTP there are discussions of 93 sightings in the Gulf Breeze area, 25 of which are Ed's, covering the period Nov. 1987 to Nov. 1995. (This includes the Sept. 16, 1991 ring sighting when I was present along with Ed and 30 other people.) Many of these sightings were of the bubba type. In several cases triangulation was accomplished and speeds were determined. In one case (Feb. 7, 1992) a diffraction grating was used to photograph a "bubba" and a road flare for comparison. The spectra were different. This and the speed calculations ruled out balloon-borne flares, the "standard" explanation, for bubba. UARHTP also includes the discussion of numerous daylight photos and videos by Ed as well as some by other people. Barbara Becker has not discussed the more recent sightings by Ed nor has she discussed the sightings by others (except Bill and Jane, whom she re- jects as witnesses). Instead, she has concentrated her effort on dis- proving the early photos and sightings by Ed. She has spent years trying to prove Ed faked his photos, as shown by her 1990 "Thoughtful Opinion" paper. Now, finally, her ultimate proof that Ed faked his photos seems to be based not on analysis of the sightings themselves, but on a legal technicality involving the publication of Bill and Jane photos. This seems like a slender thread, indeed, on which to support her al- legations of what must now be considered a massive hoax/conspiracy/cover- up by more than one person. Or, would she rather have us believe that Ed's early photos were fakes, but the more recent (post 1988) photos (such as the January 8, 1990 photos taken in the presence of other witnesses who saw the UFO and saw Ed photograph it) are real? Conventional skeptical wisdom would say you can't have it both ways. Either Ed faked them all or he faked none. What do you think? __________________________________________________________________________ Science, Logic, and the UFO Debate: http://www.primenet.com/~bdzeiler/index.html -----------------------
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 4 Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words From: Jean van Gemert <jeanvg@dds.nl> Date: Sat, 4 Oct 1997 13:50:51 +0200 (MET DST) Fwd Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 08:27:48 -0400 Subject: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words >From: c549597@showme.missouri.edu [Barbara Becker] >Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 13:21:06 -0500 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words >Yes, Independent (that means he looked at the photos WITHOUT >an agenda) photoanalyst Wm. Hyzer, however his report was disregarded by >MUFON. Re. Ms. Becker's allegation that MUFON "disregarded" the Hyzer analysis (an issue which I believe has already been illuminated somewhat by Dennis Stacy), Bruce Maccabee has this to say: -- The response to this is BOVINE EXCREMENT!!!! MUFON published Hyzer's report! Sainio and I checked on Hyzer's analysis and concluded it was wrong in certain important areas. Hyzer gave the strongest endorsement to the road shot being a hoax because there was no reflection in th hood. This is a good point, explained by a combination of th dented hood (accident that Hyzer acknowledged) plus weight in the back of the truck which tilted it in such a way as to "block" reflections of lights below a certain altitude above ground. The answer was permanently recorded in th photos itelf for anyone, including Hyzer, to see( the horizon line - treetops -- appeared twice in the hood, which should not have happened and wouldn't have without the dent) (b) Hyzer referred to the blue beam but did not test for variation in brightness where the blue beam crosses the horizon in photo 11: had he done so he would have pria facie evidence against a simple double exposure; Hyzer's explanation of photo 1 was refuted. __________________________________________________________________________ Science, Logic, and the UFO Debate: http://www.primenet.com/~bdzeiler/index.html -----------------------
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 4 [The following document has been edited by the webmaster in response to the threat of lawsuit by Barbara Becker, who claims copyright infringment. See Here for more information.] Maccabee on Becker - 1 From: Jean van Gemert <jeanvg@dds.nl> Date: Sat, 4 Oct 1997 13:51:10 +0200 (MET DST) Fwd Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 08:29:17 -0400 Subject: Maccabee on Becker - 1 Dear all, Bruce maccabee has, upon stumbling across Ms. Becker's 1990 paper, written a rebuttal to it which Bruce has asked me to post here. It's long, but relevant. -- COMMENTARY ON BARBARA BECKER'S 1990 PAPER ENTITLED "THOUGHTFUL OPINION" ON GULF BREEZE (Commentary by Bruce Maccabee, Sept. 30, 1997) Barbara Becker wrote a three part series of articles in August, 1990, as follows, with my comments inserted. I have very lightly edited what she wrote to make a consistent analysis. Barbara Becker wrote: [The quoted text that was once at this location was deleted by the webmaster on 10/9/97 in response to the threat of lawsuit by Barbara Becker, who claims copyright infringment. See Here for more information.] ***** COMMENT: At the time Barbara wrote this (summer 1990) the most complete history and analysis ---OTHER THAN what was contained in the book THE GULF BREEZE SIGH- TINGS (TGBS)--- was contained in my paper A HISTORY OF THE GULF BREEZE SIGHTINGS (AHGBS) which was published in the 1988 MUFON Symposium Proceed- ings. This 90 page paper was MUCH more complete then early version of the history as published in the Journal, so she should have used it as her prime source for comparison with the book. It was based on my interviews... which were not represented in the spring 1988 Journal publications... plus information from others. It was written in April and May, 1988. After I submitted it for publication I continued to update it and so an annotated edition, which includes copies of the viewgraphs presented at the 1988 Symposium (where I presented the result of my research), was completed in July, 1988. It is available on order from the FUND FOR UFO RESEARCH or by contacting me directly. Unfortunately Ms. Becker did not use this paper as a reference, although it had been available for several years, and this is part of her "problem": several of her criticisms would have been resolved had she used it instead of the early MUFON Journal reports. A paper that was not available in 1990, but should be obtained by any serious researcher of this case today, is the paper I presented at the 1991 MUFON Symposium entitled GULF BREEZE WITHOUT ED (GBWE). This 80 page paper concentrates on the 90 OTHER sightings by witnesses other than ED which occurred between November, 1987 and July 1988 and goes on to the many (hundred) other sightings that occurred between the summer of 1988 and the spring of 1991. As described in GBWE, there were over a dozen witnesses who said they saw exactly the same thing that Ed photo- graphed,. There were many other witnesses who reported seeing a bright, round light or ring moving through the sky and several even reported seeing the blue beam. Also, as of today any serious researcher should have a copy of "PHOTO ANALYSIS, A PICTORIAL PRIMER" by Jeffrey Sainio, published in the 1992 MUFON Symposium proceedings, pg 132. In this paper Sainio presents computer-aided analysis of several dozen UFO photos and video, including 14 of Ed's photos. For the complete story of Ed's experiences OTHER THAN what was reported in TGBS (for example, his abductions) the researcher should have ABDUC- TIONS IN GULF BREEZE (AIGB; Ed and Frances Walters, Avon, paperback, 1994) and for more recent photographic events and sightings by Ed and others throughout the world, UFOS ARE REAL, HERE'S THE PROOF (UARHTP) (Ed Walters and Bruce Maccabee, Avon paperbackl, 1997). This most recent book res- ponds directly to the double exposure criticisms and other allegations put forth by Becker and others. It also provides photos taken by other people in other countries who saw the same sort of UFO that Ed photographed. Finally, the researcher should have the paper ACCELERATION, presented at the 1996 MUFON Symposium Proceedings and now available at the web site of the National Institute for Discovery Science (NIDS): www.accessnv.com/nids. When you get to the front page click on the "WHAT ELSE" button. This paper describes in detail the analysis of Ed's July, 1995 video which is only briefly described in UARHTP. ************** SHE CONTINUES: [The quoted text that was once at this location was deleted by the webmaster on 10/9/97 in response to the threat of lawsuit by Barbara Becker, who claims copyright infringment. See Here for more information.] ******************** Comment: Barbara has summarized what I call the SIMPLE DOUBLE EXPOSURE (SDE) technique which I described fully in my MUFON Symposium presenta- tion, in the last chapter (which I wrote) of THE GULF BREEZE SIGHTINGS (TGBS), one of the references Becker cites, and also in more detail in UFOS ARE REAL HERE'S THE PROOF (UARHTP). Although I could go into great detail on this, I would like to point out a key factor overlooked by Becker: the first photo shows the left edge of the UFO image apparently blocked by the much darker tree image. The SDE tecnique will not allow a darker image to overlay or "block" a lighter image...the lighter image "bleeds through" the darker one. Hence to make this one photo, if a hoax, would require much more sophistication, on the level of Hollywood, using the Masked Double Exposure (MDE) technique. The MDE or an equivalent requires alignment between the model image and the backgroud image so that the boundaries of the images match perfectly, otherwise the error in matching is detectible. Computer aided analysis of Ed's photo 1 shows no error at the boundary between the UFO image and the tree image. To produce a high quality MDE with Ed's simple camera would be virtually impossible. A photo expert, Dr. Wm. Hyzer, realizing that the photo could be neither a SDE nor a MDE, conceived of a third method applicable to Polaroid film which required very low exposure of the model image (exposure so low that the image would only appear if a second exposure added enough light to make the film register the sum of the two exposures). This method, which requires rather precise control of light levels and exposure, is described in UARHTP. Experiments by myself and Jeffrey Sainio proved that this method would not work under the conditions of Ed's photo. The bottom line is that there is no conventional explanation for photo 1. Ed's photo #7 taken in November, 1987 (see TGBS) and photo #40, taken in Feb. 1988, also show a UFO blocked by a tree. Photo 40, which was first published in UARHTP, shows a UO blocked at the right side by a tree about 60 feet from the camera. The argments against multiple exposure also apply to these photos. ****************** She continues: [The quoted text that was once at this location was deleted by the webmaster on 10/9/97 in response to the threat of lawsuit by Barbara Becker, who claims copyright infringment. See Here for more information.] ***************** Comment: It is true that the UFO tends to be in the upper left hand side. However, as I pointed out above, no amount of "memorizing the placement of the UFO" can explain the fact that the UFO image in the first photo is cut or "blocked" by the outline of the tree image at the left side. ****************** She continues: [The quoted text that was once at this location was deleted by the webmaster on 10/9/97 in response to the threat of lawsuit by Barbara Becker, who claims copyright infringment. See Here for more information.] ************************* Comment: WRONG. The backgrounds have similar clarity, the main distortion being slight image smear due to camera vibration. The copies in the hard cover edition of the book are, of course, not as clear as the originals. In the originals one can see the TELEPHONE/POWER WIRES at a distance of a hundred feet or more. On the other hand, the UFO image is not any clearer than the background. Regarding the image smear due to motion, it is important to note that the smears of the background and UFO image, where measureable, agree. Of particular interest is photo 4 where there is a sizeable diagonal smear of the top light of the UFO and of the nearby streetlight. Jeff Sainio, MUFON photoanalyst, showed, by "clipping" the streetlight image and placing it next to the UFO top light image using computer-aided methods, that the motion smears are the same in amplitude and direction (see Sainio's article in the 1992 MUFON Symposium Proceedings). Such a "coincidence" would be virtually impossible to achieve by someone who first photographs a model with a hand held camera, thereby causing a smear of one angle and magnitude, and then photographs the background, thereby causing another smear of (probably) another angle and magnitude. Similar smears of the UFO top light and streetlight are also evident in several other photos, as described by Sainio (reference cited), although the magnitude is not as great as in photo 4. ************************* She continues: [The quoted text that was once at this location was deleted by the webmaster on 10/9/97 in response to the threat of lawsuit by Barbara Becker, who claims copyright infringment. See Here for more information.] ************************* COMMENT: The so-called "ghost-demon" photo shows an amorphous collection of faint blobby images contained in a picture of a girl at one of Ed's parties. No one has provided a completely satisfactory explanation of that photo, although anomalous reflections from a glass wall the girl was stan- ding next to have been suggested, as well as other photo artifacts. How- ever, the amorphous blobs... I hesitate to say "image"..... are NOT what one would expect from a SDE in which first a person in a mask (the ghost) is photograped in a dark room (first exposure) and then the "victim" of the ghost (the girl) is photographed (second exposure). Under these typ- ical SDE conditions one would expect a faint but definitely identifiable image of the mask. In this case the collection of faint blobs has no definite image and is very unconvincing as a "ghost." In fact, to get a "ghost" image or any image out of these blobs is really a "Rohrshach" test for the person looking at the photo. Ed did, in fact, create "ghosty" photos for his parties, but not by double exposure. He had discovered that when his camera was completely DEFOCUSED the images of people looked distorted. Hence he would photo- graph a person with the camera defocused and claim that the weird image was a result of the "ghost". He demonstrated this to the investigators. ************************************ [The quoted text that was once at this location was deleted by the webmaster on 10/9/97 in response to the threat of lawsuit by Barbara Becker, who claims copyright infringment. See Here for more information.] *********************** COMMENT: The discrepancy is in the book. In my MUFON Symposium report I have stated that Ed took photos 1,2,3, and 4 and then got another film pack. This was verified by the numbers on the backs of the Polaroid film (Type 108, which ALMOST always, has numbers from 1 to 8 on the pictures in the pack). The numbers on the backs of photos 1 - 4 are 5,6,7,and 8 (8 being the last one in the pack). Photo 5 bears a 1 on the back (hence a new pack). Becker is correct that IN THE BOOK photos 3 &4 are identical. This is an error by the publisher: photo 4 was printed twice and photo 3 not at all! Regarding the brightness of photo 5 relative to photo 4: Ed operated the camera with the shutter set on automatic exposure. However, at low light levels, such as pertained at the time of these pictures, the auto- matic characteristic essentially did not work... i.e., it did not close the shutter. I carried out experiments with the camera which showed that if there wasn't enough light the shutter would stay open as LONG AS THE SHUTTER BUTTON WAS DEPRESSED. The way Ed operated the camera, he pushed on the shutter button and held it down for about a second, but this time was variable. He did this whenever he took a picture, night, day, with or withou flash. Of course this method was fine for daylight or flash exposures because the autmatic shutter mechanism closed the shutter quickly when there was enough light. However, in low light con- ditions the shutter time was essentially controlled by Ed, although he didn't realize that until I proved it to him by experiment. Hence photo 4 could have been a relatively shorter shutter (less than a second) and photo 5 could have been a longer shutter (1 sec), thus making 5 appear brighter than 4. (Note: the relatively long exposure times explains the image motion smears evident to some extent in each of these photos. Because even though it was proven by experiment that Ed could hold the camera quite steady, he could not hold it perfectly steady.) I should point out that the combination of evening, with a cloudy sky meant that the overall light level changed considerably during the time of the photos. *********************************** [The quoted text that was once at this location was deleted by the webmaster on 10/9/97 in response to the threat of lawsuit by Barbara Becker, who claims copyright infringment. See Here for more information.] ********************************* COMMENT: The claim that it is "apparent" that the UFO is a small model is actually an opinion based on no evidence. Moreover, a comparison between the UFO photos and daylight photos (not published in the book) that are clearly taken from the same two locations shows that the UFO MUST have moved to the right between photos. This was determined by comparing the sighting lines to the UFO with the sighting lines to known nearby structures (windscreen "boards" that have white edges and so show up in the photos). At first it was thought possible that an estimate of the distance could be made by a parallax calculation since the camera was moved several feet sideways between shots. However, then I deter- mined that the sighting lines diverge, rather than converge to a single point. Hence the UFO must have moved (to the right) between photos. According to Frances it did move between photos (see TGBS). ****************** [The quoted text that was once at this location was deleted by the webmaster on 10/9/97 in response to the threat of lawsuit by Barbara Becker, who claims copyright infringment. See Here for more information.] ******************** COMMENT: Clearly the light from the bottom of the UFO is not from the camera flash. As for the brightness of the outer surface, one cannot be certain of the source. If it were a model less than 20 ft away if could be a result of the flash, since the flash will light up a white surface enough to make a distinct image at that distance, but not much further. (The image of the white rim of the pool, illuminated by the flash, il- lustrates the rapid decrease in image brightness with distance.) ********************* [The quoted text that was once at this location was deleted by the webmaster on 10/9/97 in response to the threat of lawsuit by Barbara Becker, who claims copyright infringment. See Here for more information.] ******************************************* COMMENT: This is an unconvincing argument at best. Perhaps if Ed were built like Arnold Schwarzenegger(sp?) one could detect tense muscles. However, in an average person the muscles are overlain by enough fat so as to remove any indications from the outside that there is "tension" in the muscles. Hence one would not expect to see, in a photograph like this, any indications of tension. As for complaining that Ed didn't know how to hold his hands when yelling at a UFO to get out of his life... well, that's purely a matter of opinion. ******************************** __________________________________________________________________________ Science, Logic, and the UFO Debate: http://www.primenet.com/~bdzeiler/index.html ----------------------- [Next Part]
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 4 Maccabee on Becker - 2 From: Jean van Gemert <jeanvg@dds.nl> Date: Sat, 4 Oct 1997 13:51:22 +0200 (MET DST) Fwd Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 08:30:13 -0400 Subject: Maccabee on Becker - 2 [The quoted text that was once at this location was deleted by the webmaster on 10/9/97 in response to the threat of lawsuit by Barbara Becker, who claims copyright infringment. See Here for more information.] ***************************** COMMENT: All these references to rain are a result of misinformation contained in the MUFON Journal report and in my MUFON Symposium report. The assumption that it had been raining was not based on Ed's testimony, but on the observations that (a) there were clouds in the sky and, (b) there are the several bright "dots" in the photo which were erroneously interpreted as bright reflections from water drops on the windshield. However, a careful inspection of the original photos which I was given to study in late May, 1988 (too late to be included in the Symposium paper as published; but this is mentioned in the revised version), showed that the white spots were actually tiny holes in the film emulsion. Such holes are common in Type 108 Polaroid film and occurred in many of Ed's photos, both UFO and non-UFO. For further information on the state of the weather at the time I got a copy of the weather records and found that there had been no recorded precipitation on January 12 or the previous day. (There was 0.16" rain on January 13). The same weather report showed 80% sky cover on that day, consistent with the sky cover in Ed's photo. Obviously even with 80% cloud cover it is possible for the sun to shine through, or for there to be a very bright area in the clouds "near" the sun, which could create shadows. Hence all arguments based on the assumed presence of wet roads etc., are moot. ******************************************* [The quoted text that was once at this location was deleted by the webmaster on 10/9/97 in response to the threat of lawsuit by Barbara Becker, who claims copyright infringment. See Here for more information.] ************************ COMMENT: I did not say it would be impossible to fake. More generally, I have repeatedly said that it would be possible to fake, perhaps, any single photo, given sufficient time, money, desire, technical ability and equipment. Ed had enough money and time to fake this one photo, but neither (so far as I could determine) the desire, the technical ability (knowledge of double exposure techniques) or equipment (models). Nevertheless, she is correct that this photo could be a cleverly composed SDE. Placement of the image of the model would be more than a little tricky, however, since it has to appear roughly over the road. It might take several shots to get it right. (Note: Jeff Sainio discovered some evidence in the photo that the road itself was illuminated by the UFO at a distance from the very bright area below the UFO image. If this is true, then the photo was not a double exposure.) ******************** [The quoted text that was once at this location was deleted by the webmaster on 10/9/97 in response to the threat of lawsuit by Barbara Becker, who claims copyright infringment. See Here for more information.] **************** COMMENT: ERROR: she is here referring to the ten photos obtained with the "Nimslo" 4 lens/stereo camera. This camera was given to Ed preloaded and sealed with wax. He subsequently obtained 10 pictures of an object 40 or more feet away that, according to him, passed by on the far side of some pine trees in Shoreline Park. (The rather unique arrangement or structure of the UFO lights, which is all one sees in these photos, does, in fact, give indications of partial blockage by some opaque object.) Using a parallax calculation I estimated the object to be 40-70 away and 2.5-4 ft in size. The range estimate was not precise because the outer lens spacing was only 2.5 inches and so there was only a small parallax. By way of comparison, the "SRS" camera she referred to had lenses (cameras) separated by 2 feet, which provided a much greater parallax and hence much greater accuracy for measuring distances. Becker does not mention it, but the SRS photos of May 1, 1988 were of great importance to me in determining that Ed was not faking. This is described fully in TGBS (hardcover edition, pg. 300), but evidently she did not understand what I wrote. In those photos (from left and right side Model 600 Polaroid cameras) Ed got images of two UFOS: one UFO was the type (shape) he had obtained in photos 1 - 5 and similar photos, and the other UFO image was of the type obtained with the Nimslo camera. The UFO of the first type was calculated by parallax to be about 475 ft away and about 150 high OVER THE WATER OF THE SANTA ROSA SOUND. (Specifically it was about 455 ft from the shoreline!) There was no question of this since the photos from the left and right cameras showed distant lights on a bridge about 7,000 ft away. These distant light images were used to calibrate the parallax of the camera. I calculated that the Nimslo type UFO that appears in these SRS photos was about 130 ft away and about 120 ft ABOVE THE WATER of the Santa Rosa Sound (about 110 ft from the shoreline) Ed took these pictures at the same time from the beach at a location about 20 ft from the water's edge. While analyzing these photos I was struck by the coincidence in calculated length of the Nimslo type UFO. This coincidence was very interesting because the cameras were entirely different. Using the Nimslo camera (2.5 inch lens spacing) I had found a parallax distance of at least 40 ft, consistent with Ed's description of his distance to the trees. (Note: Ed had said immediately after the sighting that he thought the UFO was far away and large, but it was at least farther than the treetops. Frances, who saw it too, had said she thought the UO was relatively close.) Using this distance plus the image length and the focal length (30 mm) I calculated a size of 2.5 ft at 40 ft. Using the SRS camera (24 inch lens spacing) I calculated the distance from parallax (130 ft) and then used the focal length (110 mm) and image length to calculate the size and again I got 2.5 ft. I tried to imagine how Ed could have used a 2.5 ft model to fake the Nimslo pictures and then some smaller, more convenient model to fake the SRS photos. I concluded that to fake the SRS photos would have required that Ed calculate beforehand the distance he would have to move the model between shots (first the left camera and then the right, moving the model sideways between shots). He would have to move the model a precise amount so that the faked parallax would yield the calculated distance (130 ft) even though the model was less than 20 ft from the camera (to be on the shore and not over water). He would also have to precalculate the size of the model to be used so that the model size, at whatever distance (less than 20 ft, though) would produce the same size image as a 2.5 ft model at 130 ft. In other words, he would have to understand everything about stereo photography and FAKING stereo photography which I discovered weeks after Ed took the photos by asking myself what I would have to do to fake this coincidence in size. Could it be done? Yes, by someone sufficiently knowledgeable and CREATIVE enough to even think of such a thing. (Note that Ed is the first UFO witness EVER to use a stereo camera to take UFO photos, and he took not just one but four stereo photos during 1988. In Feb. 1991 he took yet another stereo photo with the SRS camera, but this is "another story." See UARHTP.) You can't buy a book that tells you how to fake the parallax of a stereo photo. (See also discussion below where some of this is repeated in another context.) So, you ask, given that fakery is possible, what is the likelihood that Ed Walters figured it out on his own? My opinion: NOT A CHANCE! ************************************** [The quoted text that was once at this location was deleted by the webmaster on 10/9/97 in response to the threat of lawsuit by Barbara Becker, who claims copyright infringment. See Here for more information.] *************************** COMMENT: there was also the Nimslo type which appeared in two sets of stereo photos and during one non-photo sighting in late April, 1988 ****************************** [The quoted text that was once at this location was deleted by the webmaster on 10/9/97 in response to the threat of lawsuit by Barbara Becker, who claims copyright infringment. See Here for more information.] *********************************** COMMENT: The model story is an interesting study in fakery, all right. It turns out that the model is a fake! What follows is the story of the model. The story can be broken into three parts, the first two of which are "the setup" and the third is "the sting." 1) THE SETUP: THE BLUEPRINT PAPER IN THE MODEL The model is made of styrofoam plates glued to the top and bottom of a central cylindrical section made of blueprint paper. When the model was first shown to Ed in early June, 1990, he immediately recognized his printing on the blueprint paper. The paper was a 2" wide diagonal cut through a blueprint (diagonal so the piece would be long enough to go around the circumference of the 9" plates). The blueprint showed parts of a house design and also numbers which represent the "living area" (LA) and "slab area" (SA) of the house. These two numbers vary from house to house, so the pair of them form a design "fingerprint." The discovery of the LA and SA and Ed's admission that he had made the blueprint (there was no name on it so he could have denied ever seeing it!) initiated a search by Ed and others, including the Mayor of Gulf Breeze, of city records to discover which of the houses Ed had built corresponded to that blueprint. If they could discover which house they could determine when the blueprint had been made (obviously before the house was built) and then they would know if the blueprint paper was available to be used in the model. After a review of all house plans on file everyone agreed that there was NO blueprint for a house with the same LA and SA. The question then became, why did Ed make this blueprint. (Note: the debunker/skeptics claimed that Ed sneaked into the City Hall where the housing records are kept and changed the LA and SA on one of the house plans so that it wouldn't have the numbers found on the model. This makes little sense. You can't change a blueprint. Ed would have to substitute a new one for an old one. But the old one had a date stamp when it was received by City Hall. Hence he couln't affact a substitution without somehow faking the stamp. There is, however, NO evidence of this, nor was Ed ever accused of having changed a house plan.) Ed racked his brain for several days before recalling that in September 1989 he had been visited by the Thomas family. They were thinking of moving to Gulf Breeze and buying a house that Ed would build for them on one of the several lots that Ed owned in the city. While they were at the office in Ed's house, Ed drew a simple, dimensioned sketch of a house as it might appear on the parcel of land. They were very interested and asked directions to the land so they could see for themselves where the house would be. Ed made a copy of the house plan for them and gave it to them to take. After they left his office he decided to make a blueprint from the sketch he had drawn. Usually he wouldn't make a blueprint immediately after making the basic sketch, but he thought there was a good chance that they would buy the house and so he made the blueprint and threw away the original sketch. The next day the Thomases stopped at Ed's house briefly to say thanks but no thanks, they couldn't afford it, and then they traveled to their home far from Gulf Breeze. Ed was left with the blueprint. They had the copy of the sketch. Ed kept the bluprint for a couple of weeks and then threw it away in late September or early October since he hadn't heard from them again. It was at about this time, in the early fall of 1989, that Ed noticed that a panel truck was often parked near his house before trash collection and he actually saw someone getting his trash can (not the trash man). He thought that was strange, but he really didn't care if someone wanted to steal his trash. After Ed was confronted with the model and blueprint it took him several days to recall the name of the family for whom he had made the blueprint. However, he did recall the name and managed to contact them by phone. They still had the sketch! Ed asked them to make him a copy of their copy and send him their original copy. The original copy had Mrs. Thomas' handwriting on the back. Their house plan on their sketch had the same LA and SA, confirming that this was, indeed, the house plan which appeared on the blueprint paper in the UFO model. (Note: I don't now recall the details, but I know that Phil Klass contacted the Thomas'and tried to get them to change their story somewhat to make it agree more with his opinion that Ed had changed the numbers in a blueprint. The Thomases stuck to their story.) Thus the blueprint paper was identified: it was from a plan made in September, 1989, NEARLY TWO YEARS AFTER THE 1987 and 1988 photos in Ed's book. 2) THE SETUP: DISCOVERY Bob Menzer and family moved into Ed's old house in November, 1989. He brought with him an ice making refrigerator. Ed had had such a refrigerator as well. These refrigerators require a small copper water pipe to provide the water for the ice maker. Ed had such a pipe sticking out of the wall behind his refrigerator with a SHUTOFF VALVE on it. When Ed moved out of his house in late 1988 he turned the valve and disconnected the refrigerator. Presumably the next owner would simply reconnect a refrigerator and turn the valve on. Mr. Menzer did not rush to connect his refrigerator. It wasn't until March, 1990, that he decided it was time. He looked at the pipe coming out of the wall and saw that it was CRIMPED, that is bent and crushed. He knew he would have to saw off the end of the pipe in order to attach his refrigerator. Before sawing off the crimp he would have to shut off the water to the little pipe. He knew that there was no cellar and that the water pipes were not imbedded in the cement slab upon which the house rested. The only other place for the shutoff valves was in the attic. Inside the two car garage, near the main house wall, was a pull down ladder up into the attic. Mr. Menzer climbed the ladder and then crawled over the rafters to a point where he thought he was above the refigerator. Feeling down through the blown-in insulation (loose fiber) he found the small water pipe. His intent was to follow this pipe moving away from the refrigerator until he found the valve that he thought must be there. At this time he was several feet from the top of the ladder in a portion of the attic where a person would not be likely to go. As he moved his hands along the pipe he suddenly noticed a paper plate model of a UFO buried in the insulation. It was RIGHT NEXT to the pipe. He pulled it out and looked at it. He was aware of Ed's stories of sightings and photos, so he immediately recognized it as resembling some of Ed's UFO images. Bob continued the search for a valve but never found one because there wasn't one. Later he called Ed to find out how to turn off the water. He did not say why he wanted to turn the water off and Ed didn't ask. Ed told him there was a main valve in a little underground box in the front yard. Mr. Menzer turned off the water, attached his refrigerator and went on with the rest of his life. As for the model, Mr. Menzer thought that perhaps Ed had made it to illustrate what he had seen. He did not throw it away. He put it on a shelf in the garage and forgot about it....until.... 3) "THE STING"!!!!!!! ....until early June, 1990. One fine day in June there was a knock on Mr. Menzer's door. A reporter for the Pensacola News Journal (the only large newspaper in the area), Craig Myers, wanted to ask him some questions. Myers had already done two stories on the Gulf Breeze UFOs and Ed's book. The first article, in early March, was timed to coincide with the publication of THE GULF BREEZE SIGHTINGS. It mentioned some of Ed's sightings, of course, but gave about equal weight to sightings of others including Fenner and Shirley McConnell (who saw the same object; McConnell, a doctor/pathologist was the county coronor). It was moderately supportive of the UFO sightings. The second article, published in late April, concentrated on the controversy over Ed's photos, ignoring the sightings by others. It discussed the "ghost photo" and other "evidence" for a hoax. It provoked a heated response by several of the other witnesses who criticized Myers for biased reporting. One letter, referring to Myer's apparent attitude, began, "My mind's made up...don't confuse me with the facts." Apparently this criticism made an impression on the editors of the New-Journal becuase one of the editors wrote an editorial in which she admitted that something strange was flying around. Although she hadn't seen anything herself, she was impressed by the sightings by people whom she knew and respected: Arthur Hufford, Brenda Pollak and Fenner McConnell. "Oddly" enough, these were three of the respected people in the area who had gone on record as seeing THE SAME OBJECT THAT ED PHOTOGRAPHED!!! (Skeptics have tried, unsuccessfully, to explain these sightings way.) Because of the newspaper's reaction to the criticism of Myer's article one may imagine that he was "under the gun" to prove he was right in publishing the criticism of Ed's sightings. It is now early June and Mr. Menzer opens his door to the reporter. According to Mr. Menzer the questions went like this: "Hello, I'm Craig Myers from the New Journal. I would like to ask some questions. 1)HAVE YOU SEEN ANY UFOS? answer: no 2)HAVE YOU SEEN ANY UFO PHOTOS LYING AROUND? answer: no 3) have you seen any models lying around? ANSWER: YESSSSSSSSS!!!! At this point Craig Myers asked to see and then to borrow the model. He took it to the newspaper office. Then, a day later the editor asked Ed to come to his the office at the newspaper building. He had something to talk to him about. The editor, the reporter and others were present when they surprised Ed with the model. They ask if he had made it or ever seen it, to which he answered no, but he did recognize the printing on the blueprint paper. Then the newspaper published a front page story "MODEL FOUND" which described the discovery of the model and how it could be used, along with Ed's old camera, which he loaned to the newspaper, to create hoax photos. (Ed is such a nice, accomodating guy, loaning an "enemy" the "knife" with which to stab him...in the back! This was not the first time that he had allowed skeptics to use his camera to try to duplicate his photos. They produced some moderately convincing similar photos but they never did produce a replica of photo 1!!) __________________________________________________________________________ Science, Logic, and the UFO Debate: http://www.primenet.com/~bdzeiler/index.html ----------------------- [Next Part]
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 4 Maccabee on Becker - 3 From: Jean van Gemert <jeanvg@dds.nl> Date: Sat, 4 Oct 1997 13:51:34 +0200 (MET DST) Fwd Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 08:36:53 -0400 Subject: Maccabee on Becker - 3 Comment 1: it would appear from this overall history that someone got the blueprint paper from Ed's trash and made a model. Then said person managed to enter Ed's old house while it was on sale and often open for inspection and (a) crimp the pipe and cut off the valve and (b) place the model near the small water pipe in the attic where it would be found by someone feeling along the pipe to find a valve. This hoax probably would have "worked" if Ed had thrown away an old blueprint from a house that he had built before late 1987. Too bad for the hoaxer, he got a blueprint made several years AFTER the UFO photos were taken. Comment 2: Craig Myers told me he was "canvassing the neighborhood" to find out if there were other witnesses. However, I learned from others that he visited only one house, Menzer's. He also told me and others that he had not been given any secret information that led him to ask about a model. When challenged to take a lie detector test on whether or not he had prior knowledge of a model, he declined. Ed, on the other hand, took a carefully administered voice stress test - a type of "lie detector" - which indicated that he had not made the model.) **************************************** Barbara Continues: [The quoted text that was once at this location was deleted by the webmaster on 10/9/97 in response to the threat of lawsuit by Barbara Becker, who claims copyright infringment. See Here for more information.] *********************** COMMENT: It is true that only "Bill" and "Jane" sent to the newspaper photos that show the identical UFO. As for no one ever seeing the UFO at the time Ed photographed it, this is untrue. Frances saw it several times and their children saw it at the time Ed videotaped it (December, 1987) and his daughter was present when Ed got the photos of Frances and the blue beam (Feb. 1988). Of more importance regarding other witnesses is a sighting that occured on January 8, 1990. This sighting was not reported in TGBS (it was too late for inclusion), but is reported in my 1991 MUFON Symposium paper, GULF BREEZE WITHOUT ED (GBWE) and in UARHTP. This sighting began when Ed and Frances were walking in th evening and saw a UFO silhouetted against the uniform cloud cover (backlit by a bright moon). They ran back to their house to get a camera. Ed called several other people before returning the to street to take pictures. During the sighting half a dozen other people arrived, saw the UFO and several took their own photos. This sighting is described in detail starting on page 163 of UARHTP. ***************************** She Continues: [The quoted text that was once at this location was deleted by the webmaster on 10/9/97 in response to the threat of lawsuit by Barbara Becker, who claims copyright infringment. See Here for more information.] **************************** COMMENT: The exact times of Ed's photos and the Somerby's sighting cannot be determined to the minute. Ed's photos could have been taken after sunset. According to Duane Cook, Dori Somerby and Charlie Somerby, when they first saw the photos while they were in the Sentinel newspaper office (the day before publication), recognized the object immediately. This was BEFORE the UFO investigators knew about the photos. ************************** She continues: [The quoted text that was once at this location was deleted by the webmaster on 10/9/97 in response to the threat of lawsuit by Barbara Becker, who claims copyright infringment. See Here for more information.] **************************************** COMMENT: Hank Boland (a.k.a. "Patrick Hanks") went public with his testimony in the early summer of 1990. He denied ever being involved with UFO photo hoaxing. Becker refers to "seances" held at Ed' house. These were games intended to give the kids a thrill but were not real seances in which anyone seriously expected ghosts, spirits or whatever to appear. However, the use of the term "seance" has become important for the debunkers of Ed's sightings because their use of the term seems to give a "justification" for their reference to the photo with the unusual faint blobby "images" as a "ghost photo." ************************************************************************ She continues: [The quoted text that was once at this location was deleted by the webmaster on 10/9/97 in response to the threat of lawsuit by Barbara Becker, who claims copyright infringment. See Here for more information.] *************** COMMENT: The Journal story was wrong here, as in several other places. Both Ed and Frances searched. The local investigators did not have enough time to check and recheck the story before it was published and Ed tried to leave Frances out of involvement as much as he could. The story is presented correctly in A History of the Gulf Breeze Sightings (AHGBS). *************** She continues: [The quoted text that was once at this location was deleted by the webmaster on 10/9/97 in response to the threat of lawsuit by Barbara Becker, who claims copyright infringment. See Here for more information.] ***************************** COMMMENT: Is this a potential "error in the story" or is this Ed honestly reporting a typically stupid, illogical action which sometimes people do "in the heat of the moment?" ********************************** [The quoted text that was once at this location was deleted by the webmaster on 10/9/97 in response to the threat of lawsuit by Barbara Becker, who claims copyright infringment. See Here for more information.] **************************************** COMMENT: the investigators slightly mixed up the beginning of the first event with the beginning of the second. Ed did not try to sneak out of bed the second time. ***************************************** [The quoted text that was once at this location was deleted by the webmaster on 10/9/97 in response to the threat of lawsuit by Barbara Becker, who claims copyright infringment. See Here for more information.] ********************************************* COMMENT: Again, the investigators writing for the Journal mixed up the beginning of the first sighting with the beginning of the second. ************************************************** [The quoted text that was once at this location was deleted by the webmaster on 10/9/97 in response to the threat of lawsuit by Barbara Becker, who claims copyright infringment. See Here for more information.] ****************************************** COMMENT: again, the investigators got the story wrong. Had Becker used AHGBS as her reference she would have read: "He got up and walked to the glass French door at the end of the bedroom... He pulled the venetian blind...expecting to see the UFO once again hovering over the field." ************************ [The quoted text that was once at this location was deleted by the webmaster on 10/9/97 in response to the threat of lawsuit by Barbara Becker, who claims copyright infringment. See Here for more information.] ****************************** COMMENT: again the investigators got the story slightly wrong. In AHGBS I wrote "When Ed screamed his wife sat up in bed and she saw the creature, too." ******************************* [The quoted text that was once at this location was deleted by the webmaster on 10/9/97 in response to the threat of lawsuit by Barbara Becker, who claims copyright infringment. See Here for more information.] ********************************* COMMENT: When Ed first told this story to the investigators he left Frances out of it as much as possible to minimize the possible impact on her if the press or general public found out who Ed really was. I did not mention that Frances helped Ed when I wrote AHGBS, because Ed wanted me to leave her part of the "leg pulling" out of the story. ************************************** She continues: [The quoted text that was once at this location was deleted by the webmaster on 10/9/97 in response to the threat of lawsuit by Barbara Becker, who claims copyright infringment. See Here for more information.] ****************************** COMMENT: The answer to the above question is somewhat of a "no brainer." The MUFON team (primarily Donald Ware, USAF, ret., and Charles Flannigan, a real estate agent) conducted the investigation part time. They were not "professional" investigators. They based their report primarily on a single taped interview with Ed in early January. The fact is that they didn't get the story completely correct. My version in AHGBS was better because I did a more detailed interview and I had their interview as a starting point. However, my interview was done in the middle of February, too late to impact the MUFON Journal articles. (Besides, they didn't submit their manuscript to me for review, so I didn't know what they wrote until I saw the published version.) AHGBS is not a perfect history either. I didn't put all the details into AHGBS that Ed put into TGBS because (a) I didn't know everything and (b) many things I knew had to be left out to save space (the article was very long). There was just too much to investigate, not only Ed's sightings but others, with the result that many things were unmentioned in AHGBS. *************************************** She continues: [The quoted text that was once at this location was deleted by the webmaster on 10/9/97 in response to the threat of lawsuit by Barbara Becker, who claims copyright infringment. See Here for more information.] **************************** COMMENT: Here Barbara is making the cardinal mistake of assuming that that newspaper or journal reports are perfectly accurate. It should be emphasized that Ed and Frances took several months to write the book and they wrote it with some painstaking care, whereas the journal articles were written in a couple of weeks in order quickly get the basic story out to the interested public. *************************************** She continues: [The quoted text that was once at this location was deleted by the webmaster on 10/9/97 in response to the threat of lawsuit by Barbara Becker, who claims copyright infringment. See Here for more information.] ************************************ COMMENT: The preceding "it would seem..." statement by Becker is pure conjecture on her part. She refers to the 8 hypnosis sessions carried out by Dr. Dan Overlade in the summer of 1988. Overlade was convinced by the results of several standard psychological tests he administered that Ed was basically a normal person, i.e., sane, and certainly not a sociopath. Overlade was convinced that Ed really was in a state of hypnosis as he recounted earlier events (abductions). Of course, at the time of this writing in 1990 the content of these sessions was only partially known to a few people. (They were published in Abductions In Gulf Breeze in 1994.) So, would it be "easy" for Ed to make up a story under hypnosis? That is a matter for conjecture with no evidence other than the UFO related information itself. Becker seems to think it would "easy" for Ed to spin out a yarn while Duane Cook was riding in the truck at the same time. This is "easy for her to say," because she hasn't seen the videotape of that trip. However, the fact is that it would be very DIFFICULT for an actor (Ed) to create this story while reacting to someone (Duane Cook) who was not aware of the "script." Finally, a storyteller is no more able to pass lie detector tests than anyone else, unless the story teller happens to have a sociopathic personality (and can't seem to distinguish reality from fantasy). As Dr. Overlade and also Harvey McLaughlin (who administered 2 lie detector/polygraph tests to Ed) stated emphatically to me, Ed does not have a sociopathic personality. (Neither I nor any of the other investigators have found Ed "carrying on" the way a sociopath would, confusing demonstrable fact with fiction and amplifying on stories, etc.) ********************************* __________________________________________________________________________ Science, Logic, and the UFO Debate: http://www.primenet.com/~bdzeiler/index.html ----------------------- [Next Part]
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 4 Maccabee on Becker - 4 From: Jean van Gemert <jeanvg@dds.nl> Date: Sat, 4 Oct 1997 13:51:47 +0200 (MET DST) Fwd Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 08:37:43 -0400 Subject: Maccabee on Becker - 4 Barbara continues: [The quoted text that was once at this location was deleted by the webmaster on 10/9/97 in response to the threat of lawsuit by Barbara Becker, who claims copyright infringment. See Here for more information.] ***************************** COMMENT: Barbara's suggestion that Ed's sightings are simply a long story is an extrapolation from information provided by TEENAGERS who attended PARTIES where the intent was to have a good time, and if making up stories was part of that good time, then so be it. There is a big difference between making up a story for a party... a story which the storyteller might have to tell once in his whole life... and making up a story which makes local and then national news and which brings a horde of invesigators asking specific questions over and over. ******************************** She continues: [The quoted text that was once at this location was deleted by the webmaster on 10/9/97 in response to the threat of lawsuit by Barbara Becker, who claims copyright infringment. See Here for more information.] ************************************** COMMENT: It appears as if this is less than critical reasoning on Becker's part. She compares committing a crime by a person who tends to be a criminal (a person who steals while "awake" would probably steal under hypnosis) with a person who, as a mature adult, has no known criminal tendencies. (Note: Ed has admitted that he was a really "bad boy" when he was 19 years old. He stole a car and forged a name on a check to cash it. He went to jail for this for a short time. In late 1988 he appealed to the Governor of Florida for a complete pardon based on his recent life. In making this appeal he brought down a horde of REAL investigators on his head. For over a year they tried to dig up all the dirt they could....AND THEY DID NOT IGNORE THE UFO SIGHTING REPORTS BY ED and the possibility that he was perpetrating a hoax. The bottom line is the REAL invesigators found no evidence of criminal activity by Ed since he was about 20 years old and HE GOT HIS PARDON with complete restoration of his civil rights!!) ****************************************** Becker continues: [The quoted text that was once at this location was deleted by the webmaster on 10/9/97 in response to the threat of lawsuit by Barbara Becker, who claims copyright infringment. See Here for more information.] ********************************** COMMENT: Ed's children saw the UFO on the night when Ed got his video, December 28, 1987. ************************************ She continues: [The quoted text that was once at this location was deleted by the webmaster on 10/9/97 in response to the threat of lawsuit by Barbara Becker, who claims copyright infringment. See Here for more information.] *********************************** COMMENT: Becker is correct in saying it is her OPINION that Ed did this to gain credibility. Ed's reason was more interesing. He stated during the interview on January 4 with Ware and Flannigan (his first interview) that he believed the UFO creatures had placed something in his head that gave him the ability to hear the "hum" while he was in the blue beam on November 11 (1987; the first sighting, after taking his first 5 pictures). He wanted that ability removed. He said that he would be willing to place himself alone out somewhere where they could get to him and do whatever they wanted, providing that they would take away the hum. However, he added, he wanted to have the woods "filled with photographers." What happened on January 24 was a "slimmed down" version of what Ed said on January 4. He tried to get a MUFON investigator to go with him in the truck, but the only person he could contact was Duane Cook. Hence this situation arose out of Ed's desire to place himself where the UFO could get him, but he wanted documentation of whatever happened. ********************************* Becker continues: [The quoted text that was once at this location was deleted by the webmaster on 10/9/97 in response to the threat of lawsuit by Barbara Becker, who claims copyright infringment. See Here for more information.] ********************************* COMMENT: "...gets rid of..." Slight bias in the use of language, perhaps? After all, Ed says he did call the MUFON investigators, but got no response. ********************************** Becker continues: [The quoted text that was once at this location was deleted by the webmaster on 10/9/97 in response to the threat of lawsuit by Barbara Becker, who claims copyright infringment. See Here for more information.] ********************************** COMMENT: distracts Cook? This is all taped, by the way and Cook paid very close attention to what was happening. *********************************** Becker continues: [The quoted text that was once at this location was deleted by the webmaster on 10/9/97 in response to the threat of lawsuit by Barbara Becker, who claims copyright infringment. See Here for more information.] *********************************** COMMENT: "...continues the charade.."? Prove its a charade, Barbara. Duane got out of the truck to film Ed standing on the road in front of the truck. However, it was a drizzly night and it began to rain so Duane got back into the truck to protect the camera....which he never shut off during this whole event. ************************************** She continues: [The quoted text that was once at this location was deleted by the webmaster on 10/9/97 in response to the threat of lawsuit by Barbara Becker, who claims copyright infringment. See Here for more information.] ****************************************** COMMENT: Although the pain was gone Ed could not be sure that "they" had departed. He didn't want to take the chance of missing a sighting if the camera were turned off. ******************************** She continues: [The quoted text that was once at this location was deleted by the webmaster on 10/9/97 in response to the threat of lawsuit by Barbara Becker, who claims copyright infringment. See Here for more information.] ********************************* COMMENT: Becker makes an interesting case for "prestidigation" (trickery) in the taking of Ed's Jan. 24 photo. However, she has not mentioned the photo itself. It would have to be a double exposure, no other method would work under the conditions. Not only that but the first exposure would have to be of a rapidly moved model or a rapidly rotated camera, since there is a streak above the UFO image indicating "rapid departure." This would be an added complexity since none of Ed's previous presumably hoaxed photos showed such a streak (so why go to the trouble of puttin a streak in this one?). The streak itself is of interest. The image shows that during most of the shutter time the UFO was stationary thereby making a rather good image of itself. However, the presence of the upward streak indicates that it departed upward just before the shutter closed. Considering Ed's tendency to hold the shutter button down for 1/2 - 1 sec regardless of the conditions of the photo, plus that fact that there was little in the image to reflect the light of the flash (only a metal bar on top of the truck) and thereby cause the shutter to close, it is likely that the shutter stayed open for 1/2 - 1 sec. (Note: the pos- sibility of the temporal reverse, that the object moved rapidly to a final position and then stayed there during the remainder of the shutter time, cannot be ruled out from the photo. However, if this is a real photo it would make little sense to say Ed pushed the shutter button before he saw the UFO and managed to capture it zooming downward to a resting position. From the hoax point of view, if this were a model being moved it would be very difficult to move it rapidly to a final position in the field of view of the camera and then stop it without vibration at a final position. The most natural hoax assumption would be that the model was stationary when the shutter opened, remained stationary for a short time and then was yanked upward or the camera was suddenly turned in a downward direction.) Looking carefully at the overall streak one sees that it is actually composed of the collection of streaks of the "hot spots" (bright areas) in the UFO image. Of great importance is the observation that, start- ing from the position of the stationary image and moving upward one sees that the streaks DIMINISH IN INTENSITY. This could be because the UFO lights were "dimming down" as it moved. On the other hand if the lights stayed at a constant brightness the decrease in intensity would be an indication of extreme ACCELERATION with the velocity con- tinually increasing so that the exposure time at successive locations on the film (moving upward) is less and less. A similar effect appears in a photo Ed took with a Model 600 Polaroid camera on March 8, 1988 (Ed's photo 35). On January 8, 1990, IN THE PRESENCE OF OTHER WITNESSES, Ed took several photos of a UFO that was alternately hovering and darting around in the sky. Ed's camera was mounted on a tripod. One of his images shows a similar effect: a bright overexposed region with a streak off to the side of the picture, indicating that the object remained motionless during most of the shutter time and then streaked away just before the shutter closed. This is described in UARHTP.) ********************************* She continues: [The quoted text that was once at this location was deleted by the webmaster on 10/9/97 in response to the threat of lawsuit by Barbara Becker, who claims copyright infringment. See Here for more information.] ******************* COMMENT The "SRS" or Self Referencing Stereo Camera was created by Ed at my suggestion. After he had taken stereo pictures with the Nimslo camera it occurred to me that proof of hoax could be obtained if Ed used a stereo camera with a larger lens spacing. I presented the idea to him as a way to prove he was "telling the truth" by getting photos of objects which we could determine by calculation were long distances away. I pointed out that the greater the camera spacing the better the distance resolution. I did not point out that the same SRS camera could prove his photos were fakes if the distances turned out to be short. The basic idea is this: use the parallax to determine distance by triangulation methods and then use the image size along with the focal length and parallax distance in a simple equation to get the object size. (Results of such calculations for the May 1, 1988 photos taken with the rebuilt SRS camera have already been presented above.) I suggested that Ed get a second Polaroid 600 camera (he had bought one on March 7, 1988) and place the them one foot apart on a board which would be mounted on a tripod. When I made the suggestion I didn't really expect Ed would do it. After all it was (a) time consuming and (b) DANGEROUS if all these sightings were fakes. Use of a stereo camera could provide photographic information that would show if a UFO was a small model close to the camera. If one assumes these photos are all hoaxes, then one could conclude, if Ed made the camera, that either he was so naive that he didn't understand the capability of the camera to measured distance (in which case I would have caught him in the trap), or else he was so photographically experienced and clever that he immediately realized how to fake the parallax. To my great surprise about a week later Ed said he had made such a camera after borrowing a second Model 600 from Duane Cook. I asked him to test it out by photographing objects in back of his house. He sent me several photo PAIRS (two pictures per "photo") and a photo of the camera itself. Whereas I had suggested a 1 foot spacing (which I estimated would be good for determining distances at least to several hundred feet), Ed made the spacing 2 feet, which thereby potentially increased the range. I found that if I was told the measured distance to one reference object in the "photo" I could calculate the distances to the other objects in the photo out to 500 ft or more. The SRS camera worked. However, as I studied these pictures I realized that there were potentially three problems which would affect its accuracy. These were (a) the two cameras were not rigidly mounted to the board (he strapped them on so they could be removed), (b) the board itself could twist on the tripod and, (c), he had to press the shutter buttons on the two cameras but he might not press the buttons simultaneously. (I didn't realize (c) was a problem until Ed sent me the first test photos and described how he had taken them: he carefully pushed the right hand shutter button and then the left hand button. He didn't realize that they had to be pushed simultaneously. I told him to practice squeezing the shutter buttons simultaneously and he said later that he had practiced). Fact (a) meant that the relative pointing directions of the two cameras could change slightly so that calibration at one time would not assure calibration later if the camera had been subjected to mechanical stress. Fact (b) meant that if he pressed the buttons one after another he could twist the cameras slightly one way when he took the right picture and twist it slightly the other way when he took the second picture. Fact (c) meant that if the UFO were moving when the pictures were taken and if the shutters weren't simultaneous the parallax triangle was "broken." The above potential problems meant that if I were handed a "photo" (left and right camera pictures) I could calculate a triangulated distance (assuming the sighting lines crossed; if they diverged then no triangulation was possible). However, the distance could be in error by a some amount because of the potentially random errors in camera pointing direction and time lag between the shutters. Ed took three photos with the SRS camera in 1988: March 17, March 20 and May 1. The first two of these and their analysis is discussed in detail in AHGBS. The reader of that paper will see how I attempted to estimate the errors in distance measurement. Brief descriptions of the analyses of all three photos are presented in the last chapter of GBS (which, if Barbara read, she didn't understand!). Of these three stereo photos the May 1 photo is clearly the most important because it shows two UFOs with different parallax values and it also shows lights at known distances which allow for a calibration of the parallax. ********************************* __________________________________________________________________________ Science, Logic, and the UFO Debate: http://www.primenet.com/~bdzeiler/index.html ----------------------- [Next Part]
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 4 Maccabee on Becker - 5 From: Jean van Gemert <jeanvg@dds.nl> Date: Sat, 4 Oct 1997 13:51:58 +0200 (MET DST) Fwd Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 08:38:48 -0400 Subject: Maccabee on Becker - 5 She continues: [The quoted text that was once at this location was deleted by the webmaster on 10/9/97 in response to the threat of lawsuit by Barbara Becker, who claims copyright infringment. See Here for more information.] ****************** COMMENT: "it appeared in the only spot in the park...." No, the UFO did not appear at a spot "in the park." There was a collection of trees and bushes surrounding on 3 sides the small area where Ed had the camera set up. People in the parking lot outside this small area had their view of the southwest blocked by those bushes and trees. *********************** She continues: [The quoted text that was once at this location was deleted by the webmaster on 10/9/97 in response to the threat of lawsuit by Barbara Becker, who claims copyright infringment. See Here for more information.] ******************************* COMMENT: How does she know how hard it would be to tell. The outer cardboard box is sealed and presumably this could have been opened and resealed rather easily. However there is a thin inner foil covering which is glued to the sides of the box. This would not be easy to break or cut and then reseal. I talked to Neumann. He was of the opinion that the two boxes were new. However, this is a moot or useless point anyway. As the following discussion shows, the suggested hoax method involves the substitution of a previously prepared film pack for the pack that Neumann opened. So, what the heck...let him open a truly new pack of film! ******************************** She continues: [The quoted text that was once at this location was deleted by the webmaster on 10/9/97 in response to the threat of lawsuit by Barbara Becker, who claims copyright infringment. See Here for more information.] ****************************** COMMENT: I have experimented with a Model 600 (I bought one as soon as I learned that Ed had bought one). Reloading of film packs etc., may be possible, I haven't tried it. Barbara never does outline the hoax method in her paper. Therefore I will do it for her. To begin, assume that Ed had two "previously prepared packs" with the same serial numbers as the new packs. (The serial numbers were different for left and right cameras.) He would substitute these prepared packs for the packs that Neumann opened. Assume that Ed has prepared the packs so that the "ufo pictures" were the third in each prepared pack. Then, after the people left, he could eject the packs that Neumann opened and insert the prepared packs. This would set the counter to 10. To bring the counter down to 7 he would turn off the camera flash (to prevent other potential witnesses from seeing the light from the flash), press the shutter button of each camera twice, thereby ejecting the first two (useless) photos and leaving the prepared photos for the next shot. He would then turn on the flash and take simultaneous pictures of the foreground bushes using the prepared photos. (It would be OK if other potential witnesses saw this flash, since it would coincide with the "UFO" photo.) This would establish the location of the photos. This is the scenario which Barbara infers may have happened. However, she has not specified just how these special pictures would have been prepared. I'll do it for her. The Model 600 camera automatically ejects the picture immediately after it is taken. Through a Polaroid representative I learned, weeks after Ed had taken Model 600 UFO photos, that there is a means to do a double exposure. One has to defeat the ejection mechanism (which starts the development process) by opening the film pack insertion cover (a little "door" that holds the pack in the camera) instantaneously after pushing the shutter button. Then, if the picture gets ejected a little bit, it must be pushed back into the camera. Then one can take a second exposure, this time letting the motor eject the film. I managed to create double exposures that way. Assuming that Ed might have figured out on his own how to do a double exposure with the Model 600 (no independent evidence of this, however!), one might assume that he would prepare his special pictures by photographing a model UFO in a room where the model was silhouetted against a dark screen (the first step of the SDE method). In this case it would be a small model showing just the top light and the bottom light since the central portion makes no image in the pictures. The problem is this: he has to have one picture for the left camera and one for the right camera and THEY HAVE TO HAVE A REASONABLE AMOUNT OF "PARALLAX". If, as Barbara assumes, Ed wants these fake SRS photos to be "proof" he has to have (a) a recognizable image and (b) a calculatable parallax. The first part is easy, but the second is not. How does one synthesize the parallax? Let's suppose he takes the picture for the right hand camera first. The image will appear at some location in the picture, say slightly above center. He then has to photograph the same model with the left camera, but the pointing direction of the left camera must be DIFFERENT, but NOT GREATLY DIFFERENT from the pointing direction of the right camera. He could not simply set up the SRS camera in a room with a small model, point the camera at the model and take left and right photos. If he did, the parallax effect would be so great with a 2 foot baseline that he would be caught RED HANDED as they say! Instead, he would have to be clever...very clever...EXTREMELY clever to figure out either (a) how much to rotate the SRS camera clockwise (as seen from above) after taking the right hand photo before taking the left hand photo or (b) how much to move the model sideways (to the left) after taking the right hand photo before taking the left hand photo. Either method, I realized WEEKS AFTER Ed had taken these pictures, could be used to synthesize parallax under controlled conditions. But, if he rotated the camera or moved the model either too little or too much he could create an "unbelievable" stereo pair of photos. If he rotated the camera or moved the model too little he would get very little parallax and this would lead to a very large calculated distance (thousands of feet or miles) and a resulting UFO size could be unbelievably huge (hundreds of feet). If he rotated the camera or moved the model too much he would get too much parallax leading to a very short calculated distance (10's of feet or less) and a resulting UFO size that would be small (inches or feet in size). Or, if really screwed up and rotated the camera counterclockwise or moved the model to the right he could lose parallax altogether (the sighting lines would seem to diverge) and there would be no distance estimate: the SRS photo pair would be no more valuable than a single photo. HOW TO DETERMINE THE EXACT AMOUNT TO ROTATE THE CAMERA OR MOVE THE MODEL? Point: there are no books (that I am aware of) where you can read about how to synthesize parallax. There aren't even many books on stereo photography for the amateur (specialists doing photogrammetry are familiar with the principles, but it is not in the books you can typically buy in a book store). ED HAD TO FIGURE THIS OUT ON HIS OWN. Are you as smart as the skeptics assume Ed is? Want to try it yourself? OK. Assume a 2 foot baseline and assume the camera lens axes are parallel. Assume a small model, 9" = 3/4 foot in diameter (such as the model found in Ed's old house) is 10 ft from the camera. Now figure out how many degrees to rotate the baseline between pictures to synthesize a parallax distance of 200 ft. What angle change corresponds to 20 ft? What angle corresponds to 2,000 ft? What angle change corresponds to infinite distance? How sensitive is the calculation to angle accuracy at 200 ft? Now repeat the calculation but instead of rotating the camera calculate how much you would have to move the model sideways to synthesize 200 ft, 20 ft and 2,000 ft. What is the sensitivity to position-shift of the model at 200 ft? What distance corresponds to infinite distance? What would be the calculated size of the UFO at 200 ft, 20 ft, 2,000 ft? Easy....ONCE YOU'VE FIGURED IT OUT, you genius, you. (I have calculated the answers to these questions. If you want to know, contact me.) Ed has NEVER given any indication of having any more than very basic knowledge of photography, such as "point and shoot." I can't imagine that he would have figured out how to synthesize parallax undet these condition. And this goes double, triply, pentuply, etc. for the May 1 stereo photos where there ar two UFOs of different distances and different sizes OVER WATER! ********************************** She continues: [The quoted text that was once at this location was deleted by the webmaster on 10/9/97 in response to the threat of lawsuit by Barbara Becker, who claims copyright infringment. See Here for more information.] ******************************* COMMENT: Speak for yourself, Barbara. However, in a sense she's right: I presume we will never know EVERYTHING that happened. ******************************** She continues: [The quoted text that was once at this location was deleted by the webmaster on 10/9/97 in response to the threat of lawsuit by Barbara Becker, who claims copyright infringment. See Here for more information.] ******************************** COMMENT: Whoa, there. How does she know Ed "embellished" his accounts of the incidents as presented in the book? How does she know that he wasn't just giving a MORE COMPLETE VERSION THAN HAD BEEN PRESENTED IN THE ADMITTEDLY BRIEF ACCOUNTS PUBLISHED BY THE INVESTIGATORS WHO DIDN'T HAVE INFINITE TIME AND MONEY AND SPACE IN A MAGAZINE TO PUBLISH EVERY DETAIL? ******************************* She continues: [The quoted text that was once at this location was deleted by the webmaster on 10/9/97 in response to the threat of lawsuit by Barbara Becker, who claims copyright infringment. See Here for more information.] ************************************ COMMENT: Where are your credentials as a psychologist? *************************************** She continues: [The quoted text that was once at this location was deleted by the webmaster on 10/9/97 in response to the threat of lawsuit by Barbara Becker, who claims copyright infringment. See Here for more information.] **************************************** ENDING COMMENTS: Of course there is much more in the GBS book than Barbara has cited. In particular there is the last chapter where I presented analyses of many of the events she has discussed. At the very least, if this is a hoax it is exceedingly COMPLICATED and involves may other people. Such a thing would be difficult to "pull off" for months in a convincing way. TGBS, AHGBS and GBWE all described numerous OTHER sightings by OTHER witnesses which are consistent in one way or another with Ed's sightings. For example, not mentioned by Barbara in regard to the March 17 SRS photo sighting, is the sighting by Brenda Pollak of a bright ring light traveling over Gulf Breeze toward Shoreline Park. Brenda saw this moments before Ed's photo as she was driving to the park to join the skywatchers. If this is all a hoax, how did Ed arrange that? Part of Barbara's problem is that she doesn't understand the analytical details and calculations that have gone into the analyses of these sightings. She also does not understand the significance of the numerous experiments that were done to test the validity of Ed's photos and sightings. It is my considered opinion that, as of 1997, Ed Walters has done MORE experiments related to sightings than ALL OTHER INVESTIGATORS AND WITNESSES COMBINED. Many of these experiments were specifically designed by me to test Ed's veracity. Of course, I didn't tell him the real reasons behind some of the experiments. A major example of these experiments was the creation of the SRS camera. Ed could have simply refused to create such a camera because either it was too much trouble or he didn't have the time, or both, and I wouldn't have been any the wiser. However, he did make the camera. And, at my request he made needed IMPROVEMENTS to the camera. Any hoaxer with a brain in his head would have refused to do so because taking SRS photos greatly complicates the hoaxing. I was not the only one to try to "set him up." The MUFON team that gave Ed the sealed Nimslo camera in February, 1988, did NOT tell him that the camera could "measure" distances and hence could distinguish between a small model 10 or so feet away and a large object hundreds of feet away. He was told that, because the camera had four lenses, it would create more copies of each picture for analysis by more photo experts. In other words, he was led to believe that there was some value in having four negatives of each picture instead of just one. There was no such advantage. Whereas Ed may have responded reluctantly to some of my requests, because they impact on his time (and money), the fact is that he has always complied. The bottom line is that Ed has done far more work "above and beyond the call of duty" to provide verifiable proof of his photos and videos than anyone else IN THE WORLD, so far as I know __________________________________________________________________________ Science, Logic, and the UFO Debate: http://www.primenet.com/~bdzeiler/index.html -----------------------
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 4 Re: Maccabee on Becker 1 - 5 From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 09:09:56 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 09:09:56 -0400 Subject: Re: Maccabee on Becker 1 - 5 >Date: Sat, 4 Oct 1997 13:51:10 +0200 (MET DST) >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Jean van Gemert <jeanvg@dds.nl> >Subject: Maccabee on Becker Why Bruce Maccabee chose to use a third party to distribute this series of posts instead of subscribing and then posting directly to this List is not really a mystery. Anymore than his excluding one line from Barbara Becker's header in her original post: 'To: ufo updates <updates@globalserve.net>'. I think he knows that UFO UpDates is operated by a MUFON Ontario member who was also involved with the team that spent a considerable amount of time exposing the 'Carp Caper'. What a can of worms his subscribing here would have opened up! ebk
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 4 Re: Wang On UFO Statement By Chairman Of Joint From: Dan <geibdan@qtm.net> [Dan Geib] Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 08:51:24 -0700 Fwd Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 10:09:51 -0400 Subject: Re: Wang On UFO Statement By Chairman Of Joint > Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 04:02:32 -0700 > From: Loy Pressley <lpressle@webwide.net> > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Wang On UFO Statement By Chairman Of Joint Chiefs > > From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose) > > To: updates@globalserve.net > > Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 01:27:41 +0100 > > Subject: Fwd: Wang On UFO Statement By Chairman Of Joint Chiefs > > Ed Wang has asked me to forward the e-mail below, received by me on > > October 2. The statement by the Chairman Of The Joint Chiefs Of Staff > > was posted on Ufomind's Area 51 Mailing List on September 26 and > > forwarded by me to various places on the Internet the same day, > > including the UFO Updates and UFOR mailing lists. > <SNIP> > > Ed has told me that he regrets ever having posted the e-mail forwarded > > by Wes Thomas to UFO Updates, though he was under very heavy and unfair > > attack on the "In Search Of" list. > Not true! I'm on the ISO list...all that was done on ISO was that he was > asked for evidence to back up the claims made on the ACC site. As soon as > he was asked for more information, he started throwing accusations around > that everyone on the ISO list was attacking him. > I can't say whether or not he was attacked off line from the list, but he > certainly wasn't attacked on the list! > Loy Seems like Ed is losing favor among the skeptics and believers alike This entire ACC situation seems to be more of a promo for ACC at this point. Dan UFO Folklore at http://www.qtm.net/~geibdan/framemst.html <>=======<>========<>========<>=====<>
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 4 Re: Solved Abduction cases? From: nick@emailme.at.address.below (Nick Humphries) Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 13:06:57 GMT Fwd Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 10:12:08 -0400 Subject: Re: Solved Abduction cases? >Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 20:26:48 +0100 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Solved Abduction cases? >>From: nick@emailme.at.address.below (Nick Humphries) >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >>Subject: Solved Abduction cases? >>Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 16:31:02 GMT >>Here's something I've been wondering about for a while now and >>think some of you may be able to help me with: >>Have any abduction cases been solved - that is, found to >>have another explanation other than ET intervention? >> And if not, why not? > Hi Nick, Hi John (Scm) Hi Errol Hi All >John Velez will probably correct me on this if I am wrong but I >believe that it only becomes a true abduction case when ALL other >possibilities have been ruled out. This is correct - I'm just wondering what other explainations have been put forward. BTW, does anyone know what the ET ratio of abduction reports are? (i.e. 5-10% of all UFO sightings are unexplained, what's the abduction ratio?) ------------------------------------------------------- Nick Humphries, nick@the-den.clara.net, at your service If the Truth is Out There, what's In Here? ------------------------------------------------------- The Your Sinclair Rock'n'Roll Years http://www.the-den.clara.net/ys/cover.htm -------------------------------------------------------
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 4 Re: Solved Abduction cases? From: nick@emailme.at.address.below (Nick Humphries) Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 13:06:54 GMT Fwd Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 10:14:16 -0400 Subject: Re: Solved Abduction cases? >From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@cc.UManitoba.CA> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Solved Abduction cases? >To: updates@globalserve.net (UFO UpDates - Toronto) >Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 15:56:57 -0500 (CDT) >> From: nick@emailme.at.address.below (Nick Humphries) >> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >> Subject: Solved Abduction cases? >> Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 16:31:02 GMT >> Have any abduction cases been solved - that is, found to have another >> explanation other than ET intervention? >> And if not, why not? >Boy, have *you* opened a can of worms. Well, when I want a straight-to-the-point answer, I ask straight-to-the-point questions! >The short answer is, "It depends who you talk to." > >The long answer is yes, with some qualifications. To summarize, you've found that other explainations have been: 1) Drug-induced hallucination 2) Date-rape trauma, initially misidentified as an abduction 3) (Hard to summarize this reason, but I'll have a go:) Someone who was easily impressionable beleived they were abducted after reading similar stories of abductees. Have I summarized these fairly? (Many thanks for the response btw) ------------------------------------------------------- Nick Humphries, nick@the-den.clara.net, at your service If the Truth is Out There, what's In Here? ------------------------------------------------------- The Your Sinclair Rock'n'Roll Years http://www.the-den.clara.net/ys/cover.htm -------------------------------------------------------
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 4 Re: UK.UFO.NW irc guest - Stanton T. Friedman From: Paul Jones <paul@termcon.demon.co.uk> Date: Sat, 4 Oct 1997 14:12:39 +0000 Fwd Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 10:16:26 -0400 Subject: Re: UK.UFO.NW irc guest - Stanton T. Friedman --- PLEASE READ UPDATED SERVERS AVAILABLE FOR TONIGHTS GUEST MEETING ---- If you are using one of the dedicated IRC programs such as the excellent MIRC available free from: http://www.mirc.co.uk/index.html enter one of the below irc server addresses into your program. The nearer the server to your location the faster the connection. If one fails then try another. London.UK.EU.UltraNET.Org Belgrade.YU.EU.UltraNet.org Kalemegdan.YU.EU.UltraNet.org Singidunum.YU.EU.UltraNet.org Bor.YU.EU.UltraNet.org Zemun.YU.EU.UltraNet.org Gloucester.UK.EU.UltraNET.Org Uppsala.SE.EU.UltraNET.Org Johnson-City.TN.US.UltraNet.Org Haifa.IL.AS.UltraNET.Org Mons.BE.EU.ultraNET.Org Neuilly.FR.EU.UltraNET.Org Hofors.SE.EU.UltraNET.Org Bergen.NO.EU.UltraNET.Org Once you are connected to a server join channel: #UFO You can also use your java compatible web browser to join in the meeting such as: Netscape 3 ++ or MS Internet Explorer 4 ++ By going to any of the below www addresses you will be automatically connected to the uk.ufo.nw IRC #UFO channel. All you have to do is supply a nickname when prompted. http://www.holodeck.demon.co.uk/ultrachat.html http://www.maygale.org/07/eyesonly http://www.geocities/Area51/Cavern/2646 http://www.tedric.demon.co.uk/ultrachat.htm http://www.ultranet.org/webchat/ufo.html http://web.ukonline.co.uk/colin.light/ultrachat.htm http://web.ukonline.co.uk/phil.light http://www.ufo.grid9.net/ufo.html http://www.us.ultranet.org/webchat/ufo.html http://www.no.ultranet.org/webchat/ufo.html http://crowman.demon.co.uk/ultrachat.html -------------------------- ufo@holodeck.demon.co.uk United Kingdom UFO Network http://www.holodeck.demon.co.uk --------------------------
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 4 Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words From: BOB SHELL <76750.2717@compuserve.com> Date: Sat, 4 Oct 1997 10:08:44 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 10:55:36 -0400 Subject: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words >From: rfsignal@sprynet.com [Cathy Johnsom] >Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 20:14:13 -0700 >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > Can I ask how a poleroid camera be made to double expose any >of its film? And, another point I'd like to ask concerning the hood >reflections. If there was nothing else besides the tree line being >reflected on the hood, wouldn't it be logical to assume that the >object was further away than the treeline, and much larger in size to >be visible in the picture at all? I don't know for sure, but I >thought I would ask. Although most modern Polaroid cameras are designed to prevent double exposures, if you know what you are doing you can rig any of them to do it. It's not necessarily simple, but could be done. If you didn't know how but had the money, there are technicians who specialize in modifying cameras in a wide variety of ways. So, in theory, the Polaroid photos Ed took could be double exposures. On the point of the reflection, I think Bruce has given a detailed explanation of that point, so I will await the posting of his argument. The problem with photographic evidence, particularly still photos, is that ANY photo could be faked. But just because something could be, that doesn't mean that it is. I've been studying some photos taken in Mexico by Carlos Diaz, and I have to say that they are pretty damned convincing. Could they have been faked? Of course. Were they? How can anyone other than the photographer know? Bob
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 4 Statements by NICAP Officials in 1957 From: jan@cyberzone.net (Jan Aldrich) Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 10:16:41 -0700 Fwd Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 11:46:12 -0400 Subject: Statements by NICAP Officials in 1957 Here is an interesting newspaper article from 1957 with statements from both Hillenkoetter and Fournet. Note that there are several mistakes Charles Maney: was not a PhD, he was at Defiance College, not University. Whether Moonwatch teams, at this time, 1957, had UFO sightings or not is questionable. There were some newspaper accounts saying that some teams saw something unusual. Later analysis may have found the answer. Dr. Hynek gave Edward Ruppelt a statement for his book which said that U. S. Moonwatch teams had not reported any UFOs. Later, in communication with LTC Friend, Project Blue Book chief, Dr. Hynek was "pained" to say that the statement as far as he knew was correct at the time he gave it to Ruppelt, but after Ruppelt's updated "The Report on Unidentified Flying Objects" went to press, unidentified sighting reports came in from Moonwatch team personnel. Keyhoe and the other NICAP board members that the opening of space would bring better UFO data. The assumptions they made were unjustified. These assumption include: 1. That the satellite and tracking personnel will recognized and report anomalous airborne and space objects. 2. That the tracking personel knew about the UFO problem and were charged to get better data. 3. That the network might even be part of an effort to get better UFO data. None of these assumptions are supportable in the light of history. However, for 1957 just after a large UFO flap, they might have seemed reasonable to people who were deeply immersed in UFO research. =============================================================== Casper (Wyoming) Morning Star, November 29, 1957 Space Travel May Answer Saucers. By Douglas Larsen NEA Staff Correspodent WASHINGTON--(NEA) Man's invasion of space should produce a solution to the intriguing msytery of the nature of unidentified flying objects--the UFOs which have turned up again in the wake of Russia's two Sputniks. This is the belief of the former head of the U. S. Central Intelligence Agency, Adm. R. H. Hillenkoetter. "Satellite and space exploration programs should give us new, valuable information on UFOs, affording definite evidence as to their reality," he says, "and this will result because of a termendous increase in observation of the sky by radar and telescope tracking systems and by naked-eye observations." He adds: "This will certainly increase the number of detailed UFO reports from trained observers--reports including accurate measurement of courses, speeds, altitudes, maneuvers, and sizes and shapes of such object." * * * Since leaving as boss of the nation's top-level intelligence agency, the admiral has made himself one of the best-informed flying saucers experts in the country. He is a member of the board of hte newly-created Naitonal Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena, with headquarters here. NICAP's members include some top scientists and prominent citzens attempting to find scientific answers to the saucer mystery. Members of the board also include: J. B. Hantrnft, president of the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association; Dr. Charles A. Maney, professor of astrophysics at Defiance University, and Rev. Leon C. Le Van of Pittsburgh. They all agree with Adm. Hillenkoetter that the advent of space exploration could solve the saucer secrets. And Russia's Sputnik has already greatly increased reports of saucer sightings. Retired Marine Maj. Donald E. Keyhoe, NICAP director and well- known author on the subject of saucers, reports: "There are already increase in authenic UFO reports since the Russian satellite drew public attention to the skies. Also, spotters of Operation Moonwatch, the U. S. satellite tracking network have sighted a number of UFOs during tracking practice over wide areas." For example, several days after Sputnik's appearance an Air Force jet pilot flying 42,000 feet over Washington at night reported to Moonwatch control center officers here that he saw a disk-shaped object flashing across the sky. Moonwatch officials quickly detemined that it could not have been Sputnik. The relay of the pilot's message was not fast enough to try to track whatever the object was. But the reporting precedure is being speeded up so that tracking any reported UFO will be possible in the future. * * * "The army of amateur and professional astronomers with all kinds of telescopes, which is organized under Moonwatch, is an ideal organization for checking saucer reports," a spokesman says. AF Maj. Dewey Fournet, previous the Pentagon project officer on UFOs and now a member of hte NICAP board, looks to the future when U. S. satellites will be in the skies in great numbers. He says: "U. S. satellites -- especially the larger ones -- can be instrumented to detect or photograph UFOs within their range and transmit details to earth station." Maj. Keyhoe elaborates on this idea: "Russia and the U. S. have announced they are definitely planning several space machines. So it's quite possible that the first space ships or satellites may encountere other interplanetary machines, manned or otherwise. Our space devices may even be closely approached by such alien machines. * * * * "If this happens our space devices could be equipped to attempt automatic communication, by light or signals, or by radio, when near UFOs. Any answer woudl be automatically relayed to earth, and direct communication could then be established from earth stations by remote control of the communication systems." Keyhoe also adds: "Since the U. S. and the Russians are planning moon bases, it is not impossible that a race from some other planet could already have set up such an opertation base on the moon." [End] -- Jan Aldrich Project 1947 http://www.iufog.org/project1947/ -------------------------- Index: Roscoe Hillenkoetter Index: NICAP
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 4 Re: Solved Abduction cases? From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net> [Dennis Stacy] Date: Sat, 4 Oct 1997 13:25:31 -0500 (CDT) Fwd Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 16:00:02 -0400 Subject: Re: Solved Abduction cases? >From: nick@emailme.at.address.below (Nick Humphries) >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Solved Abduction cases? >Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 13:06:57 GMT >>>Here's something I've been wondering about for a while now and >>>think some of you may be able to help me with: >>>Have any abduction cases been solved - that is, found to >>>have another explanation other than ET intervention? >>> And if not, why not? There's an Australian abduction case --maybe someone, Chris R., can supply a citation -- in which a woman, I believe, claimed to be being abducted while, at the time, she was actually sitting in a car seat next to one of the investigators. Seems unlikely ET was invovled in that one! The problem, of course, is that the majority of abductions tend to be one-witness events. Don't flame me with examples of multiple abductions, I said the _majority_. What puzzles me about abductions is that, frequently, the classic UFO isn't even involved, at least not in the way it is in the Hill case. In that event, the UFO is first seen as a distant light which then comes closer until the UFO grows large, confronts the car, aliens emerge, and the abduction ensues. In flow chart terms, there is a straight, unbroken line from UFO sighting, to capture, examination and, ultimately, release. In other words, if so inclined, one could chart the experience as a straight line moving from left (Sighting) to right (Release) with other discrete events (Capture, Examination, Tour, etc {Bullard's eight stages]) at other points along the line. Many "modern" or post-Hill abductions, however, fall into the so-called "bedroom visitor" category in which they awake in bed, find themselves confronting aliens, and then are taken into what apears to be the inside of flying saucer, examined and released, or put back in bed. In a very real sense, we never "know" where the "UFO" is in such cases is. Is it hovering just over the house or 5000 feet up? Is it invisible to all outside observers? It won't come as a great revelation here, but there is an awful lot about abductions that don't make sense. For example, if alien technology is so advanced (the ability to hover invisibly, beam people through solid objects, etc.), why are the aliens' medical procedures so little advanced by comparison? Why have to abduct so many people (if the numbers claimed have any validity) to obtain sperm and ova samples? Seems to me if you could beam an entire body up, you could simply beam up the sperm without anyone being the wiser. Fact is, we seem further along the artificial insemination and gene manipulation areas of technology than the aliens allegedly are. It's rather as if we were to land men on Mars while still trying to send signals back to Earth by reflecting sunlight off mirrors. Don't make no sense, I say. Dennis
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 4 'Sightings on the Radio' New Time From: Skye Turell <turel33@west.net> Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 11:19:32 -0700 Fwd Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 15:56:20 -0400 Subject: 'Sightings on the Radio' New Time >Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 11:16:45 -0700 >To: Skye Turell <turel33@acme.sb.west.net> >From: eotl@west.net >Subject: Sightings New Show Time Beginning Monday, 10-6-97, Sightings On the Radio with Jeff Rense moves to a new weekday (Mon-Fri) start time of 7 pm Pacific. The show will now air from 7-10 pm Pacific Time Monday through Friday. The Sunday show remains in its traditional 8-11 pm Pacific Time period. This will enable people to hear Sightings and then Art Bell back-to-back without the one hour gap between the two shows. Skye Turell <turel33@west.net>
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 4 Warm & Friendly Greetings! From: bruce maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com> Date: Sat, 4 Oct 1997 13:52:43 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 15:58:15 -0400 Subject: Warm & Friendly Greetings! I did not intentionally leave off the header for UFO updates. I did not know where it originated. Now I do. Have a nice day.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 4 Re: Follow up on Mexico video From: Skye Turell <turel33@west.net> Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 11:38:26 -0700 Fwd Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 16:02:41 -0400 Subject: Re: Follow up on Mexico video Fowarded Message: Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 11:39:11 -0700 To: turel33@west.net From: eotl@west.net Lee and Britt Elders will be guests on the first hour of Jeff Rense's Sightings On the Radio program this Sunday, 10-5-97, beginning at 8 pm Pacific. The Elders own the new UFO footage which is said to be the greatest daytime UFO tape yet. The video, just under 30 seconds in length, arrived last Tuesday and is under intense analysis by Jim Dilettoso at Village Labs and the Elders right now. Britt told Jeff in a phone conversation on Friday that the footage is the most amazing and impressive she's ever seen. There are also some other new and fascinating aspects to this video tape which will be discussed for the first time ever on Jeff's the show tomorrow night. Skye Turell <turel33@west.net>
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 4 Re: Wang On UFO Statement By Chairman Of Joint From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose) Date: Sat, 4 Oct 1997 20:44:10 +0100 Fwd Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 16:04:48 -0400 Subject: Re: Wang On UFO Statement By Chairman Of Joint Dan Geib writes: >Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 08:51:24 -0700 >From: Dan <geibdan@qtm.net> [Dan Geib] >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Wang On UFO Statement By Chairman Of Joint > Chiefs >> Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 04:02:32 -0700 >> From: Loy Pressley <lpressle@webwide.net> >> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Wang On UFO Statement By Chairman Of Joint >Chiefs >> > From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose) >> > To: updates@globalserve.net >> > Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 01:27:41 +0100 >> > Subject: Fwd: Wang On UFO Statement By Chairman Of Joint Chiefs >> > Ed Wang has asked me to forward the e-mail below, received by me on >> > October 2. The statement by the Chairman Of The Joint Chiefs Of Staff >> > was posted on Ufomind's Area 51 Mailing List on September 26 and >> > forwarded by me to various places on the Internet the same day, >> > including the UFO Updates and UFOR mailing lists. >> <SNIP> >> > Ed has told me that he regrets ever having posted the e-mail forwarded >> > by Wes Thomas to UFO Updates, though he was under very heavy and unfair >> > attack on the "In Search Of" list. >> Not true! I'm on the ISO list...all that was done on ISO was that he was >> asked for evidence to back up the claims made on the ACC site. As soon as >> he was asked for more information, he started throwing accusations around >> that everyone on the ISO list was attacking him. >> I can't say whether or not he was attacked off line from the list, but he >> certainly wasn't attacked on the list! >> Loy >Seems like Ed is losing favor among the skeptics and believers alike >This entire ACC situation seems to be more of a promo for ACC at this >point. >Dan >UFO Folklore at >http://www.qtm.net/~geibdan/framemst.html For Dan: I cannnot see how Wang's regret and openness should speak further against him. Anyhow I think that all parties involved should leave the controversy around his e-mail address alone from now on, unless new and relevant facts or points of view turn up. I want to underline, though, that my role as a messenger between him and this list have ended. If anybody, Wang included, has views to put forward, they will be doing it themselves. For Loy: You made a comment and that is only fair, but I also think it would be fair if the parties involved found another forum for any further discussion on the events on the ISO list, also because Wang himself hasn't stepped forward to speak on his behalf. Anyhow: I didn't start them, nor have I taken part in their further development, except for one single engagement the only purpose of which was an attempt to cool everything down. I am not going to act as a messenger for any of them anymore regarding this matter, for good or for bad. No way! Stig
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 4 Re: Solved Abduction cases? From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> Date: Sat, 4 Oct 1997 13:49:43 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 16:06:48 -0400 Subject: Re: Solved Abduction cases? >Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 20:26:48 +0100 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Solved Abduction cases? >>From: nick@emailme.at.address.below (Nick Humphries) >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >>Subject: Solved Abduction cases? >>Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 16:31:02 GMT >>Here's something I've been wondering about for a while now and think some of >>you may be able to help me with: >> Have any abduction cases been solved - that is, found to have another >>explanation other than ET intervention? >> And if not, why not? > Hi Nick, Hi John (Scm) Hi Errol Hi All >John Velez will probably correct me on this if I am wrong but I >believe that it only becomes a true abduction case when ALL other >possibilities have been ruled out. Hi Sean,Nick, All, You'll get no raspberrys from me Sean. If ALL of the investigators currently working with abductees would set that as a minimum standard a great many people who are only in need of psychological help would be tended to sooner, and fewer 'abduction accounts' would get through the net and pass the test of careful scruitiny. Chris Rutkowski pointed out a case where a woman (who had originally presented herself as an abductee) had hidden memories relating to an earlier rape trauma. Had she not been directed to a qualified MHP (mental health professional) she may never have had an opportunity to explore and discover the kind of information that did eventually surface. Had that poor woman gone out on the web for instance seeking information she may have ended up at some 'New Age Space Brother' site or worse yet at a William Cooper article, or the dreaded 'doctor' (who, if I should ever mention his name, Errol would banish me from the magic kingdom- so I won't mention it. But you know who I mean.<G>) We need some sanity. I'm setting up a website strictly for folks who suspect they are having these experiences. I hope to provide them with the very best information and the very soundest advice that I can provide. Hopefully it'll counter some of the pure drek that's available out there. One day we'll get a serious investigation. In the meantime it's comforting to know that there _are_ folks like Chris out there who are being responsible about their dealings with abductees. John Velez John Velez jvif@spacelab.net
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 4 Re: Witness Anonymity From: "Julianne Presson" <earthwrk@doitnow.com> Date: Sat, 4 Oct 1997 12:50:17 -0700 Fwd Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 19:51:47 -0400 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity > From: HONEYBE100@aol.com > Date: Sat, 4 Oct 1997 03:04:48 -0400 (EDT) > To: updates@globalserve.net > Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity > >Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 15:55:18 -0500 (CDT) > >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > >From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net> > >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity > >Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 12:17:15 -0400 > >From: BOB SHELL <76750.2717@compuserve.com> > >Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity > >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net > Bob Shell wrote: > >Yes, it is true that Budd used your real name in his presentation > >in San Marino this year. I was in the audience at the time. > >Whether it was a slipup, or he just thought it didn't matter in an > >overseas presentation, I don't know. Budd was somewhat tired > >at the time, I think. > >There was no reaction from the audience when he did it, and no > >indication on his part that he noticed it. I think it passed as an > >unremarkable event. > Dennis Stacey wrote: > >Then I submit that my own inadvertent use of Linda's real last > >name in a book published in England, for which I received much flak > >here, be accorded the same status - that of "an unremarkable event" > > as I, too, was tired. > Slipping up verbally and knowingly publishing my real name are two > different cases. Whether it was a remarkable or unremarkable event, > is irrelevant. Am I to believe that you feel free to use my family name > no matter how I feel about it? Slipping up verbally...sorry no cigar on the excuse making here. Bud Hopkins has no excuse for "slipping up verbally" as he bills himself as a professional. A professional does NOT make such mistakes. It is CALLED "Ethical Behavior" in the field of Human Services. If you do not want anyone knowing who you are WHY did you use your real name in the first place. You did it to yourself. So stop blaming everyone else for your problems. The sooner you stop being the "victim" here the sooner you can get on with life. Although there are "perks" to being a "victim" all the time. You do not have to take responsibility for ANY of your actions or the decisions you make regarding yourself or your minor children. > >More recently, there are rumors that Honey Bee is reportedly un- > >happy with a videotape of her son shown at another out-of-country > >UFO Symposium by parties unnamed here, one in which her son > >reportedly identifies Javier Perez de Cuellar as the man who gave > >him the fabulous brass diving helmet. Maybe Our Lady of the Sands > >could enlighten us further as to her present position on this matter? > >Maybe she could even tel us who might have been responsible for the > >distribution of said video? > No Dennis...you have it all wrong. This is what has happened: > A video tape which was made of my son, relating to the diver's helmet > he had received from the "Third Man," was taped for research > purposes, only. If you did not want your son's face out there you should NOT have allowed him to be filmed by anyone. Who is the researcher you allowed to film your son? > My son was nine years old. In turn, this video tape > was given to a trusted colleague "in strict confidence" for his files, or > archives. I found out about two weeks ago that this video tape was > sold to a foreign TV show equivalent to our 20/20 or 48 hours and it was > also shown here in the U.S. In other words, my younger son's privacy > has been sold. I've successfully protected my family's identities all > of these years, but all in vain. I saw the tape, and there was my son, > full faced. You gave permission for your son to be filmed. I guess you will know better next time around. > No one contacted me to ask for my permission, nor did I sign a release > (which, of course, I wouldn't do). So, FCC laws have been ignored, as > well. > My son is a minor!! This particular video tape should not have been > viewed anywhere. Now my son's little round face is out there. Yes your son is a minor and YOU are the "adult" who gave permission for him to be filmed. Sorry you are the one who is responsible here for him being on the film in the first place. Had you said NO he would not be on the video. > Am I unhappy, Dennis? No. I'm furious and I will get to the bottom of > this disgusting event. And when I do, a lot of heads are going to roll. > It's one thing for an adult to fight for his/her privacy, but when this > happens to a child, especially mine, it's a different matter. Oh PLEASE.....get out of the "victim role" for a minute and ask yourself why you would allow ANYONE involved with abduction research to film YOUR minor child??? "Own your own" and get over it. You did not have to allow your child to be filmed. > It seems to me that, money rules. A little boy was sold out. YES and Budd Hopkins brings in his share of that money for himself. Sorry Hopkins is NO Saint. Why people would allow someone who uses the faulty hypnosis modality he uses on them or their kids is beyond me. I have seen him in action on Discovery Channel and he would be better served to spend a few years getting some education and practical experience. His showing pictures of grays to kids under 7 years old and then uses hypnosis on them that is suggestive at the least and invalidates any data gathered in the sessions. Now have one of your temper tantrums over this message. Frankly your continued "horn blowing" in this List about everyone taking advantage of you is getting boring. This is NOT a therapy group, it is a mailing list. If a person REALLY wants to stay behind the scenes they do NOT stand on top of the tallest building and blow a big "horn". In other words your actions do NOT match your words Linda. You are here in everyone's face on a "pity pot" expecting everyone to enable you staying on it. Well you know what they say about "pity pots" they back up on you after awhile because they get to full. Your "pity pot" backed up a long time ago, it is time to get off of it. Good Day Linda, Julianne
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 4 Re: Solved Abduction cases? From: Skye Turell <turel33@west.net> Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 14:31:34 -0700 Fwd Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 19:57:39 -0400 Subject: Re: Solved Abduction cases? >Date: Sat, 4 Oct 1997 13:25:31 -0500 (CDT) >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net> [Dennis Stacy] >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Solved Abduction cases? >>From: nick@emailme.at.address.below (Nick Humphries) >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Solved Abduction cases? >>Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 13:06:57 GMT >There's an Australian abduction case --maybe someone, Chris R., can supply a >citation -- in which a woman, I believe, claimed to be being abducted while, >at the time, she was actually sitting in a car seat next to one of the >investigators. Seems unlikely ET was invovled in that one! How do you know the investigator's perceptions were "unbroken?" That there wasn't a lapse of consciousness in which the abductee was gone? And, although I hate to be so metaphysical with this particular audience (Wait a sec, while I don my flame-proof suit), there certainly have been experiences, not necessarily within the abduction arena, where people experienced two simultaneous versions of "reality." No, wait, here's one from the abduction arena: I do seem to recall an experience of Betty Luca in which she saw herself lying on a couch, paging through a magazine at the end of an abduction experience, meaning that perhaps the ETs had somehow fragmented her consciousness/body in such a way that she was two places at once. Need I remind everyone that there is much about these events that is extremely multidimensional-seeming, and since none of us knows much about that, we're hardly in a position to comment on what's possible (or even likely) or not. If you're going to insist on these events maintaining strict adherence to traditional physics, you're in the wrong business. Budd Hopkins has a case, from Australia I believe, in which a woman and her son were abducted right out of a park, "in plain sight" of many people, including the woman's husband who was taking her picture at the time. (It's an interesting picture, full of red haziness.) And Linda Cortile's family has experienced similar events. (And, no, I can't prove any of this happened, and probably neither can Budd, so get off my case!) I raise all this because your assumption that "ET involvement seems unlikely," is not all that certain a proposition. >if so inclined, one could chart the experience as a straight >line moving from left (Sighting) to right (Release) with other >discrete events (Capture, Examination, Tour, etc {Bullard's eight >stages]) at other points along the line. OK, but your objection is based on the assumption that line is traveling across only the surface of one dimension. What if it "travels" through to another space-time (or even to points outside of space-time entirely)? Then any number of possibilities open up. >It won't come as a great revelation here, but there is an awful lot >about abductions that don't make sense. Doesn't make sense to our traditional ways of understanding things. But obviously we're going to have to expand our thinking a little bit. ;-) >For example, if alien technology is so advanced (the ability to >hover invisibly, beam people through solid objects, etc.), why are >the aliens' medical procedures so little advanced by comparison? >Why have to abduct so many people (if the numbers claimed have >any validity) to obtain sperm and ova samples? Seems to me if you >could beam an entire body up, you could simply beam up the sperm >without anyone being the wiser. Fact is, we seem further along the >artificial insemination and gene manipulation areas of technology >than the aliens allegedly are. It's rather as if we were to land men >on Mars while still trying to send signals back to Earth by >reflecting sunlight off mirrors. Obviously they need physical biological substances to create the hybrids, or they would just cobble up some computer code and "replicate" the substance in the microwave or something. There's a great deal about these experiences that also suggests that the interaction with humans is very much as important as the physical "exams" and the physical creation of the hybrids. I would remind you that this is clearly not an experiment, as we think of that process. These people know what they are doing and they are doing it on an *extremely large scale*. Therefore, I don't think they are "gathering samples." They are gathering genetic code/product, apparently for the purpose of creating a hybrid race. Why would they do that, gather such quantities/such diversity of "samples?" Well, you don't have to go very far in our literature to find a hint of this. Check out The Tower of Babel story. Something, and perhaps "the language" being referred to in that story was that of genetics, was scattered all over. There were then "many voices." I strongly suspect the Greys are reassembling those fragments into one cohesive code, one language. In a very real sense, I don't think they are creating a human-Grey hybrid race. They are creating a former human-Grey hybrid race, which might be something else altogether. I can't imagine how you assume that we are further along in genetic research and artificial insemination than the Greys are. Unless you know a lot more about the genetic work being done by the Greys than I do, and the difficulties therein (which I suspect are many), then you are hardly in a position to comment on it. >Don't make no sense, I say. That's why they call them aliens! ;-) Skye Turell <turel33@west.net>
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 5 Re: Solved Abduction cases? From: clark@canby.mn.frontiercomm.net [Jerome Clark] Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 17:29:41 PDT Fwd Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 01:03:35 -0400 Subject: Re: Solved Abduction cases? > Date: Sat, 4 Oct 1997 13:25:31 -0500 (CDT) > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net> [Dennis Stacy] > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Solved Abduction cases? > There's an Australian abduction case --maybe someone, Chris R., can supply a > citation -- in which a woman, I believe, claimed to be being abducted while, > at the time, she was actually sitting in a car seat next to one of the > investigators. Seems unlikely ET was invovled in that one! > Dennis Dennis, You're referring to the famous Maureen Puddy episode from Victoria, Australia, February 1973. There were two investigators with her at the time, Paul Norman and Judith Magee, not one. See my High Strangeness, pp. 96-97. Jerry Clark
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 5 Re: Witness Anonymity From: HONEYBE100@aol.com Date: Sat, 4 Oct 1997 18:54:39 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 01:07:09 -0400 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity >Subj: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity >Date: 97-10-04 16:00:29 EDT >From: earthwrk@doitnow.com (Julianne Presson) >To: updates@globalserve.net (UFO UpDates - Toronto) Julianne Presson wrote: Major snips... >If you do not want anyone knowing who you are WHY did you use your >real name in the first place. You did it to yourself. So stop blaming >everyone else for your problems. The sooner you stop being the "victim" >here the sooner you get on with life. Although there are "perks" to being >a "victim" all the time. You do not have to take responsibility for ANY of >your actions or the decisions you make regarding yourself or your minor >children. Oh, please!!! You've got to be kidding!! Your post doesn't sound as though you're up on the details of my case and all that's surrounding it! No, I won't bite your head off yet because you sound more like a victim than I do! Let me give you a clue. I have never used my real name in the first place. Maybe you should read up more on what's been going on. UFO UpDates, Toronto has a good web site and they're archives are hugh. >Yes your son is a minor and YOU are the "adult" who gave permission >for him to be filmed. Sorry you are the one who is responsible here for >him being on the film in the first place. Had you said NO he would not >be on the video. I'll guess that you don't know much about research or investigations either. Tsk tsk. Video's are commonly made of UFO's and the witnesses. However, when a person's wish for witness anonymity is not respected the blame goes to the blabber-mouth, not the witness. >Oh PLEASE....get out of the "victim role" for a mintue and ask yourself >why you would allow ANYONE involved with abduction research to film >your minor child??? Uh... pardon me? Get with it, Julianne! If I didn't get involved with an abduction researcher, I might not have understood what was going on with my family and me. This video was an important aspect of my case. However, it was supposed to stay behind closed doors. >Why people allow someone who uses the faulty hypnosis modality he >uses on them or their kids is beyond me. I have seen him in action on Discovery Channel and he would be better served to spend a few years >getting some education and practical experience. His showing pictures >of grays to kids under 7 years old and then uses hypnosis on them >that is suggestive at the least and invalidates any data gathered in the >sessions. In your opinion and some others, hypnosis is faulty. But not in my opinion as far as my case is concerned. Where did you get this information about Budd hypnotizing children? From Phil Klass? You must have watched the NOVA programming last year. It was a sham!!! This show was geared to make abduction research look criminal. John Velez can elaborate more on that if he wishes to. >Now have one of your temper tantrums over this message. Frankly, >your continued "horn blowing" in this List about everyone taking advan- >tage of you is getting boring. This is NOT a therapy group, it is a >mailing list. No. I won't have a temper tantrum because you aren't worth it. But you're absolutely right. This is not a therapy group, it's a mailing list. So, I suggest that you go and get some therapy. Here's another suggestion, if you're bored. Don't read the "Witness Anonymity" posts, that's all! Learn how to knitt!!! Good day to you, Julianne!! (Door slams shut)! Linda Cortile research team.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 5 Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words From: rfsignal@sprynet.com [Cathy Johnsom] Date: Sat, 4 Oct 1997 19:26:32 -0700 Fwd Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 01:10:41 -0400 Subject: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words >Date: Sat, 4 Oct 1997 10:08:44 -0400 >From: BOB SHELL <76750.2717@compuserve.com> >Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >>From: rfsignal@sprynet.com [Cathy Johnsom] >>Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 20:14:13 -0700 >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> Dear Bob, Thanks for your valued advice. It puts to rest the thought I had that Poleroid were fool-proofed against double-exposures. Whether or not the infamous pictures are staged hoaxes or not can only be known to the real participants in the picture taking process. If the pictures are real, then there are more questions that need to be answered. If the pictures are faked, then we certainly have learned a lot by those zircons. Take care for now, Cathy
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 5 The Decline and Fall of American Ufology From: Gordon@home.com Date: Sun, 5 Oct 1997 03:01:27 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 03:02:28 -0400 Subject: The Decline and Fall of American Ufology DATE OF UPLOAD: July 12, 1989 ORIGIN OF UPLOAD: ParaNet Alpha/ParaNet Information Service CONTRIBUTED BY: Dr. Willy Smith ----------------------------------------------------------------- (C) Copyright 1989 ParaNet Information Service All Rights Reserved. THIS FILE WAS PREPARED BY PARANET ALPHA -- PARANET INFORMATION SERVICE 1-303-431-1343 9600 BAUD DENVER, COLORADO http://www.xxedgexx.com/paranet/ NOTE: THESE FILES ARE NOT FOR REDISTRIBUTION OUTSIDE OF THE PARANET INFORMATION SERVICE NETWORK ----------------------------------------------------------------- By Michael Corbin/ParaNet Administrator DENVER, CO -- Gulf Breeze, Florida has been the scene of mysterious and unexplained UFO activity during the last couple of years. As the sightings mounted in frequency, the town became embroiled in the most complex controversy since the Billy Meier case several years ago. This situation has become extremely polarized as the battle between the skeptics and the believers rages on. Everything centers around some of the most dramatic photos taken of what is alleged to be a UFO, which for months, continued to buzz Ed Walters and virtually, as reported, harassed him while he shot the photos. In November, 1987, while working at his desk in his home, Ed sighted a UFO. He quickly grabbed his Polaroid camera from a closet and ran outside and snapped the first series of the the mysterious object. Ed, not sure what to do, submitted the photos to the Gulf Breeze Sentinel, a weekly town newspaper. From that point onward, Ed was visited numerous times by the UFO whereby he shot more photographs under the supervision of MUFON. To date, not only have Polaroids been taken of this object, but there is also stereo photographs and some video tape in existence detailing these encounters. Dr. Robert Nathan, a photo specialist for the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California received these photographs from the National Enquirer for study. According to Dr. Nathan, he performed a "very cursory" examination of the photographs and found many flaws and problems with them which he states "shot the case to hell" and convinced him that the photographs were hoaxed. Dr. Bruce Maccabee, a Navy photographic specialist, also performed a very detailed analysis of the photographs and rendered an opinion that he felt that the photographs could not have been hoaxed by someone of Ed's abilities. Due to the fact that Dr. Maccabee performed such a detailed study of the photographs, gives his opinion a great deal of weight for the acceptance of their authenticity. However, according to different investigative groups on the hoax side of the issue refuse to accept any of Dr. Maccabee's findings stating that there has been a serious breakdown in the methodology of UFO investigations by Dr. Maccabee and MUFON. ParaNet has rated the Gulf Breeze case a hoax. After performing a detailed investigation of this case, ParaNet continues to rate it as a total hoax, basing it's findings upon the results of the investigation, and more so, upon the recent findings of a private laboratory which studied some of the Gulf Breeze photographs which clearly show a support of some kind holding the UFO up to be photographed. Additionally, it was found that the video taped film of the UFO, shown on national television in the 'Unsolved Mysteries' segment, shows the strong possibility of a support holding the UFO up while filming was done from about 20 feet from the video camera. This is evidenced by the appearance of a street lamp in the school yard which is located behind Ed's house. While the camera is taping the UFO, it moves in front of the street lamp. At the precise moment that the UFO is directly over the street lamp, the light from the lamp blinks out and as soon as the UFO passes from it, the light blinks back on. This, according to Dr. Nathan, could indicate that the UFO is being supported on a pole while being held up for photographing. As everyone knows, Dr. Maccabee is considered to be an extremely credible scientist in the field. In light of this most recent evidence, it leads one to wonder what could possibly lie behind this if indeed it is a hoax? Have all of the scientific objectives been met in this case? Has MUFON compromised it's very charter to study this phenomenon in a scientific manner by throwing all care to the wind in light of some agenda not visible at this time? No one really knows, but here are some things to ponder. MUFON has been embroiled in the most extensive and far reaching shake up since it's history. Several of it's key members have resigned and it has been brought to ParaNet's attention that anyone visibly opposed to the Gulf Breeze case's authenticity has been either removed or censored. It has also been learned that MUFON has a large part in a book contract which has been awarded to Ed Walters detailing the Gulf Breeze case by Morrow and Company, the publishers of Whitley Streiber's books, 'Communion' and 'Transformation'. The contract is in the neighborhood of several hundred thousands of dollars. There is also a possibility of a television 'mini-series'. And the list goes on and on. Dr. Willy Smith has been a MUFON investigator and a board member for several years. He is a degreed physicist and has operated the famous 'Unicat' project, incepted by Dr. J. Allen Hynek to catalogue UFO reports that Dr. Hynek investigated during his life as a major Ufologist. Dr. Smith is not buying the Gulf Breeze case. Recently, MUFON removed Dr. Smith from it's organization as Dr. Smith publicly denounced the authenticity of the case and the credibility of Ed Walters. The story that follows is an article written by Dr. Willy Smith on the state of the UFOlogical community today. It is a very controversial piece and will most certainly create a fair amount of discussion. Dr. Smith wrote in December, 1988o and it has never been released, until now. It represents Dr. Smith's own observations and opinions, and does not necessarily reflect the opinion of ParaNet or it's staff, however it is perhaps 'on target' in describing the problems that belie each of us in our quest for the truth. It is time that we start demanding the truth and get it. The Gulf Breeze case is a good example. Have all of the scientific avenues been totally exhausted before such a conclusion was reached by MUFON? Dr. Smith tells ParaNet that Walt Andrus, founder of MUFON, absolutely refuses to release the original photographs for an independent study. ParaNet is also in possession of a letter written by Ed's attorney to Dr. Smith stating that he would be sued in court if he attempted to have the copies of the photographs that he has analyzed without the Ed's permission. Yet, when asked to provide them for analysis, this avenue is completely closed. If this case is so air tight, what have the proponents to hide from legitimate investigators? ParaNet is making a formal request to have the photographs analyzed by an independent laboratory. We will keep you posted on the outcome of this request to MUFON. It is the hope of ParaNet to get a discussion going and perhaps a rebuttal on this piece from the persons that Dr. Smith names. What do you think? We want to know. ----------------------------------------------------------------- THE DECLINE AND FALL OF AMERICAN UFOLOGY Dr. Willy Smith PREAMBLE The first version of this paper was prepared during December 1988 at the request of the prestigious British magazine Flying Saucer Review. Understandably, American affairs have low priority in Europe, and thus the publication of this paper has been delayed while its import is rapidly decreasing. This reason has decided me to revise the article and seek immediate publication in an American magazine. ================================================================= INTRODUCTION Only a few years back, ufology in the United States was booming. Several major national organizations grouped under their banners a large number of members who were interested in the UFO phenomenon and provided ample financial support and a ready market for specialized publications. In addition, many smaller groups were active enough in more localized geographical areas. Two of the major organizations, NICAP and APRO, existed almost from the beginning of public interest in flying saucers. NICAP was mainly organized by Major Donald E. Keyhoe (*) and attracted many distinguished members formerly associated with the government and the military. As the years went by, the backbone of NICAP dispersed, and the organization slowly but irreversibly ceased to exist. Some files were acquired by CUFOS, where presumably they still are. However, not even Dr. Hynek, who allegedly had paid for the files from his own funds, could gain access to them during the last two years of his life, so one must consider them all but lost for future research. The other society, APRO, was created and organized by Jim and Coral Lorenzen, and attracted some of the best investigators abroad, such as Dr. Olavo Fontes in Brazil and Horacio Gutierrez Ganteaume in Venezuela. There is no question that the prime mover behind APRO was Coral, and as her health declined, so did the organization. The library was dispersed through a secondhand book dealer, and as for the files proper, nobody seems to know what happened to them after Coral's death in 1988. Once again, valuable records have ceased to exist for all practical purposes. The other two major organizations were MUFON and CUFOS, the former a splinter group from APRO centered around Walter Andrus, then a manager at Motorola, and the latter founded by Dr. J. Allen Hynek in 1973. While Dr. Hynek attempted to create a credible scientific organization, the MUFON emphasis was and still is at the grass-roots level, as it admits to its rank and file anyone able to pay the subscription rates. At the beginning of the 80's, essentially only MUFON and CUFOS survived. Walter Andrus had organized his society in a very effective way, using the subscribers to the MUFON UFO JOURNAL as potential but untrained investigators and creating a network covering the whole country. On the other hand, Dr. Hynek insisted that the CUFOS investigators should be competent, and a much thinner network was deployed under the able direction of Allan Hendry. The above is just background information, but essential for understanding what has happened to those organizations in the last year or so. Although both groups boast a Board of Directors and claim to have guidelines for what they are doing, the truth is that they are totally controlled by a few individuals who dictate policy and do as they please. This fact is kept from the membership at large, more interested in receiving the publication on time than in its contents or internal politics. As is always the case for monolithic structures, the success or lack thereof depends basically on the personal qualities of the leaders; and when the founders grow old or die, a slow but perceptible decline of the organizations is initiated. Often enough a deceptive steady state is maintained for years because nothing occurs to shake the complacency of the leadership or to challenge it. But then, one day, a sudden event occurs, a controversial case is mishandled, and the ineffectual leadership faces a situation beyond its capabilities which threatens the very existence of the organization. A HARD LOOK AT CUFOS The destiny of CUFOS is controlled effectively by only two individuals: Jerry Clark, the editor of the INTERNATIONAL UFO REPORTER, and Mark Rodeghier, president (whatever that means) and scientific director of CUFOS. Oh yes, there is a Board of Directors, but they are not important enough to have their names listed on the publication's masthead. I discovered how little say they actually have when following Dr. Hynek's death I attempted, very naively, to bring to their attention the fact that CUFOS was precipitously departing from what had been the basic philosophy of its founder. This is not meant to say that all the persons on the CUFOS Board of "Directors" are bad guys, because some of them, such as John P. Timmerman, are gentlemen who find themselves incapable of influencing events, for reasons too complex to deal with here. Jerry Clark has a dubious pedigree because of his long association with FATE Magazine, where he achieved the position of full editor before being terminated when the publication changed ownership. Perhaps the orientation of FATE will now change, but in the past it has been devoted mostly to the occult, offering a mixed bag of articles dealing with esoteric subjects such as astrology, witchcraft, and life after death. Indeed, ufology was treated here and there, sometimes by Mr. Clark himself, but the articles have been slanted toward sensationalism and not science. The serious problem with Mr. Clark, besides the imponderable influence that his relationship with FATE undoubtedly had, is that he can be swayed too easily, and not always for the right reasons. For instance, he has been strongly influenced by his friendship with Jenny Randles, resulting in publication by the IUR of unjustified attacks against FSR which are written in vague terms and not in a constructive manner amenable to rebuttal (Ref. 1). Even Dr. Hynek was not happy with his own choice of editor for the IUR (Ref. 2), and he told me during the last months of his life that Clark was selected "because there was nobody else!" Not a very happy choice, indeed, as Mr. Clark has been telling all who care to hear how CUFOS had a turn for the better after the departure of Dr. Hynek, having finally achieved a "truly scientific orientation". Well, I guess one cannot expect any better from weekend ufologists. Two issues have recently dominated the ufological picture in the United States. The first is the MJ-12 documents, the second the Gulf Breeze sightings. The official position of CUFOS on the MJ- 12 affair is that the documents are genuine (and they might be right) but this position seems to be based not on the available evidence, but mostly on the feelings of the editor toward Barry Greenwood et al, who have taken the opposite view. I don't have enough information about this topic to assume a posture, but it seems to me that both proponents and detractors should realize that the existence of MJ-12 and the genuineness of the documents are two separate issues. On the other hand, I have expended a great deal of time and effort in studying the alleged Gulf Breeze sightings. The validity of the case is based on a collection of Polaroid photos, which at the moment of this writing are unconditionally accepted as genuine--I believe--by only a few persons: Walt Andrus (MUFON International Director), Lt. Col. Donald Ware et al. (local investigators), Budd Hopkins (abduction expert), Dr. Bruce Maccabee (physicist), and Dan Wright (a MUFON henchman who really doesn't count). It is my considered opinion that overwhelming evidence exists to label this case a hoax, but CUFOS has been vacillating on publishing any of that evidence, in spite of the fact that a capable CUFOS investigator, Robert Boyd, has been involved in the case since the very beginning. Why? Because two of Jerry Clark's friends have taken the other tack: Budd Hopkins, of controversial abduction fame, by his own admission not a photographic expert, but who after only a cursory examination of the photos proclaimed them genuine, "the best ever obtained". And Dr. Bruce Maccabee, certainly a photographic expert, who suddenly seems blind to the blatant negative evidence existing in the photos and who has engaged in a massive disinformation effort (Ref. 3 and Ref. 9) pathetically attempting to validate what cannot be validated. Friendship is admirable but should not obfuscate reason, and when our friends err, it is part of the obligation of friendship to bring them back to their senses, even if painfully. Apparently, Mr. Clark has a different opinion, but historically silence has never mollified guilt; and as the Piltdown hoax has shown, the passage of time makes things worse for those who conspired to hide the truth (Ref. 10). As for Mark Rodeghier, he has yet to obtain his Ph.D., as Dr. Hynek had hoped when he appointed him Scientific Director of CUFOS. Nonetheless, he could have become an effective leader had he developed the strong personality that such a position requires. Clearly, this is not the case, and in all matters he yields to Jerry. This has been deplorable in the specific instance of the Gulf Breeze incidents, and Rodeghier's lack of resolve has resulted in unmitigated thrashing of CUFOS and his leadership from the pages of the MUFON UFO Journal, not only by Walter Andrus (Ref. 4) but also by Ed Walters, the dubious and supposedly anonymous Gulf Breeze photographer (Ref. 5). To top it off, lately the pages of the IUR to disclose Dr. Maccabee's adamant opposition to an independent computer analysis of the suspected photos, which would have resolved the issue once and for all. Undoubtedly the IUR readership feels that something is missing in the publication, that the selection of the articles is not determined by a firmly established policy but by the predominant wind, and that Dr. Hynek's ideals of serious scientific orientation have been betrayed. Although the exact circulation of the IUR is not known, a secret maintained at the price of higher postage rates, the publication delays seem to indicate a decreasing readership and a not very promising future for CUFOS. For the memory of Dr. Hynek, whose philosophy I share, I sincerely hope to be proved wrong, and that one of these days Mark Rodeghier will overcome his timidity and give us all a surprise. AND A HARDER LOOK AT MUFON If the picture I have sketched of CUFOS doesn't look bright, the reality of MUFON is still worse. As stated above, Walter Andrus used to be a good manager; and if he had limited himself to administrative tasks, MUFON could have fulfilled its destiny. Unfortunately, this has not been the case. The many capable individuals in MUFON, such as Ray Fowler, Walter Webb, Richard Hall and Marge Christensen don't seem to have a hand in determining policy and have progressively withdrawn from the limelight. Perhaps they feel that nothing can be done, and as one of the many dissatisfied persons has put it, "Walt owns MUFON". Instead of seeking the advice of all those consultants that Andrus claims are available to the organization, he rarely if ever consults them; and when the expertise is volunteered, he ignores it if it does not satisfy his desires. In fact, many respected ufologists have resigned from MUFON, while others--including myself and Robert Boyd--have been "expelled" because of their refusal to endorse the fake Gulf Breeze photographs. In recent weeks the split has possibly become irreversible due mainly to the issues raised by the controversial viewpoints of John Lear, which may or may not be presented in July at the Reno MUFON Symposium. Walter Andrus has surrounded himself with persons willing to dance to his tune, provided that they are given positions that they (and perhaps nobody else) perceive as important. Outstanding among these, we find Dan Wright, a bureaucratic employee from Michigan, whose ambition has allowed him to rise in the ranks in spite of his obvious shortcomings. As Deputy Director of Investigations, or a similar resounding title, he has undermined the seriousness of MUFON investigations by establishing absurd rules which consider that having the appropriate forms completed is more important than the investigative process itself. The worst thing about Mr. Wright is his lack of ufological knowledge and experience, and his unshakable belief that he is favored with both. Again, I have firsthand experience with this, because in my naivete I attempted to educate him about the complexities of the evaluation of UFO reports. I soon discovered that his only emphasis was on the number of reports sent to MUFON headquarters to be placed in dusty filing cabinets, out of circulation forever. The capital sin committed by MUFON is related to the Gulf Breeze sightings. The distressing part of the Gulf Breeze saga is not whether the photos are real or a hoax but the extremes to which both the investigators and Walt Andrus have resorted to maintain the illusion of a true and extraordinary case which was properly investigated. To narrate in detail the many incidents would take too much space (see Ref. 7) so I will limit myself to the most outrageous breaches of accepted investigative procedures and established scientific discourse. 1) Censorship. Walt Andrus, as well as the local investigators (Don Ware et al.) have systematically suppressed all negative evidence, or simply not followed leads that could affect the credibility of the witness. None of the many scientific papers that I submitted to the MUFON Journal have been published or even acknowledged. Only due to the extreme pressure exerted by Richard Hall did a single negative article of less than 5 pages (Ref. 8) appear in the pages of the MUFON Journal. The rebuttal by the chief proponent, Dr. Bruce Maccabee (Ref. 9), took 18 pages of text plus photos and tables, skillfully dodging the fundamental issues, and containing so many errors of fact that they make a suitable response difficult, if not impossible, within the editorial constraints. 2) Lack of confidentiality. The local investigators (mainly Lt. Col. Ware and Col. Reid) did not hesitate to release confidential analyses of other investigators (like myself), to the witnesses, thus allowing Mr. Walters to correct his errors and change his story in an attempt to nullify the negative evidence. An interesting example of this is that the "craft" shown in the initial photos is grossly asymmetric, but was replaced by a symmetric one at a later date. Incredibly, this change has been attributed to the alleged extra- terrestrials, rather than an improvement of Ed's techniques! Yet, those same investigators created an issue when I disclosed the name of Mr. Walters (a.k.a. Mr. Hanson) at a lecture, ignoring the fact that his TWO names are common knowledge in Gulf Breeze. 3) Failure to disclose. Last, but the most important irregularity: only Dr. Maccabee has had unrestricted and free access to the original Polaroid photographs. It has been well documented that all requests for "independent examination", including the use of computer image enhancement, have been simply ignored. Since the basic tenet of scientific investigation is duplication by independent parties, if we are to invoke science the ORIGINAL photographs have to be made available. This has not been the case, and probably will never be. Having detected many shortcomings using photographs many generations removed from the Polaroid originals, I seriously wonder what is in them that MUFON and the proponents do not want others to see. Perhaps the lack of agreement between Mr. Walters' story and the manufacturer numbers on the reverse? Or the fact that apparently some of those numbers have been tampered with? WHAT IS IN THE FUTURE? Very little, if we don't do something about it. It seems that ufology in the United States is changing, and not for the better. The ideals that inspired the early pioneers in the field seem to have disappeared, and the present day publications only reflect the personal ambitions of those who write them. I find this depressing, and also intolerable, because in science the overwhelming driving force has to be the search for truth. Unfortunately, the leadership of CUFOS seems to have forgotten what the goal is, while the MUFON leaders cannot remember what they never knew. I often wonder why MUFON continues the pretense of "investigating" cases, just to file them away. When the UNICAT Project agreed to joint efforts with MUFON, it was with the clear understanding that MUFON would make the "hidden" reports available to us in exchange for free access to the UNICAT database. Neither of those things ever happened: I was unable to obtain a single investigation report from Walt Andrus, and no inquiries were ever made to the database. The reasons are now clear to me: Walt Andrus (that is, MUFON) has no interest in solving the problem posed by the UFO phenomenon. In fact, such an occurrence would mark the end of MUFON as a viable organization: why would anyone buy the MUFON UFO Journal or the IUR if the mystery has been solved? As for CUFOS, the weekend ufologists are set in their ways not to share information with others, in spite of the fact that this is contrary to the philosophy established by Dr. Hynek, for whom divulging and exchanging knowledge was of fundamental importance. Their files, or whatever still remains of them, are not accessible to anyone, much less to me because of my close relationship with Dr. Hynek. MUFON is at the breaking point, and perhaps this is the moment to offer some creative thoughts. Ufology in the United States is stagnant because of the lack of leadership in the extant organizations. They live in the past, controlled by a few persons who, bound by canons of loyalty to old friends, are unable to recognize when those friends--also set in their ways-- are violating the rigid principles of scientific methodology. Those false leaders have reached the point where the decisive basis for their editorial policies is not the search for truth, but publishing what sells regardless of its lack of scientific value. What is needed is a new organization, formed by a younger generation more committed to scientific research than to making a profit at the expense of truth. I sincerely hope that a few such individuals exist out there and that they will be able to form a new and more honest organization. Needless to say, the UNICAT Project is prepared to provide support and assistance. Dr. Willy Smith UNICAT Project May 1989 POST SCRIPTUM As I am not naive anymore, I am quite aware that what is published in the MUFON UFO Journal and the IUR pages is heavily dependent on politics. Thus, I foresee that this article will bring a vitriolic attack from those named in it. Very likely their frustration will be vented in the only way they seem to know well: attempting a destructive critique of the UNICAT Project. So be it. My associates and I are open to constructive criticism, which is always welcome. Not welcome are those critics whose main objection to the UNICAT Project is their fear that we may be approaching basic results, and whose arguments are invariably based on lack of accurate information about what we do. REFERENCES 1. Fuller, Paul; in IUR Vol. 13, No. 3, May/June 1988, p.4. 2. Hynek, J. Allen; LETTER TO THE EDITOR FROM THE EDITOR-IN- CHIEF, IUR Vol. 10, No. 4, July/August 1985. 3. Maccabee, Bruce; A HISTORY OF THE GULF BREEZE, FLA, SIGHTING EVENTS, in the 1988 MUFON Symposium Proceedings, Lincoln, NE, June 24-26, 1988. (Note: material covered by the author's presentation at the symposium was essentially different.) 4. Andrus, Walter et al.; "The Gulf Breeze, FL., Photographic Case", Part IV, in MUFON Journal No. 243, July, 1988, p.9. 5. Walters, Ed; "Ed Responds", in MUFON Journal No. 244, Sept. 1988, p.3. 6. Walters, Ed; letter to the Editor, in IUR Vol. 13, No.5, Sept./Oct. 1988, p.23. 7. Smith, Willy; "The Gulf Breeze Saga", paper presented on September 17, 1988 at the National UFO Conference, Cleveland, Ohio (Available from R.D. Boyd, P.O. Box 66404, Mobile, AL, USA, $6.00 including postage). 8. Hall, R. and Smith, W.; "Balancing the Scale: Unanswered Questions about Gulf Breeze", in MUFON Journal No. 248, Dec. 1988, p.3. 9. Maccabee, Bruce; "The Scale Remains Unbalanced", in MUFON Journal No. 252, Special Gulf Breeze Issue, April 1989, pp. 3-24. 10. Gould, Stephen Jay; HEN'S TEETH AND HORSE'S TOES, W.W. Norton and Co., 1983, p.201. ================================================================= Prepared by Michael Corbin ParaNet Administrator
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 5 Gladness and Sadness From: JJ <JJ@mail.per.to> [Jennifer Jarvis] Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 07:28:13 -0400 Fwd Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 10:02:53 -0400 Subject: Gladness and Sadness Dear Errol and Updates Forum Members, I hope that you all had a wonderful summer! (or winter if in the Southern Hemisphere!) I have recently returned from an interesting summer in the United Kingdom, and then, later, on the West Coast of Canada. I met up with UFO B.C. and CSETI in Vancouver and showed them some of the video that I have filmed over Lake Ontario. When I was in England, I was most fortunate in having the opportunity of visiting many wonderful crop formations, and meeting new and interesting people in the "fields" of "Ufology" and "cerealogy" (if that be the correct term!) I was also very happy to see that the "golden orbs" that I had been watching and filming over Lake Ontario were also occurring in the places that I visited in England. Each time they appeared, they were over or near water. I was SO glad to see them! During my final few days there, I received a 'phone call inviting me to join Ms. Shari Adamiak and Dr. Steven Greer for dinner in the Avebury area of Wiltshire. The gathering was that of a C.S.E.T.I. training session "final night dinner" held near the village and stone circle of Avebury. After a most enjoyable evening, meeting new people and making new friends, I had a few moments on my own with Shari. I asked her how she was feeling. Her reply to me was, "Oh, just fine." I then looked her in the eyes and asked her, "How are you REALLY feeling?" She replied, "I'm so scared." I then hold her close, and hugged her. I told her that she was in my prayers, and those of many others. She thanked me for that. We parted company, and went our separate ways. This scene has repeated itself in my mind, over and over again. Every time I read something about Shari or Dr. Greer, the same "tape" rolls in my head. When the "Big C" hits someone you know and love, all you can do is to support them with your love and prayers. There are glad times and there are sad times. Sincerely, Jennifer Jarvis.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 5 Alfred's Odd Ode #187 From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com> Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 08:25:47 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 10:41:55 -0400 Subject: Alfred's Odd Ode #187 Apology to MW #187 (For October 5, 1997) In the dark of the past it's inscribed on clay tablets. Vibrations of echoes -- mere hints of the fear=85 El or Al was the big dog of legend, And he struck his terror chords when he threatened what was dear. Then the people scampered madly to their squalid little caves, And they prayed forgiveness for imagined sins. They blamed the women openly, and the women bought on in, Or this move by cultures in retreat=85 would, simply, not have been. To many times in the harshest of pasts we've given up, and failed. Our Founding Fathers _mostly_ took the low path. For all respect and adulation of the rightist, landed few, Corruption was their hallmark, and we've always felt their wrath. Go further back and El or Al becomes the El-shaddai. God declaring all out war, and swinging nature's fists. Something grander with potential, knocking flat their house of cards, Collapsing all their cities, they only _thought_ they had the gist. El-Nino is now named just so, another god we're sensing. And things are getting wetter where t'was dry. The fish that like it warmer are swimming way up North. These are massive climate changes that can make a billion die. And some will say that it was _our_ fault, their hypothesized conclusion. Some will say: we have been punished for our sins. Some will say: we dumbly failed to meet a gentle God's condition. Some will say: we brought our doom upon us (only) once again. But our failing is the disregard we hold for one another. Our failing is compassionless regard. Our failing is in business with its 'eat-your-children' ethic. Our failing's in the lawn waste lying moldered off rich yards. Water thieves and wasters is what we are to him -- Him we call El-Nino out of fear. We had the tools/accoutrements for an efficacious living, But short term thought was rampant -- we'll be crying in our beer? Bet the DuPonts and the Morgens will ensconce their mountain castles. You can bet they have their freeze-dried food laid in. An early bird will get the worm on news that they hear first! As that=92s the way they write the rules -- that's the way it's always been. El-Nino is like El-shaddai of a hoary misted past. It raises all the warning flags of danger. It belies the current deep felt wish for gentle, loving gods. It makes me sneer at short term fools in anger. Lehmberg@snowhill.com El-Nino -- <God>-<Small one> A lot could probably be gained determining the etiology, or reason for the assignation of that name. I sure hope we're girding our loins for this thing=85 Better over prepared than under! -- Explore the Alien View? http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/arecibo/46/ "I cleave the heavens, and soar to the infinite. What others see from afar, I leave far behind me." - Giordano Bruno, while burning at the fundamentalist's stake for wanting to leave the squalid little cave. =B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1= =B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1= =B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1 Government or Social Harassment REPORT - Presently, "ZERO" Personal HARASSMENT; however, the harassment index is infinite for each of us. Consider the leadership that ages the bad news until it is unusable.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 5 Re: Wang On UFO Statement By Chairman Of Joint From: Loy Pressley <lpressle@webwide.net> Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 04:36:51 -0700 Fwd Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 10:50:27 -0400 Subject: Re: Wang On UFO Statement By Chairman Of Joint > From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose) > To: updates@globalserve.net > Date: Sat, 4 Oct 1997 20:44:10 +0100 > Subject: Re: Wang On UFO Statement By Chairman Of Joint Chiefs > Dan Geib writes: > > >Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 08:51:24 -0700 > >From: Dan <geibdan@qtm.net> [Dan Geib] > >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Wang On UFO Statement By Chairman Of Joint > > Chiefs > >> Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 04:02:32 -0700 > >> From: Loy Pressley <lpressle@webwide.net> > >> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > >> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Wang On UFO Statement By Chairman Of Joint > >Chiefs > >> > From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose) > >> > To: updates@globalserve.net > >> > Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 01:27:41 +0100 > >> > Subject: Fwd: Wang On UFO Statement By Chairman Of Joint Chiefs <SNIP> > For Loy: You made a comment and that is only fair, but I also think it > would be fair if the parties involved found another forum for any > further discussion on the events on the ISO list, also because Wang > himself hasn't stepped forward to speak on his behalf. I agree...and I apologize if my previous post sounded antagonistic. I know the statements that I responded to were not yours and, in any case, I have no wish to be a party to a name-calling contest that just wastes peoples time and doesn't provide anything productive. > . Anyhow: I didn't > start them, nor have I taken part in their further development, except > for one single engagement the only purpose of which was an attempt to > cool everything down. I, too, did not participate in the discussions (if you could call it that) on this subject that took place on ISO or any other list. However, since I was a witness to what occurred on the ISO list, I felt a response to the comment about these matters was appropriate. Thank you for the opportunity to reply. Loy Search for other documents from or mentioning: lpressle | stig_agermose
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 5 Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words From: c549597@showme.missouri.edu [Barbara Becker] Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 09:43:10 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 11:02:25 -0400 Subject: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words > Date: Thu, 2 Oct 1997 11:42:25 -0400 > From: BOB SHELL <76750.2717@compuserve.com> > Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > >From: c549597@showme.missouri.edu [Barbara Becker] > >Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 13:21:06 -0500 > >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words > >Yes, Independent (that means he looked at the photos WITHOUT > >an agenda) photoanalyst Wm. Hyzer, however his report was disregarded > > by MUFON. > Barbara, > That's not strictly true. I know Bill Hyzer (is that spelled right??) > and know that he thinks all UFO photos are a bunch of hooey. So you > can't really say he didn't have an agenda. > Bob Bob: As far as I know, Hyzer did not have an agenda nor an attitude about UFOs UNTIL he got involved in GB. It was Jerry Black who contacted Hyzer and persuaded him to look at the photos...for free. Black had previously contacted Andrus, who had told Black he couldnt find anyone to analyze the photos. Black told Andrus about Hyzer and his willingness to look at the photos. Three weeks later, no call from Andrus. Andrus really did not wwant the boat rocked. Black called Andrus and told him what Hyzer had said about the photos. That by simply looking at the photos in the JOURNAL it was impossible to tell if they were faked or real. He could not tell, it would require closer inspection to make a determination. That is NOT a man who has an agenda. But the man who did have an agenda was Andrus because it was only AFTER Black told him that Hyzer couldnt tell if they were real or faked, Andrus Express mailed the photos to Hyzer, second day delivery. Hyzer walked into this unassuming. He was trashed and slandered by MUFON and Andrus...of course he has an attitude now. Who wouldnt? Barbara
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 5 Re: Witness Anonymity From: pwedel <pwedel@neptune.on.ca> Date: Sun, 5 Oct 97 10:16:56 -0000 Fwd Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 11:07:22 -0400 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity >Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity >Sent: 10/4/97 11:50 PM >Received: 10/5/97 9:10 AM >From: UFO UpDates - Toronto, updates@globalserve.net >To: Errol Bruce-Knapp, updates@globalserve.net >From: "Julianne Presson" <earthwrk@doitnow.com> >To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity >Date: Sat, 4 Oct 1997 12:50:17 -0700 >> From: HONEYBE100@aol.com >> Date: Sat, 4 Oct 1997 03:04:48 -0400 (EDT) >> To: updates@globalserve.net >> Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity >> >Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 15:55:18 -0500 (CDT) >> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >> >From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net> >> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity >> >Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 12:17:15 -0400 >> >From: BOB SHELL <76750.2717@compuserve.com> >> >Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity >> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net >> Bob Shell wrote: <snip> >> Dennis Stacey wrote: <snip> Julianne Presson wrote: <snip> >If you do not want anyone knowing who you are WHY did you use your real >name in the first place. You did it to yourself. So stop blaming everyone >else for your problems. The sooner you stop being the "victim" here the >sooner you can get on with life. Although there are "perks" to being a >"victim" all the time. You do not have to take responsibility for ANY of >your actions or the decisions you make regarding yourself or your minor >children. >> >More recently, there are rumors that Honey Bee is reportedly un- >> >happy with a videotape of her son shown at another out-of-country >> >UFO Symposium by parties unnamed here, one in which her son >> >reportedly identifies Javier Perez de Cuellar as the man who gave >> >him the fabulous brass diving helmet. Maybe Our Lady of the Sands >> >could enlighten us further as to her present position on this matter? >> >Maybe she could even tel us who might have been responsible for the >> >distribution of said video? Linda Cortile wrote: >> No Dennis...you have it all wrong. This is what has happened: >> A video tape which was made of my son, relating to the diver's helmet >> he had received from the "Third Man," was taped for research >> purposes, only. Julianne Presson wrote: >If you did not want your son's face out there you should NOT have allowed >him to be filmed by anyone. Who is the researcher you allowed to film your >son? Goodness, this is distressing Julianne. Should abductee's stop trusting researchers? Oh well, so much for one of our best resources in finding out about this phenomenon. The witnesses themselves. Because if we follow this line of thought you propose, I don't think too many witnesses will feel safe and comfortable in the future coming forward with information about one of the most important, enigmantic phenomenon in the history of our species. >> My son was nine years old. In turn, this video tape >> was given to a trusted colleague "in strict confidence" for his files, or >> archives. I found out about two weeks ago that this video tape was >> sold to a foreign TV show equivalent to our 20/20 or 48 hours and it was >> also shown here in the U.S. In other words, my younger son's privacy >> has been sold. I've successfully protected my family's identities all >> of these years, but all in vain. I saw the tape, and there was my son, >> full faced. Julianne Presson wrote: >You gave permission for your son to be filmed. I guess you will know better >next time around. You're right Julianne, no abductee should every go to a researcher and give their real name, because, as you insinuate, they are sacrificing their identity to research. Or, am I wrong, do you feel that abductee's can trust researchers and give them their real name. Can they trust them not to go and violate their anonymity? Linda Cortile wrote: >> My son is a minor!! This particular video tape should not have been >> viewed anywhere. Now my son's little round face is out there. Julianne Presson wrote: >Yes your son is a minor and YOU are the "adult" who gave permission for him >to be filmed. Sorry you are the one who is responsible here for him being >on the film in the first place. Had you said NO he would not be on the >video. More distressing comments Julianne, you seem to have completely missed the point or are just unaware of what these abductee's go through. The tape wasn't supposed to be shown. A trust was violated. The culprate is not Ms. Cortile. The villian is the researcher, the villain is people like you who seem to support such behaviour. If I follow your words correctly, if Linda went to a researcher in trust, and had one of her children filmed (in trust), then she _should_ expect that film to be posted in the media???????????? ******************************** WHAT'S WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE JULIANNE? ******************************** Linda Cortile wrote: >> Am I unhappy, Dennis? No. I'm furious and I will get to the bottom of >> this disgusting event. And when I do, a lot of heads are going to roll. >> It's one thing for an adult to fight for his/her privacy, but when this >> happens to a child, especially mine, it's a different matter. Julianne Presson wrote: >Oh PLEASE.....get out of the "victim role" for a minute and ask yourself >why you would allow ANYONE involved with abduction research to film YOUR >minor child??? Why do you think she was approaching researchers Julianne? Do you have any idea what happens to a person, a persons family, when this phenomenon visits them? Do you have any idea the importance an abductee will feel,(and a responsilbity to their fellow humans), to investigate and find the truth. Please do not suggest the pursuit of fame and adoring fans. All these people (abductee's) seem to ever get (from a segment of the community) is grief, condescencion, and rudeness posted at them. Some of us make them feel like they should never come forward... Julianne Presson wrote: >YES and Budd Hopkins brings in his share of that money for himself. Sorry >Hopkins is NO Saint. Why people would allow someone who uses the faulty >hypnosis modality he uses on them or their kids is beyond me. I have seen >him in action on Discovery Channel and he would be better served to spend a >few years getting some education and practical experience. His showing >pictures of grays to kids under 7 years old and then uses hypnosis on them >that is suggestive at the least and invalidates any data gathered in the >sessions. We do not have to associate Linda's motives with Budd's now, do we? Or is that required to strengthen an already weak point. >Now have one of your temper tantrums over this message. Frankly your >continued "horn blowing" in this List about everyone taking advantage of >you is getting boring. This is NOT a therapy group, it is a mailing list. Don't worry, Linda has a lot of friends who will not through temper tantrums. Nor will she. But we will make note of your position in research. We will regard your scientific ethics with the words you have spoken here. I have not observed Linda do any horn blowing. I have consistently seen her stand up in defense, not offense, if a message is posted about her. I have not seen her post anything first that started one of these threads, have you? > Your "pity pot" backed up a long time ago, it is time to get >off of it. Very mature Julianne. You know Julianne, I've been doing research with the aboriginal community in my neck of the woods. Some of these people need and require their anonymity. They have seen some remarkable and important things. They _need_ to know that they can trust me not to repeat their names. Some of these people are braves. If I were to violate any of the braves anonymity (who did not wish me to), I would in short order be without my testicles or my life, take a pick. And no one would ever know who did it. I do not need that type of insentive to respect common decency in another human beings desire to convey important information, and remain anonymous. Sometimes when I read posts like this, I think there are others that do. >Good Day Linda, >Julianne Good day Julianne, May the farce be with you. Paul. Search for other documents from or mentioning: pwedel | earthwrk |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 5 Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words From: c549597@showme.missouri.edu [Barbara Becker] Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 09:52:16 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 11:51:34 -0400 Subject: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > From: "Serge Salvaille" <sergesa@connectmmic.net> > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words > Date: Thu, 02 Oct 1997 13:42:53 -0500 > Dear Barbara [Becker], > I have been following this thread since the beginning. Needless > to say that you made a point regarding Ed Walters. I doubt > though this should have any influence on the debate: information > as such is relevant only to the spectators, not the debaters. > You have mentioned... > >Yes, Independent (that means he looked at the photos WITHOUT > >an agenda) photoanalyst Wm. Hyzer, however his report was disregarded by > >MUFON. > Any way to get our hands on this document ? > Serge Salvaille, system programmer > Serge: The "Hyzer Report" is copyrighted. (We all kno what THAT means now dont we?) I must get his permission to copy it. That might take a little time. Can someone scan this or will you accept me typing it in? BB
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 5 Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words From: c549597@showme.missouri.edu [Barbara Becker] Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 10:15:07 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 12:21:09 -0400 Subject: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words > Date: Thu, 02 Oct 97 06:33:45 > From: "Roger R. Prokic" <rprokic@ibm.net> > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words > >From: c549597@showme.missouri.edu [Barbara Becker] > >Date: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 09:47:38 -0500 > >To: ufo updates <updates@globalserve.net> > >Subject: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words > >What happened to my critics? Steve, Don, Roger et al? > >I thought we were going to have a good discussion. Do > >you not understand the law? Or does your silence > >indicate agreement? > Barbara, put aside your pride of knowledge for law... Why cant I be proud of what I have learned. Why must I set it aside for your ignorance? It took a lot of work to understand the copyright law and to understand it as it applied to Duane Cook, the Sentinel and Walters. I had no intention of making a false claim. Subsequently I HAD to be POSITIVE, without a doubt, before I presented that information in its current form. I have only presented what can be backed up. And I have made it EASY to understand. I have given you the law as it is written and a website hosted by the LIBRARY OF CONGRESS to read a paraphrased version. > So, aside from the law, why would the pictures from Believer Bill > and the other person you mention be considered a hoax? That is > the real question... NO Roger, the real question is why did Ed Walters lie about taking the photos? Why does he feel he has to lie about alot of things? BB
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 5 Housekeeping - Missing UpDates? From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 12:48:47 -0400 Fwd Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 12:48:47 -0400 Subject: Housekeeping - Missing UpDates? There are many subscribers here who pay for limited size mailboxes. If you suddenly seem to have missed several days worth of UpDates, the chances are that you didn't check your mail for a while - your mailbox choked and started bouncing posts back to UpDates and your address was removed from the List. UpDates has not, as yet, disappeared without warning and if you suddenly stop receiving UpDates, either your mailbox filled or your server wasn't accepting mail for you.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 5 Posting Instructions From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 12:57:55 -0400 Fwd Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 12:57:55 -0400 Subject: Posting Instructions Posting Instructions To help current and future readers of UFO UpDates' posts and the UFO UpDates Instant Archive software at: http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates please observe the following rules when posting to the List. 1. Line-length Please make your lines no more than 70 characters long ------------------------This line is 70 characters--------------------- Longer lines are wrapped by various pieces of software along the Net and leave awkward and eye-jarring line lengths. 2. Attribution When responding to a message from the List, _always_ include the four line 'header' from the body of that message at the start of _your_ message - eg.: >Date: 01 Jan 97 00:00:01 EST >From: Genghis@mukluk.com <Bob Bobberts> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: UFO UpDate: Grays are Grey Area Again - it's at the beginning of the 'body' of the message you are responding to. 3. Quoting _Always_ quote from the message to which you are responding. Quotes should come _before_ you key your response. Start each quoted line with a 'greater-than' sign (>) as the first character. It should look like this: >Start each quoted line with a 'greater-than' sign (>) as the >first character. It should look like this: Keep quoted material from previous messages to a minimum: Just quote enough text to let people know what you are referring to. Messages that do not utilize the required quoting protocol or contain excessive quoting will not be posted to UpDates. The Archive software will automatically italicize these lines. Visit the Archive page and take a look. Most modern E-Mail software will allow the user to click a 'Reply' button and automatically open a new window, with the message being responded to inserted with universal quote-mark (>) at the beginning of each line. When 'Reply' is clicked, some E-Mail software will insert a line which states: On 01 Jan 97 at 00:00:01 EST, UFO UpDates wrote: If your program does this, please remove it - UFO UpDates did not _write_ the message - it merely posted it to the List. 5. Don't send 'personal' responses to the list that should be sent directly to the original author. Send a message to the list only if it contains new information that you want _everyone_ to see. Messages that contain what the List Administrator considers to be personal attacks or 'flames' will not be posted to the List. Those messages will be forwarded to the person they refer to for their information. 6. URLs (Web Site addresses) _must_ include 'http://' and be on one line. The Archive software will make the URL a 'click-able' link to that address in your archived message. ------------------------------------
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 5 Re: Roswell Rods Kal Korff posting - 5-14-97 From: Jose and Karen Escamilla <rods@rmi.net> Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 12:55:04 -0700 Fwd Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 22:16:23 -0400 Subject: Re: Roswell Rods Kal Korff posting - 5-14-97 Re: Kal K. Korff on Rods - from May 14,1997 posting which reads: >From: TotlResrch@aol.com >Date: Wed, 14 May 1997 03:55:59 -0400 (EDT) >Fwd Date: Wed, 14 May 1997 16:05:30 -0400 >Subject: Re: 'Roswell Rods' >Recently, there has been talk about "huge Rods" being seen and filmed >over Roswell. While I have not taken the time to analyze these images in >detail, I have taken a cursory look at them and have noticed a couple of >things: >1) They are almost always pretty much out of focus -- which is >unfortunate and, to some, suspicious. >2) The photographer and his (presumed wife) have also photographed >"ghosts" on numerous occasions. >3) There is a video and still photos of these images for sale. >4) OF COURSE they have "showed up" just in time for the 50th anniversary >of Roswell. >While I have no idea(s) whether these images are "real" or not, I do >hope that he goes out and buys a powerful zoom lens so that better >images can be obtained. We need more than just blurry, out of focus >images to work with if there's any hope of resolving this issue. >This is what I would hope any prudent person would do given the chance >to capture these "ETs" on film repeatedly. It also might help to have >more than one photographer involved, shooting at different angles and >with varying video, film, and camera equipment and lenses. >Finally, I am not optimistic this will ever be done, (IF past cases can >be considered a pecedent) and it is a shame that once again when the >apparent opportunity to bring a scientifically controlled environment >for documenting these things and can easily be done, that some excuse >will probably be made as to why this wasn't possible. The most likely >one? "They quit showing up" >It will be interesting to see how this case develops. I, too, would >encourage people to checkout the "Rods" WEB site and peruse BOTH the >"ghost" photos and the supposed "UFO" pictures. Who knows, maybe we just >might get lucky this time around. >Kal K. Korff Kal, In the posting in May you mentioned that we will probably say the Rods have disappeared and cannot produce the scientific documentation you readily offer as missing with the images we currently have. We are going forward with this investigation, with scientific principals applied, stereo camera tiangulation, professional optical equipment so that the images are captured as "clear and detailed" as possible, and this is a phenomean that is not declining, but progressing. Since your posting in May, we now have 23 states where Rods are being reported and videotaped. There are better, more clear, images being submitted to us, taken by "others" with Digital Broadcast quality cameras, in broad daylight, and using high shutter settings of 1/10,000. To further your commentary on the suspicians you may have toward me and "my assumed wife-(we are married)" all I can say is that observations made by you, Skeptical Inquirer's Joe Nickels, Philip Klass and others in the past, are the reason we are going to further the investigation into the Rods until we find out what they are....or are not. The Rods Expedition is being funded and we are very close to documenting Rods with the equipment long needed for this type of investigation. The problems and suggestions with the trends of the past among UFO cases, (as you refer to), is not a problem with us. We are pushing the envelope on this phenomena leaving no stone unturned in our scientific investigation. From using Kodak's new 40,500 fps motion measurement cameras, (high speed video cams that can stop a bullet in mid-flight, and for measuring balloon deployment), to recording audio imprints of the environments where Rods appear more frequently, we intend to put together an investigation on the Rods with intent on covering every arguement raised; insect theory, video artifacts, lens anomolies, Linda's battery causes Rods theory, natural phenomena, anything you suspect we will cover and bring forth conclusive evidence. I am not looking toward UFOlogy as a career. I'm going to puch this project in order to get it finished and go on to making movies as was my original plan in 1994, beofre we had the UFO experience at Midway, New Mexico. I suggest you do an independent investigation, using your suggested protocols so we can all compare notes, (but I strongly suspect), you will give us all some lame answer like, "it would be a waste of time" rather than go for it full speed. The next phase of evidence we will be presenting will incorporate as thorough a process in the documentation aspects of our investigation. You are welcome to join us out in the field, (as I invited you while in LA, during our LEZZA Show appearance together), and I welcome your insights into this documentation, because I know that one way or the other, we will prove you and Skeptical Inquirer's, Joe Nickels, etc., wrong in a fraud being committed by myself, my wife, and the Independent videographers that have joined this investigation. The Roswell case, Billy Mier and most of the cases that you people always rely on as a model for debunking, are old hat. If you guys want to really get some credibility with us, come and join us in investigating the Rods, which are here and now, and are increasing. We are using you guys as our model, because we are covering every aspect you would turn to. Sincerely, Jose Escamilla
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 5 Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words From: c549597@showme.missouri.edu [Barbara Becker] Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 14:34:09 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 22:20:32 -0400 Subject: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words > From: wlmss@peg.apc.org [Lawrie Williams] > Date: Sat, 4 Oct 1997 09:13:36 +1000 (GMT+1000) > To: ufo-l@mb.protree.com, updates@globalserve.net > Subject: One BB Smear is Worth 1000 Witnesses? > > From: c549597@showme.missouri.edu [Barbara Becker] > > Date: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 09:47:38 -0500 > > To: ufo updates <updates@globalserve.net> > > Subject: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words > > What happened to my critics? Steve, Don, Roger et al? I thought > > we were going to have a good discussion. Do you not understand the > > law? Or does your silence indicate agreement? > > BB > Barbara Becker says "Ed Walters hoaxed the B&J photos." > She is also on record as saying: > > 1) Ed Walters copyrighted photographs allegedly taken by someone > > else. > > That at the least would make him a thief. > > 2) Ed Walters copyrighted photographs taken by himself. > > That at the least makes him a liar. > > > So Ed Walters copyrighted two photos because the people who took > them did not want to come forward? Big deal! By no reasoning can > that lead to the conclusion that fraud was involved. Yes, that IS called fraud. And it IS a big deal. > And she wrote him 4 letters about this! > Four letters is certainly not "brief correspondence" like she > claims. It is pestering. If I was pestering he did not have to write back. > So where is the human face of Ufology? On Mars. : ) > If anyone is close to Ed & Frances Walters, it would be *very* > interesting to hear how they feel about this latest intrusion. > Nit-picking "Investigation" of this type puts people off coming > forward, so it is counterproductive. Please do. I send everything I write to Ed Walters. If he wants to respsond Im sure he will. Snip > But the other side of this coin is that when some self-appointed > "investigator" Self-appointed? Is that a slur? Who is supposed to appoint me Andrus/God? > goes out of their way to penetrate the privacy of abductees > with petty claims such as above, Abductee? Ed Walters an abductee? Get real. Lets see, on national television, (AFTER GBS came out),on the Oprah Winfrey show, in front of God, Mark Rodeghier, Phil Klass, and millions of people...Ed Walters stood up and said: "Read my lips, I never said I was abducted." He must have forgotten page 261 in GBS: May 1, 1988 - Twentieth Sighting - The final Encounter. "When I was forty-one years old, I photographed a UFO and was abducted." Then he went on to write UFO Abductions at GB. > My reaction to Barbara Becker's continuing attack on Ed Walters > is one of disgust You dont like the message so you go after the messenger. Thats OK with me. > not just because it is so unfair but also because of the long > term damage this kind of smearing does to people's trust in Ufology > and Ufologists. This has NOTHING to do with SMEARING Ufology or Ufologists. It has to do with RESTORING the honor and integrity of the subject and its devotees. One poorly handled investigation reflects on everyone in Ufology. > Maybe BB is sincere and just wants to punish Ed Walters for coming > forward and sharing his experiences with the world without being as > perfect as Barbara herself would have been in the same situation. > Or maybe she is insincere and wants information repressed at its > source by making it unpleasant for abductees to speak out, thus > handicapping serious ongoing ufological investigation. No, I just want the truth. BB
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 5 Philip J. Imbrogno From: Philip Mantle <el51@dial.pipex.com> Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 03:59:03 +0000 Fwd Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 20:51:27 -0400 Subject: Philip J. Imbrogno Dear Bruce, A colleague of mine in Lancashire is in the process of researching sightings of triangular-shaped UFOs. He would particularly like to contact Philip J. Imbrogno the co-author of NIGHTSIEGE, which looked into the Hudson Valley sightings in the mid-l980's. If anyone has a contact address and/or phone number for Philip Imbrogno, or has any information on the Hunson Valley sightings I would be most grateful if they could contact me. All the best, Philip Mantle.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 5 UFOs? See For Yourself From: John Koopmans <john.koopmans@sympatico.ca> Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 13:57:25 -0700 Fwd Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 20:59:24 -0400 Subject: UFOs? See For Yourself Hi Errol, Hi John Velez, Hi List: There has been a lot of discussion lately about the number of UFOs that can be seen from our backyards. John Velez has been discussing this for a long time. He even posted a few pictures to try to wake us up. Others have mentioned the "rods" that can be seen when the sun is blocked out, and a video taken of the area surrounding the sun. I am indebted to John Velez for helping me learn how to "see" these objects (although I have yet to see a "stationary" object"). Now I can't understand why I could never see them before. There are more objects up there than I ever could have guessed! You can take an armchair view of this and debate these sightings forever. Or you can wake up and see for yourselves! It's quite simple, and with the following procedure, I can almost guarantee immediate results. What I can't do is provide an explanation of what these things are. Perhaps someone with a powerful camera can take this experiment to the next step. The Procedure On a perfectly clear day (no clouds or haze) take an ordinary set of binoculars (I use a Minolta Standard EZ 10X50 Wide Angle 7 degree) and find a place where the sun is blocked (eg. by a roofline, top of window frame, etc.). After focussing the binoculars on a distant object (eg. jet), turn the binoculars to the area near the sun (be careful that you don't accidently focus on the sun itself). Hold the camera in place, and you will likely immediately see a lot of "fluff" floating by (eg. dandelion fluff). Most of it will likely be out of focus, and moviing in the direction of the prevailing wind. Look way beyond the fluff, and you will soon see numerous bright objects racing across the sky. Most of them look like bright, silvery round objects, about the size of planets. They move quite rapidly, but slower than the dandelion fluff blowing by with the wind. It is difficult to determine their elevation, but if I had to make a guess, I would say anywhere from 10,000 to 50,000 feet. They move in all directions across the sky, sometimes in a direction opposite to the wind direction. Usually they travel in straight lines across the sky (they are no longer visable when they are no longer reflected by the sun), but occassionally they seem to veer in a slightly different direction. In a way, they look like satellites when seen at night, but most travel much faster. Other Interesting Features In addition to these objects, is another most unusual feature. Occassionally you'll see a tiny "spiral" of cloud-like material suddenly appear in the sky (at very high elevation). These are beautiful to watch. Sometimes they are spirals, and other times ribbons. They appear suddenly, and last for about 5-10 seconds. It is almost as though an object in the upper atmosphere was leaving a type of "jet trail". The Next Steep I tried to take pictures of the bright objects, but couldn't see them through a camera with a 200 mm lens. It is my hope that someone on the list will try to photograph the objects with a larger, more powerful camera lens, and have the photo enlarged. BTW, once you have trained your eyes to see the objects (don't get confused with the floating fluff, birds, etc.) you should be able to see, on the average, about one object every ten seconds. This is not an exaggeration. I am astounded by the number of these objects. See For Yourself I am not willing to debate whether I saw this or not. Get your binoculars out and see for yourself. Anyone with a pair of binoculars should be able to do it. And if anyone has a powerful camera, please post the picture for others to analyze. The experiment should also be carried out during the winter, when the "fluff" explanation can be more easily tested. Also, an enlargement can help test the high flying, highly reflective bird explanation. Any feedback will be greatly appreciated. John Koopmans (Thanks, John "There are UFO's over NY and I ain't too surprised" Velez)
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 5 Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words From: BOB SHELL <76750.2717@compuserve.com> Date: Sun, 5 Oct 1997 13:21:23 -0400 Fwd Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 19:59:07 -0400 Subject: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words >From: rfsignal@sprynet.com [Cathy Johnsom] >Date: Sat, 4 Oct 1997 19:26:32 -0700 >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >Dear Bob, > Thanks for your valued advice. It puts to rest the thought I >had that Poleroid were fool-proofed against double-exposures. Whether >or not the infamous pictures are staged hoaxes or not can only be >known to the real participants in the picture taking process. If the >pictures are real, then there are more questions that need to be >answered. If the pictures are faked, then we certainly have learned a >lot by those zircons. >Take care for now, >Cathy Cathy and all, It is important to remember today that the old saying "The camera doesn't lie" is completely outmoded. Any image CAN be faked. Particularly still images. Of course this does not mean that all are, just that the images do not stand alone as evidence. The story told about them, and the teller(s) of that story must be considered as part of the package. Someone got very angry with me at a UFO Conference after he showed a video and said "that couldn't be faked", and I told him a simple way to fake it. Those of us who make our livings in photography know all sorts of tricks of the trade, some simple and some complex, for faking things. It is how we make our livings. I am constantly making things hang in mid air, and have a tool box full of goodies for doing so. I'm getting ready this week to photograph some Christmas ornaments for a holiday magazine cover, and will be suspending them in mid air. In this case I will be using micro-thin tungsten wire, which is strong and non-reflective and just doesn't show up in the photograph. That's just one of the many things in my bag of tricks, and I am not even a special effects expert!!! Bob P.S.: Note to whoever started this thread. The old Chinese saying is actually "One picture is worth 10,000 words". You have devalued pictures by a factor of ten!!!!
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 5 UFO ROUNDUP Volume 2, Number 38, October 5, 1997 From: Masinaigan@aol.com Date: Sun, 5 Oct 1997 13:37:02 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 20:16:33 -0400 Subject: UFO ROUNDUP Volume 2, Number 38, October 5, 1997 --------------------- UFO ROUNDUP Volume 2, Number 38 October 5, 1997 ALIEN KIDNAP ATTEMPT FOILED IN ISRAEL On September 18, 1997, Palestinian Authority police investigated the attempted abduction of a ten-year-old Arab girl by a space alien. According to the Israeli newsmagazine Yerushalayim, ten-year-old Suha A'anam was studying on the second-story balcony of her family's home in Dir Al Ajwan, a West Bank village near Tulkarem, about 64 kilometers (40 miles) northwest of Jerusalem. Suddenly, she felt something tugging her left hand. Looking up, she spied "an alien" holding her arm. "She screamed hysterically, alerting neighbors to the scene just in time to save her. She was taken to Tulkarem Hospital with scratches to her arm." "A neighbor told police that she heard a noise like a helicopter, looked out her window and saw 'a whirlpool in the air, spreading ash everywhere.' opposite Suha's balcony." Six days earlier, on September 10, Muhand Faras, 16, was walking home from school near Tulkarem "when he came upon a strange being of a man's size but with a small 'root' in the middle of his face. It's skin was colored 'like a frog' (dark green--J.T.) It had two tiny hands with three fingers each and long fingernails. The alien made a threatening gesture at Muhand's face, screamed something and then flew into the sky." Muhand said he had no idea where the alien went after that because he "was too frightened to look at it" and "thought it might shoot something dangerous" at him. (See Yerushalayim for September 19, 1997. Also check CNI News, volume 3, number 15, part 1, for October 1, 1997. Many thanks to Mike Lindemann of CNI News for this report.) ALIENS AMBUSH TWO MEN IN PUNTA ARENAS, CHILE On Monday, September 22, 1997, at 11 p.m., Enrique Bermudez Sosa parked his car in a wooded area near Punta Arenas, the southernmost city in Chile, intent on doing some skywatching. Suddenly, Bermudez heard a strange skittering noise all around the vehicle. Dousing the headlights, he could make out small humanoid figures running around his car. He described the creatures as "small, one meter (three feet, four inches) tall, long arms, short legs, big heads, but could not see the eyes or any other (facial) details." He counted eight aliens in all. The creatures surrounded his car for 40 minutes. Then they vanished into the woods. Bermudez started his car and drove away at an extremely high speed. On Tuesday, September 30, 1997, at 11:30 p.m., Dr. Carlos Munoz, an investigator for Agrupacion de Investigaciones Ovniologicas (AION), the well-known Chilean UFO study group, returned to the scene with Bermudez. "They got out of the car to do some skywatching, and suddenly they heard and saw something move closer to them. They could only distinguish shadows, not shapes. Then they saw 30 meters (99 feet) in front of them a flourescent tube-like light in vertical position suspended about one meter from the ground. This light had a red color on the upper part and the rest was white. The tube was also pulsating." Immediately Dr. Munoz grabbed his videocamera and began shooting. To his astonishment, the UFO could not be seen through the viewfinder. So he put the camera on his car roof, hoping to steady it. Still the UFO did not register an image in the viewfinder. The two men then got in the car and fled. As they drove away, they heard "a loud engine noise" behind them. "And from nowhere appeared a black sports car with polarized windows." The sportscar swerved in front of them, and, as it did so, "all the needles of the instrument panel (Dr. Munoz's dashboard) jumped like crazy." (Muchas gracias a Luis Sanchez Perry para esas noticias.) (Editor's Comment: The only road out of Punta Arenas goes to Rio Gallegos, Argentina. Only by ship or ferry is the city accessible to the rest of Chile. It should be a simple matter for the Chilean police to track down the mysterious black sportscar.) AUSTRALIAN HELICOPTERS STALKED BY A UFO A solitary UFO approached two Australian rescue helicopters near Lismore, a city near the Queensland/ New South Wales border 100 miles (160 kilometers) south of Brisbane. The first incident took place Monday, September 29, 1997, as a Northern Rivers helicopter was returning to Lismore from a flight to Brisbane at around midnight. The Westpac flight crew "watched the flight of an unidentified flying object" just south of Jacobs Well on the Gold Coast. "The UFO had three bright lights evenly spaced along the side of it. The pilot said it 'seemed to be flat in appearance.' The UFO resembled "an aircraft banking" and "after one minute, it dropped from sight." On Wednesday, October 1, 1997, Wayne Fisher and Rob Hill, pilots for the Westpac Lifesaver Rescue Service, were "flying at 7,000 feet in a clear night sky" when a bright light suddenly illuminated the interior of their helicopter. "The sudden burst of 'white light' was at first thought to be lightning, but the sky was clear and the light came from above and to the rear of the aircraft." "Fearing a collision with another aircraft, the pilot immediately radioed Brisbane Air Service. It was confirmed that 'there is nothing within miles of you.' Fisher continued his southward flight to Lismore. At 10:45 p.m., "Mr. W.P. and his 15-year-old daughter, K, were driving in the Ballina area when they saw 'a very large, round metallic bright blue object that quickly crossed the night sky in four or five seconds.'" (See the Northern News of New South Wales for October 3, 1997, "Two Air Crews in UFO Riddle," page 1. Many thanks to John Hayes for forwarding this newspaper article.) DAYLIGHT DISC SPOTTED AND FILMED IN PHOENIX, ARIZONA On Saturday, September 27, 1997, at 2:30 p.m., Arizona Skywatch director Tom King "saw a flashing silver object in the sky. After a few seconds of watching it, I realized I've seen and videotaped these strange objects in the past. I ran inside and grabbed a still camera and ordered my brother Rob to come out and videotape the thing." Returning outside, Tom began shooting still photos. "It appeared to be five to ten thousand feet in the sky at a northwest direction from my vantage point," he reported. "I was using a Canon T-50 with 1000 speed film. It had a 500mm telephoto lens and a 3X adapter." He shot four photos of the UFO. Arriving with the videocam, Rob King began to shoot. But he was unable to get an image because of "the resolution of the color viewfinder." Twenty minutes later, elsewhere in Phoenix, Mike DeVarennes, who had just spoken to Tom King on the phone, went outdoors and spotted the daylight disc. Grabbing his videocam, he shot one minute of footage. The tape "shows a blinking white dot in the sky. It is blinking in a pattern of 1/30...Soon afterwards, it turns largely black, looking like a Hockey Puck. It continued to blink a white/silver to black pattern over and over." Mike did "a final zoom on 24X digital towards the end of the video. During part of this, a 'Meier"-type disc is seen in several frames. This part of the footage does not appear to be an optical or an out-of-focus effect." (Many thanks to Errol Bruce- Knapp for forwarding these reports.) TRIANGULAR UFO SIGHTED OVER RHODE ISLAND On Friday, September 26, 1997, at 1:40 a.m., six cars driving on Rhode Island Route 10 in the Olneyville section of Providence, Rhode Island (population 200,000) spotted a large triangular UFO flying slowly to the east. The six cars stopped on an overpass, and the occupants got out for a better look. They had the UFO in view "for approximately ten minutes. The object had three very bright lights, arranged in a triangular pattern, together with five smaller, dimmer lights arranged in a straight line on the ventral side of the object. The object appeared to slowly rotate during the ten minutes or so, at which time it began to rise vertically and then accelerated very rapidly until it disappeared in the night sky." One of the witnesses telephoned the National UFO Center in Seattle, Washington and described the object seen. (Many thanks to Peter Davenport for this news story.) (Editor's Note: Check out the black helicopter story further on in this issue.) WOMAN SPOTS HOVERING UFO NEAR TWIN CITIES On Saturday, September 27, 1997, at 7:30 p.m., Crystal R. stepped out of her home in Brooklyn Park (population 43,332), a suburb 12 miles (18 kilometers) northwest of the Twin Cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul in Minnesota. The night was rainy, and, as she halted on the doorstep, Crystal "saw five cylindrical lights spaced evenly apart in a circle I would estimate to be eight to ten feet (2.5 to 3 meters) across. Lights were pulsating on this panel around the circle. Object hovered over the top of our large weeping willow (tree), which is at least 30 feet (9 meters) high." Crystal said she watched the object hover "for approximately five seconds." During that time, it "made strange low-pitched humming sounds." She said she went back into the house for a moment to get a drink of water and then "looked out the front door again to see if the object was still there. It was, so I observed it, wondering what it was. Suddenly, it disappeared. It did not fly away or move. It was just gone and did not reappear to my knowledge." (Many thanks to Tim Hagemeister of NACOMM for this report.) DAYLIGHT DISC SPOTTED SOUTH OF AUSTIN, TEXAS On Friday, September 26, 1997, at about 3:30 p.m., Harvey H. knew he was "going to be in the yard awhile so I grabbed my 7X50 binoculars because I enjoy looking at airplanes." Facing the south, Harv "was watching a twin-engine turboprop plane operating out of Austin's Mueller Airport. In my lower field of view, traveling in the same direction as the plane, appeared an object that I still do not recognize." "It was an oval-shaped object of a whitish hue," he reported. "Its narrow side was facing the direction of travel. It definitely was not unfinished metal reflecting sunlight. It moved straight and unswerving. I don't suppose I saw it for more than three seconds as it crossed my field of view." "I've looked at aerial objects for a good many years, but I could not say whether this object was a flattened softball-like thing flying at 50 miles per hour or if it was a far larger object at a high altitude flying a tremedous speed beyond the plane." (Many thanks to Steve Wilson Sr. for forwarding this news story.) (Editor's Note: One mile in three seconds equals 1,200 miles per hour.) WITNESSES REPORT A UFO DOGFIGHT IN MISSOURI On September 18, 1997, around 8 p.m., Steven L., aged 11, was accidentally locked out of his home and went to a friend's house to await his parents' return. The friend, Alan G., aged 12, lives on a hilltop just southwest of the city of Springfield, Missouri (population 133,116). The boys suddenly became aware of "numerous moving star-like lights in the clear night sky. To their amazement, the white lights were making quick movements" and flying away from each other. Fifteen minutes later, "the boys were startled to see a strange-looking, triangular UFO with blue, green and red lights enter the area, towards a group of the white lights. Suddenly, the triangle UFO was under attack by two white lights shooting 'sparks.'" The triangular UFO took evasive action, the boys reported, and flew away to the northwest. "Then, about ten minutes later...the triangle UFO returned, angling between the two white lights. Then two smaller UFOs moved in again, shooting more sparks. This caused the triangle to make several turns before disappearing to the southwest." Steven and Alan reported "no sound was heard" during the event. At the same time, southeast of Springfield, private pilot Bruce Lanza, while cleaning his airplane, "noticed two moving white lights traveling side-by-side from south to north in the eastern sky, when suddenly they veered apart from each other." Lanza reported, "One went up and the other went down." He also said he did not hear any aircraft noise during his sighting. (Many thanks to Brian Adams of the Ozarks Area Research Group for this report.) LAST WEEK'S TYNE TEES UFO CASE CAUSES CONTROVERSY Authorities in the UK have come up with many varied explanations for the mysterious nocturnal lights seen along Scotland's eastern shore the night of Monday, September 22, 1997. Alan Pickup of the Royal Observatory at Edinburgh said the aerial display "was almost certainly a meteor-- perhaps the size of a suitcase." "It would have been traveling at anything from 10 to 50 miles per second," he said, "It certainly is a very rare event. A meteor bright enough to be seen in Scotland during daylight has not been seen for some time." The UK's Ministry of Defence stated that the object was not a meteor but was actually an old Soviet (Russian) satellite, Cosmos 2343, buring up as it plunged through Earth's atmosphere. However, according to British ufologist Graham W. Birdsall, the senior operations chief at RAF Fylingdales, Squadron Leader Paul Raymond, said, "The Ministry of Defence are saying that the object was Cosmos 2343, but we can't categorically say that this is the case." Birdsall also spoke to sources at RAF Boulmer, who reportedly claimed that their squadrons had been placed on alert the evening of Monday, September 22. No "stand down" order was received by RAF Boulmer until 9 to 10 a.m. on Tuesday, September 23. Also, a Rescue Service lifeboat crew reported seeing an array of "bright lights going into the sea" that night. (Many thanks to Graham W. Birdsall for this story.) NEW WITNESS APPEARS IN BRAZIL'S VARGINHA CASE During August, ufologist Bob Pratt flew to Brazil and met with Cynthia Luce of MUFON to further investigate the Varginha case. On January 20, 1996, a UFO crashed near Varginha (population 120,000) in the state of Minas Gerais. Seven aliens reportedly survived the crash and were rounded up by troops of Brazil's Servico Inteligencia do Exercito, (Army Intelligence Service) better known as S-2. One alien was seen in an empty lot on the Rua Suecia in Varginha's Jardim Andere section by three young women, Liliane Fatima da Silva, her sister Valquiria Fatima da Silva and Katia Andrade on their way home from work. Pratt and Luce investigated the story of another witness, a man named Carlos Sousa, who claims to have witnessed a saucer crash in Tres Coracoes, 25 kilometers (15 miles) southeast of Varginha, one week before the Varginha crash. On January 13, 1996, Sousa "was driving north from Sao Paulo on the highway to Belo Horizonte (capital of Minas Gerais state--J.T.) About 8 a.m., he was 5 kilometers (3 miles) south of the Tres Coracoes/Vargniha highway intersection when he heard a strange noise." "He thought something was wrong with his pickup truck and stopped. When he got out, he realized that the noise was coming from a cigar- shaped craft about 120 meters (336 feet) in the air and off to the left side of the highway. It had windows along the side and what appeared to be a jagged hole in the front, a long 'crack' running back to the middle of the craft, and smoke or vapor coming out of the 'crack.' It was moving along to the north." "Sousa jumped in his pickup and followed the UFO. It crossed over to the right (east) side of the highway, then went into a steep dive and disappeared. Sousa thought it had crashed and desperately searched for a road that would lead to the area. After 20 or 30 minutes, he found a dirt road and turned onto it." Minutes later, Souza drove over the crest of a hill and spotted a debris field spread out over "a wide area, as well as about 40 armed soldiers, two trucks, a helicopter, an ambulance and several cars." "Sousa stopped and was able to pick up a piece of very light material, that floated to the ground as he dropped it. But soldiers with rifles rushed toward him and ordered him to leave." Later, at a roadside restaurant on the way back to Sao Paulo, Sousa was questioned by two men who "knew his name and everything about him." He was ordered to forget all about what he had seen in that farm field. (Many thanks to Bob Pratt for letting UFO ROUNDUP quote from his very detailed report.) BLACK HELICOPTERS SEEN IN THREE STATES More black helicopter sightings were reported recently, with incidents in Michigan, Rhode Island, Arizona and Puerto Rico. On Saturday, September 13, 1997, a Michigan man "while driving up to Ann Arbor" (population 107,316), a city 38 miles (61 kilometers) west of Detroit, "saw three black unmarked helicopters" carrying equipment "which could have been weapons. They were flying in perfect formation over U.S. (Highway) 23. They flew right over the road, and then they went in different directions. They were out of sight within a few seconds." (Email Interview) On Saturday, September 27, 1997, at 1 p.m., Giles and Stella Mousseau of North Smithfield, Rhode Island (population 8,500), about 15 miles (25 kilometers) northwest of Providence, looked out their window and "saw a black military helicopter with no markings flying around the neighborhood." The chopper flew back and forth for 30 minutes at low level, occasionally hovering "and slowly zigzagging, like it was looking for something." At 1:30 p.m., Mrs. Mousseau called her daughter in Wickford, R.I. and reported the strange incident. (Email Interview) On Monday, September 29, 1997, at 1:10 a.m., at an undisclosed location in Puerto Rico, "a helicopter was seen of a black color, flying over an area where two UFOs had appeared. The helicopter was at a low altitude and flew around for five minutes." (USENET Item) Recently, while driving to Payson, Arizona (population 5,068), veteran ufologist Clark Hathaway and his wife, Julia, had a black helicopter encounter. Formerly a resident of Sacramento, California, Hathaway moved to New Mexico in 1996 and formed the Four States UFO Group in Farmington, N.M. The Hathaways were driving on Arizona Highway 87, near the town of Sunflower, when Clark "noticed approaching what I thought was a highway patrol helicopter. As it drew closer, however, I could see in silhouette the rocket pods carried under the winglets. The gunship was flying no more than 150 feet (45 meters) above the strip of desert between the double lanes of the highway." "Julia exlaimed, 'That IS a black helicopter!'" "I at first uttered a short unprintable but soon we started to realize that it was indeed a black gunship with NO visible markings. By that time it had drifted to the left...I immediately wondered where the thing was headed and where its base of operations was." (Many thanks to Clark Hathaway for this report.) ON THE BOOKSTANDS: Scott Corrales's book, CHUPACABRAS AND OTHER MYSTERIES is out, and it's well worth the price. Not only does Scott update us on the Chupacabra incidents of 1996, he provides a great summary of Latin America's most important UFO sightings of recent years. This is a book that belongs in every ufologist's library. It's available for $19.95 at Greenleaf Publications, P.O. Box 8152, Murfreesboro, Tennessee USA 37133. Preston Dennett's ONE IN FORTY - THE UFO EPIDEMIC is also on sale. The book contains dozens of true accounts of UFO close encounters. The book costs $19.50, plus shipping and handling, and can be ordered from Kroshka Books, 8080 Jericho Turnpike, Suite 207, Commack, New York USA 11725 from the UFO Files... 1954: FRANCE'S LONGEST DAY Forty-three years ago, on October 2, 1954, a wave of UFOs invaded France. Here's the summary... "The French government meteorological station at Morvan saw an oval-shaped craft going at amazing speed, 3,000 feet up." "Cigar-shaped objects were seen at Coulommiers, sixty miles south of Paris, and police photographed marks left by a strange mushroom-shaped object." "Mme. Simone Geoffroy of Diges, a hundred miles south of Paris, said, 'I saw a curious engine like a cigar pointed at both ends in a field.'" "At Blanzy (Saone-et-Loire department), two men saw a cigar-shaped thing in a freshly plowed field. It was about six feet long with a pointed metal terminal. As they approached, the fusiform object rose into the sky vertically." "Over the beach at Carry-le-Rouet, three women saw 'a half-cigar in the sky, throwing out smoke.'" "Over Les Invalides airport in Paris, actress Michele Morgan saw a glowing disk." (See FLYING SAUCERS UNCENSORED by Harold T. Wilkins, Pyramid Books, 1967, pages 56 and 57.) (Editor's Note: Michele Morgan starred with Jack Haley and Gloria DeHaven in the 1943 movie "Higher and Higher." Which, incidentally, was Frank Sinatra's first film.) That's it for this week. Join us next week for more saucer news from "the paper that goes home-- UFO ROUNDUP." See you then! UFO ROUNDUP: Copyright 1997 by Masinaigan Productions, all rights reserved. Readers may post news items from UFO ROUNDUP on their websites or in newsgroups provided that they credit the newsletter and its editor by name and list the date of issue in which the item first appeared.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 5 Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words From: c549597@showme.missouri.edu [Barbara Becker] Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 14:47:29 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 22:28:16 -0400 Subject: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words In a previous post, Cathy Johnson asked: " Can I ask how a poleroid camera be made to double expose any of its film? I have a rather lengthy but I think interesting reply. Ed used what was called a "Point and Shoot" camera. It was a Polaroid Colorpak, popular in the 1970s. Unlike todays Polaroids that eject the film after it is taken, a photogrpah taken with the Colorpak remained inside the camera until it was pulled out. Pulling the photo out of the camera started the development process which basically ended when the backing was pulled from the film strip. The fact that the film stayed in the camera until removed made double or triple exposures effortless. It was an easy camera to use. It had few adjustments and exposure times were automatic. Light levels were read by the photoelectric cell, which determined the correct exposure times for exisitng conditions. In July of 1991 I queried Walters about the camera. He replied: (postmark July 15, 1991) "Too bad you have no idea what you are talking about - try it with a 108 colorpak. Signed Ed. (He then added) The 17 year old 'elec eye' does not work." July 18,1991 I replied. "Too bad the electronic eye was broken. Did it break with the shutters open or closed?" (postmark July 20,1991) Ed Walters: "Its fine now -just had to be cleaned. But keep in mind the manual shutter is what operates the camera after darkness." I wrote him one more time and he did not repsond. This basically ended our correspondence. COMMENT: First, on July 15, 1991 the "eye" is broken, but by the 20th it is fixed? I suppose it is possible but it seems highly improbable. It just seems odd to me. I called Polaroid and talked to Harro Limbo. Seems that the Polaroid Colorpak had a double shutter system and without a functioning "eye" the shutters would stay in whatever position they were in when it quit working. That would totally disable the camera. But Walters said, "its the manual shutter that operates the camera after dark." There is no manual shutter in that camera. If Walters had a "manual shutter" it was because of some odd malfunction in Walters' camera. Because of this fluke, Walters had more control over the exposure times than someone with a correctly working Colorpak. This would allow even more flexibility in creating multiple exposures. I did learn something else very interesting is talking with Mr. Limbo. For those of you not familiar with GBS or Mr. Limbo... In Walters' book GBS on the Acknowledgments page, (page 7) Walters says: "Authentication of the photographic evidence required the expertise of the professionals and others like Harro Limbo, a technical expert with Polaroid Corporation..." What exactly does that say? How do YOU read that? Do you read that Harro Limbo authenticated the photographs? Gee, doesnt that make you think they are real? Afterall POLAROID AUTHENTICATED THEM right? Wrong. Well what it REALLY says is: "Authentication ... REQUIRED the expertise of... Harro Limbo. It never says Limbo authenticated the photos. And before you start yelling...I just want everyone who reads this to know that HARRO LIMBO NEVER SAW ED WALTERS PHOTOGRAPHS. In calling Polaroid, I spoke many times with Limbo and I was totally shocked the first time we spoke to learn that he had never seen them muchless "authenticated" them. And he continued, even if he had seen the photos the opnly thing he could have authenticated was that they were a Polaroid film product. I encouraged him to contact Walters and the publisher but he declined saying that he felt the whole thing would eventually blow over. Please tell me how can Ed Walters photograpahs be taken seriously when even what he writes is deceiving? BB
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 5 Re: Solved Abduction cases? From: ej77@dial.pipex.com (Mike Wootten) Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 20:30:21 GMT Fwd Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 22:33:33 -0400 Subject: Re: Solved Abduction cases? >>From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@cc.UManitoba.CA> >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Solved Abduction cases? >>To: updates@globalserve.net (UFO UpDates - Toronto) >>Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 15:56:57 -0500 (CDT) >>> From: nick@emailme.at.address.below (Nick Humphries) >>> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >>> Subject: Solved Abduction cases? >>> Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 16:31:02 GMT >To summarize, you've found that other explainations have been: >1) Drug-induced hallucination >2) Date-rape trauma, initially misidentified as an abduction >3) (Hard to summarize this reason, but I'll have a go:) Someone >who was easily impressionable beleived they were abducted after >reading similar stories of abductees. One category has been missed in my view, ie: False memory induced by an investigator or hypnotist during a 'regression' where the witness did not have prior concious knowledge of an abduction. The will to find an abduction in a witness is so strong and the witness' state of conciousness during hypnosis is such that it lends to easy suggestion, I am sure this category equates to many cases. Views? Mike Wootten
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 5 Re: Passing of Dr. Bruce DePalma From: Skye Turell <turel33@west.net> Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 13:53:34 -0700 Fwd Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 22:34:53 -0400 Subject: Re: Passing of Dr. Bruce DePalma I've just been informed of the passing of Dr. Bruce DePalma, one of the great minds of our time. This is sad and disturbing news. It's a loss that will be noted and felt around the world. I had the honor of having Bruce on the program for three hours just a month ago. His brilliant work in free energy was as important as it gets, and his contribution to the awareness of the critical state of the world's environment was eloquent, urgent, and unforgettable. He has left a profoundly important legacy. - Jeff Rense Skye Turell <turel33@west.net>
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 5 Re: Witness Anonymity From: "Julianne Presson" <earthwrk@doitnow.com> Date: Sun, 5 Oct 1997 15:00:29 -0700 Fwd Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 22:48:22 -0400 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity > Date: Sun, 5 Oct 97 10:16:56 -0000 > From: pwedel <pwedel@neptune.on.ca> > To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net> > >Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity > >Sent: 10/4/97 11:50 PM > >Received: 10/5/97 9:10 AM > >From: UFO UpDates - Toronto, updates@globalserve.net > >To: Errol Bruce-Knapp, updates@globalserve.net > >From: "Julianne Presson" <earthwrk@doitnow.com> > >To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net> > >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity > >Date: Sat, 4 Oct 1997 12:50:17 -0700 > >> From: HONEYBE100@aol.com > >> Date: Sat, 4 Oct 1997 03:04:48 -0400 (EDT) > >> To: updates@globalserve.net > >> Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity > >> >Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 15:55:18 -0500 (CDT) > >> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > >> >From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net> > >> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity > >> >Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 12:17:15 -0400 > >> >From: BOB SHELL <76750.2717@compuserve.com> > >> >Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity > >> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net [..............] > Julianne Presson wrote: >>If you did not want your son's face out there you should NOT have >>allowed him to be filmed by anyone. Who is the researcher you >>allowed to film your son? >Goodness, this is distressing Julianne. Should abductee's stop trusting >researchers? Oh well, so much for one of our best resources in finding >out about this phenomenon. The witnesses themselves. Because if we follow >this line of thought you propose, I don't think too many witnesses will >feel safe and comfortable in the future coming forward with information >about one of the most important, enigmantic phenomenon in the history of >our species. Welllll.....this is about minor children. Ethical researchers do NOT use children with out protecting their identity. As for trusting researchers. What are their qualifications for doing therapy? What is their track record with clients? Have there been any complaints files or licenses revokes? These are ALL questions ANYONE seeking help should ask first before allowing hypnosis or any other type of therapy to begin. > >> My son was nine years old. In turn, this video tape was > >>given to a trusted colleague "in strict confidence" for his files, > >>or archives. I found out about two weeks ago that this video tape was > >>sold to a foreign TV show equivalent to our 20/20 or 48 hours and it > >>was also shown here in the U.S. In other words, my younger son's privacy > >>has been sold. I've successfully protected my family's identities > >>all of these years, but all in vain. I saw the tape, and there was my > >>son, full faced. > Julianne Presson wrote: >>You gave permission for your son to be filmed. I guess you will know >>better next time around. > You're right Julianne, no abductee should every go to a researcher and > give their real name, because, as you insinuate, they are sacrificing > their identity to research. Or, am I wrong, do you feel that abductee's > can trust researchers and give them their real name. Can they trust them > not to go and violate their anonymity? If said researchers are LICENSED Therapists and release ANY information on clients without getting written permission from the client there is recourse. However if you are going to a person who is not a trained therapist you have no recourse. In other words, do NOT go to a layman expecting to receive Therapy of any kind. If you do not want people to know who you are stay off the stage and videos as well as do NOT give out your real name. People who really want to protect their privacy do not stand on the tallest building blowing a horn. > Linda Cortile wrote: > >> My son is a minor!! This particular video tape should not have been > >> viewed anywhere. Now my son's little round face is out there. > Julianne Presson wrote: >>Yes your son is a minor and YOU are the "adult" who gave permission for >>him to be filmed. Sorry you are the one who is responsible here for him >>being on the film in the first place. Had you said NO he would not be on >>the video. >More distressing comments Julianne, you seem to have completely missed >the point or are just unaware of what these abductee's go through. The >tape wasn't supposed to be shown. A trust was violated. The culprate is >not Ms. Cortile. The villian is the researcher, the villain is people >like you who seem to support such behaviour. If I follow your words >correctly, if Linda went to a researcher in trust, and had one of her >children filmed (in trust), then she _should_ expect that film to be >posted in the media???????????? Linda is the adult responsible for the safety of her child. The researchers actions were unethical. However that does NOT leave the mother harmless. We see this all the time, with unethical researchers (people calling themselves researchers). Yes Linda "should" have been able to trust the researcher, and she should have gotten something in writing. However..."shoulda autta, notta, gotta" does not get it. As for me supporting unethical behavior, NOT... I AM the first one out of the gate when I see unethical behavior in a so-called professional and NON-professionals doing Therapy. > ******************************** > WHAT'S WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE JULIANNE? > ******************************** Your view that is what is wrong. Stop enabling... > Linda Cortile wrote: >>>Am I unhappy, Dennis? No. I'm furious and I will get to the bottom >>>of this disgusting event. And when I do, a lot of heads are going to >>roll. It's one thing for an adult to fight for his/her privacy, but when >>this happens to a child, especially mine, it's a different matter. > Julianne Presson wrote: > >Oh PLEASE.....get out of the "victim role" for a minute and ask yourself > >why you would allow ANYONE involved with abduction research to film YOUR > >minor child??? > Why do you think she was approaching researchers Julianne? Do you have > any idea what happens to a person, a persons family, when this phenomenon > visits them? Do you have any idea the importance an abductee will > feel,(and a responsilbity to their fellow humans), to investigate and > find the truth. When one needs therapy they go to a REAL therapist. Why do you feel an abductee would "feel Important"? Why would they be any more special than anyone else? That is exactly the problem my friend, abductees are no more important than anyone else and they have NO corner on KNOWING because of abduction experiences. I live with a abductee and we have had visitations. The point is the woman talks the talk but does not walk the walk. If you do not want to be identified you do not "GO PUBLIC". > Please do not suggest the pursuit of fame and adoring fans. All these >people (abductee's) seem to ever get (from a segment of the community) is >grief, condescencion, and rudeness posted at them. Some of us make them >feel like they should never come forward... Look, I have seen repeated flames to people like Peter Brookesmith from this woman in this List. Are you saying she has a right to flame others here and tell them off but no one should call her on her behavior because she is a abductee? NOT, that is SICK behavior. Stop enabling "victimhood" in abductees. Life goes on, even for abductees. They can choose to Heal or they can run all over the Internet BLAMING everyone else for their mental state. If LInda is NOT looking for attention then why does she get up on stage and talk and why did she allow any filming of herself or any member of her family by anyone? Video is NOT requires, a statement and shots of the helmet would have worked as well for research. > Julianne Presson wrote: >>YES and Budd Hopkins brings in his share of that money for himself. >>Sorry Hopkins is NO Saint. Why people would allow someone who uses >>the faulty hypnosis modality he uses on them or their kids is beyond >>me. I have seen him in action on Discovery Channel and he would be >>better served to spend a few years getting some education and >>practical experience. His showing pictures of grays to kids under 7 >>years old and then uses hypnosis on them that is suggestive at the >>least and invalidates any data gathered in the sessions. > We do not have to associate Linda's motives with Budd's now, do we? Or >is that required to strengthen an already weak point. She is his main show when he speaks. How can you NOT associate the two. And why are the people associated with Hopkins so leery about the truth? My points are hardly weak. >>Now have one of your temper tantrums over this message. Frankly your >>continued "horn blowing" in this List about everyone taking advantage of >>you is getting boring. This is NOT a therapy group, it is a mailing >>list. > Don't worry, Linda has a lot of friends who will not through temper >tantrums. Nor will she. But we will make note of your position in >research. We will regard your scientific ethics with the words you have >spoken here. Is this supposed to make me shut up about unethical behavior??? I guess you don't know me very well do you. :-) > I have not observed Linda do any horn blowing. I have consistently seen >her stand up in defense, not offense, if a message is posted about her. I >have not seen her post anything first that started one of these threads, >have you? What is this "Blame Shifting". Everyone else here makes Linda flame them? The best defense is NO DEFENSE. Why would she have to flame anyone who does not agree with her? What are you "The Gate Keeper" of the group. >> Your "pity pot" backed up a long time ago, it is time to get >>off of it. > Very mature Julianne. You know Julianne, I've been doing research with >the aboriginal community in my neck of the woods. Some of these people >need and require their anonymity. They have seen some remarkable and >important things. They _need_ to know that they can trust me not to >repeat their names. Some of these people are braves. If I were to violate >any of the braves anonymity (who did not wish me to), I would in short >order be without my testicles or my life, take a pick. And no one would >ever know who did it. I do not need that type of insentive to respect >common decency in another human beings desire to convey important >information, and remain anonymous. Sometimes when I read posts like this, >I think there are others that do. PLEASE....are you saying Linda should cut Peter Brookesmith's nuts off or have one of her friends do it. Your statement above has nothing to do with what we are discussing. This is NOT Indians living in the wilderness. Julianne Search for other documents from or mentioning: earthwrk | pwedel |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 5 Re: Witness Anonymity From: "Julianne Presson" <earthwrk@doitnow.com> Date: Sun, 5 Oct 1997 14:21:42 -0700 Fwd Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 23:04:13 -0400 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity > From: HONEYBE100@aol.com [Linda Cortile] > Date: Sat, 4 Oct 1997 18:54:39 -0400 (EDT) > To: updates@globalserve.net > Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity >>Subj: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity >>Date: 97-10-04 16:00:29 EDT >>From: earthwrk@doitnow.com (Julianne Presson) >>To: updates@globalserve.net (UFO UpDates - Toronto) > Julianne Presson wrote: > Major snips... I notice you are choosing NOT to address the issue of Hopkins using your real name when he speaks???? Are you saying it IS OK for Hopkins to use your name but if anyone else does they are dog meat? >>If you do not want anyone knowing who you are WHY did you use your >>real name in the first place. You did it to yourself. So stop blaming > >everyone else for your problems. The sooner you stop being the "victim" >>here the sooner you get on with life. Although there are "perks" to >>being a "victim" all the time. You do not have to take responsibility >>for ANY of your actions or the decisions you make regarding yourself or >>your minor children. >Oh, please!!! You've got to be kidding!! Your post doesn't sound as >though you're up on the details of my case and all that's surrounding it! >No, I won't bite your head off yet because you sound more like a victim >than I do! I have talked to people who have told me enough about your case to know it is FULL of holes large enough to float a Mother Ship through. Dear, I don't do "victim". Although I have heard your "act" on stage is very polished. >Let me give you a clue. I have never used my real name in the first >place. Maybe you should read up more on what's been going on. >UFO UpDates, Toronto has a good web site and they're archives are hugh. I don't need any clues, I can see the "writing on the wall" just fine, thank you. :-) >>Yes your son is a minor and YOU are the "adult" who gave permission >>for him to be filmed. Sorry you are the one who is responsible here for >>him being on the film in the first place. Had you said NO he would not >>be on the video. >I'll guess that you don't know much about research or investigations >either. Tsk tsk. Video's are commonly made of UFO's and the >witnesses. However, when a person's wish for witness anonymity is not >respected the blame goes to the blabber-mouth, not the witness. FYI, I AM a CHT and CD Counselor. I know how "proper research" is done. You learn that when you go to College. You even learn how to do it so the results are not "tainted". > >Oh PLEASE....get out of the "victim role" for a mintue and ask yourself >>why you would allow ANYONE involved with abduction research to film >>your minor child??? >Uh... pardon me? Get with it, Julianne! If I didn't get involved with >an abduction researcher, I might not have understood what was going on >with my family and me. This video was an important aspect of my case. >However, it was supposed to stay behind closed doors. Dear that still does not explain why you would allow your minor child to be taped without getting something in writing. Or you could have at least put the child behind a screen. >>Why people allow someone who uses the faulty hypnosis modality he >>uses on them or their kids is beyond me. I have seen him in action on >>Discovery Channel and he would be better served to spend a few years >>getting some education and practical experience. His showing pictures >>of grays to kids under 7 years old and then uses hypnosis on them >>that is suggestive at the least and invalidates any data gathered in the >>sessions. >In your opinion and some others, hypnosis is faulty. But not in my >opinion as far as my case is concerned. Where did you get this >information about Budd hypnotizing children? From Phil Klass? You >must have watched the NOVA programming last year. It was a sham!!! >This show was geared to make abduction research look criminal. >John Velez can elaborate more on that if he wishes to. As I have stated I AM a Hypnotherapist who was schooled at Eastern Washington University. I have never talked to or plan to talk to Phil Class. He is a "bore". He does not do honest research and neither does Hopkins. Mack, Boylan, etc. You and John can say what you like about the NOVA show but the video clips of Hopkins showing very young children drawings of grays and then using hypnosis on them which is not acceptable with a child that young tells the story. The show in no way made anyone look like criminals. It did a VERY good job at pointing out Hopkins has NO training as a therapist. People who have NO training as a therapist have NO business doing therapy. Now Hopkins may be a very nice person, but that does not make him a trained therapist. What I see with those who are doing most abduction research is an UN-natural "dependence" by the client on the researcher. 95% of female abduction experiencers suffer from what is called "Learned Helplessness" and "CO-Dependence". This is NOT from experiencing abduction, it is a "family" dysfunction. Both disorders can be traced back when a FULL Family History is done. Proper therapy is needed for these disorders for the client to become a functioning person again. >>Now have one of your temper tantrums over this message. Frankly, >>your continued "horn blowing" in this List about everyone taking advan- >>tage of you is getting boring. This is NOT a therapy group, it is a >>mailing list. >No. I won't have a temper tantrum because you aren't worth it. But >you're absolutely right. This is not a therapy group, it's a mailing >list. So, I suggest that you go and get some therapy. Here's another >suggestion, if you're bored. Don't read the "Witness Anonymity" posts, >that's all! Learn how to knitt!!! Dear, I do not do needle point or knit, maybe you should try a CO-Dependence group for starters. Then you should try taking a battery of personality inventories, and allow a Therapist to gather a COMPLETE family history. As well as going to an MD to have a complete physical to include testing for chemical imbalances in the brain and a cat scan. Then find a REAL scientist who can place some equipment in your home to indicate changes in the environment. As for as you telling me I need therapy and that I AM more a victim than you that is called "projecting" and it does not work with me. Sorry NO cigar. >Good day to you, Julianne!! (Door slams shut)! Good day to you Linda (whatever your name really is) and since you have closed the door I can expect NO reply to this message. :-) Auhhhhh SILENCE IS GOLDEN. That also must mean this list can get back to what it is intended for, instead of listening to your whining and flaming attacks on people who belong to this list. > Linda Cortile > research team. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Sure, standing up on a stage where people are "paying" to listen to you and an untrained hypnotist is hardly a research team. :-) Have you thought of contacting Bill Bell who produced Y & R about your problems, it might make a good soap. Julianne
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 5 Visits Limited for Martian Meteorite From: RSchatte@aol.com Date: Sun, 5 Oct 1997 18:59:33 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 23:06:39 -0400 Subject: Visits Limited for Martian Meteorite --------------------- Forwarded message: Subj: Visits Limited for Martian Meteorite Date: 97-10-05 12:12:59 EDT From: AOL News .c The Associated Press</I></PRE></HTML> By MICHELLE KOIDIN SPACE CENTER, Houston (AP) - The door to Room 237 has extra locks, a new alarm system and a gray sign that makes it clear what's inside: Meteorite Processing and Cosmic Dust Laboratories. The main attraction behind the door at Johnson Space Center's Building 31 is a controversial 4 1/2-billion-year-old meteorite from Mars. Dubbed ALH84001, it has been there for 12 years, but oh what an announcement about possible life on Mars can do. ``It's been breathless. It's just been a yearlong race,'' said Marilyn Lindstrom, one of the curators responsible for Room 237. ``All of it's been positive. All of it's been exciting. But all of it's been exhausting.'' NASA scientists went public in August 1996 with their belief that ALH84001 contains signs of primitive life on Mars. Many of their colleagues have disputed the claim. Since the announcement, requests for a look at the rock star and pieces of it for research have intensified. So has security, with extra locks and an added alarm system. A cabinet-level Japanese official, Russian cosmonauts and the head of the European Space Agency are among 260 people who have gotten a peek at the new celebrity. The public isn't allowed into the lab. The rock, a potato-shaped, 4.2-pounder when it was discovered in Antarctica in 1984, was launched to Earth when another meteorite struck Mars 16 million years ago. Since it arrived in Houston in 1985, it has been cut into 300 pieces. The largest weighs 1.5 pounds and the smallest pieces are as tiny as a grain of sand. Half of the pieces, including the biggest one, remain in the Houston lab. Chips and slices adding up to about a tenth of the meteorite had been distributed to scientists before the announcement. Then dozens of requests came pouring in and 92 pieces totaling about 7 ounces were sent out this summer after a committee spent months figuring out which researchers should be accommodated. Lindstrom's office has been flooded with requests to see ALH84001. ``It's slowed down, thank goodness,'' she said. ``The first couple months we were wondering if we were ever going to get done with it.'' Lindstrom escorts visitors and the media into the lab. She gives them white, nylon coats and matching hats and booties and leads them into an elevator-sized air shower, where filtered air blows off dust. Once inside the main room, the meteorite is found in a stainless steel and glass cabinet. The portion that is usually on display, the second-largest, is fist-sized and gray. ``It looks so ordinary because it's mostly one mineral,'' Lindstrom said. ``In some ways it looks more boring than other meteorites. It's so blah.'' The announcement about ALH84001 has inspired people from around the world to send rocks to the lab, asking that they be analyzed in case they are meteorites. During a normal year, the lab receives 10 or so such requests. Over the last year, more than 100 have arrived. Most people get their rocks and a form letter back in the mail. ``I just got a rock from France, but it's not a meteorite,'' lab scientist Cecilia Satterwhite said. ``Most people are looking to make a quick buck. They know they're worth money. They know there's a market out there.'' There are 12 meteorites in the world that have been identified as Martian and all of them have become more valuable as a result of the announcement, Lindstrom said. Johnson Space Center has five of them. Rock ALH84001 is priceless, not only because of the NASA finding but because it is a geologic great-great-great-grandfather compared with others, Lindstrom said. ``This rock is 4 1/2-billion-years-old. That's as old as the planet. That's as old as the solar system just about,'' Lindstrom said. ``It's the very earliest thing that formed on Mars. ``You can get philosophical about that if you want to - you know, that we were supposed to find it,'' she added. ``You can play whatever kinds of mind games you want with the fact that we've got it.'' AP-NY-10-05-97 1202EDT Copyright 1997 The Associated Press. The information contained in the AP news report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or otherwise distributed without prior written authority of The Associated Press.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 5 Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words From: "Serge Salvaille" <sergesa@connectmmic.net> Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 19:12:42 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 23:10:53 -0400 Subject: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words >From: c549597@showme.missouri.edu [Barbara Becker] >Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 13:21:06 -0500 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words Dear Barbarba Becker, You wrote: > The "Hyzer Report" is copyrighted. (We all kno what THAT means > now dont we?) I must get his permission to copy it. That might > take a little time. Can someone scan this or will you accept me > typing it in? You probably know by now that I have found the appropriate info on the Net. Many thanx for the offer though. This is very nice of you. In the light of the most recent thread (!? thread ?! A DAMN CABLE!!!): "The Decline and Fall of American Ufology" what more can be said ? Let's sit back for a while and try to figure out who wants to do good and who wants to do goods. Serge Salvaille
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 5 Re: Witness Anonymity From: Peregrine Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> Date: Sun, 5 Oct 1997 20:15:28 -0400 Fwd Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 23:22:45 -0400 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity The Duke of Mendoza presents his compliments to the List. >From: HONEYBE100@aol.com [Linda Cortile] >Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 04:55:30 -0400 (EDT) >To: updates@globalserve.net >Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity >Peter Brooksmith wrote this to Jerry Clark: God damn hell, there is that E Fairy again. Didn't hit Jerry this time, but somebody out there in the dark night, on a lonesome prairie or in an Alpine village, an outback sheep station, an estaminet in Antwerp or some bordello in Calcutta, is going to be presented with an unwanted - very likely undeserved - E, courtesy of the Manhattan Contessa. Aaiiiieee! But such is life. Well, anyway: Linda said: >Oh...come off it, Peter!!!! You're just angry because I think >you're a user and a pest. and she said: >You're also annoyed because I am 'not' naive. and: > [...] I haven't replied to your posts >because I've been shunning you and I'm glad you're angry...you >deserve to feel that way. This is a pity, for it is a gladness about a vacancy. I am no more annoyed or angry than my cat Morgan C.X. Earnshaw, aka "Mr Bones", who is pushing up zeds (or zees) not 10 feet from this keyboard. How Linda can read my emotions escapes me; much as it escapes me how she could *really* have shimmied her way through the quasi-liquid molecules of her glass window and up, up and away into that big red light over her house, lo these many years ago. The world is full of mysteries. Another is quite why my feeble attempts at wit, successful or otherwise, and witty or not in my own opinion, should have bugger-all to do with whatever names Linda want to call me. But, for the record, Linda may call me a user and a pest, by all means. Be my guest. Call me any name you want, I will never deny it. You could even call me a cab. Seems to me that Linda's the one to get steam on her x-ray specs all the time. All these people supposedly making money offa her "misery", as long as we discount Budd, of course, whose blood money Linda accepted only reluctantly (I detect a contradiction here, or what Jerome neatly calls "selective outrage") and spent it all on a cavity (size prudently undisclosed) at the dentist's; so when Budd tells me Linda has "a financial interest" in the book, which an innocent wit would take to mean a percentage, I feel on the one hand that the whole of the truth is not quite being disclosed by one or the other party, and on the other a certain sympathy and understanding that Linda hopes Budd's book sells a million (or he makes a million, whichever) because we can all use the extra bob or two. Then there are all these people in Linda's personal turd file/pile, which seems to consist - by one of those magical coincidences with which her life is replete - of anyone who questions anything she says. Sundry rants. Shunning this person and that (a difficult trick to perform electronically, without saying you're doing it, which rather disposes of the force thereof), as if it were somehow important of whom Linda approves or does not. Fascinating stuff. It doesn't move the debate, such as it is, onward or upward, when the best Linda can do in response to doubting enquiries and the occasional criticism is flounce into shunnery, or tell people that if they were birds they would fly backwards, or that they're in need of therapy and should learn to knit, and so on. But it will make for a bunch of interesting footnotes in the eventual fat dossier on her case. I am left with the general impression that very little of what Linda has said in this forum is substantive - entertaining as it's been in its own special way. Not only has much of what she's said consisted of nothing more than emotionally framed opinion (abuse or approval); there are internal contradictions even in that, and one instance at least of what stinks in my nostrils as a fairy story. >From: HONEYBE100@aol.com (Linda Cortile) >Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 00:16 (EDT) >Fwd Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 08:23:59 -0400 >Subject: Re: Question for Londa Cortile <---note spoor of "I" Fairy >In 1994, at lunch-time, John sat quietly in the school cafeteria [snip] >Unknowingly [sic], a couple of casting directors walked through the >lunchroom (with mother superior's permission, of course). [snip] >these casting directors were on a national search for new children >to play in a movie entitled, "Two Bits," starring Al Pacino. >I'm proud to say that my pretty boy, John, was chosen to play a >small role in the movie. [snip] John's role was for him to yell >out: "YOU ROOFED IT!" How very improbable. First, we are hereby invited to believe that a Mother Superior gives permission to two adults who claim to be casting directors to swan through her school, without prior permission from or knowledge of the *parents*, looking for pretty children. To do this in an era in which paedophilia is the most fashionable sin, Mother Superior must be mad. (All right, perhaps she is.) Second, the movie actually credits one casting director, Glen(n?) Daniels. By a truly amazing coincidence, another of those with which Linda's life is so liberally adorned, Daniels is deceased, dead, a stiff, in short, an ex-human being. As unreachable as all those, er, "witnesses" of her famous "abduction". This is inconvenient for investigators so heretical as to want to check the story, but perhaps no more than a fortunate accident for Linda. Third, Daniels and his (I'll assume Daniels is male) phantom sidekick would be flying in the face of years of experience, standard industry practice, and very probably the movie's accountants in finding his extras in this way. He'd also piss off mightily the very people he had been working with for years and might reasonably expect to work with again. How so? The system works like this. Daniels wants a pretty boy for a bit part in his movie, which is set in New York. He doesn't go on a nationwide tour at vast expense to the budget, peering into schools and playgrounds and running the risk of being sued or arrested or at best told to piss off quick. And anyway why go to Open Thighs, Indiana and Merkin, Oregon when there are all those budding little actors in Noo Yoik with the appropriate local accent. Who have agents. Who have fax machines. So Daniels sends out some faxes and probably gets composites and CVs back and holds interviews and auditions or looks at showreels or just possibly does a screen test or two and finally casts Pretty Jon N in his part. Daniels would be a fool to go outside the agency system for obvious political and diplomatic reasons. Especially for a coveted speaking part. All of which - especially the speaking part - suggests that pretty Jon N has an agent and perhaps has some acting experience, which in turn makes thespian training at least a likelihood. However, there is another possible way Daniels might indeed have found and hired Jon in school. That would obtain if the school were an acting school, and of course if it is then the line about Jon having no drama training &c would *really* be spoilt. If I were a bookmaker taking bets on how Johnny got his part, I'd be giving much shorter odds on some combination of the above possibilities than on Linda's version. And Bayesian logic tells us that if Linda is not telling the truth in this instance, doubt is cast on everything else she has said. If Linda is not quite telling the whole truth here, one ostensibly reasonable motive for her private cover-up would be that she is, as she tells us so frequently, doing nothing more than try to protect her family; why, she may say, she'll risk even her reputation for truthfulness in that cause. And elsewhere she has become highly ventilated about Johnny's name and face appearing on television without her permission. Linda's protestations here, as with her histrionics over the matter of her own (lack of) anonymity, contradict her actual behavior (or, perhaps, her failure to act appropriately). Linda - who, I am pleased to have her confirm, is not naive - shouldn't have gone to Albuquerque if she wanted to avoid limelight or the possibility that her cover would be broken. She certainly shouldn't have got up on that stage. Or any other, at any other time. She should have stayed at home and taken her own advice and learned how to knit. But she didn't. All else, in my view, follows from that. And as for little Johnny. If the whole dime-novel drama of the Lady of the Sands abduction is true, she could reasonably and legally have insisted that no copies of the "research tape" of Johnny identifying the "third man" be made or distributed, and that "serious researchers" (that cant!) who wanted to see it would just have to haul hairy buttock to sunny Noo Yoik and Budd's studio to do so (not that there'd be much point: Hopkins's technique in this "experiment" invalidates the result in any case). But she didn't so insist. So her protectiveness was a little lax here. And it gets much, much worse. The copy of the ("outrageous, wicked, moronic, scurrilous" &c &c) report on Linda's case by Hansen, Butler & Stefula that I have is dated 8 January 1993. The prefatory acknowledgements in "Witnessed" are dated 14 May 1996, and it's safe to assume the MS was complete by that date. So, for well over three years Linda's real name has been out on the street, and in that time had appeared in various magazines, on pictures supplied by photographic agencies, and possibly elsewhere. Nonetheless Linda appears to have raised no objections to Hopkins's speculations about "Richard" being Johnny's real father, "the product of an alien-controlled 'bonding' procedure with Linda" (p340 of the Pocket Book paperback). In other words, for 'bonding' read 'bonking', courtesy of alien panders (no wonder they have eyes like saucers). In what are perhaps the most stupefying passages in his or any book, Hopkins writes (pp336-7): "We must consider the possibility that Richard may have been the individual selected by the UFO occupants to sire little Johnny... Or can it be that some kind of genetic manipulation has occurred, a mix of some sort, and Johnny is carrying characteristics of both Richard and Steve, his putative father." It would be hard to surpass the exquisite bad taste of this, and it is difficult to imagine how either Hopkins or Linda thought that Johnny would remain unaffected or even undamaged by its publication. In 1996. When they knew Johnny's real identity and home location were, whether they liked it or not, for good reasons or bad, already available to anyone who chose to look hard enough. But then Hopkins remarks: "I am not interested in putting the issue of Johnny's parentage to a scientific test for the obvious reason of its potentially destructive effect upon the Cortile family. Here again, simple human concerns must override our need to know." Rarely have I read such a grotesque display of humbuggery, or been so nauseated. One one level, you can take all decency out of your system and contemplate a question that could be resolved scientifically, and see Hopkins, tangled in poltroonery, back away from that. But if Hopkins really believed that "simple human concerns must override our need to know", he would never have been so unspeakably crass as to raise the issue in the first place. Humbug, and sickening humbug too. Budd Hopkins is, in real life, and kept away from his hobby-horse, a decent and honorable man, it seems to me; and I would predict that if Linda had objected to this and related parts of his book he would have excised them before publication. The hypothesis is easily tested. Meanwhile it's not too illogical or irrational to assume that Linda has to take some responsibility for their appearance. In which case her declarations of unbending care and concern for her progeny ring hollow as a shaman's drum. On the matter of hypnotising children in abduction investigations (which Linda has taken leave to doubt), I may add here that Hopkins and other leading abductionists have been criticised by many -- not just skeptics -- for subjecting very young children to the technique. Some, whatever Linda may squeak, have been as young as two and half years old (I have Hopkins saying this on tape, in public, and expressed my outrage at it when reviewing his "performance" in Fortean Times in 1993). Even had it not been shown how easy it is to implant false memories in anyone - and to a child these would be especially distressing memories - this shows an astonishing degree of arrogance and callousness. Suppose Hopkins and his cronies are right, and aliens are snatching children unawares from their beds at night. What possible good can outweigh the potential harm in dragging these experiences into consciousness? And suppose they are wrong? How much less defensible could this kind of thing get? John Harney speaks for common humanity when he writes (in "Magonia" #59, April 1997): "When I was a small child I suffered from nightmares, but my parents comforted me and reassured me that the monsters in them were not real and that they were only dreams. I believe that most children are treated in this way. Imagine the effects, then, of making it plain to children that not only are the dream-creatures real, but that there is no escape from them. Such an approach hardly seems therapeutic, to put it mildly, but this is the line taken by Hopkins and company. If they can persuade intelligent and more or less sane adults to believe such nonsense, the long-term effects on children hardly bear thinking about." Indeed they don't. I'd call it a form of child abuse. Yours &c Peregrine, Duke of Mendoza Quite close to anger by now but not for my own sake
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 5 Re: Solved abduction cases? From: DevereuxP@aol.com Date: Sun, 5 Oct 1997 20:17:49 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 23:26:17 -0400 Subject: Re: Solved abduction cases? Hello List, I've been travelling considerably and on a non-stop schedule since I returned, so I am owing responses since way back to some members of the List, for which I apologise and which I'll deal with as soon as I can. But this one can be answered relatively quickly. Nick Humphries asked: >From: nick@emailme.at.address.below (Nick Humphries) >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Solved Abduction cases? >Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 16:31:02 GMT >Here's something I've been wondering about for a while now and >think some of you may be able to help me with: > Have any abduction cases been solved - that is, found to have >another explanation other than ET intervention? > And if not, why not? The answer is yes. Probably many, as other List members have already indicated -- depending on one's terminology (and how far one wants to move the goalposts). You'll find a description of the unravelling of a two-witness abduction case in the forthcoming UFOs and UFOLOGY book by myself and Brookesmith (out in UK: November 1997, Blandford Press; out in US: spring 1998, Facts on File). I don't think it has entered the general UFO literature before. The remarkable thing about this case, is the amount of time and dedication and knowledge the investigator had to have to solve it. That may explain why so many abduction reports remain unchallenged as literal events (I'm NOT saying that the *experiences* need not be real). Dennis Stacy wrote: >Date: Sat, 4 Oct 1997 13:25:31 -0500 (CDT) >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net> [Dennis Stacy] >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Solved Abduction cases? >There's an Australian abduction case --maybe someone, Chris R., >can supply a citation -- in which a woman, I believe, claimed to >be being abducted while, at the time, she was actually sitting >in a car seat next to one of the investigators. Seems unlikely >ET was invovled in that one! <snip> That was the case involving Maureen Puddy. Again, had not that case been followed up in a dedicated manner, *and while the reported series of abductions were taking place*, it probably would remain an unchallenged literal UFO abduction. The rest of what Dennis had to say was superb, a real breath of fresh air from North America on these matters. Again, this sort of discussion is engaged in some depth in UFOs & UFOLOGY. I do hope literalist ufologists will read it with open minds - there is no debunking, but an honest debate and an urging for us to at least peer outside of the automatic ETH paradigm. There are multiple other ways of looking at the kind of reports that make up what we call "ufology". Chris Rutowski also sent in a reasonably balanced posting on this issue: >From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@cc.UManitoba.CA> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Solved Abduction cases? >To: updates@globalserve.net (UFO UpDates - Toronto) >Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 15:56:57 -0500 (CDT) >Boy, have *you* opened a can of worms. >The short answer is, "It depends who you talk to." The long >answer is yes, with some qualifications.. . <snip> I remain puzzled, though, how he can even guess that maybe 5 percent of abuction reports are real, when he himself says he can't distinguish them from mental phenomena explanations: <snip>. . .my *guess* is that the percentage of "real" to "not-real" >abductions is probably of the same order as that of UFOs to IFOs: >about 5%. The trouble is, I don't see an easy way to separate >the wheat from the chaff...<snip> One must I assume, I take it, that Chris simply accepts, with a kind of intellectual reflex, that there has to be a literal explanation somewhere for some UFO abductions? I have always suspected that Chris was a closet ETHer (closet perhaps even to himself), and this would seem to confirm that view. Unless, of course, Chris can explain just what he did mean. And finally, for this posting, Jerry Clark, someone I have enormous respect for, chipped in his two-pennyworth on a related topic: >From: clark@canby.mn.frontiercomm.net [Jerome Clark] >Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 11:32:01 PDT >To: updates@globalserve.net >Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Questions for abductees He takes the venerable Duke of Mendoza (30 Sep 1997 - "Questions for Abductees")to task: >Does anybody, including yourself, know the meaning of the phrase >"the folklore that calls itself `abduction research'"? All of >us, including the undersigned (as you kindly reminded me >recently), are capable of writing (and thinking) in haste, and > I daresay you are doing so here. There is folklore about >abductions, but the experience of abduction is not "folklore," >as you yourself imply when you suggest that "abnormal psychology" >is the be-all and end-all of the question. You are too intellectually >sophisticated, I should think, to use "folklore" and "nonsense" >as if the two were interchangeable, for another thing. Labeling >"abduction research," whatever else can be said against or for >it, "folklore" is to mischaracterize the nature of both, or to >find meanings for these words not immediately apparent to the >rest of us. All you are saying, I guess, is that you don't like >people to research abductions and come to conclusions about them >you don't like. <snip> The last sentence reveals that Jerry is in his hot-under-the-collar mode, and we all know, despite his scholarship, intelligence and erudition, that the ETH paradigm has Jerry firmly caught by the short and curlies. Jerry is trying to fabricate friction. The Duke was clearly referring to how abduction research, especially in North America, has attracted its own themes, sub-themes, beliefs (many simply assumed), protagonists, etc. All the stuff of folklore. What I read the goodly Duke as saying is that the activity of abduction research is a study in its own right. He didn't say that abduction experiences in and of themselves were folklore. I also didn't see him say that "abnormal psychology" was the be-all and end-all. What I did see him do was to carefully qualify the term with "so-unhelpfully-called". Once upon a time, Jerry didn't accept the ETH, but now (I would say under the pressure of the intellectual ufological environment in which he is immersed in the USA)he does. Once upon a time, Jerry didn't seem at all impressed by abduction reports. Now, he seems to be softening (I'd say for the same reasons). In the way Jerry now doesn't credit contactee claims of early ufology, I just hope he and I live long enough for him to be able to look back and come to the same, if tragically belated, conclusion about today's "abduction scenario". I must stress that I think the abduction experience is real in many cases, and of tremendous importance. But I feel we can learn more about it by not tunnel-visioning ourselves into just abduction reports. We are SO ignorant about the realms of the mind, of the range of conscious experience, that we really do need to explore "abnormal psychology" and study a wide base of literature and conduct practical experiments. (That is what I and colleagues are doing with lucid dreaming right now, and the much slagged-off Persinger is doing important mind-altering investigations too.) Numerous researchers in various fields are all supplying important and highly germane information that needs putting together before any of us plump for an ET literalist answer. This is not "medicalizing" the matter, as you suggested elsewhere in your posting, Jerry -- a crude, knee-jerk attitude if I may say so. And it is far from being a be-all and end-all -- good lord Jerry, we are all so ignorant in this whole business of consciousness research! It is the literalist "explanation" that has become the be-all and end-all of abduction research, surely? Dennis Stacy has listed some of the inconsistencies in the whole abduction business. Jerry, take a deep breath: doesn't it sound more like a mental phenomenon (however remarkable and important -- all of which I think it to be) than real cosmic ships taken away people at night? Really and truly? The experients themselves are being given the literalist framework in which to interpret their experiences -- that is just part of the shame and the disgrace of abduction research as it currently stands. This wheel is still very much in spin. Be careful where you stand. Paul Devereux Search for other documents from or mentioning: devereuxp | nick |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 5 Re: Witness Anonymity From: Don Ledger <dledger@istar.ca> Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 22:24:04 +0100 Fwd Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 23:29:24 -0400 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity > Date: Sun, 5 Oct 97 10:16:56 -0000 > From: pwedel <pwedel@neptune.on.ca> > To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net> > >Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity > >Sent: 10/4/97 11:50 PM > >Received: 10/5/97 9:10 AM > >From: UFO UpDates - Toronto, updates@globalserve.net > >To: Errol Bruce-Knapp, updates@globalserve.net > >From: "Julianne Presson" <earthwrk@doitnow.com> > >To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net> > >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity > >Date: Sat, 4 Oct 1997 12:50:17 -0700 > >> From: HONEYBE100@aol.com > >> Date: Sat, 4 Oct 1997 03:04:48 -0400 (EDT) > >> To: updates@globalserve.net > >> Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity > >> >Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 15:55:18 -0500 (CDT) > >> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > >> >From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net> > >> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity > >> >Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 12:17:15 -0400 > >> >From: BOB SHELL <76750.2717@compuserve.com> > >> >Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity > >> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net > >> Bob Shell wrote: > <snip> > >> Dennis Stacey wrote: > <snip> > Julianne Presson wrote: > <snip> > >If you do not want anyone knowing who you are WHY did you use your real > >name in the first place. You did it to yourself. So stop blaming everyone > >else for your problems. Everything snipped ........ Hello everyone, I have withheld comment on this thread since it started several months back because I wanted to see how it would develope even though I had my own thoughts on the matter. I have seen it develope into a lot of personality bashing with the pros and cons of witness anonymity being offered on both sides. Stanton Friedman once said, "What's in it for the witnesses?" What indeed. >From what I can gather, Linda Cortile has suffered the loss of her privacy and now it seems her son's privacy as well. She has probably suffered ridicule in her community from those who know who she is and so perhaps has her son. She won't have taken abuse from all that know of her ordeal because there are those out there that know first hand of what she has gone through and still others who will understand irregardless. And what of her husband and the rest of her family? What will he husband have gone through at his workplace...one can only imagine. When I got into this business a few years back I figured I had a few things going for me that might be of some value to the study of the UFO phenomenon. I have a healthy curiosity. I have the abilty to see both sides of an argument. I have a technical background. I'm a pilot, which I figured was handy to have in a field that is chock full of aerial phenomena; and I have a code of ethics that I operate under where it pertains to the field of Ufology. It is the latter on which I choose to dwell here. First let me say that I suffer from all of the usual garbage that we humans are forced to drag around with us, such as envy, greed and jealousy etc.so don't accuse me of setting myself up in a stainless steel coat of shining amour. I am far from sainthood.<G> But maybe it was from being kicked around mentally and physically by my peers quite a bit when I was an overweight kid that I got to see first hand what it was like to be the butt of ridicule and heartless comments. But then a marvelous thing happened, in my mid teens I shed my weight and became "normal". I became part of the pack and for once I got a chance to dish it out myself...but never to people who were fat, 'cause I knew how that could hurt. Mostly I just satisfied myself at getting back at the fair sex for having dumped me so many times when I was the little porker and had more dates broken, usually over the phone, than I can remember. So my new found powers let me be the dumper instead of the dumpee. Anyway one day a blond came along and played me like Van Cliburn plays the piano and so I've been married to her for nearly 32 years. My whole point here is that other peoples feelings and how you can affect their lives is super important. All of us are aware of instances where peoples lives have been subjected to harrassment and outright murder because of their exposure to the public eye and some misguided person's need to satisfy some inner demon. John Lennon's murder, the attack on Reagan and the multible stabbing of Teresa Saldana are just a few examples. "That's not likely to happen in this field."you say. Why not? And who's to say it hasn't already. We've all heard stories of investigators in our field that died under mysterious circumstances and even the short time I have been involved in this field I have had weird calls and unexplained events happen to me that seemed to be associated with my investigations. So going into any new investigation, I offer those witnesses that I interview anonymity right up front..whether they ask for it or not. If they don't want it fine, if they do I respect that and work within those confines. I find it very objectionable that someone entrusted with a video tape allowed in confidence would turn around and sell it for what small value it might have. Linda should out the S.O.B. I know, I know.. it's a tough world out there, dog eat dog, everybody's trying to make a living...but at some one else's emotional expense? That's tabloid style folks, pure and simple. If it doesn't bother you then wait until it happens to you or worse yet, to your kid. I defy anyone then to sit on their high horse and say well, I had it coming because I dared to come forward and ask for help. Jesus people, witnesses are our stock and trade. Without them we can't investigate. If everyone clammed up where would we be, there would be no phenomenon to study. The witnesses are the phenomenon. Now having said all of the above there is one type of witness out there that really gets to me. They are the ones on the inside, whether it be government, military or private citizens that choose to honour some inside code. I'm not talking about oaths that are taken, swearing to not reveal the secrets of those institutions upon going to work or serve with them under threat of imprisonment, job loss or what have you. I'm talking about the code that comes from pride of belonging to some unit, service or organization that is sworn to protect the people who put them there, pay them and placed their trust in them but then denies those same people the right to know because "We know and we have a code that says, this is inner circle stuff and we are special, and you great unwashed out there will never know because you are just too damned simple to understand it." I've run into this more than a few times now and I'm here to tell you folks, if they slip up, I'll print it using their names. If it's somebody under oath then I'll respect their anonymity but I'll still pass on the information. In summary I guess it's fair to say that I have to come down on the side of the witnesses, giving them the benefit of the doubt and respecting their wishes, and their right to try and lead a normal life after what most often seems to be traumatic experiences where Abductions and Close Encounters are concerned. There is evidence to suggest that though more people than ever before believe that UFOs are of extraterrestrial origin and that people are being abducted by the occupants of these craft, that fewer people are coming forth with their experiences for fear of being outed and ridiculed. Let's face it, we all know of more than a few as investigators, and if we multiply them by our own numbers, there's hundreds if not thousands right there. People that will not be documented....maybe one of which has the answer. Finally though, where I feel it is the duty of each witness of a UFO sighting to come forward and have it documented, both with the designated agency and a reputable civilian agency [just to keep things on the up and up] I think that abduction cases deserve a degree of anonyimty of its own due to what can be circumstances of a highly personal nature. There are people out there that are dealing on a day to day basis with a tremendously trumatic experience "on their own" because they cannot risk coming forward even to someone they may trust for fear of this experience coming out in to the light. They do this to protect loved ones, jobs and their privacy. After seeing what happened with Honeybee, can you blame them? Next. Don Ledger Search for other documents from or mentioning: dledger | pwedel |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 5 New Jersey Arson At Iron Mountain Archive From: RGates8254@aol.com [Robert Gates] Date: Sun, 5 Oct 1997 21:51:13 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 23:38:12 -0400 Subject: New Jersey Arson At Iron Mountain Archive In a message dated 97-10-03 02:53:46 EDT, you write: > Subj: UFO UpDate: New Jersey Arson At Iron Mountain Archive > Date: 97-10-03 02:53:46 EDT > From: updates@globalserve.net (UFO UpDates - Toronto) > To: updates@globalserve.net > From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose) > To: updates@globalserve.net > Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 04:36:20 +0100 > Subject: Version Just Updated: New Jersey Arson At Iron Mountain > Just received this short comment from Tim after I told him that I had > fullfilled his request to forward his e-mail about the arson of > government archives at Iron Mountain. I'm sure he won't mind me giving > this short quote. The rest of his e-mail is about other UFO stuff: > "Thanks..... I hammered many researchers with it back then but nobody > paid any attention to it. Alot has been happening in NJ as well as > sightings and solar filming." Iron Mountain also has quite an underground storage facility besides the above ground section that was mentioned. Its the underground facility (nuclear proof) where the govt **may have stored** sensitive records. Last I heard Standard Oil and some other gigabuck corporations store their corporate records undergound there. Cheers, Robert Search for other documents from or mentioning: rgates8254 |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 6 Re: Witness Anonymity From: "Clark Hathaway" <earthwrk@doitnow.com> Date: Sun, 5 Oct 1997 23:15:31 -0700 Fwd Date: Mon, 06 Oct 1997 09:56:41 -0400 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity > From: HONEYBE100@aol.com [Linda Cortile] > Date: Sat, 4 Oct 1997 18:54:39 -0400 (EDT) > To: updates@globalserve.net > Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity > >Subj: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity > >Date: 97-10-04 16:00:29 EDT > >From: earthwrk@doitnow.com (Julianne Presson) > >To: updates@globalserve.net (UFO UpDates - Toronto) > Julianne Presson wrote: > Major snips... >>If you do not want anyone knowing who you are WHY did you use your >>real name in the first place. You did it to yourself. So stop blaming >>everyone else for your problems. The sooner you stop being the "victim" >>here the sooner you get on with life. Although there are "perks" to >>being a "victim" all the time. You do not have to take responsibility >>for ANY of your actions or the decisions you make regarding yourself or >>your minor children. > Oh, please!!! You've got to be kidding!! Your post doesn't sound as > though you're up on the details of my case and all that's surrounding it! > No, I won't bite your head off yet because you sound more like a victim > than I do! Nice REACTION! I would like to offer that it would serve you better to practice response rather than reaction. Reaction is typical of the actions observed in my fellow experiencers over the years. I AM not going to attempt to speak for Julie, but I AM familiar enough with your case to have some particular suspicions myself as to certain circumstances. > Let me give you a clue. I have never used my real name in the first place. > Maybe you should read up more on what's been going on. UFO UpDates, > Toronto has a good web site and they're archives are hugh. Now let me give you a clue. It wasn't enough for me to sit in a so-called CE-IV group 'support' meeting month after month, being surrounded by a din of whining about being a 'victim' and observing a wannabe guru in the midst of the creation of a modern myth. I don't understand the rational of being on a national TV show and not using one's own name. I mean really. >>Yes your son is a minor and YOU are the "adult" who gave permission >>for him to be filmed. Sorry you are the one who is responsible here for >>him being on the film in the first place. Had you said NO he would not >>be on the video. > I'll guess that you don't know much about research or investigations > either. Tsk tsk. Video's are commonly made of UFO's and the witnesses. > However, when a person's wish for witness anonymity is not respected the > blame goes to the blabber-mouth, not the witness. Quite the contrary miss Linda or whatever your name is. Julianne IS a researcher and an honest one at that. She makes an attempt to take a look at all of the data. Not only that, but Julie HAS experienced along with me some rather extreme visitations since early 1995. After leaving the Sacramento area in spring of 1996, they stopped. Although these did not result in either of us being abducted, the events had most of the 'trappings' most often associated with abduction experiences. Be that as it may, your above rhetoric speaks to the fact that most 'abductees' dislike and even flat refuse to take responsibility for their own actions. Once they learn to begin to, some real progress can be measured. I AM speaking from personal experience. >>Oh PLEASE....get out of the "victim role" for a mintue and ask yourself >>why you would allow ANYONE involved with abduction research to film >>your minor child??? > Uh... pardon me? Get with it, Julianne! If I didn't get involved with an > abduction researcher, I might not have understood what was going on > with my family and me. This video was an important aspect of my case. > However, it was supposed to stay behind closed doors. Guess what sweetie, you still don't understand what has happened to you. All you have is a piece of the myth created by Mr. Hopkin's and various other so-called researchers all of whom base their conjecture on only part of the data available to them. Those who do make an attempt to use all of the available data unfortunately do not possess the necessary requirements for the most part to correctly evaluate it. Only two researchers of note have made any kind of an approach top understanding what is really occurring in so far as abduction phenomena is concerned. These two are the author John Keel and the other would be Dr. Jacques Vallee. What makes these two gentlemen different from the adherents of the 'nuts and bolts' crowd, is that each is obviously somewhat knowledgeable in Metaphysics as well as UFOs. Please note that neither is an abduction researcher. >>Why people allow someone who uses the faulty hypnosis modality he >>uses on them or their kids is beyond me. I have seen him in action on >Discovery Channel and he would be better served to spend a few years >>getting some education and practical experience. His showing pictures >>of grays to kids under 7 years old and then uses hypnosis on them >>that is suggestive at the least and invalidates any data gathered in the >>sessions. >In your opinion and some others, hypnosis is faulty. But not in my opinion > as far as my case is concerned. Where did you get this information about > Budd hypnotizing children? From Phil Klass? You must have watched the > NOVA programming last year. It was a sham!!! This show was geared > to make abduction research look criminal. John Velez can elaborate more on > that if he wishes to. Phil Klass IMO, is NOT an honest researcher. Anything he has to say on this subject has no merit as far as I AM concerned and is ignored. As far as I have been able to ascertain, Julie does not consider Hypnosis as such as being inherently faulty, but rather some amateur practitioner's methodology or lack thereof as the case(s) may be. It is a valid and valuable tool in competent as well as ethical hands. >>Now have one of your temper tantrums over this message. Frankly, >>your continued "horn blowing" in this List about everyone taking advan- >>tage of you is getting boring. This is NOT a therapy group, it is a >>mailing list. > No. I won't have a temper tantrum because you aren't worth it. But > you're absolutely right. This is not a therapy group, it's a mailing > list. So, I suggest that you go and get some therapy. Here's another > suggestion, if you're bored. Don't read the "Witness Anonymity" posts, > that's all! Learn how to knitt!!! Linda or whoever, I AM going to give this straight from the shoulder. If you are anything like me and have at least one or more genuine experiences of the variety that falls into the realm of being called "Alien Abduction", then I would bet that you have long felt that you are here for some 'special' purpose, but perhaps have never been able to quite define what it is. You are highly intuitive and more than likely artistically inclined in some way to include music. You have perhaps always felt that you were a bit 'different' than others. You may get off on being in the spotlight as being someone special. The role of victim feeds this need. The above has been MY experience. I AM not going to tell you that you didn't experience anything or that it wasn't real. I know that if someone said that to me, they had better be prepared for a fight. What I will tell you is that it wasn't physical despite Budd Hopkins', John Mack's or anyone else's including R. Boylan's narrow Sci-Fi view of the phenomena. People being taken into a bright light through solid walls up through ceilings or even through the locked steel rear doors of a '79 Ford Van as in my case Linda, does NOT constitute an event occurring in physical reality. Rather, it would be better defined as being a psychic occurrence. It happened in the Astral plane of experience rather than on the plane of third density. That does not mean to state however, that the occurrence was not real. Far from it. In my case it was extremely real as well as terrifying. As I came to understand what had happened to me and a bit of the mechanics involved, I also came to an understanding of how I had created the circumstances that not only allowed the events to occur, but to keep them happening as well. I have reason to believe that these episodes go back to my childhood. Moreover, I do not believe that I AM alone in this boat either. I suspect that this applies to nearly every person who has undergone one or more of these experiences. > Good day to you, Julianne!! (Door slams shut)! How predictable Linda. Look Linda. Know that you ARE indeed very special! We each create our own reality and therefore are ultimately responsible for the circumstances upon the path we walk as individuals. There are few if any exceptions. I happen to suspect that you agreed long ago to fulfill a purpose during these times. It is because of this that you were targeted for these visitations and resultant interference. You may therefore, regard this as a wakeup call... a sounding of the trumpet as it were. You will either regard this message as the raving of a delusional fool, or it will serve to set you to wondering hopefully leading to the fulfillment of the true purpose for your being here ... One to which you committed to long ago as indicated if you have indeed had a genuine experience. You have been sold a bill of goods by those who perpetuated the 'abduction' event(s) and it has been innocently perpetuated by Mr. Hopkins and his colleagues. No matter how good their intentions, their efforts have neither served the experiencer's nor the general public's better interest. Ignorance of Universal Law does not constitute a valid excuse. > Linda Cortile Sincere Kindest Regards... Clarke Hathaway
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 6 Re: Randle's Response to Kent Jeffrey's 'Defection' From: "Roger R. Prokic" <rprokic@ibm.net> Date: Sun, 05 Oct 97 21:22:27 Fwd Date: Mon, 06 Oct 1997 09:47:00 -0400 Subject: Re: Randle's Response to Kent Jeffrey's 'Defection' >From: KRandle993@aol.com [Kevin Randle] >Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 15:32:32 -0400 (EDT) >To: updates@globalserve.net >Subject: New Web Site >For those interested in my response to Kent Jeffrey's >defection to the dark side, might I suggest >http://www.crystalsky.com How about posting your response here on UFO Updates... so we can read it here, and discuss it. Roger
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 6 Re: Witness Anonymity From: XianneKei@aol.com Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 03:42:29 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Mon, 06 Oct 1997 10:07:47 -0400 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity >Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 22:24:04 +0100 >From: Don Ledger <dledger@istar.ca> >To: updates@globalserve.net >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity >Everything snipped ........ >Stanton Friedman once said, "What's in it for the witnesses?" What >indeed. Depends on what the witness might want out of it. >From what I can gather, Linda Cortile has suffered the loss of her >privacy and now it seems her son's privacy as well. She has probably >suffered ridicule in her community from those who know who she is and so >perhaps has her son. She won't have taken abuse from all that know of >her ordeal because there are those out there that know first hand of >what she has gone through and still others who will understand >irregardless. And what of her husband and the rest of her family? What >will he husband have gone through at his workplace...one can only >imagine. Yes, we can imagine. We could also imagine that nothing much untoward has happened. Was Linda -- or any witness, for that matter, made aware of the possible consequences of "going public?" One must wonder about that. I had the opportunity to meet Linda, first in Austin at MUFON's annual conference, a couple of years ago, and again last year in North Carolina, at another MUFON Conference. She wasn't hiding behind sunglasses or anything and seemed perfectly willing to speak to people who came up to her with questions. One has to wonder why she would subject herself to all of this if she truly wanted her privacy. No, she didn't introduce herself as anything other than Linda Cortile. I think it's great if witnesses want to "go public" with their stories. It probably helps the witness and the audience enjoys it too. But when they serve themselves up, they shouldn't complain about the attention. I don't remember the exact quote but I remember Linda saying in North Carolina something like: "I'm ready for the skeptics." It sounded like a challenge to me. Well, here we are. [snip] >So going into any new investigation, I offer those witnesses that I >interview anonymity right up front..whether they ask for it or not. If >they don't want it fine, if they do I respect that and work within those >confines. And rightfully so. But how do you advise them about talking with the media? >I find it very objectionable that someone entrusted with a video tape >allowed in confidence would turn around and sell it for what small value >it might have. Linda should out the S.O.B. I know, I know.. it's a tough Don, how do you know that the videotape was entrusted to someone? How do you know that the person who had a copy of the videotape didn't have permission to use it? How do you know that it was sold? No one, to my knowledge has mentioned any names (other than Hopkins') and I'm not going to invoke the person's name who had a copy of the tape either. I first heard this story last week when a fellow researcher (internet impaired) called me with the story -- complete with names. I was aghast -- I didn't believe it. But rather than let this fester, I called some of the folks involved for direct information. Although, I haven't checked with everyone, it is my opinion that the videotape was not sold to anyone. If we have someone on the list who is fluent in Spanish and would like to finish interviewing someone with me, maybe we can get to the bottom of this. Email me, if you are fluent in Spanish and are located in the United States and we'll do a conference call with the people involved in this story. While I still don't have ALL the facts, I would say, that it probably wasn't prudent for this videotape to be shown anywhere, but I don't know for sure what qualifications were given when the videotape was handed over from Budd Hopkins. >world out there, dog eat dog, everybody's trying to make a living...but >at some one else's emotional expense? That's tabloid style folks, pure >and simple. If it doesn't bother you then wait until it happens to you >or worse yet, to your kid. I defy anyone then to sit on their high horse >and say well, I had it coming because I dared to come forward and ask >for help. Jesus people, witnesses are our stock and trade. Without them >we can't investigate. If everyone clammed up where would we be, there >would be no phenomenon to study. Witnesses are very important Don. I agree. But we can't stand behind promises once testimony is out of the bag. If the tapes weren't to be seen or heard by anyone else, why make them in the first place? Think about that. All throughout "Witnessed," if you have read it, Hopkins is making videotapes and claiming it is his proof to use against the skeptics. He certainly intended on showing them sometime, don'cha think? Did he NOT tell the people he was taping what he was going to be doing with this stuff? The tape of Little Johnny picking "the third man" out of a photo line-up would be pretty useless if you couldn't see Little Johnny's face as he was looking at the photos. I'm sorry that the tape ended up on a TV program -- it really doesn't seem right, but someone surely must have dislcosed to Linda, her husband Steve and Little Johnny that this COULD happen. Rebecca
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 6 Re: Witness Anonymity From: Don Allen <dona@totcon.com> Date: Mon, 06 Oct 1997 03:59:57 -0400 Fwd Date: Mon, 06 Oct 1997 10:09:22 -0400 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity At 01:07 AM 10/5/97 -0400, Linda Cortile wrote: >From: HONEYBE100@aol.com [Linda Cortile] >Date: Sat, 4 Oct 1997 18:54:39 -0400 (EDT) >To: updates@globalserve.net >Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity >>Subj: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity >>Date: 97-10-04 16:00:29 EDT >>From: earthwrk@doitnow.com (Julianne Presson) >>To: updates@globalserve.net (UFO UpDates - Toronto) <Major snips> >Let me give you a clue. I have never used my real name in the first place. >Maybe you should read up more on what's been going on. UFO UpDates, >Toronto has a good web site and they're archives are hugh. Yes, of course Julie would do well to review all of the posts on this thread. I would even extend that to perusing your original abduction account, the pissing match between Jerry Clark and George Hansen, from a few years back on your story, and the papers written by Stefula, Butler and Hansen wherein they make a pretty good case of blowing your abduction account to smithereens. >Good day to you, Julianne!! (Door slams shut)! >Linda Cortile Funny, isn't that what former UN secretary, Perez De Cuellar did to your supposed abduction account, Ms Napolitano? Slamming the door, that is, on what was claimed he witnessed. Don
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 6 Re: Witness Anonymity From: HONEYBE100@aol.com [Linda Cortile] Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 05:43:57 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Mon, 06 Oct 1997 10:16:18 -0400 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity >Date: Sun, 5 Oct 1997 20:15:28 -0400 >From: Peregrine Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> >Subject: Witness Anonymity >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> Peter wrote: >First, we are hereby invited to believe that a Mother Superior gives >permission to two adults who claim to be casting directors to swan >through her school, without prior permission from or knowledge of >the *parents*, looking for pretty children. To do this in an era in >which paedophilia is the most fashionable sin, Mother Superior must >be mad. (All right, perhaps she is). Yes. These two casting directors were given permission to swan the school cafeteria (not the whole school) looking for children to fit a role. They don't need permission from the parents. Nor have they asked permission to let the plumbers, electricians, or substitute teachers in the school. I don't know where you live, but if that's what they do in your schools (ask permission to do every little thing) because of a high rate of paedophilia, I'd move away!!! >Second, the movie actually credits one casting director, Glen (N?) >Daniels. By a truly amazing coincidence, another of those with which >Linda's life is so liberally adorned, Daniels is deceased, dead, a stiff, >in short, an ex-human being As unreachable as all those, er, "witnesses" >of her famous "abduction." This is inconvienient for investigators so >heretical as to want to check the story, but perhaps no more than a >fortunate accident for Linda. Oh God! Glenn died? Do you know how? I feel bad about that. He was a nice man. Although, Daniels was the boss, he wasn't the only casting director. There was the other casting director named Eve. They worked for "Two Bits" Productions. The movie was filmed in Philadelphia, not in New York. Since you're trying to make a liar out of me, why don't you ask me for tangable proof about the movie, etc? Are you afraid that I'll make you look silly, paranoid, or drunk? I have all the proof you need!! Just ask! If you don't believe that my case actually happened, then that's your right to an opinion. I don't really care, one way or the other! Nor do I try to convince anyone that my case has occurred. I know it's hard for some to believe. However, I know what I've experienced and that's what matters to me. I don't even know you! We have never met or spoken and yet, you're trying to make a liar out of me! Then, you become angry because I defend myself against your allegations? I don't see you sitting down for what I have dished out to you! Do you have a double standard here? Or is it because you and Budd don't get along? Yes, I've heard about that little tiff you and Budd had in the past. Tsk tsk. Do you realize that you've written 25 or more (long) paragraphs in your most recent post? That's a lot to type! And it didn't say anything! I don't know who you think you are! Apparently, you are not, who you think you are... unless you think you're Julianee Presson!!! Or, should I feel flattered that you're willing to spend all that time, thinking of me? <G> (I'm blushing). :-) I don't believe that anyone on this list is learning anything about "Witness Anonymity," outside of how disfunctional some of us are here within this UFO community. As you said in one of your previous posts, "you were trying to provoke me to reply to you." Now that I have replied, you don't like it. The same goes for "Julianne Presson." I won't reply to her posts because they're nonsensible. In fact, everytime she posts a thread, it proves how little she knows. She even thinks that Budd Hopkins works as an unlicensed therapist!! What makes matters worse, is that SHE claims to be an educated something, or other!! I hope SHE'S not a therapist!!! After all, she claims that 95% of abductee's have been abused!!! So, Julianne can write what she pleases. I'm just going to sit here, with a big bag of popcorn and let her entertain me! All UFO witnesses have a right to anonymity no matter what the circumstances are. This is what most of us believe and thank God, we're in the majority. If it weren't for the witnesses, there'd be no ufology. So far, I've only read 4 or 5 sensible posts on these "Witness Anonymity" threads. You Peter, have chosen to bring the subject up. So why aren't you writing anything about it? If you want to argue, I'll argue, but I don't think that those who spend their valuable time reading these threads want to read poop!. If they do, and if Errol doesn't mind posting, we'll continue. And Peter, this is what you should do -> Take your bottle of Scotch and have a drink with Julianne. You shouldn't be drinking alone. <G> I'm being witty! I like hot butter on my popcorn! Linda Cortile
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 6 Re: Roswell Rods Kal Korff posting - 5-14-97 From: BOB SHELL <76750.2717@compuserve.com> Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 07:41:44 -0400 Fwd Date: Mon, 06 Oct 1997 10:17:48 -0400 Subject: Re: Roswell Rods Kal Korff posting - 5-14-97 >Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 12:55:04 -0700 >From: Jose and Karen Escamilla <rods@rmi.net> >To: updates@globalserve.net >Subject: Re: Roswell Rods Kal Korff posting - 5-14-97 Gee. I thought this whole "rods" thing had died from lack of interest. Jose never did answer my questions about makes and models of video cameras used in his work, nor did he send me any videos to examine. Bob
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 6 Re: Passing of Dr. Bruce DePalma From: BOB SHELL <76750.2717@compuserve.com> Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 07:43:20 -0400 Fwd Date: Mon, 06 Oct 1997 10:18:21 -0400 Subject: Re: Passing of Dr. Bruce DePalma >Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 13:53:34 -0700 >To: updates@globalserve.net >From: Skye Turell <turel33@west.net> >Subject: Passing of DePalma What did DePalma die from? The passing of two infinite energy researchers in less than a week is disturbing. Bob
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 6 Re: Solved abduction cases? From: clark@canby.mn.frontiercomm.net [Jerome Clark] Date: Mon, 06 Oct 1997 10:38:50 PDT Fwd Date: Mon, 06 Oct 1997 13:02:09 -0400 Subject: Re: Solved abduction cases? > And finally, for this posting, Jerry Clark, someone I have enormous > respect for, chipped in his two-pennyworth on a related topic: > >From: clark@canby.mn.frontiercomm.net [Jerome Clark] > >Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 11:32:01 PDT > >To: updates@globalserve.net > >Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Questions for abductees > He takes the venerable Duke of Mendoza (30 Sep 1997 - "Questions > for Abductees")to task: > >Does anybody, including yourself, know the meaning of the phrase > >"the folklore that calls itself `abduction research'"? All of > >us, including the undersigned (as you kindly reminded me > >recently), are capable of writing (and thinking) in haste, and > > I daresay you are doing so here. There is folklore about > >abductions, but the experience of abduction is not "folklore," > >as you yourself imply when you suggest that "abnormal psychology" > >is the be-all and end-all of the question. You are too intellectually > >sophisticated, I should think, to use "folklore" and "nonsense" > >as if the two were interchangeable, for another thing. Labeling > >"abduction research," whatever else can be said against or for > >it, "folklore" is to mischaracterize the nature of both, or to > >find meanings for these words not immediately apparent to the > >rest of us. All you are saying, I guess, is that you don't like > >people to research abductions and come to conclusions about them > >you don't like. <snip> > The last sentence reveals that Jerry is in his hot-under-the-collar > mode, and we all know, despite his scholarship, intelligence and > erudition, that the ETH paradigm has Jerry firmly caught by the > short and curlies. > Jerry is trying to fabricate friction. The Duke was clearly referring > to how abduction research, especially in North America, has attracted > its own themes, sub-themes, beliefs (many simply assumed), protagonists, > etc. All the stuff of folklore. What I read the goodly Duke as saying > is that the activity of abduction research is a study in its own > right. He didn't say that abduction experiences in and of themselves > were folklore. I also didn't see him say that "abnormal psychology" > was the be-all and end-all. What I did see him do was to carefully > qualify the term with "so-unhelpfully-called". > Once upon a time, Jerry didn't accept the ETH, but now (I would > say under the pressure of the intellectual ufological environment > in which he is immersed in the USA)he does. Once upon a time, > Jerry didn't seem at all impressed by abduction reports. Now, > he seems to be softening (I'd say for the same reasons). In the > way Jerry now doesn't credit contactee claims of early ufology, I > just hope he and I live long enough for him to be able to look > back and come to the same, if tragically belated, conclusion about > today's "abduction scenario". > I must stress that I think the abduction experience is real in > many cases, and of tremendous importance. But I feel we can learn > more about it by not tunnel-visioning ourselves into just abduction > reports. We are SO ignorant about the realms of the mind, of the > range of conscious experience, that we really do need to explore > "abnormal psychology" and study a wide base of literature and > conduct practical experiments. (That is what I and colleagues > are doing with lucid dreaming right now, and the much slagged-off > Persinger is doing important mind-altering investigations too.) > Numerous researchers in various fields are all supplying important > and highly germane information that needs putting together before > any of us plump for an ET literalist answer. This is not "medicalizing" > the matter, as you suggested elsewhere in your posting, Jerry > -- a crude, knee-jerk attitude if I may say so. And it is far from > being a be-all and end-all -- good lord Jerry, we are all so ignorant > in this whole business of consciousness research! It is the literalist > "explanation" that has become the be-all and end-all of abduction > research, surely? Dennis Stacy has listed some of the inconsistencies > in the whole abduction business. Jerry, take a deep breath: doesn't > it sound more like a mental phenomenon (however remarkable and > important -- all of which I think it to be) than real cosmic ships > taken away people at night? Really and truly? The experients themselves > are being given the literalist framework in which to interpret > their experiences -- that is just part of the shame and the disgrace > of abduction research as it currently stands. > This wheel is still very much in spin. Be careful where you stand. > Paul Devereux Paul, You're in your mind-reading mode, I'm afraid, my friend. You don't know me well, so -- in defense of a not particularly persuasive argument -- you feel free to attribute personality and motivation to me. The phrase "the folklore that calls itself `abduction research'" still makes no sense, and I am surprised that you would try to defend it. In doing so, you rephrase the argument -- you'd have to, for the sake of coherence -- to recycle the usual jumble of claims, long effectively refuted by the one academically trained folklorist participating in the discussion, Eddie Bullard; see, for but one of many examples, his "Folkloric Dimensions of the UFO Phenomenon," JUFOS 3 (1991). I also see the inevitable North America bashing, a particular obsession of yours. Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't you actually live here at least part of the time? (A small, irrelevant aside: When are you going to learn to spell Chris Rutkowski's last name correctly?) Though I think you are wrong about the UFO phenomenon (though more interestingly so than most, except in the above- expressed; I trust that the full treatment in your and Peter's forthcoming book is more substantive), I respect the intellectual processes that led you to the conclusions you espouse. Anybody who knows me would find immensely hilarious the suggestion that I hold views out of some craven need to conform with fashion. I would appreciate your extending the courtesy to me of respecting my own thinking even when you disagree with it. My views (which you don't understand in any case) of the abduction phenomenon are complex and evolving. I have grave reservations about the excesses of both camps; see, for one example, my piece on John Mack (IUR, March/April 1994). Those who are interested in understanding why I have come to the particular conclusions I have about the UFO phenomenon are invited to read my UFO Encyclopedia, where the reasons, right or wrong, are laid out in full and, if you disagree, you will not be forced to bring my personality into the discussion. I find the debunking literature (which is what we're discussing here) mostly shallow and vacuous; it would never pass muster in other areas of scholarly discourse, and it does not deserve to be taken seriously until its standards improve. (Please don't now insist that I'm therefore arguing that abductions are true unless proven otherwise. Give me a break.) I see more evidence here of traditions of disbelief (as David Hufford would call them) than of traditions of scholarship. But one is allowed free rein when the target is something presumed to be both absurd and contemptible, such as the UFO experience. For a revealing survey of the logical and evidential inadequacies of alternative explanations to abduction phenomena, see Stuart Appelle's "The Abduction Experience: A Critical Evaluation of Theory and Evidence," JUFOS 6 (1995/1996). It seems to me that we needn't be frantic for conclusive answers when such manifestly are unavailable. I simply don't understand your need to bash all to whom Ultimate Truth is not so apparent as it is to you. A few abduction cases strike me as impressive and truly puzzling, and more plausibly (albeit tentatively and undogmatically) interpreted as interactions with nonhuman intelligences than as hallucinations generated by immersion in obscure folklore texts. Most abduction stories are not evidential, for all sorts of reasons, and I see no reason to believe that abductions are happening to untold millions. But there is a phenomenon here in search of an explanation. I feel perfectly comfortable as an agnostic here. Anybody who seeks to persuade me that he or she has that explanation would do well to use good arguments, which I always am happy to hear. No effort to bully -- or caricature -- me, or any of the rest of us who remain open-minded about this most difficult and contentious of subjects, into submission is going to do the job. And finally, as to the Dylan quote/paraphrase at the end of your posting: it seems to me, my friend, that you, too, ought to take heed. Jerry Clark
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 6 Re: Solved abduction cases? From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@cc.UManitoba.CA> Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 09:23:42 -0500 (CDT) Fwd Date: Mon, 06 Oct 1997 12:57:23 -0400 Subject: Re: Solved abduction cases? > From: DevereuxP@aol.com > Date: Sun, 5 Oct 1997 20:17:49 -0400 (EDT) > To: updates@globalserve.net > Subject: Solved abduction cases? > knowledge the investigator had to have to solve it. That may explain > why so many abduction reports remain unchallenged as literal events > (I'm NOT saying that the *experiences* need not be real). > The rest of what Dennis had to say was superb, a real breath of > fresh air from North America on these matters. Again, this sort Obviously, Paul, you've been smoking, but not inhaling. Much of what is being said by serious North American researchers has nothing to do with the ETH. > Chris Rutowski also sent in a reasonably balanced posting on this > issue: > >From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@cc.UManitoba.CA> Well, maybe Chris Rutkowski did, but it's that Rutowski guy who you keep referring to, here and in the Fortean Times. Good thing *I* know what I'm talking about, at least. > I remain puzzled, though, how he can even guess that maybe 5 percent > of abuction reports are real, when he himself says he can't distinguish > them from mental phenomena explanations: > <snip>. . .my *guess* is that the percentage of "real" to "not-real" > >abductions is probably of the same order as that of UFOs to IFOs: > >about 5%. The trouble is, I don't see an easy way to separate > >the wheat from the chaff...<snip> Gee, you mean just like Earth Lights? > One must I assume, I take it, that Chris simply accepts, with > a kind of intellectual reflex, that there has to be a literal > explanation somewhere for some UFO abductions? I have always suspected > that Chris was a closet ETHer (closet perhaps even to himself), > and this would seem to confirm that view. Unless, of course, Chris > can explain just what he did mean. Yes, I know you think I'm a closet ETH believer. Of course, anyone who knows me and has actually read my work knows this is not the case. Your view of me on this is obviously what renders you incapable of accepting my comments about UFOs and Earth Lights at face value. As for explaining my point in the original post, you might note the use of quotation marks around the words "real" and not-real". This is a common literary device used when the author wants to convey to the reader that the words are not to be taken literally (as defined in the Globe and Mail Style Manual). In the context of my post, I was comparing abduction cases to "ordinary" UFO reports. Since I note that a small percentage of UFO reports do not have simple explanations, my suggestion is that a small percentage of abduction cases do not have simple explanations. In neither case does the small percentage of cases automatically mean that aliens are implicated. That doesn't seem to brand me an "ETHer", does it? Oops! Sorry, I meant to note that this character named "Rutowski" is the one who must be an "ETHer" in Paul's opinion. > I must stress that I think the abduction experience is real in > many cases, and of tremendous importance. But I feel we can learn Oh? And how do *you* suggest we separate the "real" from the "not-real"? > This wheel is still very much in spin. Be careful where you stand. And the elephant is standing over you, too. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ To innocent readers of Updates: I apologize for being so abrasive in this post. I have taken a bit too much verbal abuse during the past year or so and I finally felt I had to respond in such a manner. Sorry. This caught me on a Monday morning, and I haven't had my coffee yet. Besides, Paul and Peter were the ones who labelled me "grumpy", so I have to take my name to heart sometimes. For the record: No, I am not a closet ETHer. I don't know why Paul keeps saying that, and I have no idea why he has yet to get my name right in print or online. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ We now resume our regularly-scheduled UFO UpDates posts ... -- Chris Rutkowski - rutkows@cc.umanitoba.ca (and now, also: Chris.Rutkowski@UMAlumni.mb.ca) University of Manitoba - Winnipeg, Canada
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 6 Re: Witness Anonymity From: Peregrine Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Ptr Brooksmith] Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 10:43:13 -0400 Fwd Date: Mon, 06 Oct 1997 12:58:52 -0400 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity The Duke of Mendoza presents his compliments. >From: "Julianne Presson" <earthwrk@doitnow.com> >To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity >Date: Sun, 5 Oct 1997 15:00:29 -0700 >PLEASE....are you saying Linda should cut Peter Brookesmith's >nuts off or have one of her friends do it. Fear not, Julie. I have more than one set, all larger and more powerful than the three I usually employ for daily wear. Yours &c Priapus D. Musclebound Sage, Mage & Triorch
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 6 Bruce Maccabee and UpDates From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> Date: Mon, 06 Oct 1997 21:56:15 -0400 Fwd Date: Mon, 06 Oct 1997 21:56:15 -0400 Subject: Bruce Maccabee and UpDates >Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 19:48:04 +0200 (MET DST) >X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.1.2 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Jean van Gemert <jeanvg@dds.nl> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words >>From: c549597@showme.missouri.edu [Barbara Becker] >>Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 14:47:29 -0500 >>To: updates@globalserve.net >>Subject: One pic is worth 1000 words. Eds Polaroid <snipped> > Dear all, > Sorry for having to include all the above. Bruce Maccabee has a > response to it: <snipped> Jean, If Bruce Maccabee wants to get involved in discussion here he is welcome to do so. He can subscribe to the List and do his own posting. It is not necessary for anyone to third-party for him. Errol Bruce-Knapp, Moderator, UFO UpDates - Toronto
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 6 Re: Passing of Dr. Bruce DePalma From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net> Date: Mon, 06 Oct 1997 13:08:01 -0700 Fwd Date: Mon, 06 Oct 1997 13:46:02 -0400 Subject: Re: Passing of Dr. Bruce DePalma > Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 07:43:20 -0400 > From: BOB SHELL <76750.2717@compuserve.com> > Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Passing of Dr. Bruce DePalma > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > >Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 13:53:34 -0700 > >To: updates@globalserve.net > >From: Skye Turell <turel33@west.net> > >Subject: Passing of DePalma > What did DePalma die from? The passing of two infinite energy > researchers in less than a week is disturbing. Bob, Try three in about a month. Stephan Marinov committed suicide about a month ago. DePalma died of cancer, I am told. Terry
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 6 Re: Gladness and Sadness From: dgullick@interlog.com (David Gullick) Date: Mon, 06 Oct 97 14:09:34 Fwd Date: Mon, 06 Oct 1997 21:23:14 -0400 Subject: Re: Gladness and Sadness >Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 07:28:13 -0400 >From: JJ <JJ@mail.per.to> [Jennifer Jarvis] >To: updates@globalserve.net >Subject: GLADNESS AND SADNESS Dear Ms Jarvis, >I have recently returned from an interesting summer in the United >When I was in England, I was most fortunate in having the opportun >ity of visiting many wonderful crop formations, and meeting new and >interesting people in the "fields" of "Ufology" and "cerealogy" I am sure a number of List readers would be absolutely delighted if you were to furnish some digital scans of the photographs of these formations. If required, the local MUFON could/would provide tech assistance. Some dates, locations, conditions, etc. would prove invaluable in aiding others to be so fortunate as to see and identify them also. Being neither a trained Ufologist/Cereologist nor qualified as an observer/commentator, but having visited the Avebury/Stonehenge area most summers of my adult life I have yet to see a "crop Circle". This lack of success is not without effort tho; I have spoken quite regularly with local farmers, tradesmen, drivers, publicans, etc. all of whom have never seen a "crop circle". Also, I made a special trip to see the "Julia Set" that supposedly appeared close to Stone- henge, yet there was nothing! >"golden orbs" that I had been watching and filming over Lake Ontario >were also occurring in the places that I visited in England. Each >time they appeared, they were over or near water. I was SO glad to Which bodies of water were these? Pictures, reports, how many etc.. djg
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 6 Re: Witness Anonymity From: Christopher Penrose <penrose@sfc.keio.ac.jp> Date: Tue, 7 Oct 97 03:40:30 +0900 Fwd Date: Mon, 06 Oct 1997 22:12:51 -0400 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity >From: "Clark Hathaway" <earthwrk@doitnow.com> >To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity >Date: Sun, 5 Oct 1997 23:15:31 -0700 >> From: HONEYBE100@aol.com [Linda Cortile] >> Date: Sat, 4 Oct 1997 18:54:39 -0400 (EDT) >> To: updates@globalserve.net >> Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity >Ignorance of Universal Law does not constitute a valid excuse. This is depressing. Just where exists any so-called "Universal Law" and why do you waste our bandwidth insisting that Linda adhere to it? People, the obsessive lack of civility on this list, in particular the offensive hostility that Linda Cortile is experiencing is embarassing. Please stop wasting our time and bandwidth with such vacuous dreck! Julianne, Clarke, etc., I don't know you people. However, I do know that you have some desire to be taken somewhat seriously as researchers of abduction phenomenae. I really can't take you seriously until you can show a modicom of respect for a reputed abductee, Linda Cortile, and/or actually share some useful, topical information. You make very clear instead that you are hateful baby vipers with nothing better to do than to snap your tenuous jaws. If you need to chastise Linda for what you feel is naivete on her part, or if you need to challenge her to a mud wrestling duel in Atlantic City, send her some email. Don't email the list. I have seen the "sweetie" un-repartee a few too many times this week. And Linda, you seem to enjoy the onslaught! But please, we understand your feelings about the use of your name and your child's video; I think a lawyer may be more eager to listen further at this point. "Re: Witness Anonymity" is starting to look like this week's "thread of shame" on the Area 51 mailing list. UFOlogy is showing its best face to the world. Chris penrose@sfc.keio.ac.jp
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 6 Re: Witness Anonymity From: Vince_Johnson_at_TENSOR__HSTN@ccmailsmtp.hstn.expl.pgs.com Date: Mon, 06 Oct 97 13:21:15 cst Fwd Date: Mon, 06 Oct 1997 22:40:07 -0400 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity >Date: Sat, 4 Oct 1997 06:52 EST >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto - <updates@globalserve.net> >From: HONEYBE100@aol.com (Linda Cortile) >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity >>Subj: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity >>Date: 97-10-04 16:00:29 EDT >>From: earthwrk@doitnow.com (Julianne Presson) >>To: updates@globalserve.net (UFO UpDates - Toronto) >Yes your son is a minor and YOU are the "adult" who gave permission >for him to be filmed. Sorry you are the one who is responsible here for >him being on the film in the first place. Had you said NO he would not >be on the video. >>>I'll guess that you don't know much about research or investigations >>>either. Tsk tsk. Video's are commonly made of UFO's and the >>>witnesses. >>>However, when a person's wish for witness anonymity is not respected the >>>blame goes to the blabber-mouth, not the witness. >>Oh PLEASE....get out of the "victim role" for a mintue and ask >>yourself why you would allow ANYONE involved with abduction research >>to film >your minor child??? >Uh... pardon me? Get with it, Julianne! If I didn't get involved with an >abduction researcher, I might not have understood what was going on >with my family and me. This video was an important aspect of my case. >However, it was supposed to stay behind closed doors. Hi Linda, In "Eyewitnessed," Hopkins described why he made the videotapes of you and your son -- because the case was of such historic importance that future researchers should have access to these tapes to validate your experiences. A reasonable position, in my opinion... But as I've questioned in previous posts on this subject, don't you find your experiences to be historically significant enough for you (and your son) to suffer this relatively minor invasion of privacy? Did Budd ever tell you that *nobody* would ever see these tapes? If he didn't, I just don't see why you should be so outraged over these materials becoming available to researchers for study. After all, that's why they were made. Regards, Vince
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 6 Re: Phoenix Sightings Update From: fergus@ukraine.corp.mot.com Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 14:23:19 -0500 (CDT) Fwd Date: Mon, 06 Oct 1997 22:41:49 -0400 Subject: Re: Phoenix Sightings Update > From: William.Hamilton@pcsmail.pcshs.com > Date: Tuesday, 30 September 1997 10:02am MT > To: updates@globalserve.net > Subject: Phoenix Sightings Update > PHOENIX SIGHTINGS UPDATE > I have two items of interest to those who have followed > the story on the Phoenix sightings of March 13. > 1) I have finally received the statement published in > Tucson Weekly on those A-10s from Maryland. > "Lt. Keith Shepherd, public information officer at Davis- > Monthan Air Force Base, confirms that an eight-plane squadron > of A-10 fighter-bombers from the 175th Fighter Wing, > based in Baltimore, Maryland, landed at Davis-Monthan > Air Force Base at approximately 8:30 p.m. on March 13, > returning from the Phoenix area. The Baltimore unit > was in Arizona to conduct training exercises." > and "Shepherd says an initial check at Davis-Monthan > revealed that all of the planes permanently stationed > at the Air Force base had landed before 6 p.m. on > March 13. It was a recent report from a Marana Air > National Guard unit that inspired a deeper look at > the records." (Tucson Weekly Vol. 14 No. 21 July 24-30, 1997) > When this was published in the Arizona Republic, some > facts got changed including the time of landing. This caused > some skeptics to proclaim that the videos of the Phoenix > Lights taken close to 10 p.m. that night were the > flare drops from these A-10s that had landed an hour-and-a-half > earlier! These flare drops, accomplished before 8:30 p.m. > on that night, do not account for the horizontally moving > formation of lights seen over Phoenix at around 8:30 p.m. > We are back to "unidentifieds". Sorry, Bill, I don't see that this resolves the issue. The information published in the Arizona Republic, apparently obtained by their reporter Randy Reid independently from that in the Tucson Weekly, refers to an actual flight schedule, stating: "A flight schedule from Davis-Monthan Air Force Base, shows that a squadron of planes from Operation Snowbird left at 8:15 p.m. on March 13 and returned at 10:30 p.m." "A spokesman for Luke Air Force Base confirmed that the Maryland planes were authorized to use the Barry Goldwater range from 9:30 to 10 p.m. on March 13." Since it does not seem likely that planes authorized to use the test range from 9:30 to 10:00 would have landed at 8:30, both these statements are in contradiction to the "approximately 8:30" given by the Tuscon Weekly reporters (Jim Nintzel and Julian Grajewski). I would also note that, unlike several other statements by Lt. Shepherd in the article, the 8:30 figure is not a direct quote, so reporters not familiar enough with the case to be aware of the time issue could simply have misinterpreted something he said, such as "the planes did not return until sometime after 8:15". I think we cannot make any conclusions until we get the results of your FOIA request to Davis-Monthan. It might also be prudent to file an additional request to Luke AFB about exactly when the Maryland planes were authorized to use the "Barry Goldwater" test range at Gila Bend, so as to confirm or disconfirm the 9:30 to 10:00 times. -George Fergus full text of Arizona Republic article at: http://personal.netwrx.net/xalium/chapterhouse/march13/republ5.htm full text of the Tucson Weekly article at: http://www.weeklywire.com/tw/07-24-97/curr2.htm (At least, that's where it was when I downloaded it, but either they've moved it or it's not on-line any more.)
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 6 Re: Witness Anonymity From: "Julianne Presson" <earthwrk@doitnow.com> Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 12:38:40 -0700 Fwd Date: Mon, 06 Oct 1997 22:44:01 -0400 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity > From: XianneKei@aol.com > Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 03:42:29 -0400 (EDT) > To: updates@globalserve.net > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity > >Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 22:24:04 +0100 > >From: Don Ledger <dledger@istar.ca> > >To: updates@globalserve.net > >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity > >Everything snipped ........ > >Stanton Friedman once said, "What's in it for the witnesses?" What > >indeed. > Depends on what the witness might want out of it. I have to agree with you on this. > >From what I can gather, Linda Cortile has suffered the loss of her > >privacy and now it seems her son's privacy as well. She has probably > >suffered ridicule in her community from those who know who she is and so > >perhaps has her son. She won't have taken abuse from all that know of > >her ordeal because there are those out there that know first hand of > >what she has gone through and still others who will understand > >irregardless. And what of her husband and the rest of her family? What > >will he husband have gone through at his workplace...one can only > >imagine. > Yes, we can imagine. We could also imagine that nothing much > untoward has happened. Was Linda -- or any witness, for that > matter, made aware of the possible consequences of "going > public?" One must wonder about that. I would think most people would know unless they lived in a vacuum. [.....] > While I still don't have ALL the facts, I would say, that it > probably wasn't prudent for this videotape to be shown anywhere, > but I don't know for sure what qualifications were given when the > videotape was handed over from Budd Hopkins. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Are you saying Hopkins is the one who handed over the video Linda is complaining about? Julie
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 6 Re: Solved Abduction cases? From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 23:39:11 +0100 Fwd Date: Mon, 06 Oct 1997 22:57:34 -0400 Subject: Re: Solved Abduction cases? >From: nick@emailme.at.address.below (Nick Humphries) >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Solved Abduction cases? >Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 13:06:57 GMT >>Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 20:26:48 +0100 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >>From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Solved Abduction cases? >> Hi Nick, Hi John (Scm) Hi Errol Hi All >>John Velez will probably correct me on this if I am wrong but I >>believe that it only becomes a true abduction case when ALL other >>possibilities have been ruled out. >This is correct - I'm just wondering what other explainations >have been put forward. BTW, does anyone know what the ET ratio of >abduction reports are? (i.e. 5-10% of all UFO sightings are >unexplained, what's the abduction ratio?) Hi Nick, Hi Errol, Hi All I'm afraid I don't know the ratio, the only person I know who could accurately asses that figure would be Budd Hopkins as he has probaly seen more abductees than anyone else?? As to other explanations. I had a case not too long ago of a couple. They were both "psychic" and had various "powers", but they were both definitely VERY close emotionally and physically. She could astral project at will and he always knew where she was, and could tell you two minutes before she walked into the room when she would walk into the room. Sounds wierd I know but that is they way they were. Anyway back to the case, he was a ardent ufo buff, believed nearly everthing that he read. One night he awoke he could'nt _feel_ his wife next too him, and he could'nt move a finger. he felt petrified. He can't remember if he went back to sleep or was put to slep but either way when he awoke the next time she was there next to him. I looked into this case as fully as I could and could come up with no answers until one day got the two of them to go into seperate room and give each of them seperate instructions. I asked her to astrally projet herself somewhere other than where she was and then I went into the other room and asked him to tell me when she would come into the room, he could'nt because he could'nt _feel_ her. It was then my conclusion that when he awoke in the middle of the night that she was _off_ somewhere and he then froze in fright because he could'nt _feel_ her.Its not a definite answer _but_. btw He still believes that she was abducted and she still is not so sure, after all it was him that told her she _must_ have been not visa versa. This is not meant as a definative answer but _an_ answer. There are things in the universe billions of years older than our human race. They are vast, they are timeless. If they are aware of us at all we are of no more consequence to them as ants are to us. Sean Jones http://www.tedric.demon.co.uk/ http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Zone/1745/Index.htm
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 6 Re: Solved Abduction cases? From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net> Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 17:53:20 -0500 (CDT) Fwd Date: Mon, 06 Oct 1997 23:00:44 -0400 Subject: Re: Solved Abduction cases? >Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 14:31:34 -0700 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Skye Turell <turel33@west.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Solved Abduction cases? I wrote: >>There's an Australian abduction case --maybe someone, Chris R., can supply a >>citation -- in which a woman, I believe, claimed to be being abducted while, >>at the time, she was actually sitting in a car seat next to one of the >>investigators. Seems unlikely ET was invovled in that one! Skye (I hope I've got the right respondent) wrote: >How do you know the investigator's perceptions were "unbroken?" >That there wasn't a lapse of consciousness in which the abductee >was gone? You can always step to one side of an observation and raise another objection -- in which case I should probably stop while I'm ahead (time-wise, anyway). Obviously, you missed my earlier point, so I'll reiterate it. What you're doing is "demonizing" the aliens. Not by making them "bad" (demons per se), but by ascribing one power after another to them until you've raised them to the status of all-powerful, omnipotent beings. What I tried to suggest was that you can't have it both ways. You can't continually embue them with the power to do absolutely any and everything (space travel, invisibility, etc.) while at the same time limiting them (in terms of sperm & ova extraction techniques and so on). You need to go read up on what is currently feasible in terms of terrestrial science in regard to in vitro fertilization, genetic engineering, cloning, etc., and get back to me. I don't have the time to do it for you. The easy out is to further "demonize" (see previous posts about the use of quotation marks) their alleged actions by ascribing human motives to them (which you accuse me of doing). Thus, while they can purportedly remain invisible if so desired, they also allow themselves to be routinely photographed by John Velez and others. But not to worry: John Deardorff, in his own initimable way, will have an answer for this problem as well. The point is, if the aliens were a billion years in advance of us in terms of aeronautics, they would probably be at least half that time along in terms of genetic engineering as well. >No, wait, here's one from the abduction arena: I do seem to >recall an experience of Betty Luca in which she saw herself lying >on a couch, paging through a magazine at the end of an abduction >experience, meaning that perhaps the ETs had somehow fragmented >her consciousness/body in such a way that she was two places at >once. You have only Betty's -- not the aliens' -- word that she even had such an experience in the first place, unless you can claim to have been an astralplane witness yourself to same. You might as well give us your calculations on the number of angels (or demons) that can fit on the head of a pin. >Need I remind everyone that there is much about these events that >is extremely multidimensional-seeming, and since none of us knows >much about that, we're hardly in a position to comment on what's >possible (or even likely) or not. If you're going to insist on >these events maintaining strict adherence to traditional physics, >you're in the wrong business. No, I'm not. You are. Because you insist on mystifying personal anecdotes, for which no other evidence, in most cases, -- _other than the anecdote itself, often recovered under hypnosis_ -- has been presented or confirmed, never mind the ufologists' favorite word of choice, "documented." When reason, common sense and "traditional" physics have all been thoroughly exhausted, I'll be happy to consider your particular, personal brand of multidimensional metaphysics. That exhaustion has not yet happened. The brutal truth is that it hasn't even been remotely approached, whereas you seem to think it's been tried in every instance and found wanting. >Budd Hopkins has a case, from Australia I believe, in which a >woman and her son were abducted right out of a park, "in plain >sight" of many people, including the woman's husband who was >taking her picture at the time. (It's an interesting picture, >full of red haziness.) And Linda Cortile's family has >experienced similar events. (And, no, I can't prove any of this >happened, and probably neither can Budd, so get off my case!) No, I won't get off your case. The whole point is that you can't prove it, Budd can't prove it, and even the people who took the pictures can't prove it. So what are you left with? Some faded photographs and anecdotes. I was present when Budd presented this case at a MUFON symposium and, frankly, I thought it was one of the most laughable things I'd ever seen in my life. In essence Budd said here's a case involving UFO invisibility, and to demonstrate same I'm going to show you an old snapshot in which a UFO doesn't appear! Could I sell you some land in west Texas or, failing that, a bridge in Brooklyn or San Francisco? >I raise all this because your assumption that "ET involvement >seems unlikely," is not all that certain a proposition. I guess not, although I was only referencing a single case at the time, one which you obviously knew nothing about, and, moreover, an instance of cases which you had requested list members submit. On the other hand, if the two investigators who were present at the time the woman said she was on a spaceship said she wasn't, who do you go with? I opt for the odds, which were two to one in this case. What if I had said that ET played no role in the re-election of Bill Clinton? Would you beg to differ, as "not all that certain a proposition"? >OK, but your objection is based on the assumption that line is >traveling across only the surface of one dimension. What if it >"travels" through to another space-time (or even to points >outside of space-time entirely)? Then any number of possibilities >open up. It wasn't an objection, but an observation and comment. Your observations and comments, on the other hand, are almost entirely incomprehensible. Even if they were valid, my point wouldn't have changed: why does the UFO move in a straight line from sighting to capture, examination and release in one instance, and not do so in others? >Doesn't make sense to our traditional ways of understanding >things. But obviously we're going to have to expand our thinking >a little bit. ;-) I don't want you to expand your thinking. That's the goddam problem. I just want you to think in the first place. <snip> >These people know what they are doing and they are >doing it on an *extremely large scale*. Therefore, I don't think >they are "gathering samples." They are gathering genetic >code/product, apparently for the purpose of creating a hybrid >race. Says who? And if so, why do it so crudely, having already conquered multidimensional space travel, two-places-at-once-reality and God only knows what else? You get some human DNA (assuming you hadn't already mastered the art of creating the desirable genes on your own), you engineer it just so, and you get on with your life. You don't have to keep re-abducting human males for more samples, for God's sakes! How many times do I have to say this? A good milking of a human male probably results in something like 100 million spermatozoa. Even if you want genetic diversity, there's no need to abduct the same male ever again. You've already got a hundred million of the guy, you go on to someone else. _It's the apparent necessity to repeat the same abduction scenario itself that doesn't make sense._ You might as well argue that a billion years from now, our own terrestrial scientists, despite having conquered the mysteries of quantum mechanics and faster than light space travel in the interval, will still somehow be obsessed with human sexuality in terms of sperm and ova -- and feel compelled to physically and forcefully (not to mention repeatedly) extract same -- not yet quite having figured out how to manufacture and manipulate same on their own. Believe me: If ET has been there and done that as far as space and interdimensional travel is concerned, then they've been there in terms of genetic engineering, too. In short, sober up, folks. There is nothing we could offer them -- even if we wanted to. >Why would they do that, gather such quantities/such diversity of >"samples?" Well, you don't have to go very far in our literature >to find a hint of this. Check out The Tower of Babel story. >Something, and perhaps "the language" being referred to in that >story was that of genetics, was scattered all over. There were >then "many voices." I strongly suspect the Greys are reassembling >those fragments into one cohesive code, one language. In a very >real sense, I don't think they are creating a human-Grey hybrid >race. They are creating a former human-Grey hybrid race, which >might be something else altogether. And everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Although your Tower of Babel analogy seems wholly appropriate here, I won't even ask what the difference is between a "human-Grey hybrid race" and a "former human-Grey hybrid race" because, frankly, I don't want to have to respond to same. >I can't imagine how you assume that we are further along in >genetic research and artificial insemination than the Greys are. >Unless you know a lot more about the genetic work being done by >the Greys than I do, and the difficulties therein (which I >suspect are many), then you are hardly in a position to comment >on it. >Skye Turell <turel33@west.net> So go read the terrestrial literature. Failing that, channel Zircon from Zeta Reticuli like I do (reason, common sense and traditional physics having failed me). That's why I'm in the position I'm in. You mere mortals never cease to amaze me. As a last resort, you might consider the possibility that our own genetic engineering capabilities resulted from the recovery of the Roswell crash debris. SA Sasquatch
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 6 Re: Stanton Friedman Online From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> Date: Tue, 7 Oct 1997 00:14:49 +0100 Fwd Date: Mon, 06 Oct 1997 23:02:11 -0400 Subject: Re: Stanton Friedman Online Hi Errol, Hi All We here at UK-UFO-Network Online had the very great pleasure of having Stanton Friedman as our special guest on saturday the forth of October. Since the log of the meet is extremely long, Stan was online for over two hours, a webpage with the log has been made and uploaded to one of our UK-UFO-Network members webspace. The log can be located at http://www.crowman.demon.co.uk/stanton-friedman.htm I reccomend it as a very excellent read as Stan answered many, many questions in the time that he was online. There are things in the universe billions of years older than our human race. They are vast, they are timeless. If they are aware of us at all we are of no more consequence to them as ants are to us. Sean Jones http://www.tedric.demon.co.uk/ http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Zone/1745/Index.htm
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 6 Re: Gladness and Sadness From: JJ <JJ@mail.per.to> [Jennifer Jarvis] Date: Mon, 06 Oct 1997 22:54:08 -0400 Fwd Date: Mon, 06 Oct 1997 23:12:57 -0400 Subject: Re: Gladness and Sadness >From: dgullick@interlog.com (David Gullick) >Date: Mon, 06 Oct 97 14:09:34 >To: updates@globalserve.net >Subject: Re: Gladness and Sadness > >>Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 07:28:13 -0400 >>From: JJ <JJ@mail.per.to> [Jennifer Jarvis] >>To: updates@globalserve.net >>Subject: GLADNESS AND SADNESS >Dear Ms Jarvis, >>I have recently returned from an interesting summer in the United >>When I was in England, I was most fortunate in having the opportun >>ity of visiting many wonderful crop formations, and meeting new and >>interesting people in the "fields" of "Ufology" and "cerealogy" > I am sure a number of List readers would be absolutely delighted if >you were to furnish some digital scans of the photographs of these >formations. If required, the local MUFON could/would provide tech >assistance. Some dates, locations, conditions, etc. would prove >invaluable in aiding others to be so fortunate as to see and identify >them also. > Being neither a trained Ufologist/Cereologist nor qualified as an >observer/commentator, but having visited the Avebury/Stonehenge >area most summers of my adult life I have yet to see a "crop Circle". >This lack of success is not without effort tho; I have spoken quite >regularly with local farmers, tradesmen, drivers, publicans, etc. >all of whom have never seen a "crop circle". Also, I made a special >trip to see the "Julia Set" that supposedly appeared close to Stone- >henge, yet there was nothing! >>"golden orbs" that I had been watching and filming over Lake Ontario >>were also occurring in the places that I visited in England. Each >>time they appeared, they were over or near water. I was SO glad to >Which bodies of water were these? Pictures, reports, how many etc.. >djg Hi there David!!! Thank you for your reply re. crop formations and "golden globes." Well, if you are interested in my early sorties to Lake Ontario, there are some reports that I posted in the first week of April to UFO Updates. These can also be found at http://www.cseti.org under Working Group reports - Southern Ontario. I went over to England, yet again, for the "circle season" and met up with all the gang...Ron Russell, Joe Burkes, ilyes (inside a caravan at the Torus) and Busty Taylor. I also had the pleasure of an evening with Dr. Steven Greer, and Research Assistant Ms. Shari Adamiak. It was a wonderful year. The formations were spectacular. To be in such a creation, so close to the time of production, is magical. The "beauty" near Silbury Hill, which was dubbed the "Koch Snowflake," was barely 48 hours old when I did my 35 mm stills. The poppies were happily growing within the formation, but other plants had already produced 180 degree bends in the stems. If you are interested in any copies of these prints, you are more than welcome. My "golden globes" appeared over the River Thames at Wargrave, Berkshire. There was a sighting near Sunningdale, actually over Chobham Common, just after I returned home from England. I had already had several sightings of "Golden Globes" at this location on August 4th. One "golden globe" appeared over the river estuary at Teignmouth on June 28th at 20.29 hrs. in presence of 4 witnesses, including Roy Dutton and Busty Taylor. Then, on the east coast of England, at Clacton-on-Sea, Essex, there appeared 5 golden globes, at no more than 20 degrees elevation over the Thames Estuary. My current focus, now back home, is the north shore of Lake Ontario. I continue to film there on a daily basis, and recorded some interesting submersions on the nights of September 3rd and 4th. Thank you for your interest. Very best wishes.. JJ
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 6 Re: UFO ROUNDUP Volume 2, Number 37 - Scottish From: James Easton <pulsar@compuserve.com> Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 20:27:25 -0400 Fwd Date: Mon, 06 Oct 1997 23:07:45 -0400 Subject: Re: UFO ROUNDUP Volume 2, Number 37 - Scottish Regarding... >Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 07:17:24 -0400 >From: Graham William Birdsall <106151.1150@compuserve.com> >Subject: Scottish Event Graham wrote: >This was an extremely interesting event in every sense. >Senior scientific officer Alan Pickup of the Royal Observatory in >Edinburgh said the object was almost certainly a meteor - up to the >size of a suitcase. >"It would have been travelling at anything from 10 to 50 miles a >second. It is certainly a very rare event. A meteor big enough to be >seen in Scotland during daylight has not been seen for some time," >said Mr. Pickup. >The official Ministry of Defence explanation now offered is that the >event can be put down to the re-entry of declining Cosmos 2343 - a >satellite which burned up in the atmosphere. Graham, The 24 September edition of the Scotsman newspaper - www.scotsman.com - carried a lengthy front page article on the incidents. The following extract may be of interest: Mystery of the spy that fell to Earth By Annette McCann and Bill Chisholm A Russian spy satellite was blamed last night for an outbreak of hysteria stretching from the Western Isles to the north of England. As red flaming objects rained down from the skies across Britain, the extent of the disaster was unclear. In the Borders it was said to be a plane crash; in Edinburgh it was a meteorite shower; and in Newcastle they feared aliens had landed. The sparkling objects, which were reported to disappear in the morning midst or crash to the earth's surface, had thousands reaching for the telephone as the emergency services were inundated with calls. The Home Office said last night, however, that it was the Kosmos 2343 satellite. Unofficial reports from Moscow described it as "a minor satellite" launched in May at the Russian cosmodrome in the former Soviet republic of Kazakhstan. It was blown up by the Russians last week to protect military secrets and was expected to land over Ireland and parts of Cornwall, said an expert on satellite re-entry, Alan Pickup, last night. It what was described as an "extremely unusual" incident by the Ministry of Defence, the craft was said to have disintegrated as it entered the atmosphere. In a statement issued last night, the MoD said that the early morning light show was likely to have been caused by the fragments of the satellite. "There is a lot of satellite debris in space which usually burns up on re-entry to the Earth's atmosphere but occasionally some fragments do get through. This is what we understand happened this morning", a spokesman said. "These fragments do not pose a danger to the public but as a precaution it's advisable to inform the police of any pieces that might be found". [...] Sightings of fiery bright lights and "whooshing" noises or explosions were reported to the coastguard at Stornoway and Aberdeen, the Northern Constabulary Police, and the coastguards in the north of England. At first, it was thought the lights were from a meteorite storm. The US space agency NASA was contacted early on but experts said they were not aware of any incidents involving space craft re-entry into the atmosphere. [...] According to astronomers, a meteorite shower which had not been due to reach the atmosphere until next month must have arrived early. The bright lights travelling at high speed sparked a full-scale emergency in the Borders when another woman reported a possible plane crash in Berwickshire, near the A6105 road. Louise Aitken Walker, said, "Everything was silent out on the moor, then my attention was drawn to a fiery object the size of a football descending about 300 metres from me. It completely disappeared ten feet from the ground". A RAF Sea King helicopter was scrambled from Boulmer in Northumbria. [...] A spokesman at the rescue co-ordination centre at RAF Kinloss said, "We have no idea what this could be". [...] A spokesman from the British Geological Survey in Edinburgh said they, too, were in the dark. He said, "We are checking our instruments but at the moment we have not found anything". After hours of checking data, scientists in Edinburgh said the amazing catalogue of sightings came from a "sonic event" in the skies above the Moray Firth. But staff at the Royal Observatory in Edinburgh said the cause of the sightings was likely to be a meteor. [...] A spokesman for the Ministry of Defence in London said that pieces of the satellite had not yet been recovered. He was still very confused about the incident. [End] >We have further quotes of interest, including comments made by Squ. >Leader Paul Rayfield, senior operations chief at the early warning >ballistic missile facility at RAF Fylingdales, home to the world's >most sophisticated radar, in which he states: >"The Ministry of Defence are saying the object was Cosmos 2343, but >we can't categorically say that this is the case." The story also featured on the front page of the following day's edition of the "Southern Reporter", a weekly publication which covers the Scottish Borders area. The article noted that, "The Ministry of Defence originally issued a statement saying that it was the Kosmos 2343 satellite, a Russian spy satellite...". However, yesterday (Wednesday) the ministry altered its statement and confirmed it was in fact a meteorite". Courtesy of the UK UFO Network - www.holodeck.demon.co.uk - there are a couple of comparative reports which come to mind: Source: Westmoreland Gazette - Kendal - Date: 21st July 1995 UFO mystery Mystery surrounds the sighting of a huge object seen burning up as it entered the earth's atmosphere. Kirkby Lonsdale man Derek Atkinson, 53, was returning home from a fishing trip at around 11.30pm on Saturday (July 15) when he saw a strange sight in the night sky. The self employed joiner said: "It looked like a massive shooting star or a meteorite but it was a tremendously large object with a tail of white flame. "I don't think it was a shooting star because you normally see them come down in a gradual trajectory and this lasted for a number of seconds, a lot longer than a shooting star. "It was surrounded by a massive spread of white flame and then there was a massive explosion and it disappeared behind some clouds." Mr Atkinson, who himself dismisses the idea it could have been a UFO, added: "I have never seen anything like it before but lots of people must have seen it." A spokesman for the Royal Observatory, at Edinburgh, said it was possible Mr Atkinson could have seen a satellite re-entering and burning up in the atmosphere or a larger than normal meteorite which is quite a rare sight. [End] Source: Dundee Evening Telegraph Date: 31st July 1995 In Tayside and Fife Flood of calls after reported UFO sighting The appearance of a mysterious object in the sky over Tayside and Fife has prompted many people to report sightings. Calls throughout eastern Scotland have been flooding into the Evening Telegraph ever since a Montrose woman first spotted a bright blue ball shaped glow in the sky at the weekend. She appealed for other people who saw something in the sky around midnight on Friday to report it. She believed what she saw might have been a UFO. The woman, too embarrassed to be named, explained, "Because no one else seems to have seen it, I am beginning to question my sanity. People are thinking 'crazy woman.'" Others who also witnessed the phenomenon have assured the woman she was not alone. Calls reported to the Tele have ranged from Falkland, Pittenweem, Buckhaven, Inverkeillor, Dundee, Arbroath and Kinross. Kirkcaldy bus driver David Robert, of Buchan Court, saw a yellow flash followed by a big blue flash shortly before midnight on Friday as he made his way to Pittenweem from Cupar. He said: "I've seen shooting stars before, but this was nothing like that. It was much bigger than I've seen before." James Watt, Courthill Farm, Inverkeillor, also saw a big glowing ball with a tail around the same time. He explained: "I'm glad someone else saw it. People I spoke to over the weekend never saw anything either and I admit I did have my doubts." Astronomers at the Mills Observatory in Dundee are following the theory that the object was a meteor. [End] Wasn't there also a similar event we discussed a few months ago. I can recall reports of mysterious explosions and falling lights being observed off the north coast of Scotland, the rescue services being alerted, etc. I believe you ran a feature on this in the magazine. Although meteors seem the most likely explanation, how frequently might a tiny meteor cause a "sonic event" or an audible explosion? James. E-mail: pulsar@compuserve.com
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 7 Re: Witness Anonymity From: HONEYBE100@aol.com [Linda Cortile] Date: Tue, 7 Oct 1997 02:01:58 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Tue, 07 Oct 1997 09:22:49 -0400 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity >Date: Mon. 06 Oct 1997 03:59:57 -0400 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Don Allen <dona@totcon.com> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity Don Allen wrote: >Yes, of course Julie would do well to review all of the posts on >this thread. I would even extend that to perusing your orignal >abdiction account, the pissing match between Jerry Clark and >George Hansen, from a few years back on your story, and the >papers written by Stefula, Butler, and Hansen wherein they >make a pretty good case of blowing your abduction account to >smithereens. I think everyone on the list would do well to review, not only the posts regarding Witness Anonymity, but also, the papers written 5 years ago, by the "Three Stooges" Stefula, Bulter and Hansen, before the case was completely researched. I want everyone to know what they've tried unsuccessfully to do with their adverse propaganda and untruths, while they physically and verbally harrassed my family and me. It's there for every- one to see. >Good day to you, Julianne!! (Door slams shut)! Linda Cortile >Funny, isn't that what the former UN secretary (so-in-so) did >to your supposed abduction account, Ms. (so-in-so)? Slamm- >ing the door, this is, on what was claimed he witnessed. Yes. Thank God! I can't imagine how life would've been for my family and I, if he had admitted it. Someone up there is watching over us, and you can be sure it isn't an alien. Hats off to the Third Man! When he protected himself and his interests, he protected mine too. Umm..this popcorn tastes good...but I dripped butter on my keyboard! Linda Cortile
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 7 Re: Witness Anonymity From: XianneKei@aol.com Date: Tue, 7 Oct 1997 00:15:03 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Tue, 07 Oct 1997 00:26:15 -0400 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity >From: "Julianne Presson" <earthwrk@doitnow.com> >Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 12:38:40 -0700 >Fwd Date: Mon, 06 Oct 1997 22:44:01 -0400 >Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity > Are you saying Hopkins is the one who handed over the video Linda > is complaining about? Yes. But I think he may have had good intentions when he did so. I have not spoken with Hopkins on this, nor do I expect to. I think the facts will come to light soon enough. Rebecca
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 7 Re: Bruce Maccabee and UpDates From: Jean van Gemert <jeanvg@dds.nl> Date: Tue, 7 Oct 1997 08:26:10 +0200 (MET DST) Fwd Date: Tue, 07 Oct 1997 09:25:50 -0400 Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and UpDates At 09:56 PM 10/6/97 -0400, you wrote: >If Bruce Maccabee wants to get involved in discussion here >he is welcome to do so. He can subscribe to the List and do >his own posting. >It is not necessary for anyone to third-party for him. Dear All, Errol, I don't consider myself a "third-party" here. I forwarded Ms. Becker's posts and asked Bruce to comment on them for balance, not the reverse. If Bruce himself had taken the initiative of chartering me to spread his stuff things would be different, but he didn't. As for Bruce subscribing himself, he already gets swamped by enough other stuff, and just wouldn't have the time to follow this list too. Not all to uncommon on the Internet. Best, Jean __________________________________________________________________________ Science, Logic, and the UFO Debate: http://www.primenet.com/~bdzeiler/index.html -----------------------
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 7 Re: Solved abduction cases? From: Scott Hale <shale@megalinx.net> Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 23:12:04 -0800 Fwd Date: Tue, 07 Oct 1997 09:21:12 -0400 Subject: Re: Solved abduction cases? Chris Rutkowski wrote: > From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@cc.UManitoba.CA> > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Solved abduction cases? > To: updates@globalserve.net (UFO UpDates - Toronto) > Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 09:23:42 -0500 (CDT) > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > To innocent readers of Updates: > I apologize for being so abrasive in this post. I have taken a bit too > much verbal abuse during the past year or so and I finally felt I had > to respond in such a manner. Sorry. This caught me on a Monday morning, > and I haven't had my coffee yet. Besides, Paul and Peter were the ones > who labelled me "grumpy", so I have to take my name to heart sometimes. > For the record: No, I am not a closet ETHer. I don't know why Paul > keeps saying that, and I have no idea why he has yet to get my name > right in print or online. > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > We now resume our regularly-scheduled UFO UpDates posts ... Well, this does pale in comparison to the stuff I've been reading over in he Witness Anonymity thread! I'm sorry I started the original thread way back when...My monster has grown out of control. Don't worry about them getting your name right because I don't think I've seen Mr. Brookesmith sign his name to a post. I only see someone signing their name Priapus D. Musclebound or some other derevation of the initials PDM. Could it be that Mr. Brookesmith thinks he's witty? hmmm..... We all get a little grumpy sometimes, especially on Mondays! Now that we all know you're a closet ETHer we can hold a coming out party for you and maybe convince this deadly duo to take part in a little march. Who knows? Maybe they'll create a banner that has your name spelled right? (As well as Mr. Brookesmith's?) > -- > Chris Rutkowski - rutkows@cc.umanitoba.ca > (and now, also: Chris.Rutkowski@UMAlumni.mb.ca) > University of Manitoba - Winnipeg, Canada Apology Accepted. No Apologies Here, Scott K. Hale Search for other documents from or mentioning: shale | rutkows |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 7 Re: Bruce Maccabee and UpDates From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> Date: Tue, 07 Oct 1997 09:37:57 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 07 Oct 1997 09:37:57 -0400 Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and UpDates Jean van Gemert wrote: >Date: Tue, 7 Oct 1997 08:26:10 +0200 (MET DST) >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Jean van Gemert <jeanvg@dds.nl> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Bruce Maccabee and UpDates >>If Bruce Maccabee wants to get involved in discussion here >>he is welcome to do so. He can subscribe to the List and do >>his own posting. >>It is not necessary for anyone to third-party for him. > Dear All, Errol, > I don't consider myself a "third-party" here. I forwarded > Ms. Becker's posts and asked Bruce to comment on them for > balance, not the reverse. If Bruce himself had taken the > initiative of chartering me to spread his stuff things > would be different, but he didn't. > As for Bruce subscribing himself, he already gets swamped > by enough other stuff, and just wouldn't have the time to > follow this list too. Not all to uncommon on the Internet. With respect and regard for you Jean, the rule still stands. There are few subscribers here who read everything. Modern mail programs have filters that are simple to use (one reason I insist on keeping thread lines intact). To reiterate: If Bruce Maccabee wants to be read here he is welcome to subscribe.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 7 Re: Witness Anonymity From: Glenn Joyner <infohead@airmail.net> Date: Tue, 07 Oct 1997 02:19:10 -0600 Fwd Date: Tue, 07 Oct 1997 09:54:29 -0400 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity With apologies to Alfred Lehmberg.... (Heh) WITNESS ANONYMITY (ad nauseum) by Glenn Joyner In this field we would call UFOlogy, Fraught with questions and bad psychology, There lies a thread of truth, elusive, For which investigation is conducive. There are those that pound their fists and claim, And others who only shout, "For shame!" Still some folks try to shift the blame From those upon which we should take aim. Witness anonymity, This thread is such an absurd pity! Tossed barbs and flames abound within, Yet some of us just sit and grin. The point of investigation, it would seem, Is to verify whether those that scream That they have been abducted by Those little critters from the sky. Now if these things do really occur, Why is it such a saddle burr, For us to ask the abductees, For the full details, if they please. Witness anonymity, This thread has become a joke to me! Many feathers will be ruffled I see, Because I spew this soliloquy! If your questions they do not like, They impale your heads with verbal spikes, Rather than converse with civility, It becomes a shouting match, with duplicity. The encounters become, as things progress, A personality-bashing, sordid mess. Why do the proponents become so defensive When the nature of questions is comprehensive? Witness anonymity, The thread that will not "vanished" be! We understand the need for it, But should it contain such venomous spit? If you go public with your identity, Even in a UFO lecture�s sanctity, Then who you are becomes known by all, So why cry "foul!" and kick the stall? The principal gnashes out vehement words, And snarls about backward-flying birds, While those who watch drop their jaws, And wonder "why?" ... what is the cause? Witness anonymity, The thread that drove this writer to see That maybe things aren�t as they�re claimed, And any who question will get flamed. Take pause for a minute, if you will, If sharp retorts can momentarily be still, To consider how this mess appears, To those with brains between their ears. This one subject, with its vehement cries, Has effectively served to polarize, A group of people who should toil as one To determine if Budd has jumped the gun. Witness anonymity, Oh why won�t you let me be? That awful thread which I deplore, And yet I find myself reading more.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 7 Re: Witness Anonymity From: HONEYBE100@aol.com [Linda Cortile] Date: Tue, 7 Oct 1997 03:44:17 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Tue, 07 Oct 1997 09:59:28 -0400 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity >From: Clark Hathaway >earthwrk@doitnow.com> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity >Date: Sun, 5 Oct 1997 23:15:31 -0700 Snipettes Clark Hathaway wrote: >I would like to offer that it would serve you better to practice >response rather than reaction. Reaction is typical of the >actions observed in my fellow experiencers over the years. >I AM not going to attempt to speak for Julie, but I AM fami- >liar enough with your case to have some particular suspi- >cions myself as to certain circumstances. Sorry! I'm Italian! We're known for our reactions. That's what makes us so adorable! <G> As far as your suspicions are concerned, I have a few of my own. I wonder who I'm writing to that claims to know so much about my character. >Julianne IS a researcher and an honest one at that. She makes >an attempt to take a look at all the data. What kind of data? You know her...I don't! >Not only that, but Julie HAS experienced along with me some >rather extreme visitations since early 1995. After leaving the >Sacramento area in spring of 1996, they stopped. Although >these did not result in either of us being abducted, the events >had most of the 'trappings' most often associated with abduc- >tion experiences. Oh boy...here we go. snip... >It would better be defined as being a psychic occurrence. >It happened in the Astral plane of experience rather than on >the plane of third density. Clark? You're New Age, aren't you? Are you trying to convert me? Sorry...I'm a Roman Catholic who has had a UFO experience. I'll keep an open mind. Thanks anyway. >I happen to suspect that you agreed long time ago to fulfill a >purpose during these times. It is because of this that you were >targeted for thesevisitations and resultant interference. In other words, if I agreed to be abducted a long time ago because I promised that they could, they're abducting me now? So, if I demanded the keys to your car and all of your valuables, you'd give them to me because you promised long ago that I could have them? I don't know what else to say, Clark. I don't know much about this religion. >You have been sold a bill of goods by those who perpetuated >the 'abduction' event(s) and it has been innocently perpetuated >by Mr. Hopkins and his colleagues. No matter how good their >intentions, their efforts have neither served the experiencers nor >the general public's better interest. I don't know, Clark. I think that the general public should speak for themselves regarding alien abduction research. Abductees, I'm sure, have their own opinions too. Regards, Linda Cortile
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 7 Re: Witness Anonymity From: HONEYBE100@aol.com [Linda Cortile] Date: Tue, 7 Oct 1997 03:00:49 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Tue, 07 Oct 1997 09:57:19 -0400 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity >From: XianneKei@aol.com >Date: Mon. 6 Oct 1997 03:42:29 -0400 (EDT) >To: updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity Rebecca wrote: Yes, we can imagine. We could also imagine that nothing much >untoward has happened. Was Linda - or any witness -, for that >matter, made aware of the possible consequences of "going >public?" One must wonder about that. I don't know about the other abductees, but I wasn't warned of the consequences of coming forward publicly. In fact, at the time, I didn't even know that going to a 1992 UFO conference meant that I was going public and I wasn't aware that anyone outside of our support group, knew me. I found out too late. >I had the opportunity to meet Linda, first in Austin at Mufon's >annual conference, a couple of years ago, and again last >year in North Carolina, at another MUFON Conference. She >wasn't hiding behind sunglasses or anything and seemed per- >fectly willing to speak to people who came up to her with >questions. One has to wonder why she would subject herself >to all of this if she truly wanted her privacy. No, she >didn't introduce herself as anything other than Linda Cortile. Outside of my husband and children's identities, there is no privacy. Unfortunately, my identity came out 5 years ago. So, whether I like it or not, I've been out there. There's no need to hide behind sunglasses <G> and I'm perfectly willing to speak to people who approach me. Most of them tell me about their own experiences. So, I'm not really subjecting myself to anything negative. In fact, I've felt flattered and a little embarrassed when talking with these people. It would be ungracious and rude of me to turn them down. They're always nice. And I must admit that I've made a lot of new friends across the country over the years and the only time I see them again, is at a MUFON conference. Also, I have an interest in the propulsion of UFO's. There's no better place than a UFO conference to satisfy my curiosity. Rebecca, we've met? Describe yourself to me in a private e-mail. I'd like to remember you. >>I think it's great if witnesses want to "go public" with their >stories. It probably helps the witness and the audience enjoys >it too. But when they serve themselves up, they shouldn't >complain about the attention. I don't remember the exact quote: >but I remember Linda saying in North Carolina something like: >"I'm ready for the skeptics." It sounded like a challenge to me. >Well, here we are. Now that I've been public for a few years, talking about my case more recently, has helped me and others as well. However, I 'have' complained about the attention, way back in the past, because I was an unwilling abductee. I can't remember exactly what I said either. But I can say that objective skeptics are not a challenge to me. They're a breath of fresh air. It's the hard-line skeptics and debunkers that I'll challenge, if they give me a reason too. They sort of...keep me young! Most arguments do. I inherited it from my Mom. Take care, Linda Cortile
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 7 Re: Bruce Maccabee and UpDates From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com> Date: Tue, 07 Oct 1997 06:08:18 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 07 Oct 1997 10:07:40 -0400 Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and UpDates At 09:56 PM 10/6/97 -0400, you wrote: >>Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 19:48:04 +0200 (MET DST) >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >>From: Jean van Gemert <jeanvg@dds.nl> >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words >>>From: c549597@showme.missouri.edu [Barbara Becker] >>>Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 14:47:29 -0500 >>>To: updates@globalserve.net >>>Subject: One pic is worth 1000 words. Eds Polaroid ><snipped> >> Dear all, >> Sorry for having to include all the above. Bruce Maccabee has a >> response to it: ><snipped> >Jean, >If Bruce Maccabee wants to get involved in discussion here >he is welcome to do so. He can subscribe to the List and do >his own posting. >It is not necessary for anyone to third-party for him. >Errol Bruce-Knapp, >Moderator, UFO UpDates - Toronto Errol- There are a number of researchers that quite honestly don't have time to wade through the nonsense in the various lists that are on the "net", and for that reason I have tried to make sure they see items that they would be interested in. I have a number of people that I fax your UPDATES to because they have no computer, and they are always very grateful. In return, they sometimes provide details that the list would find of interest, which I tend to post. Bruce does, indeed, have a computer. However, he isn't "active" on the Internet and has become less involved with Compuserve in recent months. I don't know what Jean had tried to post (I've been trying to work with both Jean and Bruce to make sure we don't waste bandwidth, and it was mostly in his hand at this point), but as a list subscriber I would state that I believe that it should have been posted if it was relevent to the discussion. I'm not sure how you are going to define when a person should post on their own, or more importantly the limitation to quotation that you will allow before that is triggered. The particular thread involved here is probably getting out of hand, and obviously some of those involved are far too close to the subject matter and should probably seek help (sorry, couldn't help it). As a list moderator, I would be concerned about those who post material to the list and then threaten legal action when others quote sections of it in their reply, claiming copyright violation. The explosive personalities involved in this genre could tie up resources in a legal battle, and since this list is moderated there is (I believe) greater exposure to inclusion in any legal entanglement. I will forward your message to Bruce, but I couldn't speculate as to whether he'll want to get directly involved. If this is a policy of the list, I would be interested in the defined limitations. Steven Kaeser
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 7 Re: Phoenix Sighting From: William.Hamilton@pcsmail.pcshs.com Date: Tuesday, 7 October 1997 8:39am MT Fwd Date: Tue, 07 Oct 1997 23:17:01 -0400 Subject: Re: Phoenix Sighting >From: fergus@ukraine.corp.mot.com >Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 14:23:19 -0500 (CDT) >To: updates@globalserve.net >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Phoenix Sightings Update >> From: William.Hamilton@pcsmail.pcshs.com >> Date: Tuesday, 30 September 1997 10:02am MT >> To: updates@globalserve.net >> Subject: Phoenix Sightings Update > PHOENIX SIGHTINGS UPDATE >Sorry, Bill, I don't see that this resolves the issue. The >information published in the Arizona Republic, apparently obtained >by their reporter Randy Reid independently from that in the Tucson >Weekly, refers to an actual flight schedule, stating: >"A flight schedule from Davis-Monthan Air Force Base, shows that >a squadron of planes from Operation Snowbird left at 8:15 p.m. on >March 13 and returned at 10:30 p.m." >"A spokesman for Luke Air Force Base confirmed that the Maryland >planes were authorized to use the Barry Goldwater range from 9:30 >to 10 p.m. on March 13." >Since it does not seem likely that planes authorized to use the >test range from 9:30 to 10:00 would have landed at 8:30, both these >statements are in contradiction to the "approximately 8:30" given >by the Tuscon Weekly reporters (Jim Nintzel and Julian Grajewski). Your right, it doesn't entirely resolve the issue as these other times are quoted in the Arizona Republic and Lt. Keith Shepherd has been re-assigned and all calls pertaining to this event have been referred to Lt. LeMarco (757) 764-5007 at Langley. However, we have shown that the lights videotaped at 10:00 p.m. were north of the Estrella Mts and not on the test range. They were not the bright magenesium flares reported by the National Guard. They were also seen at other times in horizontal flight. One more note: We have no reports from Tucson, Casa Grande, or Gila Bend reporting the flares that night. None. Bright flares of this type, seen for 150 miles should have been reported in those areas and yet we have yet to find one witness to these National Guard flares. Strange. Sincerely, Bill Hamilton Exec Director Skywatch International Search for other documents from or mentioning: william.hamilton |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 7 Re: Passing of Dr. Bruce DePalma From: "Roger R. Prokic" <rprokic@ibm.net> Date: Tue, 07 Oct 97 06:09:37 Fwd Date: Tue, 07 Oct 1997 23:04:08 -0400 Subject: Re: Passing of Dr. Bruce DePalma >Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 07:43:20 -0400 >From: BOB SHELL <76750.2717@compuserve.com> >Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Passing of Dr. Bruce DePalma >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >What did DePalma die from? The passing of two infinite >energy researchers in less than a week is disturbing. Bob, I think you just egged on the conspiracy buffs. <g> Roger
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 7 Re: Phoenix Sightings Update From: fergus@ukraine.corp.mot.com [George Fergus] Date: Tue, 7 Oct 1997 10:21:54 -0500 (CDT) Fwd Date: Tue, 07 Oct 1997 23:15:24 -0400 Subject: Re: Phoenix Sightings Update > From: fergus@ukraine.corp.mot.com > Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 14:23:19 -0500 (CDT) > To: updates@globalserve.net > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Phoenix Sightings Update <snip most of my earlier message> > full text of the Tucson Weekly article at: > http://www.weeklywire.com/tw/07-24-97/curr2.htm > (At least, that's where it was when I downloaded it, but either > they've moved it or it's not on-line any more.) Sorry, something must have been down when I tried to check it yesterday. I tried again today, and the Tucson Weekly article from 7-24-97 is still at the same location, after all. So as to why Bill Hamilton had trouble getting a copy of it, I don't know. -George Fergus
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 7 Re: Bruce Maccabee and UpDates From: c549597@showme.missouri.edu Date: Tue, 07 Oct 1997 11:37:06 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 07 Oct 1997 23:20:28 -0400 Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and UpDates > Date: Tue, 07 Oct 1997 06:08:18 -0400 > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com> > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Bruce Maccabee and UpDates > At 09:56 PM 10/6/97 -0400, you wrote: > >>Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 19:48:04 +0200 (MET DST) > >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > >>From: Jean van Gemert <jeanvg@dds.nl> > >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words > >>>From: c549597@showme.missouri.edu [Barbara Becker] > >>>Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 14:47:29 -0500 > >>>To: updates@globalserve.net > >>>Subject: One pic is worth 1000 words. Eds Polaroid > ><snipped> > >> Dear all, > >> Sorry for having to include all the above. Bruce Maccabee has a > >> response to it: > ><snipped> > >Jean, > >If Bruce Maccabee wants to get involved in discussion here > >he is welcome to do so. He can subscribe to the List and do > >his own posting. > >It is not necessary for anyone to third-party for him. > >Errol Bruce-Knapp, > >Moderator, UFO UpDates - Toronto > Errol- > There are a number of researchers that quite honestly don't have time > to wade through the nonsense in the various lists that are on the > "net", and for that reason I have tried to make sure they see items > that they would be interested in. I have a number of people that I > fax your UPDATES to because they have no computer, and they are always > very grateful. In return, they sometimes provide details that the > list would find of interest, which I tend to post. Bruce does, > indeed, have a computer. However, he isn't "active" on the Internet > and has become less involved with Compuserve in recent months. It is very nice of you to keep certain people up to date, especially those who do not have computers and I say that sincerely. In that case, it seems more appropriate for you to intercede. However in Bruce's case he has a computer and an Internet connection, he is able to reposnd for himself. > I don't know what Jean had tried to post (I've been trying to work > with both Jean and Bruce to make sure we don't waste bandwidth, and it > was mostly in his hand at this point), but as a list subscriber I > would state that I believe that it should have been posted if it was > relevent to the discussion. I'm not sure how you are going to define > when a person should post on their own, or more importantly the > limitation to quotation that you will allow before that is triggered. Maccabee has the time to write a response to a paper I wrote 7 years ago AND the time to respond to the copyright paper but he cant find the time to participate in the list first-person? I suugest that you and Jean quit running interfernce for Bruce and let him fight his own battles, fact to face. He is a big boy now. > The particular thread involved here is probably getting out of hand, > and obviously some of those involved are far too close to the subject > matter and should probably seek help (sorry, couldn't help it). As a > list moderator, I would be concerned about those who post material to > the list and then threaten legal action when others quote sections of > it in their reply, claiming copyright violation. Maybe you should get your facts straight before you open your mouth. This has NOTHING to do with the paper on Copyright and Maccabees reply. > The explosive personalities involved in this genre could tie up > resources in a legal battle, and since this list is moderated there > is (I believe) greater exposure to inclusion in any legal > entanglement. This is another paper I wrote many years ago. When I (BB) discovered (just recently) that a paper I had written 7 years ago was posted on a website, I wrote to the webmaster and asked that it be removed. It IS a copyrighted material, which I explained to him, and said I did not want it reproduced without permission. He was most gracious and removed it from his website. I then found the paper reproduced in its entirety and a commentray by Maccabee intersperced. I have no problem with Maccabees commentary...he can write all day long about it as far as I am concerned...however, I have not given ANYONE permission to reproduce it in any form...or to discect it. That includes Maccabee, UPDATES and UFOMIND. (And you imply Steve that I "should seek help" because I dont want my copyrighted materials abused?) It is simply a legal request. I have asked UFOMIND as well as updates to remove my copyrighted materials. I would expect them to be as gracious as John Gilbert in the UK. BB
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 7 Re: Witness Anonymity From: "Julianne Presson" <earthwrk@doitnow.com> Date: Tue, 7 Oct 1997 11:24:48 -0700 Fwd Date: Tue, 07 Oct 1997 23:24:53 -0400 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity > From: XianneKei@aol.com [Rebecca Schatte] > Date: Tue, 7 Oct 1997 00:15:03 -0400 (EDT) > To: updates@globalserve.net > Subject: The VideoTape > >From: "Julianne Presson" <earthwrk@doitnow.com> > >Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 12:38:40 -0700 > >Fwd Date: Mon, 06 Oct 1997 22:44:01 -0400 > >Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity > > Are you saying Hopkins is the one who handed over the video Linda > > is complaining about? > Yes. But I think he may have had good intentions when he did so. I have not > spoken with Hopkins on this, nor do I expect to. I think the facts will come > to light soon enough. Maybe so, but as a researcher he knew the risks. Julie
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 7 Re: Gladness and Sadness From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> Date: Tue, 7 Oct 1997 13:20:51 +0100 Fwd Date: Tue, 07 Oct 1997 23:29:58 -0400 Subject: Re: Gladness and Sadness >From: dgullick@interlog.com (David Gullick) >Date: Mon, 06 Oct 97 14:09:34 >To: updates@globalserve.net >Subject: Re: Gladness and Sadness > I am sure a number of List readers would be absolutely delighted if >you were to furnish some digital scans of the photographs of these >formations. If required, the local MUFON could/would provide tech >assistance. Some dates, locations, conditions, etc. would prove >invaluable in aiding others to be so fortunate as to see and identify >them also. > Being neither a trained Ufologist/Cereologist nor qualified as an >observer/commentator, but having visited the Avebury/Stonehenge >area most summers of my adult life I have yet to see a "crop Circle". >This lack of success is not without effort tho; I have spoken quite >regularly with local farmers, tradesmen, drivers, publicans, etc. >all of whom have never seen a "crop circle". Also, I made a special >trip to see the "Julia Set" that supposedly appeared close to Stone- >henge, yet there was nothing! Hi David I too made a special effort to go and see the Julia set on the opposite side of the road from Stonehenge, but I too missed it. The farmer for whatever reason, (probably because of loads of people traipsing all over his property) harvested the field fairly soon after the formation was made. My friend did see it, and he went by just two weeks after. He said it was a truly fantastic, in size and beauty. I have a scanned ariel pic of the set if you want to email me I will happily forward you a copy. There are things in the universe billions of years older than our human race. They are vast, they are timeless. If they are aware of us at all we are of no more consequence to them as ants are to us. Sean Jones http://www.tedric.demon.co.uk/ http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Zone/1745/Index.htm
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 7 Latest in Latin logic From: legion@werple.net.au [John Stepkowski] Date: Wed, 8 Oct 1997 06:04:11 +1000 (EST) Fwd Date: Tue, 07 Oct 1997 23:32:42 -0400 Subject: Latest in Latin logic Hi Errol; Appended is an article which may be of interest. Now there's an official Vatican-approved Latin translation for 'UFO' -- and Page Three girl and disco and playboy and whisky! Is this a covert survival guide for the imminent UFO invasion? When the Greyliens/Reptoids land en masse, distract them with pictures of Page Three girls, the noise of discos, and the stupefying effects of whisky. Once they've succumbed to our Earthly delights, the invasion will be thwarted. You read it here first. - John ======================================================================= >From Melbourne _Herald Sun_, Oct. 7, 1997, p. 21 ================================================= Latest in Latin logic The Vatican has published a Latin dictionary containing phrases that may raise eyebrows among the faithful. Page Three girl (exterioris pagine puella), disco (orbium phonbographicorum theca) and UFO (res inexplicata volans) can all be found in the volume. So too are babe (praecipua scaenica actrix), playboy (juvenis voluptarius) and whisky (viscium). The 15,000-word dictionary was produced on the orders of the Pope. He found that many bishops were unable to speak the language of the Holy Mother Church. The book has become a best-seller in Rome. -- DAILY MAIL ======================================================================
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 7 Re: Witness Anonymity From: XianneKei@aol.com [Rebecca Schatte] Date: Tue, 7 Oct 1997 17:32:10 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Tue, 07 Oct 1997 23:36:20 -0400 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity > From: HONEYBE100@aol.com [Linda Cortile] > Date: Tue, 7 Oct 1997 03:00:49 -0400 (EDT) > Fwd Date: Tue, 07 Oct 1997 09:57:19 -0400 > Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity > I don't know about the other abductees, but I wasn't warned of > the consequences of coming forward publicly. In fact, at the > time, I didn't even know that going to a 1992 UFO conference > meant that I was going public and I wasn't aware that anyone > outside of our support group, knew me. I found out too late. Do you think you could have benefitted from some advice about making an appearance at a UFO Conference? I'm not being snide here. I'm really trying to make a point. Someone NEEDS to be able to spell these kinds of things out for abductees. This is why I think that John Velez' idea of an Abductee Information Center is such a good idea! Abductees don't just need support groups (support groups might not be a good idea in all cases) but they do need to know the pitfalls and traps of telling their story. > Outside of my husband and children's identities, there is no > privacy. Unfortunately, my identity came out 5 years ago. So, > whether I like it or not, I've been out there. There's no need to > hide behind sunglasses <G> and I'm perfectly willing to speak to > people who approach me. Most of them tell me about their own > experiences. So, I'm not really subjecting myself to anything > negative. In fact, I've felt flattered and a little embarrassed when > talking with these people. It would be ungracious and rude > of me to turn them down. They're always nice. And I must admit > that I've made a lot of new friends across the country over the years > and the only time I see them again, is at a MUFON conference. > Also, I have an interest in the propulsion of UFO's. There's no > better place than a UFO conference to satisfy my curiosity. But at the same time Linda, you are putting yourself out there. I think it's perfectly fine if you want to share your story, interact with others or even attend conferences to satisfy a curiosity. There is nothing wrong with that. But you must be aware by doing so, opens you up to criticism (even if you didn't there'd probably be critics). You can't expect to go around the country telling your story and remain anonymous at the same time. I know you were outed a long time ago. I can't unring that bell. I don't know the circumstances of why that happened but it did. Rebecca
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 7 Re: Witness Anonymity From: "Clark Hathaway" <earthwrk@doitnow.com> Date: Tue, 7 Oct 1997 14:47:47 -0700 Fwd Date: Tue, 07 Oct 1997 23:49:07 -0400 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity > From: HONEYBE100@aol.com [Linda Cortile] > Date: Tue, 7 Oct 1997 03:44:17 -0400 (EDT) > To: updates@globalserve.net > Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity > >From: Clark Hathaway >earthwrk@doitnow.com> > >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net > >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity > >Date: Sun, 5 Oct 1997 23:15:31 -0700 > Snipettes > Clark Hathaway wrote: > >I would like to offer that it would serve you better to practice > >response rather than reaction. Reaction is typical of the > >actions observed in my fellow experiencers over the years. > >I AM not going to attempt to speak for Julie, but I AM fami- > >liar enough with your case to have some particular suspi- > >cions myself as to certain circumstances. > Sorry! I'm Italian! We're known for our reactions. That's > what makes us so adorable! <G> As far as your suspicions > are concerned, I have a few of my own. I wonder who I'm > writing to that claims to know so much about my character. Ms. Napolitano: My first inner response was "oh no, here we go again". <grin> Let me respond by stating that it is my conviction that Ethnic Background has nothing to do with it. To be frank, I have spent a good amount of the past sixteen years unraveling a lifetime of personal destruction due to having been raised in an extremely dysfunctional household. I long ago STOPPED making excuses ethnic or otherwise for my BAD behavior. It has been my observation that since you have joined this list, it has steadily declined as to the amount of contributors. As to your character, your actions speak for themselves. > >Julianne IS a researcher and an honest one at that. She makes > >an attempt to take a look at all the data. > What kind of data? You know her...I don't! That is unfortunate for you for obvious reasons. > >Not only that, but Julie HAS experienced along with me some > >rather extreme visitations since early 1995. After leaving the > >Sacramento area in spring of 1996, they stopped. Although > >these did not result in either of us being abducted, the events > >had most of the 'trappings' most often associated with abduc- > >tion experiences. > Oh boy...here we go. > snip... You know, I find this extremely interesting. You have expectations of everyone coming into contact with your tale, believing every nuance of it. At the slightest sign of incredulity on the part of the observer however, you bristle with righteous indignation. How is this so in light of the fact that you are obviously discounting my claim as to being a fellow experiencer and our (Julie and My) claims of events as alluded to above? > >It would better be defined as being a psychic occurrence. > >It happened in the Astral plane of experience rather than on > >the plane of third density. > Clark? You're New Age, aren't you? Are you trying to convert > me? Sorry...I'm a Roman Catholic who has had a UFO experience. > I'll keep an open mind. Thanks anyway. You see Linda? You are here placing assumptions. New Age is a term that only the ill informed would use to describe my more intellectual pursuits. By way of a little education my dear ... provided you are open to it, New Agers are Pop-Metaphysicians. That is, those who take whatever sounds good at the time or that they think looks good from a casual study of Metaphysics and run with it. I have been active in the study of Metaphysics since the age of twelve. I have been a student and researcher of UFOlogy since the age of nine. I AM 54 years old. To be clear on this, it is more appropriate for a New Ager to believe that being floated through a closed and locked window from within a twelfth story apartment constituted an event that took place in physical, third dimensional, reality. Relative to the above it is plain that I do NOT view these types of events as being physical. I do view the events as being real in some cases however, but as occurring on another level. > >I happen to suspect that you agreed long time ago to fulfill a > >purpose during these times. It is because of this that you were > >targeted for thesevisitations and resultant interference. > In other words, if I agreed to be abducted a long time ago > because I promised that they could, they're abducting me now? Not necessarily. Given that these events are indeed occurring, it is certain aspects of your inner being that has been making allowance for it. Given the veracity of your stated experiences Linda, you know the answer inside as to why and how this could be happening. > So, if I demanded the keys to your car and all of your valuables, > you'd give them to me because you promised long ago that > I could have them? I don't know what else to say, Clark. I don't > know much about this religion. I AM not an adherent to any religion. Religion and dogma have nothing what so ever to do with this. I was not referring to you having given permission to be abducted. I was addressing a possibility that you had during prior time, agreed to fulfill a service and that possessing certain requirements to enable you being capable of performing this service, it resulted in you becoming a target for these undesired visitations. What I AM referring to in part is this. It has been my observation that many abduction experiencers have a more attuned intuitive faculty than would appear to be the norm. Many of these seem to have decided metaphysical leanings. Often because of lack of coherent direction, they get caught up in New Age pursuits that are a blend of mysticism, UFOs and Aliens. They forget what it is that they have come for due to the distraction. I AM going to put this into context from my own personal experience. I AM convinced that some UFO sightings are real. I find it difficult to deny that they are due to my having witnessed them in broad daylight from an estimated distance of less than a quarter mile as well as from greater distances both during daylight hours as well as during night. Likewise due to personal experience, I have to believe that some people have truly experienced something that they remember as an abduction by assumed Alien beings based upon my own abduction experiences, and those of others as recounted in numerous conversations. I also believe due to a great many memories, that I have lived many times before. Many of my fellow experiencers as it turns out, have arrived at suspecting if not knowing that they too have lived before. Not only that, but in a great many of these, the feeling also exists that they are here for something that in most cases, they cannot quite remember. I have discovered partially, why I AM here. I have discovered how to bring these unwelcome visitations and interference in my spiritual journey to a halt. I believe that there exist a great many of my fellow experiencers out there who are in similar circumstance to those in which I found myself. My apologies to those who resent an introduction of Metaphysical subjects into a UFO forum, but from my perspective it is unavoidable as the basis of cause for most UFO activity as well as labeled 'Alien Abduction' is definitely paranormal and is encompassed more properly by the term Metaphysics and Quantum Physics as well or so I AM informed. > >You have been sold a bill of goods by those who perpetuated > >the 'abduction' event(s) and it has been innocently perpetuated > >by Mr. Hopkins and his colleagues. No matter how good their > >intentions, their efforts have neither served the experiencers nor > >the general public's better interest. > I don't know, Clark. I think that the general public should speak > for themselves regarding alien abduction research. Abductees, > I'm sure, have their own opinions too. You have a point, but I hasten to point out that it is these salesmen Themselves who are the sole spokesmen for their pseudo-scientific pursuits, is it not? I suggest that the public would be served far better were there some counterpoint to them other than the obvious debunkers. My purpose you see is not to debunk as I AM convinced that these events are indeed happening to many people. It is just that I see them from a different perspective. I want to make some observations relative to your specific case if you will kindly indulge me. [1] It is claimed that you were "floated through the closed window of your 12th-storey East Side Apartment" by 2 or more Aliens to rise up through a beam of blue light to enter a UFO hovering above. {a} Does this appear to be a normal third dimensional reality occurrence to you Linda, or one more properly described as paranormal? {b} Your story includes the reputed accounts of Richard and Dan, two supposed independent witnesses who have to date not stepped forward to identify themselves and offer corroborating testimony in support of your account. I personally find it very convenient that their stories apparently changed due to a likelihood of their accessibility was considered as they were at first reported to be policemen. Secret Service personnel would be far less accessible. I consider it a nice touch, if extremely implausible. {c} Relative to these two supposed witnesses if indeed existent, I fail to understand how they could identify you or any one else given that the event occurred at night and at a distance far above them. I defy you or anyone else for that matter to ID some one from that distance without some sort of visual aid such as binoculars. {d} It was also reported that a Janet Kimble identified you from the Brooklyn Bridge a quarter of a mile away. Not only that, she performed this miraculous accomplishment despite the Bridge Lights having been mysteriously extinguished as well as the headlights of numerous headlamps of cars on the bridge at the time. {e} Relative to the above, how is it that this occurred, but apparently did not make the next day's paper? Surely, that would make for some sensational reading. After all, newspapers make their way through such stories. Please do not attempt to fill me with rationalization that no-one reported the event due to their being tired from a long day or the possibility that nefarious agents of the secret government intercepted their reports and frightened them into silence. Kindest Regards... Clark Hathaway
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 8 {82} part 1 - United Kingdom UFO Network From: United Kingdom UFO Network <ufo@holodeck.demon.co.uk> Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 20:39:05 +0000 Fwd Date: Wed, 08 Oct 1997 00:42:09 -0400 Subject: {82} part 1 - United Kingdom UFO Network ______ _______ ____ ------ / / // ____// |---------------------------------------------- U K / / // ___/ / / ' Sept 8th, 1997 / / // / / / / N E T W O R K part 1 Issue 82 --- (_____//__/ -- (_____/------------------------------------------------ The United Kingdom UFO Network - a free electronic magazine with subscribers in over 40 countries. This issue comes in 3 parts. If any part is missing please mail: ufo@holodeck.demon.co.uk giving the issue number. The issue will be reposted to you. Please put the details as below in the subject section e.g. Repost {82} part 1, part 2 or part 3. In this issue: Editorial ----------- Special Guests to the UK.UFO.NW - UFO - IRC channel. United Kingdom News --------------------------- [UK 1] New UFO Explosions Over Scotland! [UK 2] Proof Positive of Military Cover-Up of UFOs [UK 3] Scientists step back 385m years [UK 4] A starless night and the ghost bomber roams the skies World News --------------- [W 1] TWA Flight 800 [W 2] Lego UFOs [W 3] Pilotless Stealth Fighter [W 4] MUFON Skywatch Investigations August 1987 [W 5] Art Bell Show Satellite Hit With EMP? [W 6] Cy Gilson Polygraph test of Travis Walton [W 7] Mars Pathfinder - Still no signal [W 8] First sighting of KGB X-Files [W 9] Arthur C. Clarke - Why ET will never call home A FEARFUL SYMMETRY by D. Lynne Bishop ------------------------------------- Part 4 Editorial ====== Special Guests to the UK.UFO.NW - UFO - IRC channel. The uk.ufo.nw has had a very pleasant few weeks recently with various guests attending our weekly irc meetings. The most recent have been: John Velez Michael Lindemann Matthew Williams Stanton T. Friedman All have spent at least a couple of hours answering visitors questions live online. The number of people on channel during the meetings has been phenomenal. We would like to thank the guests for giving up their free time to be with us. We would also like to thank everyone who attended the meetings for doing so. It won't stop here though. We have more guests lined up for the future. Dan Sherman (see e-zine issues 80 & 81) will be with us later this year. Watch this space for more news. The log of the Matthew Williams and Stanton T. Friedman meetings will be sent out as special issues to subscribers shortly. Both make a worthy read. Full information on how to join us at our weekly irc meetings can be found at the foot of the e-zine. United Kingdom News ================= [UK 1]****** Source: Sightings on the Radio From: Skywatch Submitted by: Stig Agermose Date: 23rd September 1997 New UFO Explosions Over Scotland! At 2:30pm Tuesday 23rd September 1997, news reports came in saying UFO's and bright lights were seen from Scotland to Tyne Tees on the previous night from 23:30-03:30 22nd & 23 Sept. The lights were witnesses by the residents up & down the East Coast, Scotland & Tyne Tees areas. These reports stated that many people had called local news and TV stations having seen bright objects of various sizes and shapes emitting bright lights and travelling at erratic speeds for a period of time not yet established. The lights were observed shooting across each other and then witnesses heard several loud explosions followed by bright flashes and a crackling noise which in turn prompted the immediate response of the nearby Rescue Services. The Life Boat and helicopters were out searching the areas for any sign of wreckage which at this time was thought to be a plane or other aircraft. Many of the people that telephoned the Rescue Services said that they thought that there had been a mid-air collision. Today a MOD person from RAF Kinloss Craig Lindsey said that the military are checking the area and have mounted an investigation into the reports. News is coming in all the time and I will be speaking to my source tonight to get the latest, and hopefully some eye witness accounts to report in the next few days will be available. [UK 2]****** Date: 9th June 1997 Author: Matthew Williams Proof Positive of Military Cover-Up of UFOs By: Matthew Williams Copyright 1997 You can reach Matthew at truthseekers@celtic.co.uk Matthew Williams is a former civil servant who worked for HM Customs & Excise Criminal Investigations department who since his own UFO sighting, back in 1990, now investigates the UFO enigma full time. He has managed to get the MOD to unwittingly admit that they knew the whereabouts of UFO files which were listed missing - (which they secretly had hidden) - whilst at the same time they were spinning a web of untruths to public, press and MPs. He has also looked into the governments investigations of UFOs and had uncovered the amazing details of how one department, implicated in UFO investigations, operates from a super secret facility in Corsham, Wilts which is housed underground in 35 miles of nuclear proof tunnels. Matthew has become a whistle blower on the existence of this base and a number of other secret bases. Matthew believes in direct action to expose bases and has been involved in some actions against bases in the UK. ****** The following information may to the uninitiated seem complex or trivial so it must be clearly pointed out that the reasons for providing this information are simple. The MOD says that there is no cover-up over UFO information and also they state that there have been no secret departments investigating UFOs. This we manage to disprove along with uncovering a policy of downplaying the UFO subject. The story gets even more interesting when you learn that after we found out these facts in a MOD file the MOD removed the incriminating file from public view. This file implicated Provost & Security Services (based at RAF Rudloe Manor), which is a deprtment that I have been researching for some years, as having investigating the UFO subject - a point which they deny. I have supplied snippets from the original government documents which show the points we are making. If anyone wishes to get hold of copies of the originals they can do so by visiting the Public Records Office in Kew, London where the files can be booked out and photocopied. File no AIR 2/16918 provides the best evidence to show that in the 1960s there were no fewer than seven secret government departments within the Ministry Of Defence that were investigating UFOs. Former UFO public office investigator Nick Pope claimed that in his experience there were no other departments investigating UFOs. We have a problem with this statement in light of these new files which show otherwise. Could it be that Nick Pope in his low ranking position of Executive Officer (an entry level grade) was not aware of these departments, or is he covering them up? When questioned, Nick Pope assured me that he did not know of these departments when he was working in the MOD and had no dealings with them. When researching UFO files you encounter the thirty-year rule problem. This means that any information which is released through official channels is subject to a thirty year filing rule (sometimes longer). This means that by the time the files reach our hands and we learn things the departments which dealt with the information have probably closed down or had their names changed and so we cannot find out their current status or records, or even to make complaints. The departments clearly named many times in this file have no other documentation or references within the Public Records Office. Consequently we suspect that this file was probably not meant to reach the Public Records Office. Are we going a bit far in stating this? Perhaps not when you learn that after researchers exposed the file it was then removed from view at the Public Records Office and only returned after questions being raised in the House Of Commons by the Rt. Hon. Ieuan Wyn Jones, MP for Anglesey North. The confirmed departments involved in UFO investigation that we know of in the 1960's are: * AMOC (Air Ministries Operations Centre) * AIS (Air Information Service) * AI(Tech)4a (Air Intelligence Technical 4a) * AI(Tech)5b (Air Intelligence Technical 5b) * AI1 (Air Intelligence 1) * DSTI (Department of Scientific and Technical Intelligence) * DDI-Tech (Department of Defence Intelligence Technical) * Public departments investigating UFOs who were in fact simply letter writers that fronted these other departments are DS8 & Air Staff 2 & S6. * CAA (Civil Aviation Authority) has also conducted investigations of the UFO phenomenon, and has recently finished an investigation a near miss of a UFO and a jetliner coming which was making its final approach to Manchester airport. * Extra departments rumoured to be investigating UFOs include D155 and DI64. The files which were used for the basis of these investigations are as follows: AIR 2/16918, AIR 16/1199, AIR 2/17318, AIR 20/7390, AIR 20/9320, AIR 20/9321, AIR 20/9322, AIR 20/9994, AIR 2/17318, AIR 2/17526, AIR 2/17527, AIR 2/17982, AIR 2/17983, PREM 11/855. We know from statements made to us by serving officers and also former serving officers and officials, inside the MOD, that many files exist which have never been released to the public. We also hear from Lord Peter Hill Norton, Commander of the Fleet (MODs highest position possible), that in his opinion there is a cover-up and UFOs are of defence significance. He states that films and evidence of UFOs are being withheld by the MOD. A MOD ruling from 1967 meant that all UFO reports would be preserved in the Public Records Office for viewing by the public, because of renewed interest in the subject of UFOs. However if the seven secret MOD departments were investigating UFOs back then, where are the departments files relating to this? No files are available or due to be released for these departments. It is as if they didn't exist and efforts to find out if these departments moved on to have new names have proved fruitless as this information is deemed sensitive and cannot be given out to the public. We know that documents exist which have not been released to the UK public because these documents have been copied to the US government and have been released to US citizens under the American Freedom of Information Act. This release circumvented UK secrecy laws. Some of these documents show that UFO incidents have taken place on UK soil, involving American airbases. We also know that some of these bases have had overflights of UFOs, which subsequently interfered and rendered some of the nuclear weapons stored on the base inoperable, e.g. the 1980 Woodbridge / Bentwaters incidents. The mere fact that these weapons were stored in this US airbase on British soil is still a top-secret. (Proof of the nuclear aspect is available in a new book LEFT AT EAST GATE published by Michael '0 Mara books.) I have just secured my own evidence of the Nuclear aspect at Bentwaters by secretly visiting the site with a team of UFO investigators, including Richard Conway and two original witnesses. We visited the nuclear bunkers and will be releasing this proof soon. Readers should note that the proposals for a UK Freedom of Information act are clear in there being no responsibility for the MOD to take part. (Although it is my understanding that some MOD departments feel that they may be included so are preparing anyhow). I feel this is an unnaceptable situation and would only support a total government and military-wide Freedom of Information act. When looking at the files which follow, remember that whenever the MOD have been questioned on the subject of UFOs they have given a statement that UFOs are of "No Defence Significance". Clearly the files show that UFOs were of defence significance otherwise they would not be investigating them at such a high level. SO WHAT FILES ARE WE TALKING ABOUT ANYHOW..... 1. "Project Bluebook" was the USAF public project to investigate UFOs using air force resources. Its leader, Dr J Allen Hynek left the project in disgust saying that it was keeping the best and most unexplained records away from the Bluebook files. Subsequently he stated that the conclusions of the report, which were that most sightings could be explained and that no evidence of extraterrestrial life could be determined, was at the very best a cover-up of the highest order. (There were secret level investigations going on behind Project Bluebook which we now know of as project Sign and Grudge.) In this letter the MOD were writing to Project Bluebook and state that UFO investigations were carried out as part of the MODs Air Force Technical Intelligence Dept. Obviously the MOD, whilst writing to another Military unit, were prepared to admit to their investigations at a high level which is a point they would not admit publicly. This then shows that investigations went on at a high level than those of Airstaff 2a, the former office of Nick Pope. MOD admit to a policy of playing down the subject of UFOs. In doing this they avoid public or political pressure to mount a large scale - probably public - investigation on UFOs. It is not the military's right to make decisions that will affect politics. The military are supposed to be under the control of government and not acting in such a way as to dictate government policy. 2. Nick Pope was asked directly about Provost and Security Service and RAF Rudloe Manors involvement in UFO investigations. He denied any knowledge of these facts although he was in office at a time when Kerry Philpott (Nick Popes successor) alleges that they sent reports to him. Work that out! Here we see a file letter showing that Provost & Security Service were investigating UFOs and that the files were classified as CONFIDENTIAL (a little hard to see on this photocopy). We also see that the MOD sent out officers to interview witnesses which may give rise to certain cases of "Men In Black" or "Men from the Ministry" visitations that have been reported by witnesses over the years. The MOD have denied that they ever sent out officers to visit witnesses. Nick Pope in his book OPEN SKIES CLOSED MINDS very firmly states the opinion that no MOD officers went out to visit witnesses and believes that these "MIBs" were just oddball characters - "Walter Mitty characters" who "dressed up" to scare witnesses and were nothing to do with the MOD. In fact this file gives the name of the officer who went out to interview the witness and page 2 of the report (which is not included in this file) goes even further into the fact that officers visited her on a few occasions. The witness, Mrs Ann Henson has now been visited by UFO researchers who confirmed that she was "advised" by the MOD to not talk about her sighting to press or public and not to discuss the MOD investigation. She kept to this silence for 30 years until she was contacted by researchers. My question is how many other witnesses have been "advised" not to talk by the MOD in this fashion? Provost and Security Service is the department which has been rumoured for many years as being involved in UFO investigations and was first exposed in such a role in Timothy Goods book Above Top Secret. I featured my investigations into Rudloe Manor Alien Encounters a few editions ago and now it is clear the importance of this and other departments in the whole UFO investigations network. Provost & Security Services are based at RAF Rudloe Manor. Another interesting feature about RAF Rudloe Manor is that most of its facilities are housed underground in a labyrinth of 35 miles of tunnels. I have never heard any rumours of aliens down there, though - just a lot of intelligence work and war time control operations. 3. MOD have made statements that no UFO reports were classified secret yet in this Intelligence report, from one of the Secret UFO investigation units, we see the word SECRET clearly used. The report describes an object which was moving at speeds EXCEEDING 1400Mph. No explanation could be found for the sighting. The speed was faster than any aircraft of the day.Officers who were experienced in radar made the statement that the reported contacts were not those of any conventional aircraft. We read that the MOD were unhappy to see reports of UFOs getting to the press and deny that the sighting was not backed up with radar evidence. This is clearly disinformation being fed to the British Public - proof again of a cover-up. The tone of this statement shows us that these secret investigators would pass on recommendations to civil servants in the publicly known UFO reporting departments (Nick Popes office) enabling them to make statements fit for public consumption. In this way the secret units could operate their investigations without being hindered because the names of these departments were hidden from view by the "front of shop" Whitehall MOD office writing replies to people. OTHER FACTS Some of the other documents available in UFO files include radar tracking of objects by the military. One incident which occurred in West Freugh which was forwarded to secret department DDI Tech was that of a set of five objects, which were measured to be as big as ships, which proceeded from 50,000ft to 70,000ft. A second radar was switched on and confirmed the objects at this height. The considered expert opinion of the military was that these objects were indeed unidentified and of an unknown type and origin. The radar operators were able to rule out the possibility of radar interference or that they may have misidentified charged clouds etc. This makes the incident very worthy of note. Other incidents include similar radar tracks of objects which travelled at speeds in excess of 4000 MPH. These speeds are faster than any known aircraft can achieve today, let alone back then in the 1960's! THE MISSING FILE In and around March 1995 the file which contained so many of these revelations about departments in the MOD investigating UFOs went missing after Nick Redfern was filmed for a documentary called Out Of This World. The official explanation for the missing file was that it has been misfiled. We suspected otherwise but it took the intervention of MP Ieuan Wyn Jones asking a question in the House Of Commons to bring the file back. The file was returned two days after the question being tabled. Still the excuse that we were given was that it had indeed been misfiled - this was after one year of looking for it and one major file search (known as a census). In a visit to the Public Records Office in 1996, myself and Richard Conway and Chris Fowler were told by Vivian Bales that the file was probably with the MOD as they often recalled sensitive files which they may have released information in by mistake. It was her opinion that this is possibly what had happened. We did not prompt her for this explanation and she gave it to us as an unofficial comment. It seems she may have been telling the truth as we shall see. I didn't buy the official missing file story so went on my own search for who might have had the file at the MOD. I used contacts I have in government to give me a lead about where inside the MOD where I might find an answer. I was given the details of a small department which is housed inside the Metropole Building in Northumberland Avenue. This is the Central Records Management Unit and after speaking to the staff there I was put onto the Deputy Departmental Records Officer, Mr I D Goode. Mr Goode checked his records and confirmed that he had records on the file being inside the MOD and sent to a department in November of 1996. He could not tell us which department because he said this was against the rules, but confirmed to me that by his records someone at the MOD had the file. I asked him to be very sure of what he was saying and he re-confirmed the details to me verbally and then by letter. This proved that an MP and members of the public were being lied to about the whereabouts of this file. Both the MOD and Public Records Office had assured us that they had carried out proper checks on the whereabouts of this file. If they had then surely they would have found out that it was booked to MOD. The fact that we were not told which department was dealing with the file was proof that there was some collusion behind the scenes. The final part of the saga is that an official clamp-down has come into force, and now we are told by Kerry Philpott of the MOD official UFO cover-up department that Mr I D Goode was in fact wrong and had made a clerical error and the records he had should have read Nov 95. This letter should not have come from Kerry Philpott anyway - it should have come from I D Goode who had made the statement to me in his previous letter. Why does it always happen when someone asks about UFOs or writes to government officials that a clamp down on details happens and you get a reply from Kerry Philpott? Why is it also that government denies that many other departments investigate UFOs and then send their watered-down conclusions through Kerry Philpott and Airstaff 2a for dissemination to the public. Well I think the answer to that question is obvious from the above. One thing is now clear, we have the ammunition to fight the government over the files of these seven secret departments who files do not appear in the Public Records Office. It has even been hinted to me by one insider that if any files for these departments did exist that they would not become public because most of these files are Defence Intelligence orientated and these types of files rarely get released, if at all! My source also tells me that these files would most certainly be screened for department names which were not to be public and our departments would probably come into that category. So a fight, it will probably have to be! SUMMARY What we have here is clear evidence of the Ministry of Defence being involved in playing down and covering up UFO sightings. UFO reports were classified as secret and details probably were not meant to be released to the public. Procedures were in place for the secret departments to lie to the public about conclusions of their investigations through the front of the Whitehall civil servant departments. We also know that the enormity of the sightings that were being reported back then show that UFOs were of extreme defence significance. Lastly we now know that the MOD were sending out officers to interview witnesses and these said same officers were trying to silence witnesses. It all fits together nicely. What we now need to know is where did those departments go and where do they operate from today. We also need to know where all of the investigations files from the many years of UFO research these departments have carried out. We are preparing to find these departments and to ask for the files. We will bring you further updates of any information we gather. Readers will be very interested to read about even more of the revelations in a new book by author Nick Redfern which will be released in September. It is called "A Covert Agenda" and will be published by Simon & Schuster. [UK 3]****** Source: Daily Mail newspaper Date: Thursday to October 1997 Scientists step back 385 million years A set of ancient footprints discovered in Ireland may be the oldest in the world, scientists said yesterday. They were made by a 3ft long salamander like amphibian known as tetrapod, which was one of the first creatures to emerge from the sea. The creature lived around 385 million years ago - long before the first dinosaurs or mammals.. The fosilised trail, leading 60ft out of the sea on Valentia Island off County Kerry, is said to be so valuable that round - the - clock guards may be needed. [UK 4]****** Source: Daily Mail newspaper Date: Thursday to October 1997 (see e-zine issue {73}for original story - available from:) (http://www.holodeck.demon.co.uk/) A starless night and the ghost bomber roams the skies By Chris Brooke For years, the mystery of the ghost bomber has been part of the folklore of the district. On starless nights, sightings of the fuzzy image of a World War II Halifax airplane would frequently be reported in the skies above the remote East Yorkshire village of Wetwang. With no other explanation to hand, locals speculated that the area might be haunted by some tragic pilot who perished in an act of wartime heroism. The legend of the ghost bomber spread, until an aviation buff in the neighbouring village of Fridaythorpe admitted: "Er, sorry - but it's probably all my fault." Richard Triners hobby is sketching. His favourite subjects are old aeroplanes...and occasionally, to give him inspiration, he projects a picture of an old bomber, on the night sky. The 52 - year - old former RAF personnel officer began his night time projections when he moved to the area seven years ago. It was at the time that the first sightings of a mystery four engined wartime bomber in RAF colours were reported. He carried on, unaware of the stir he was creating five miles away in Wetwang. "All the local papers carried stories but for some reason I didn't see them," a sheepish Mr Triner said yesterday. "Then a friend told me about the latest spate, which started three weeks ago. "That's when I was playing around with the image of a Halifax bomber to inspire me to sketch it. "I thought then that I'd have to tell people it's me, but I hope everyone can see the funny side." Mr Triner, who cares full time for his disabled wife Susan, added: "it might seem an eccentric thing to do but it's harmless and I'm very sorry if I've upset anyone. "I use a 100 - watt projector and need very dark nights, usually in the early morning. I can't always get the image in full focus, some times it works, some times it doesn't. "A ghostly appearance could be explained by the fact that the image often gets blurred. "It can look spooky and with clouds rushing past the image it looks like it's moving. Over the years it might have looked like the Battle of Britain out there." Not all the locals, however, are convinced by Mr Triners explanation for the dozens of appearances of the Wetwang bomber over the years. He projects images of the Halifax only at night and when conditions are cloudy to give the best chance of a perfect image - and many people claim they have seen the ghost airplane during the day. World News ========= [W 1]****** Source: Teletext - World News Date: Thursday 25th September 1997 TWA Flight 800 USA: Investigators believe that bundled wires may have caused the explosion that brought down TWA Flight 800 last year, killing 230 people. [W 2]****** Source: Teletext - Factfile Date: Thursday 25th September 1997 Lego UFOs Danish toy giant Lego is pinning it's hopes of a Christmas jackpot on it's new range of high-tech UFO toys. [W 3]****** From: "Brian Straight" <briansxx@iquest.net> Source: Sunday Times newspaper Date: Sunday 21st September 1997 Pilotless Stealth Fighter IN THE week that the future of America's F-117 stealth fighter is uncertain, following an unexplained crash at a Baltimore airshow, an American military contractor has revealed its plan for a next-generation, pilotless stealth fighter capable of flying at hypersonic speeds. The Uninhabited Combat Air Vehicle (UCAV) has a wingspan of about 27ft, and each fighter will cost about $12m (7.7m). The American air force hopes the first UCAVs could begin service in about 2005. The UCAV's tail-less design and futuristic rounded surface will allow it to avoid enemy radar, and an onboard computer will constantly randomise its flight path to confuse enemy tracking systems. Northrop Grumman, the Californian defence contractor that also built the B-2 Spirit stealth bomber, is developing the first UCAV, which will use the same radar-deflecting material as the B-2. Greg Zwernemann, manager of advanced uninhabited concepts, says the UCAV will be used for dangerous missions such as deep strikes into enemy territory and attacking heavily guarded enemy bases. -[continued in part 2]- Search for other documents from or mentioning: ufo | truthseekers |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 8 {82} part 2 - United Kingdom UFO Network From: United Kingdom UFO Network <ufo@holodeck.demon.co.uk> Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 20:39:43 +0000 Fwd Date: Wed, 08 Oct 1997 00:53:20 -0400 Subject: {82} part 2 - United Kingdom UFO Network ______ _______ ____ ------ / / // ____// |---------------------------------------------- U K / / // ___/ / / ' Sept 8th, 1997 / / // / / / / N E T W O R K part 2 Issue 82 --- (_____//__/ -- (_____/------------------------------------------------ The United Kingdom UFO Network - a free electronic magazine with subscribers in over 40 countries. This issue comes in 3 parts. If any part is missing please mail: ufo@holodeck.demon.co.uk giving the issue number. The issue will be reposted to you. Please put the details as below in the subject section e.g. Repost {82} part 1, part 2 or part 3. "Real-time datalinks between operators on the ground and the weapons system mean that we can attack without risking an air crew," he explains. According to an American air force report on UCAV technology, intelligent programs will also be used in the aircraft's onboard computer. Zwernemann says that after take-off from an American airbase the UCAV would be guided towards targets by GPS, the global satellite positioning system. A second, smaller version that can be launched from current bombers is under development and will increase the UCAV's range. Once over hostile terrain, a constantly updated map of known defences will be used to pinpoint targets. Human operators will then take over to launch and guide missiles. Although the American military claims that most of the technology it intends to use to control the UCAV does not yet exist, a recent report reveals that there are already plans to use virtual-reality (VR) technology and even holographic displays to allow operators to control the UCAVs easily. The report also hints at the operators' ability to reshape the plane's entire wing, not just the rudders used in current plane designs. Several air-force contractors are working on such systems, and have already flown prototype versions. It is envisaged that operators will enter a room containing holographic displays and VR equipment, and because each UCAV would require attention only when near a target, each operator could control several units during a shift. Once the UCAV launches its payload, a "return-to-base" agent is activated, which can then fly back to a pre-programmed base without operator intervention. The agent is also able to recalculate constantly its course to evade detection by enemy radar. The report also recommended that the air force "aggressively encourage and exploit" thought-control systems, now being developed, to allow the disabled to move a computer cursor on screen. The main advantage of not having a pilot on board is that the plane's performance does not need to be stifled to ensure a pilot survives. Whereas a normal plane can accelerate only at about 10G, the UCAV will have an acceleration of about 20G, allowing it to outrun most current missiles. Because there is no cockpit, the design is flatter, making it even less visible to radar. Northrop Grumman's UCAV also includes a third wing, called a delta wing, on the front of the aircraft. This increases manoeuvrability, and the air force believes it will allow the fighter to dodge missiles. However, the delta wing, when combined with the plane's speed, also dramatically increases the stresses on the UCAV's airframe and would kill a pilot instantly. Initially, the UCAV is likely to use existing fighter jet engines. However, the air force has revealed that a future version is likely to use a combination of existing jet engines and new, air-breathing engines capable of reaching hypersonic speeds of up to Mach 15 (about 5km a second). The UCAV will also have an altitude range of 85,000ft-150,000ft. According to the report, this will allow accurate strikes to be carried out anywhere in the world in a matter of minutes. Although Northrop Grumman and the air force have not yet revealed exactly what payloads the UCAV could carry, the air force has admitted it is developing a high-powered airborne laser (ABL) to destroy slow-moving targets such as missile launchers. Several fighters could work together to destroy larger targets with an ABL. The UCAV will also be able to carry a range of guided missiles weighing up to 1,000lb. The air force also revealed plans for tiny microexplosive missile systems, carrying only a few grams of explosive, that could be used to track and detonate when they hit an individual soldier moving round the battlefield. [W 4]****** Source: Sightings on the Radio From: George A. Filer: MUFON Eastern Director Date: August 1997 MUFON Skywatch Investigations August 1987 In July, UFO air crews were on vacation, but August activity has suddenly increased. NEW JERSEY (Case 97/8/6) David Stein, a computer expert was driving home late from work on the Garden State Parkway, when he saw blue circular lights low over the highway. At approximately 10:00 p.m., his and other cars started slowing near the Hazlet exit about twenty miles south of New York City. The bright blue lights were not blinking, but seemed to contract and expand in intensity causing traffic to stop and look at the amazing sight. The UFO moved up and down and to the left and the right of the roadway. David believes other drivers must have seen the low flying craft, because so many cars stopped on the heavily traveled highway. The craft appeared as a disc about three inches in diameter at arms length. David estimated its actual size was much larger than an automobile. After the traffic stopped, the bright blue lights suddenly flew off to the west between some trees at high speed and then traffic resumed. David Stein was very shaken by the sighting. He said, "He had always been a skeptic about UFOs, but not any more. I feel no helicopter or other craft could perform those maneuvers." Further investigation is continuing. GEORGIA (Case 97/2/20) John Thompson, GA State Director has finished the investigation of a sighting over La Grange. The witness, a mechanic, saw four bright white lights in the Northeast sky. Each light was larger than Venus and formed a rectangle that stood 45 degrees above the horizon. He slowed his vehicle to obtain a better look and his truck lights angled up on a hill. The four separate lights suddenly merged at instantaneous speed, and then flew almost straight up. The lights were like spotlights, brighter and larger than anything the witness had ever seen in the sky, except for the sun or moon. Total viewing time was over a minute. The exact date of the sighting is unknown, but occurred in the second half of February of this year. FLORIDA (Case 97/6/17) Jean and Eugene Brown MUFON State Section Directors, field investigators Carol Hammond, and Polly Bryer have finished the investigation of a Tampa daylight sighting. Olga Booker, the primary witness was driving home at 11:20 a.m. when she spotted what she at first thought was a blimp with red and white lights. She then realized it was not blimp and started to follow in her car. The object was moving slowly from the south to north low over some trees and buildings looking like a heavy iron pot. The object was pyramid shaped with one side slightly curved with three pulsating orange to red colored lights on each corner. There were also a series of white twinkling lights on the UFO. About thirty lights were on the rear curved portion of the car sized object. It was flat like a pancake and had no wings, tail, or windows. It was a dark green/grey/brown color. It had scratch or grain like lines running left to right that reflected a copper or gold like color on its surface. Two male witnesses also saw the object. One looked at the UFO and said, "What is it?" It flew off to the east at high speed. The object was sighted just a few miles north of MacDill Air Force Base and coming from that direction. The Air Force said, "It was not theirs." Olga appeared on local TV showing a drawing she made of the craft. FLORIDA (Case 97/08/11) In Key West, Shayna Szmiot reports seeing a hazy ring around the moon. She stated then, "There were flashing lights similar to a police car that zipped around the moon and passed over my house within 20 seconds. It then showed a strobe light then disappeared within 30 seconds with a similar flash of bright lights!!!! Their phone number is: 305 295 1356 Shayna address is: 1411 Truman Ave. Key West, FL 33041. Thanks to John Thompson, GA State Director and ISUR. KENTUCKY Mr. Hutch, age 24 reports sighting two UFOs at 12:20 a.m., August 12, 1997 near Buffalo, in central Kentucky. He and his wife saw two objects moving directly overhead at a high altitude but, too far away to tell the size or shape. They looked like stars, but were moving fast in random patterns. They moved too fast for normal aircraft, and too erratic for the meteors. They both seemed to be moving at same time, but not in same format or direction. It was a warm, dark night, there was a slight mist in the air and storms were forecast. The craft darted around the sky for 15 minuets The sighting took place near an urban area, where there is an air route close by. Thanks to B.U.F.O.D. Website Case R207, Ben at Ben@abcfield.force9.co.uk or http://www.abcfield.force9.co.uk TEXAS On the evening of Friday, July 25, 1997, Cliff S. and his young son were in their pickup truck going west on Farm Road 1488, in eastern Texas when they saw something unusual in the sky. In their farm county, Cliff explained, "They're used to seeing air traffic traveling between Dallas and Houston in a north-south direction. So when a strange object appeared in the western sky, he took notice. They saw two bright beams, a blinking red in between rather unusual in the way it was going. It seemed to hang in the sky and not move, so we watched it for a while. I reached back and got my binoculars (which) I'd left in the truck since the (Hale-Bopp) comet, and pulled over. I looked at it. It was about the size of an airliner, but much closer. I could see a faint gleam of a cockpit in the middle, with window panes. I was having a weird feeling, such as I remember having as a kid whenever I'd seen unusual things in the sky." Cliff's son took the binoculars and confirmed the sighting. Then Cliff watched and said, "Now that I realized that they were very close, I couldn't hear any sound. I turned off the truck engine to hear better, and we both got out. It was just overhead, but the only sound around it was like its wings cutting through the air. Directly overhead...we couldn't see the outline, but it seemed triangular. It was black or dark. No red lights visible from below. A pair of white lights close together, side by side...then another pair behind it, less bright, then another pair, bright again, at the rear. They also had two bright white spotlights at the tip of each wing. It seemed to be following our (farm) road to the east, and would slowly bank to one side, then to the other." (Many thanks to Steve Wilson Sr. for this news story.) UFO ROUNDUP, #31 Editor Joseph Trainor, Masinaigan@aol.com ARIZONA On 5 Aug. 1997, in Ash Fork, AZ. Wheels Wegener II reports seeing two sets of very bright blue/greenish lights. There were five or so, he cannot remember exactly how many. He reports, "The lights were hovering over peak across the valley from where I live with one American made chopper with them. The chopper was in area the day before. One set of lights turns on end, and drops into the top of the mountain, or behind it, then comes back up and into horizontal formation and all three leave. A couple of days before, a bright silver ball was in the sky moving toward Phoenix. It vanishes into a bright blue circle and then the blue circle vanishes. Thanks to Wheels165@aol.com and Skywatch International at Skywatch@wic.net QUOTE FROM FIRST CIA DIRECTOR Admiral Roscoe Hillenkoetter, the first Director of the CIA (1947-1950). Stated in 1950, "Unknown objects are operating under intelligent control. It is imperative that we learn where UFOs come from and what their purpose is." The source for this quote is: Bruce Maccabee, Maryland MUFON State Director "What The Admiral Knew: UFO, MJ-12 and R.Hillenkoetter," International UFO Reporter, Nov/Dec., 1986. FIRE OFFICER'S GUIDE Jerry Washington, Kentucky MUFON State Director provides us with several paragraphs out of chapter 13,"Enemy Attack and UFO Potential" of the "Fire Officer's Guide To Disaster Control, (2nd Edition)." The authors: William M. Kramer, Ph.D.,District Fire Chief, Cincinnati Fire Division, and the Director of Fire Science, University of Cincinnati; and Charles W. Bahme, J.D., Deputy Chief of the L.A. Fire Department (Retired), Captain, USN Reserve and Attorney at Law, have penned the vanguard publication used throughout the fire and disaster control fields as a teaching tool. ENEMY ATTACK AND UFO POTENTIAL In this chapter we will now turn our attention to the very real threat posed by Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs)...if the apparent visits by alien beings and their space vehicles should pose any type of threat, it will, as always, be the fire service that is called upon to provide the first line of life-saving defense and disaster mitigation... Hence, as we near the year 2000 and move beyond, any comprehensive disaster plan should address the potential for panic and other deleterious effects that might befall a populated area when unexplained phenomena occur. We will see, as we continue our discussion in this chapter, that widespread blackouts, communication disruptions, and other potentially disastrous conditions have been linked directly to UFO sightings. Hence, fire service leaders who want to ensure that their disaster planning is complete will not neglect an appendix to outline these things that could be done in preparation for an occurrence of such phenomena... The subject of UFOs was not included in previous editions of this book. The first edition was the "Handbook of Disaster Control" which Chuck personally published in 1952 following his release from active naval duty in the Korean War. Although his services in the conflict as Security Coordinator for the Chief of Naval Operations involved the creation of a worldwide disaster control organization for the protection of the physical properties of the Navy, it must be admitted that the directives approved for this new organization did not reflect any significant concern for a flying saucer threat to its shore establishment. That was in the 1950s. Now that we are in the 1990s it is doubtful that the UFO potential would be brushed off so lightly by our military security forces. This change of attitude was evidenced as far back as December 24, 1959, when the Inspector General of the Air Force issued the following Operations and Training Order: "Unidentified Flying Objects -- sometimes treated lightly by the press and referred to as 'Flying Saucers' -- must be rapidly and accurately identified as serious Air Force business..." [W 5]****** Source: Sightings on the Radio Date: 12th September 1997 Art Bell Show Satellite Hit With EMP? David Kressman, Director, STA GE-1 HIT WITH APPARENT E.M.P. DURING "AREA-51" CONFESSION Art Bell hosts "Coast-to-Coast AM," a nightly talk show from Pahrump, Nevada, a small town near "Area 51" (an airbase which the U.S. government officially denies the existence of, despite the massive size of the complex. UFO's are frequently seen near this site.) Art's radio program is relayed from the studio in Pahrump to the network headquarters by satellite GE-1. At about 1AM EST, Friday, September 12, 1997, he designated one phone line for Area 51 employees to call in and "spill the beans." Several interesting and convincing callers took the bait. Then came one bizarre call from an obviously distraught and terrified man who claimed to be a former Area 51 employee recently discharged for "medical" reasons. He cited malevolent extraterrestrials at Area 51 and an impending disaster that the government knew would take out "major population centers." Midway through this call (according to GE engineers) the satellite's "Earth sensor lost lock" and the craft rolled into an attitude where it no longer pointed at the uplinks, causing 50 channels to go off-air for about 30 minutes. Shortly after the outage began, the live internet video feed from Art's studio was lost as well. Unaware of these events, Bell continued talking to the caller for another minute during the outage until he heard a scream and the phone went dead. A reporter from Penthouse visiting the studio to gather information for a story about the program witnessed the event and furiously took notes. Minutes later, Bell received a call from his network on a conventional analog "hotline" saying that he was "off the air." He checked the uplink transmitter and saw that it had suffered complete loss of communication with GE-1. At this point they resumed transmission on a 56k digital phone line and went back on the air. Then the analog "hotline" to the network cut out and Art was unable to speak to network engineers. One of the first callers after the outage was someone who claimed to be from Area-51 "security." He said that his job was to "close gaps," the network had been "pulsed" and that we "would not hear from the caller again." (An ElectroMagnetic Pulse is a method of overloading electronic equipment in a target area; EMP generators were funded under the original SDI research. The phenomenon was discovered by accident during the 1960's when the phone network in Hawaii was disabled by a nuclear test 800 miles distant.) Speculation about an EMP continued as this was "verified" by several callers: A man from Kingston (also near area 51) said he was on hold waiting to go on the air, and both his home telephone lines went dead. Another caller, an RF engineer employed at Hughes AeroSpace in Tucson (and an expert on EMP shielding), stated that he had suffered "cloud bounce" from the pulse and his personal computer and digital watch were wiped clean. A third caller reminded the audience that author Nick Begich stated in his book "Angels don't Play this HAARP" that a military antenna array in Alaska has the capability to remove individual satellites from service and generate such pulses. (Incidentally, the HAARP design bears a great similarity to the work of Nikola Tesla, who publicly made claims about the potential of his inventions to generate EMP anywhere on the planet.) Finally, another caller reminded the audience of an event several months prior where it was confirmed that a number of employees at the Cheyenne Mountain nuclear-hardened underground base convinced as many friends and family as they could to move immediately to a remote location in South America. Art closed the show by speculating on whether (in the mind of the government) the "enemy" of National Security had now become the American people. [W 6]****** Date: 4th February 1993 Cy Gilson Polygraph test of Travis Walton The Final Test The following report on the final polygraph examination of Travis Walton was actually sponsored by a skeptic, Jerry Black. The test was performed with the latest state of the art equipment, by Cy Gilson, the most highly respected polygraph expert. 4 February 1993 Mr. Jerry Black (Address) Blanchester, Ohio Dear Mr. Black, On February 4, 1993, a polygraph examination was administered to Mr. Travis Walton. The purpose of this examination was to determine whether or not Mr. Walton was being truthful in his statement about seeing a UFO and being abducted by the UFO plus other facts surrounding the abduction. During the pretest interview, Mr. Walton said he had worked for Mike Rogers intermittently for about six years on a seasonal basis. He never socialized with any of the crew. On November 5, 1975, they had worked a little later than usual trying to meet the contract commitment. By the time they were driving back to town, the sun had gone down but there was some light, like twilight. As they were driving, he could see a glimmer of light in the trees ahead. At first he thought it may be a downed airplane. The light was unusual. As they neared a clearing he saw the object he called a UFO. This object will be referred to as a UFO throughout this report. As the truck came to a stop, Mr. Walton got out. Believing it may take off, he walked briskly towards the UFO but slowed his pace before reaching it. He described it as being round and hovering about 20 feet above the ground. He did not go underneath it but stood there looking up at it. He said the UFO started to wobble slightly and make a noise. Mr. Walton said the noise was like a low rumble that developed into a higher pitch that seemed to increase in frequency. At this point he became afraid and decided to go back to the truck. He recalls being hit with an electrifying type of shock that stunned him, leaving him unconscious. He recalls he slowly regained consciousness. He found himself in a small room that was damp or humid. He had pain throughout his body but mostly in his chest and head. He then saw three creatures he described as being about four feet tall with large, dark eyes. He was lying on some type of table. As these creatures approached him he got off the table. There was some type of shelf near the wal1 where he found a straight pipelike object lying on it. He describes it as being round like a piece of pipe but lightweight. He cannot recall if it was solid or hollow. He picked it up and started to lash out at the creatures to keep them at bay. The creatures left the room by an open doorway, turning right. Mr. Walton walked to that doorway, looked down a hall and he went left. He walked into another room, trying to find an exit from this enclosure. He did not know if he was in a spaceship or a building. A humanlike creature came into the room, took him by the arm, leading him to another very large room where several more humanlike creatures were. By this time most of the pain was gone. He was forced down on a table and had a mask, similar to an oxygen mask, put on his face. He does not remember anything else until he awoke next to the road, just outside Heber. As he regained consciousness, he looked up, seeing the UFO or one similar to the original one, hovering overhead. As he looked up at it, the UFO sped off into the sky. Mr. Walton said his story is true. He said accusations made about him are lies. He had not been on any drugs of any kind. He was not hiding out somewhere on the Gibson ranch. He urinated in a jar and this sample was given to Dr. Kandell later that same day. Mr. Walton denies he conspired with Mr. Rogers to perpetrate a hoax to help him get out of the Turkey Springs contract with the Forestry Service. Two series of questions were asked to cover all the areas we believe were important. The relevant questions asked and the answers given are as follows: Series #1: Question #R1: On November 5, 1975, in the forest area called Turkey Springs, did you see a large glowing object hovering in the air? Answer: YES Question #R2: While you were standing near that UFOlike object, did you believe you were struck by an energy source emitted from that large object? Answer: YES Question #R3: After regaining consciousness in a small, humid room, did you see nonhuman creatures with large dark eyes? Answer: YES Question #R4: Did you conspire with your brother Duane or anyone else or act alone to stage a hoax about your UFO abduction? Answer: NO Series #2: Question #R1: Between November 1 and 11, 1975, did you use any drugs, either legal or illegal? Answer: NO Question #R2: Between November 5 and 10, 1975, were you hiding anywhere on the Gibson ranch? Answer: NO Question #R3: Was the urine sample given to Dr. Kandell on November 11, 1975, your first voided specimen following your UFO experience? Answer: YES Question #R4: Was this UFO incident a conspiracy to help Mike Rogers get out of his Turkey Springs contract? Answer: NO Mr. Walton's physiological responses were monitored during the presentation of these questions by means of a Scientific Assessment Technology's Computer, Model CAPS 700. The following responses were recorded on this instrument's strip chart: relative blood pressure; skin conductance; thoracic and abdominal respiration. Data from three presentations of these questions were respiration. Data obtained for each series, and were subject to numerical scoring and computerbased analysis. The numerical score of Series #1 was +34. The numerical score of Series #2 was +26. In the system of numerical scoring developed and validated at the University of Utah, total numerical scoring of +6 or more is considered indications of truthfulness. The computerbased analysis returned a posterior probability of truthfulness of .964 in the first series, and a .961 in the second series. These indicating that charts like these produced in each series, by Mr. Walton, are produced by truthful examinees 96% of the time. Based on the numerical score of the polygraph charts and the computer based analysis, it is the opinion of this examiner that Mr. Walton was being truthful when he answered these relevant questions. Sincerely, Cy Gilson Thank you, Jerry Black! These examinations clear the air with a thoroughness, an utter finality, which can't be refuted. Cy Gilson used a widely practiced, extremely accurate, stateoftheart method developed and perfected at the University of Utah. This involves a computerized monitoring and analysis of the tracings along with a pointscoring system of the charts applied by the examiner. In summary: The computer put all three of us near the top of the range designated as conclusively truthful (almost no one ever achieves the theoretical maximum of 1.00), with me at .964 and .961, Mike at .990, and Allen at .993. On the numerical score I was first with +34 and +26 points, Mike had +31 points and Allen had +22 points. - Travis Walton [W 7]****** From: owner-iso_update@lists.primenet.com Date: Friday 3rd October 1997 Mars Pathfinder - Still no signal The Mars Pathfinder spacecraft team has been experiencing communication problems with the lander spacecraft on Mars. The last successful data transmission cycle was completed Saturday morning, September 27, 1997 at 3:23 am (sol 83). On September 27, at 11:15 pm, (sol 84) no signal was received. The spacecraft was powered on at 2:00 am local Mars time to perform early morning weather measurements and sky images. The lack of a signal, at that time was thought to be caused by a possible reset, ground system problem or low voltage condition. A reset or a low voltage condition, caused by the aging battery, would cause the spacecraft sequence to automatically stop and not execute its planned communication with earth. On September 29 at 1:30 am (sol 85) the team attempted to command the spacecraft to send a carrier signal to earth over the low gain and high gain antennae. Neither signal was received. In the early morning of September 30 (sol 86), the team again attempted to command the spacecraft to send a carrier signal to earth over the low gain antenna. This attempt was done at Mars local noon in order to ensure maximum power on the solar arrays in order to power the s/c transmitter . No signal was received. At this point a preliminary assessment was made of possible problems. As in the past, loss of communication can be caused by problems with the ground system, flight software and/or flight hardware. On early Wednesday morning, October 1, (sol 87), assuming a possible hardware problem, the team commanded the spacecraft to switch to its auxiliary transmitter. At first no signal was received but at approximately 4:23 am, a signal was received that lasted for about 20 minutes. The team also attempted to power on the secondary string of the main transmitter but no signal was seen. Thursday morning, October 2, (sol 88), the team attempted to get digital data from the auxiliary transmitter. During the beginning of track the spacecraft auxiliary transmitter signal was seen again. The signal turned off at 11:30 local solar time on Mars indicating that the s/c computer had enough power to wake-up and turn off the transmitter. Because of the late wake-up there was no time to attempt to receive digital data from the s/c. At this point the team assessed that the s/c may be seeing extra loads on the bus resulting in late wake-up times. Since this could be related to a battery failure, commands were sent to put the spacecraft in a mode where it does not use the battery and takes it off-line. It is not clear whether these commands were received. October 3, (sol 89), the team once again attempted to get digital data on the auxiliary transmitter. No data was received. However, the time of day in which it was necessary to try and send data due to tracking station elevation requirements may have been too early for the s/c to have been awake. A later attempt was made to send and activate a sequence on the s/c which put the Pathfinder in the safest state possible for a potential non-operational battery. There was no signal indicating that these commands executed on the s/c. The problem of not seeing this signal could have been ground station related. -[continued in part 3]- Search for other documents from or mentioning: ufo | ben | masinaigan |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 8 {82} part 3 - United Kingdom UFO Network From: United Kingdom UFO Network <ufo@holodeck.demon.co.uk> Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 20:39:43 +0000 Fwd Date: Wed, 08 Oct 1997 01:03:56 -0400 Subject: {82} part 3 - United Kingdom UFO Network ______ _______ ____ ------ / / // ____// |---------------------------------------------- U K / / // ___/ / / ' Sept 8th, 1997 / / // / / / / N E T W O R K part 3 Issue 82 --- (_____//__/ -- (_____/------------------------------------------------ The United Kingdom UFO Network - a free electronic magazine with subscribers in over 40 countries. This issue comes in 3 parts. If any part is missing please mail: ufo@holodeck.demon.co.uk giving the issue number. The issue will be reposted to you. Please put the details as below in the subject section e.g. Repost {82} part 1, part 2 or part 3. The rover continues to be in a contingency state. Sojourner will do nothing until Sunday, October 5 (sol 91) and then will begin to drive in an arc around the lander. The team continues to investigate a number of possible scenarios. Since so little information is currently available from the s/c the number of possible scenarios is large. However, since the s/c battery has exceeded its expected lifetime by a factor of 3, scenarios associated with the degradation of the battery are probably most likely. Learning how the s/c operates without the battery is something the team is in the process of doing. Although the Pathfinder mission has extended far beyond its expected lifetime, the team is currently doing everything possible to attempt to get back on schedule with Pathfinders extended mission. -- In Search of: http://www.in-search-of.com For questions e-mailto:Ask-Dr.Dan@in-search-of.com or: http://www.in-search-of.com/ask-dr.dan.shtml [W 8]****** Source: News Of The World newspaper Date: 28th September 1997 From: Calb1701@aol.com FIRST SIGHTING OF KGB X-FILES The clearest photos ever taken of UFOs have been unearthed in a massive KGB archive hidden since the collapse of the Soviet Union. And the dozens of pictures PROVE we are being visited by aliens, says the first Western expert given access of the incredible X-Files. British-born Philip Mantle showed some pictures exclusively to the News Of The World. He said: "They're fantastic, among the best I've seen." "Most UFO photos are taken at night, but these are all daylight shots of great clarity." Explained Philip: "In the 1980s the KGB instructed military personnel to report to report any sightings. Their files are huge, the biggest UFO study in history. "The information in them is superb and no body outside Russia ever knew about them." Flashing News of the archive comes just after 48 hours of Swissair jumbo jet captain insisted he had a "spherical" UFO at 23,000ft over New York. And a flying saucer features in one of the best KGB-file photos. Taken in Moscow on October 13 1990, it clearly shows a dark craft flashing by residential tower blocks at high speed. Author and lecturer Philip, 39, of Leeds, a former investigations chief of British UFO Research Association, concludes: "This is going to show that there ARE strange things in our skies. They are either aliens ....or something even more sinister. "I am sure the truth will come out." US investigations have now revealed evidence of alien technology implanted in humans. California surgeon Dr Roger Leir has removed three "highley anomalous implants" from a couple who claimed to have had UFO encounters. Two were removed from the woman's toes. The third was in the man's hand. And all were attached to nerves were known to exist. Dr Leir, working with Houston-based alien investigator Derrel Sims, said the implants were ultra-hard magnetic cores surrounded by a dense grey membrane which could not be cut. Tissue The membranes, made of tough proteins formed from skin and blood, prevented signs of inflammation or rejection. No one knows how the objects entered the body because no scar tissue or entry point was found. Dr Leir said "If these can teach us how to prevent tissue rejection, we could revolutionise surgery." [W 9]****** Source: The Times newspaper Date: 5th August 1997 From: "Brian Straight" <briansxx@iquest.net> Arthur C. Clarke on the myth of the extra-terrestrials Why ET will never call home It is probably too much to hope that the US Air Force's belated revelations about the source of many UFO sightings will put a stop to this tedious nonsense. Could anyone ever have seriously imagined that the Earth's skies have been full of alien visitors for the past half century, without the matter being settled one way or another? For decades now, the radars of the great powers have been able to track all objects much larger than a football that come anywhere near our planet. Of course, it may be argued that alien spacecraft invariably use Stealth techniques but it is hard to see why they should bother, since they seem so willing to make contact. In any case, that would hardly help them to evade detection by the legions of amateur astronomers who constantly scan the skies. Though it is perhaps unkind to do so, I would like to remind the UFO fanatics how earlier, widely accepted stories of alien meetings turned out to be ludicrous fabrications. Does anyone still remember George Adamski's Flying Saucers Have Landed? He reported cities on the other side of the Moon, and I believe there was once a lady who made a good living lecturing about her honeymoon on Venus. Well, we have seen the lunar Farside (and I've never forgiven the Apollo 8 crew for resisting the temptation to report a black monolith there) and we know that any Venusian rivers are likely to consist of molten lead. We will have to go further afield than our immediate neighbours to look for intelligent life perhaps life at all. What is particularly ludicrous is the widespread idea ( la Independence Day) that for several decades some super-secret branch of the United States Government has had alien spacecraft and aliens in its possession. Anyone who will believe that will believe anything. I have known many of the people who would have been involved in such a cover-up, and I can assure you that it would have a half-life of about 48 hours. As one Pentagonian once remarked sadly: "I wish it was true then all us majors would be colonels." I think that settles the matter; but then of course, I may be part of the conspiracy. Indeed, at least two of my friends were on the CIA committee looking into the UFO question, at a time when it was seriously considered that spaceships might be involved. One member (the late Professor Luis Alvarez, now famous for his theory that dinosaurs were exterminated by an asteroid 65 million years ago) told me how easy it was to dispose of most of the sightings, because the average observer simply does not know how many remarkable things there are in the sky. Frankly, if you have never seen a UFO, you're not very observant or else you live in the city and don't have access to the sky, which nowadays is an all-too-common state of affairs. I have seen at least ten UFOs, and several of them were very convincing: it took quite an effort to convert them into Identified Flying Objects. And I still can't get over the fact that my most dramatic sighting was from Stanley Kubrick's penthouse on the upper East Side the very night we had decided to make a little home-movie together. (I'm embarrassed to say that the brilliant light we watched moving across the sky turned out to be the Echo balloon satellite, seen under rather unusual circumstances. Also, Stanley and I were in somewhat exalted mood, and perhaps not as critical as we should have been.) One of the chief reasons I have never been able to take reports of alien contact seriously is that no spaceship ever contains aliens the occupants are always human! Oh, yes, they do show a few minor variations such as large eyes, or pointed ears (Hi there, Mr Spock!) but otherwise they are based on the same general design as you and I. Genuine extra-terrestrials would be really alien as different from us as the praying mantis, the giant squid, the blue whale. Nature is incredibly ingenious: just look at the fantastic variety of creatures on this planet. We are products of thousands of throws of the genetic dice; if evolution was re-started once again on Earth, at any point the branches of the tree of life might have taken a different direction and we would not be here. But something would be . . The recent excitement about Mars has again focused public interest in the possibility (most experts would say the the probability) of life on other worlds. However, we should not expect too much even from the fantastically successful Pathfinder mission. Watch out for Mars Surveyor, next month though, personally, I have considerably greater expectations for life beneath the ice-floes of the Jovian satellite Europa, for reasons given in my book 3001: The Final Odyssey. With any luck, within the next few years (what a millennial present that would be!) we may have an answer to a question that has haunted mankind since our first ancestors started looking at the skies. And let me give the last word to the brilliant team of engineers and scientists at the Jet Propulsion Lab who have amazed the world with such detailed close-ups up of the Red Planet. In reply to my message: "Hope Rover's hub-caps aren't stolen overnight," they responded: "But how exciting if they are . . ." And who says that scientists have no sense of humour? --- A FEARFUL SYMMETRY A TRUE STORY OF ALIEN INTRUSION INTO HUMAN LIVES By D. Lynne Bishop A FEARFUL SYMMETRY Copyright 1995 by D. Lynne Bishop All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical including photocopying, recording or otherwise without prior permission of the publisher, except by a reviewer who may quote brief passages. First Printing September 1995 Printed in the United States of America BOOKFINDER PUBLISHING --- CHAPTER FIVE I now knew the hidden information that had lain behind my amnesia, but it gave me little comfort. I had opened a Pandora's box, and like the figure from Greek mythology, had watched in horror as all manner of things foul in nature had sprung forth. And yet, like Pandora, I could no more close the lid on the revelations that were forthcoming than she could. I could only hope that personal growth and understanding would be the ultimate result of my actions. During my search for answers in the midst of the maelstrom, I had drawn my sister into the vortex. She, too, began recalling fragmentary dreams, and subconscious promptings from old, buried memories. Many of the fragments suggested that she, too, was tied inextricably into the alien abduction phenomenon. The ever-widening pattern of involvement distressed me terribly. I could hardly bear the thought that Mother and I were a part of it, much less my fraternal twin sister. The implications of inter-generational alien intrusion were more than I wanted to contemplate--and the fact that my sister had children made the implications even more frightening. My sister's curiosity was aroused by the possibility of her involvement, so a session was arranged for her, to be held July 12. While she knew of Mother's and my sessions, she was not aware of the details derived from those sessions On July 12, 1992, my husband and I drove my sister and her husband to the arranged session. Excerpts from that session are included here. During the pre-hypnosis discussion, my sister described several "dream" fragments, which would be explored during the session. There was also a discussion, included here, that had direct bearing on the potential inter-generational aspect of the phenomenon, relating to the possibility of implants in abductees. At this point, my sister was not hypnotized: John: Okay. You've written about a possible dream that might not be a dream. About what age would you have been? Laura: I think I was about twenty . . . maybe nineteen. John: So that would have been about 1972 or '73? Laura: Uh, huh. There might be two incidents. In one, something is going on, and I was in bed. Something disturbed me . . . so I get up, and I know other family members are there. I know the aliens are coming in. So, anyway, we're going to try to prevent them from coming in, but I know there's nothing we can do to prevent it, really. By that time, I'm in the living room, and I see something bright. Then there's a panic goin' on, or something . . . and we're trying to lock doors. But we always have trouble locking them; they don't work well. So, we're in the living room, and I knew they were going to come down the chimney. I knew they were on top of the house and out back--we were surrounded. John: Okay. What's the next thing you can recall? Laura: The final thing I remember is being in the living room, and I thought this part was so funny, because I had frozen, and had told everybody to just freeze and act like statues. I remember all of us being frozen in these positions, and thinking I had told them to do that. (Laugh). I thought . . . it was like they couldn't see us, if we couldn't see them. Then I felt . . . like a . . . a semi-float feeling. It wasn't like I was walkin' with them or anything like that. I just . . . had a view of the fireplace and everybody still standing there. That's all I remember. But when I woke up, it was much more clear. I wanted to go wake everybody up and tell them, "My God, I've been on a UFO!" John: Have you and your sister talked about this? Laura: No. I haven't discussed any of this with her. John: You mentioned that your children had a lot of nosebleeds . . . Tell us about those . . . Laura: Both my sons had a lot of nosebleeds. One of them . . . I took him to the doctor . . . I think he was in about the 2nd Grade, so this would have been late '80's. And, uh . . . he had a hole . . . (laugh) . . . and, uh . . . that never did freak me out until now. I'm not real freaked out by it, even at this point, you know. But, the doctor said, "The vein has a hole in it. Take a look." And I did. It was circular . . . and I saw it with my own eyes. The doctor cauterized it. HYPNOSIS SESSION July 12, 1992 John: (Setting the time-frame) . . . And you can recall the early '70's . . . the house and your family, when you were around nineteen or so . . . and you can begin to describe all that you see around you . . Laura: The bedroom has red wallpaper, and the bedspread is gold. The light is a chandelier. The closet is dark . . . with a sliding door. I'm gonna sleep. It's getting dark. It's nighttime. John: Is there any action? Laura: I'm getting up. It's really dark. I'm in the hallway now. There's dark paneling and red carpet, and the bathroom is blue. There's a light on, somewhere. I go look out the front doorway. I might have heard a car . . . maybe a motor. I thought it was a car. The fireplace is on my left, the TV's on my right. I'm sitting on the fireplace. I don't know why I'm there. There are newspapers there, and I think about reading one. Then I go to the backdoor. John: As you go to the backdoor, are you alone? Laura: I'm not sure . . . (my sister) might be there. But I wouldn't want her to be there. I'm afraid something would happen to her. John: It's okay, it's all right to see everything now. You're safe; you can know what happened . . . Laura: I think she's there, and we're talking about the barn . . . about going out there. There was a green light, or maybe blue . . . She's telling me about it. She went to the patio, but I'm not going to go. I see something white in front of the barn . . . silver in the center with a white glow around it. It's pie-shaped and as big as the barn. It whirs. There are three legs . . . it's sitting on them. It's pretty low, but you could walk under it. John: Are you alone in the house now? Laura: Everyone's asleep except (my sister). She's awake, see . . . She's right there. I think she wants to go out there, but I don't think it's a good idea at all. I'm not goin' John: Take another good look . . . and see if you see anything else . . as you look out there. Laura: It has little windows in the middle. They're square. There's a blue light coming out of them. The grass is moving underneath in a circular pattern. It's bent flat. John: What's the very next thing that's different; that changes the scene? Laura: We went outside and looked at the light and the backdoor. And the trees . . . I just went as far as the trees. (My sister) went clear up toward it . . . but I'm not goin'. There are two little friends . . . two little beings. They're holding her hands, one on each side. They're little and skinny . . . and there's an orange light. I keep trying to figure out what that might be. The light from the craft makes them appear to be different colors. John: What would their actual color be? Describe what they look like. Laura: White. They don't have clothes. They have three long fingers, and one that might be a thumb, but it's in front . . . in the wrong place. The fingers are long and rubbery. I think they have mittens on. Their arms are long. They have big heads and they're bald. Their face gets kinda longer on the side, though. They're squashed . . . and then kinda gets concave a little further down. They don't have a nose--it's all flat back down there to the chin line. I don't see a mouth. I think they wear a mask. It's kind of on the top half, and their eyes are covered up. They're almost as tall as my sister. They wear helmets. The fingers are bulbous on the ends. John: And what are they doing? Laura: They're walking toward the craft with my sister. Their movement is just . . . smooth. I can't tell if my sister's walking. She has on a long nightgown. I just stay by the tree. I don't think I can move. There's a door on the craft that opened . . . on the front toward the bottom. There's a black and gray light. The door opened like a camera iris. And they're going to go up. The gray light is solid, but it's got sparkles . . . pink sparkles. And they go up the light into the craft, and then the door closes. John: And then what happens? Laura: I waited by the tree, and then the door opened and she came down that gray thing, again. She's really quiet, doesn't say anything. I think she's going to go back into the house. I'm going to follow her . . . I know the spaceship will go away soon. John: How old are you and your sister right now, as you're standing by that tree? Laura: I think we're about sixteen . . . maybe seventeen. John: (Since this episode was new, and not related to any of the dreams she'd had, the hypnotist initiated a new line of questioning, in an attempt to bring out the dream memory.) . . . Now that you've seen the craft, it won't be hard to remember the other time, when you felt you needed to protect your family . . . go to that feeling . . . perhaps you can notice how old you were . . . at that time . . . Laura: Younger, I think. 'Bout ten years old. John: Okay. Perhaps you can recall what you were doing; why you might have felt protective at some point . . . Laura: I think it's because we had just moved there. That's why it all happened, I think. John: Go to that first time . . . you can remember that first moment and where you are . . . Laura: I keep thinking it's because she's under the . . . by the pond, where the tree is that she buried her little horses. I think it's because she was down there alone all the time. There's something down there, behind the pond, where it runs off . . . I think she found something. She showed it to me . . . it looked like a diamond--but a mirror. It was reflective . . . triangular. I think she buried it under the tree. It was really pretty, shiny . . John: Why did she bury it? Laura: She put every . . . she buried every . . . her stuff. It was all buried there. Little horses. When they broke their legs. It was funny to me. I thought it was funny. I laughed. John: Oh, when they broke their legs, she had to put them out of their misery? Laura: Uh, huh. John: Why would she bury this diamond-shaped thing? Laura: I think she liked it. And so she put it there so she'd know where it was. John: Was she not supposed to show it to anybody? Laura: Probably not, but she showed it to me. She treated it like a big secret. John: And who gave it to her? Laura: I don't know . . . She showed it to me behind the pond. (Chuckle) . . . Maybe a man gave it to her, if she didn't find it. I didn't find it with her; she just showed it to me. John: Okay. And so, at age ten, we were talking about a time when you felt a need to protect the house . . . that you felt "they" would get in, no matter what. Can you describe where you were when you had that feeling? Laura: I was in the front bedroom. There was something bright outside the window. It was round, like a basketball. It was in the sky, coming down. It's across the street. I think it crashed. It was mostly white . . . it was like a meteorite. Only it wasn't quite that fast. And it kinda glowed. I stood at the window and watched it come down. John: What's the very next thing you do? Laura: I think I'm just gonna stay. I'm just gonna lay in my bed. I'm gonna cover my eyes with my hands and not look . . . John: But what about everyone else in the house? Laura: I'm not gonna think about 'em. John: What are you gonna do? Laura: I think my mother would get up. Anyway. She would get up, and she'd open the door--the front door--anyway. John: So your mother got up? Laura: Uh, huh. I think she opened the front door. John: So, where's your sister? Laura: She's on the other bed, and she's sleeping. John: So, why would you need to hide in bed? Laura: I don't know. There are . . . all those things . . . I just . . I wouldn't wanta look. I wouldn't wanta look. John: So, what did you do? Laura: I got up with my mother, and went to the door with her. John: What did you see, when you went to the door with her? Laura: People . . . I think. But they're . . . hmm . . . I bet they're . . . John: Are they neighbors? Laura: No. Not really. There are two or three people there. John: What do they look like? Laura: They're like . . . dark . . . clothes. It's like a dark blue, really. Midnight blue. And they have a different . . . they're wearing weird hats. (Nervous laugh). They look like sailor hats . . . Little Boy Blue hats . . . like . . . they're so weird! John: And what happens? What does your mother do? Laura: She let them come in. I think she felt like they needed to use the phone. They're in there, using the phone. I think they just wanted to come into our house. That scared me. John: Well, how do they look, themselves? Laura: They look like . . . identical triplets. John: Triplets . . . Can you describe their faces? Laura: They have dark eyes . . . dark brown eyes . . . really dark brown. They look . . . more like . . . Oriental . . . crossbreed. One is kinda tall, and there are two shorter ones. The eyes are bigger . . weird looking . . . there are no whites around the eyes. John: Do they do anything? Laura: They really . . . (laugh) . . . They like us. They were happy they came there to use the phone. I don't know why they want to use the phone. They pick it up, but I don't think they really use it. John: When they talk, what is their voice like? Laura: They make you think you're hearing them. John: Take a good look, and zero in on the face. Laura: Hm . . . They're full, though. They have lips and a little nose. No teeth, but they kind of smile. John: Okay. Be very aware of the next thing they do, and who all is in the room with you. Laura: I think all of us came in. My brother and sister, too. We're all just listening and standing there, looking. They don't really use a voice, but they're talking to us. I don't really want to listen. I'm just bored, or something. But they were really happy when they came in the door. They were glad to see us . . . almost smiling. I don't know what they were saying, because I was so impressed with their dumb hats. They acted like they were gonna use the phone, but didn't really. I think it was just a good excuse to get in the door. My brother and sister were listening to them, but I was bored. I just kept staring at them. Their eyes were dark, Oriental-looking . . . Egyptian-looking. Kinda elongated. But they're just so dumb looking, 'cause they need to take those hats off! John: Could you tell what color their hair was? Laura: If they had eyebrows, they were really pale. I don't see any hair at all. John: Can you describe their outfit a little more? Laura: Midnight-blue clothes. It's a one-piece, tight- fitting. They're probably uniforms. It's got a gold stripe on it, vertical to one side. And on the hat, too. (Laugh) . . . That's why I thought it was so ugly. John: Do you have any idea how long they stayed? Laura: It was all night, I think. They talked to us . . . but I thought it was boring. And then they left. They walked in unison, like triplets. They all moved together, and they walked back up the road to the hill . . . where the light came down. --------------------------------------------------------------------- UNITED KINGDOM UFO NETWORK STATEMENT uk.ufo.nw statement: The articles or text appearing within these pages are not necessarily the views or opinions of United Kingdom UFO Network. REPORTS Please forward all reports to: ufo@holodeck.demon.co.uk WWW Visit us on the World Wide Web at http://www.holodeck.demon.co.uk/ BACK ISSUES & FILES For information on receiving back issues and other files send mail with REQUEST INFO in the subject area to: ufo@holodeck.demon.co.uk IRC - (INTERNET RELAY CHAT) The meetings take place at 11pm (2300hrs) each and every Saturday night. Times will vary depending on your location in the world. If you would like to know the time in your part of the world send a mail to: ufo@holodeck.demon.co.uk In the subject section put: IRC TIME INFO In the message of your mail please put: a) Your Country b) Your location c) Nearest major City Connecting to our weekly UFO meetings on the IRC (internet relay chat) is now easier than ever. If you are using at least one of the following web browers: Netscape 3 ++ MS Internet Explorer 4 ++ Simply visit one of the below url's (world wide web) addresses. When the 'ultrachat' page has loaded you will see a large grey filled box somewhere on the screen. It may then take a few more seconds for the java script to load and run. The grey area will then turn white and you will be asked to enter a nickname. Your own name or a nickname will suffice here. Once you press return you will be presented with various bits of information scrolling up the screen. After a few seconds you will be connected to the uk.ufo.nw #UFO channel. Down the right hand side of the screen you will see a list of the people currently on channel. At the bottom of the screen is where you type your messages. The large upper left section of the screen is were you read and follow the proceedings of the meetings. Don't be shy. We are all a friendly bunch. Give it a go. You'll soon get the hang of it. We'll be happy to offer any assistance that you may need. http://www.holodeck.demon.co.uk/ultrachat.html http://www.maygale.org/07/eyesonly http://www.geocities/Area51/Cavern/2646 http://www.tedric.demon.co.uk/ultrachat.htm http://www.ultranet.org/webchat/ufo.html http://web.ukonline.co.uk/colin.light/ultrachat.htm http://web.ukonline.co.uk/phil.light http://www.ufo.grid9.net/ufo.html http://www.us.ultranet.org/webchat/ufo.html http://www.no.ultranet.org/webchat/ufo.html http://crowman.demon.co.uk/ultrachat.html If you are using one of the dedicated IRC programs such as the excellent MIRC available free from: http://www.mirc.co.uk/index.html enter one of the below irc server addresses into your program. The nearer the server to your location the faster the connection. If one fails then try another. London.UK.EU.UltraNET.Org Belgrade.YU.EU.UltraNet.org Kalemegdan.YU.EU.UltraNet.org Singidunum.YU.EU.UltraNet.org Bor.YU.EU.UltraNet.org Zemun.YU.EU.UltraNet.org Gloucester.UK.EU.UltraNET.Org Uppsala.SE.EU.UltraNET.Org Johnson-City.TN.US.UltraNet.Org Haifa.IL.AS.UltraNET.Org Mons.BE.EU.ultraNET.Org Neuilly.FR.EU.UltraNET.Org Hofors.SE.EU.UltraNET.Org Bergen.NO.EU.UltraNET.Org Once you are connected to a server join channel: #UFO The uk.ufo.nw #UFO channel is open 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Visit the channel at any time. There is usually someone there to talk to. For those of you needing help connecting to our IRC meetings send your questions to: ufo-irc-advice@crowman.demon.co.uk If you want to be a little more adventurous and perhaps use one of the dedicated IRC programs such as the excellent MIRC visit the below urls for advice: http://www.crowman.demon.co.uk/ultranet.htm http://web.ukonline.co.uk/phil.light/irchelp.htm SUBSCRIPTION INFORMATION The UK.UFO.NW free fortnightly e-zine covering UFO reports and information from the UK and around the world is now available by subscribing to our new List Server. Send mail to: listserv@sjuvm.stjohns.edu In the main body of the mail put: subscribe ufo fn ln note: in place of fn put your first name. in place of ln put your last name. For example: subscribe ufo John Smith A confirm mail will then be sent to you which you need to reply to within 48 hours to be put on the e-zine mailing list. If you have problems you may also subscribe by sending mail to: ufo@holodeck.demon.co.uk In the subject section of your mail type: SUBSCRIBE Search for other documents from or mentioning: ufo | ask-dr.dan |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 8 Re: UFO Report from Project Wringer? From: jan@cyberzone.net (Jan Aldrich) Date: Tue, 07 Oct 1997 19:01:05 -0700 Fwd Date: Wed, 08 Oct 1997 01:05:58 -0400 Subject: Re: UFO Report from Project Wringer? Greetings List Member, I do not know if this report originated with Project Wringer, but I suspect it did. In the Project Blue Book files there is at least one Wringer UFO report. Project Wringer existed in Europe and Asia. It involved interviewing 1) military, industrial and other personnel of former Axis countries, 2) POWs held in the Soviet Union and other communist countries, 3) displaced persons who might have intelligence or military information. In a previously cited collection at the National Archives II is a box of UFO reports found at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base after the Project Blue Book files were transferred. There were several reports similar to the following from German POWs returned from the East. The project taking the reports is not identified, but I believe it was one of Air Intelligence Service Squadrons engaged in Project Wringer. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 10. SOURCE: EP 134892, Rpt. No. 5418-47758 dated 19 January 1954. Date of Observation: May 1953 XXXXXXXX "Preamble: During his internment in PW Camp #1 in STALINGRAD (48/42N 44/30E) SOURCE ?????? some ???? of general interest and ???? allegdedly observed a couple of flying saucers. SOURCE was always interned in the camp. He understood a little Russian. "Flying saucers: SOURCE emphasized that he had never seen or heard anything of flying saucers before he observed two of then on a dusty morning over STALINGRAD in May 1953 when he was on guard within the camp. He observed them in a rather high altitude flying fast in one direction, one following the other. Thinking they had something to do with scientific research of Russia he forgot about his observation until he came back home in Oct 53 and saw designs of flying saucers in West European magazines. He could not provide further details." ================================================================= One word is crossed out XXXXXXXXX; others are impossible to read ??????. -- Jan Aldrich Project 1947 http://www.iufog.org/project1947/
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 8 Re: The Decline and Fall of American Ufology From: "John W. Ratcliff" <jratclif@inlink.com> Date: Tue, 7 Oct 1997 20:51:23 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 08 Oct 1997 01:07:23 -0400 Subject: Re: The Decline and Fall of American Ufology It seems a shame to me, from a purely homo-sapian-centric point of view, that there is all this concentration about a "faliure" on our part as UFO researchers.... Why is this? We imbue awesome powers, technological, intellectual, and sometimes even spiritual, into these intruders into our realm, yet somehow feel compelled to place the blame on...who...US!?? What did *we* do wrong? Isn't trust earned? Does the lab rat have the obligation, morally and intellectually, to "explain" the scientest who is conducting the genetic experiments on him? I'm not suggesting the lab rat ought not get nervous about the next experiment, that seems a reasonable response to me. But take responsibility for their behaviour? Their actions? Their agenda? Their lies? Their propoganda? Their mind games? Nah...best just push the button that releases another pellet of food, paycheck, what have you, and move on. Needless to say, the time to get particularily worried about the so called 'aliens' is about the time they stop conducting their covert activities and thrust themselves into the forefront of human culture. However, given their modus operandi for recorded human history, I wouldn't hold my breath about it. The UFOs will reveal themselves in a time which matches their timetable, in a manner which matches their agenda, in a way that produces the reactions they desire, aind without concern for me, you, Kevin Randle, Phillip Klass, or any other UFO proponent, or detractor, of the last several thousands years. John
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 8 Re: Witness Anonymity From: "Clark Hathaway" <earthwrk@doitnow.com> Date: Tue, 7 Oct 1997 20:30:40 -0700 Fwd Date: Wed, 08 Oct 1997 01:24:32 -0400 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity >From: Christopher Penrose <penrose@sfc.keio.ac.jp> >To: updates@globalserve.net >Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity >Date: Tue, 7 Oct 97 03:40:30 +0900 >>From: "Clark Hathaway" <earthwrk@doitnow.com> >>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net> >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity >>Date: Sun, 5 Oct 1997 23:15:31 -0700 >>> From: HONEYBE100@aol.com [Linda Cortile] >>> Date: Sat, 4 Oct 1997 18:54:39 -0400 (EDT) >>> To: updates@globalserve.net >>>Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity >>Ignorance of Universal Law does not constitute a valid excuse. >This is depressing. Just where exists any so-called "Universal Law" >and why do you waste our bandwidth insisting that Linda adhere to it? First of all, I don't recall insisting anything. I certainly did not suggest or insist as you term it that she adhere to anything. Perhaps beside self stated depression, you also suffer chronic Myopia. You were obviously not reading very carefully. I was referring to the beings who perpetrate the abductions and those who collaborate with them. As for wasting bandwidth, I suppose that I didn't realize that you had been appointed the KEEPER of the list. Hmmmmm... or are you just another of Ms. Napolitano's groupies? <EG> Universal Law is not so-called, it is self evident. Simply put: One may not interfere with the spiritual path of another uninvited without dire consequences. Although these are not always readily apparent, they exist none the less. I can provide much bibliography if you wish. >People, the obsessive lack of civility on this list, in particular the >offensive hostility that Linda Cortile is experiencing is embarrassing. >Please stop wasting our time and bandwidth with such vacuous dreck! Again bud, who appointed you the keeper of this list? What makes you think that Ms. Napolitano has the right to label other people and flame them when they write something that she doesn't necessarily agree with without reprisal? >Julianne, Clarke, etc., I don't know you people. However, I do know >that you have some desire to be taken somewhat seriously as >researchers of abduction phenomenae. I really can't take you >seriously until you can show a modicom of respect for a reputed >abductee, Linda Cortile, and/or actually share some useful, topical >information. You make very clear instead that you are hateful baby >vipers with nothing better to do than to snap your tenuous jaws. If >you need to chastise Linda for what you feel is naivete on her part, >or if you need to challenge her to a mud wrestling duel in Atlantic >City, send her some email. Don't email the list. I have seen the >"sweetie" un-repartee a few too many times this week. Look Pal, don't give me the poor lil abductee routine. From your rhetoric I gather that you know little of the subject. The sooner that Linda comes to an understanding as to her true part in all of this, the quicker she will be able to put it behind her. I do not hate anything or anyone. I do experience intense dislike for some circumstances as well as various actions of others. I AM a multiple abduction experiencer like Linda claims to be. I spent more than two years involved in an abductee support group that served more to support the so-called Therapist's views than support the reintegration of the experiencer. I witnessed group manipulation by this egotist and the action of magnified peer pressure upon those who had trouble swallowing the party line. As this person made TV appearances, wrote books and made spoke at various UFO conferences, it soon became plain that he was making money at these endeavors. Therefore aside from reasons that will become plain with further words below, I take a somewhat skeptical view of those who are involved in the field of Abduction Phenomena Research. >And Linda, you seem to enjoy the onslaught! But please, we understand >your feelings about the use of your name and your child's video; I >think a lawyer may be more eager to listen further at this point. Simply put, Ms. Napolitano enjoys being the center of attention. The 'star' of the show. I might add that since this star came on stage the roster of quality contributors to this list has dwindled. The fact still remains that she IS responsible for the video being made in the first place. Had this not occurred, she would not have experienced that which has given her reason to whine. What could be more plain then that? She and every other Abduction experiencer truly needs to do some deep self examination and come to an understanding as to their responsibility as to their part in what happened to them. Once that they do that, they can begin to bring a halt to these experiences and to heal. >"Re: Witness Anonymity" is starting to look like this week's "thread >of shame" on the Area 51 mailing list. UFOlogy is showing its best >face to the world. Well, wrong area. This is not the Area 51 Mailing List, nor is it the "Linda List" either. Now I have a question for you. Why do you insist on tying UFOs to abduction phenomena when there exists except in one case, absolutely NO evidence of the physical or circumstantial variety that they have any connection? It is assumed! The one exception and that on strong circumstantial evidence only, is that of Travis Walton. Think about this. Information deriving from genuine abduction experiences is controlled by the perpetrators themselves! The perpetrators can and do appear to the abductees any damned way that they please. For we, the people who are experiencing these phenomena to accept at face value whatever is being presented to us by these perpetrators as truth and constituting the reality of what is, is not only extremely foolish, but damned dangerous as well! Finally Chris ... you may not like metaphysics being introduced into a forum such as this. Too bad. Like it or not, there remains quite a bit of paranormal phenomena associated with close UFO sightings. This is self evident to any one who has done their home work. Why so many choose to ignore these data is beyond my nderstanding other than they feel extremely uncomfortable with it. That the abduction phenomena is neck deep in the paranormal is a gross understatement. Plainly put, there is far more that is going on here than meets the eye. Attempts at mundane understanding just don't cut it. If they did, some of the assumed 'professionals' would be much closer to a solution than they apparently are. In closing I wish to state that there are in fact NO professionals in either of these fields. No one discipline has a better take on what is occurring than another except for possibly parapsychology coupled with archaic metaphysical philosophy and history. It is an extremely unorthodox phenomena and as such, perhaps demands an unorthodox approach. I have found some solutions for myself that have worked. We went through an entire year of visitation and attempted interference as well as abduction that all failed. How many other abductees have you witnessed that could make the same claim? More importantly and perhaps revealing, given the chance how many would take it and see a stop to the visitations and abductions? <g> >Chris >penrose@sfc.keio.ac.jp Sincere Kind Regards... Clark Hathaway Search for other documents from or mentioning: earthwrk | penrose |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 8 Celebrity Believers From: Carl/Sharolyn Stenger <stenger@spindle.net> Date: Tue, 7 Oct 1997 22:42:30 -0500 (CDT) Fwd Date: Wed, 08 Oct 1997 01:26:41 -0400 Subject: Celebrity Believers Dan Ackroyd was a guest today on The Rosie O'Donnell Show today (10/7/97). He spent a few minutes promoting his "Soul Man" sitcom, and then Rosie said, "I believe you share an interest I have - UFOs." He spent the rest of his time on the show talking enthusiatically about UFOs and even showed a copy of Budd Hopkins' _Witnessed_. He suggested to Rosie that she have the woman from the book as a guest on her show. (Please do it, Linda! Then maybe the "Witness Anonymity" posts will finally dwindle away. Ha!) Rosie stated again that she is a believer, but that she doesn't think the Alien Autopsy Film is real. Dan agreed, and said he thinks it was a rubber dummy that "some guys in England filmed to try to get famous." The Rosie O'Donnell Show is very popular and has a very large audience. Budd Hopkins couldn't have PAID for better advertising for his book. To have UFOs discussed so openly and without embarrassment by show business personalities of their statures on a G-rated, successful, non-tabloid type TV show was quite surprising and refreshing. Will wonders never cease! Sharolyn
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 8 Re: Witness Anonymity From: HONEYBE100@aol.com [Linda Cortile] Date: Wed, 8 Oct 1997 00:36:41 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Wed, 08 Oct 1997 01:27:48 -0400 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity >Date:Tue. 7 Oct 97 03:40:30 +0900 >From: Christopher Penrose <penrose@sfc.keio.ac.jp> >To: updates@globalserve.net >Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity Snippettes >This is depressing. Just where exists any so-called "Universal Law" >and why do you waste our bandwidth insisting that Linda adhere to >it? >People, the obsessive lack of civility on this list, in particular the >offensive hostility that Linda Cortile is experiencing is embarassing. >Please stop wasting our time and bandwidth with such vacuous >dreck! Thank you, Chris. Well said! Soon, this thread will have to go on without me. I have a family wedding that I'm preparing for in the mid-west. We're leaving in a week. >And Linda, you seem to enjoy the onslaught! But please, we >understand your feelings about the use of your name and your >child's video. I think a lawyer may be more eager to listen fur- >ther at this point. Well, the onslaught keeps me young. <G> All kidding aside, I appreciate your thoughts and that of others. I hope something good came from these posts. Hopefully, they were a warning to others about witness anonymity. I've wondered, how many people saw these threads? Maybe thousands. I hope this video tape situation isn't as bad, as I was told it was. I saw a tape of the TV program it aired on, but the details of how it got into the posseasion of these peoples hands, has not yet been clear to me. If I'm going to need a lawyer, then, so be it. >"Re: Witness Anonymity" is starting to look like this week's >"thread of shame" on the Area 51 mailing list. UFOlogy is showing >its best face to the world. Well, ufology has shown some of the crack-pots within its community, that's for sure. However, I want to apologize to those who have read some of my nasty responses. I didn't want to offend anyone, other than those who have been downright insensitive and arrogant. While growing up, I was raised to fight back and so have my children. So, if I have offended the innocent, I'm truly sorry. Warm regards, Linda Cortile
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 8 Re: Witness Anonymity From: HONEYBE100@aol.com [Linda Cortile] Date: Wed, 8 Oct 1997 00:36:54 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Wed, 08 Oct 1997 01:29:34 -0400 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity >From Vince Johnson at TENSOR HSTN@ccmailsmtp.hstn.expl.pgs.com >Date: Mon. 06 Oct. 97 13:21:15 cst >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity Vince Johnson wrote: >In "Eyewitnessed," Hopkins described why he made the videotapes >of you and your son - because the case was of such historic impor- >tance that future researchers should have access to these tapes to >validate your experiences. A reasonable position, in my opinion... There was only one video made of my son. It was filmed in my home, by my husband, with our camera. This particular video was made for the appointed researcher's files, at his request, if certain portions of my case needed to be validated in the future. If the occasion ever arised, these videos were supposed to be viewed privately. No one was to have personal or physical access to them outside of the appointed researcher and the child's parents. Apparently, without my knowledge, this video tape of my son was 'entrust ed' to a colleague. In spite of that, the video was distributed around. You know, TV, conferences, etc. From what I've heard, this video was sold. I don't have all the details, yet. Are things so bad within the UFO community, that trusted colleagues can't be relied on anymore? Or, have things always been that way? >But as I've questioned in previous posts on this subject, don't you >find your experiences to be historically significant enough for you >(and your son) to suffer this relatively minor invasion of privacy? This invasion of privacy is not minor. It's a disgrace. I don't believe that any case is worth the indignities of anyone, much less a child. >Did Budd ever tell you that *nobody* would ever see these tapes? >If he didn't, I just don't see why you should be so outraged over >these materials becoming available to researchers for study. After >all, that's why they were made. I was told that these tapes would be viewed privately, on a need to be basis, for study. I don't know if you have children, but I'm sure if this had happened to your child, you'd be outraged too. Regards, Linda Cortile
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 8 Re: Bruce Maccabee and UpDates From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> Date: Wed, 08 Oct 1997 02:07:32 -0400 Fwd Date: Wed, 08 Oct 1997 02:07:32 -0400 Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and UpDates Regarding my insistance that Bruce Maccabee subscribe in order to respond to posts to this List: >From: bruce maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com> >Subject: UFO UpDate: Bruce Maccabee and UpDates >Sender: bruce maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >Erroll, [snipped] >I already get Skywatch and other stuff. The information deluge is >amazing. I guess I could try it for a while and see how much >duplication there is. Also, if Barbara's discussion is going to >be centered here, I should find out what people are saying, so, >OK. SUBSCRIBE (gulp).
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 8 Re: Witness Anonymity From: XianneKei@aol.com [Rebecca Schatte] Date: Wed, 8 Oct 1997 02:07:47 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Wed, 08 Oct 1997 08:45:36 -0400 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity > From: "Julianne Presson" <earthwrk@doitnow.com> > To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net> > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity > Date: Tue, 7 Oct 1997 11:24:48 -0700 [snipped everything due to formatting problems] We were discussing Budd's intentions with the videos. I thought he might have had good intentions and you replied: > Maybe so, but as a researcher he knew the risks. Does he? What is Budd? Is he an artist? A therapist? A researcher? An investigator? Which hat does he wear? I think there is fine line that Budd walks. It's my opinion that he doesn't walk that line very well. Rebecca
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 8 Re: Witness Anonymity From: Don Allen <dona@totcon.com> Date: Wed, 08 Oct 1997 01:37:06 -0400 Fwd Date: Wed, 08 Oct 1997 08:43:58 -0400 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity At 09:22 AM 10/7/97 -0400, Linda "Cortile" wrote: >From: HONEYBE100@aol.com [Linda Cortile] >Date: Tue, 7 Oct 1997 02:01:58 -0400 (EDT) >To: updates@globalserve.net >Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity >>Date: Mon. 06 Oct 1997 03:59:57 -0400 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >>From: Don Allen <dona@totcon.com> >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity >Don Allen wrote: >>Yes, of course Julie would do well to review all of the posts on >>this thread. I would even extend that to perusing your original >>abduction account, the pissing match between Jerry Clark and >>George Hansen, from a few years back on your story, and the >>papers written by Stefula, Butler, and Hansen wherein they >>make a pretty good case of blowing your abduction account to >>smithereens. >I think everyone on the list would do well to review, not only the >posts regarding Witness Anonymity, but also, the papers >written 5 years ago, by the "Three Stooges" Stefula, Bulter and >Hansen, before the case was completely researched. I want >everyone to know what they've tried unsuccessfully to do with >their adverse propaganda and untruths, while they physically >and verbally harrassed my family and me. It's there for every- >one to see. This is my frank appraisal of your "case" - it's a fictional story that has key mystery witnesses who disappear very conveniently, and I _never_ bought into it. As for the "three stooges" as you put it, they poked plenty of holes into this fictional work of yours. One of the so-called "stooges" went on to write an extremely detailed scathing paper on CSICOP, but I doubt you even heard of that Ms. Napolitano, since you were so busy at the time making appearances at conferences all over the country hawking your story as the "abduction case of the century". Cough, cough. Can you say "over-hyped with no substance" ? You might not be able to but I sure can. Oh, I DO realize what I've written here will upset a lot of people but then again, I really don't care. I always calls em' like I smells em. This one has always smelled like elderly fish to me. No tangible witnesses, no tangible evidence, disappearing characters, murder attempts with bizarre plot twists that would make any Hollywood script writer envious. Why haven't you sold the rights for a Movie of the Week? Do you get the sense I don't believe you? Ah! It's BS. >>Good day to you, Julianne!! (Door slams shut)! > >Linda Cortile > >>Funny, isn't that what the former UN secretary (so-in-so) did >>to your supposed abduction account, Ms. (so-in-so)? Slamm- >>ing the door, this is, on what was claimed he witnessed. > >Yes. Thank God! I can't imagine how life would've been for >my family and I, if he had admitted it. Someone up there is >watching over us, and you can be sure it isn't an alien. >Hats off to the Third Man! When he protected himself and his >interests, he protected mine too. That dog don't hunt. The fact is, De Cuellar never witnessed anything concerning your case and has said so repeatedly to anyone who cared to listen. To claim otherwise makes toast of your argument. >Umm..this popcorn tastes good...but I dripped butter on my >keyboard! I don't consider fictional stories of your type to be of any entertainment value. Many people on this List might buy into your story at face value, but I'm not one of them. Get the violins out..I predict I'll be attacked for speaking my blunt opinion and skewering another "sacred cow". Oh well, all in a days work for a non-paid Govt Pysop Agent. <g> Don
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 8 Re: Bruce Maccabee and UpDates From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com> Date: Wed, 08 Oct 1997 07:17:50 -0400 Fwd Date: Wed, 08 Oct 1997 09:04:06 -0400 Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and UpDates >From: c549597@showme.missouri.edu >Date: Tue, 07 Oct 1997 11:37:06 -0500 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Bruce Maccabee and UpDates >> Date: Tue, 07 Oct 1997 06:08:18 -0400 >> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >> From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com> >> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Bruce Maccabee and UpDates >It is very nice of you to keep certain people up to date, especially >those who do not have computers and I say that sincerely. In that case, >it seems more appropriate for you to intercede. However in Bruce's case >he has a computer and an Internet connection, he is able to reposnd for >himself. Why is Bruce's case different because he has a computer? Is that the defining factor as to whether someone else can post a person's comments? Errol's position in this is not clear, and needs much better clarification if this is a "rule" that we are all to follow. >> I don't know what Jean had tried to post (I've been trying to work >> with both Jean and Bruce to make sure we don't waste bandwidth, and it >> was mostly in his hand at this point), but as a list subscriber I >> would state that I believe that it should have been posted if it was >> relevent to the discussion. I'm not sure how you are going to define >> when a person should post on their own, or more importantly the >> limitation to quotation that you will allow before that is triggered. >Maccabee has the time to write a response to a paper I wrote 7 years ago >AND the time to respond to the copyright paper but he cant find the time >to participate in the list first-person? I suugest that you and Jean >quit running interfernce for Bruce and let him fight his own battles, >fact to face. He is a big boy now. Whose running interference? These was a discussion going on that pertained to an issue that he was researching, and I forwarded you paper to him for a comment, which I then forwarded on to UPDATES (sorry again about that formatting Errol . . .<g>). Until now, that has been acceptable on UPDATES. This isn't "running interference", bu information sharing. When information is restricted in an abitrary manner, one has to be concerned about who is making that decision and how the personal beliefs of that person are affecting the process. I understand what Errol is trying to do, but I think that his position is indefensible unless he can come up with a "rule" that is clearly "objective", rather than "subjective". >> The particular thread involved here is probably getting out of hand, >> and obviously some of those involved are far too close to the subject >> matter and should probably seek help (sorry, couldn't help it). As a >> list moderator, I would be concerned about those who post material to >> the list and then threaten legal action when others quote sections of >> it in their reply, claiming copyright violation. >Maybe you should get your facts straight before you open your mouth. >This has NOTHING to do with the paper on Copyright and Maccabees reply. That's good, but it's just a thought. BTW, I'm curious as to which facts I got in error. >> The explosive personalities involved in this genre could tie up >> resources in a legal battle, and since this list is moderated there >> is (I believe) greater exposure to inclusion in any legal >> entanglement. >This is another paper I wrote many years ago. When I (BB) discovered >(just recently) that a paper I had written 7 years ago was posted on a >website, I wrote to the webmaster and asked that it be removed. It IS a >copyrighted material, which I explained to him, and said I did not want >it reproduced without permission. He was most gracious and removed it >from his website. >I then found the paper reproduced in its entirety and a commentray by >Maccabee intersperced. I have no problem with Maccabees commentary...he >can write all day long about it as far as I am concerned...however, I >have not given ANYONE permission to reproduce it in any form...or to >discect it. That includes Maccabee, UPDATES and UFOMIND. (And you imply >Steve that I "should seek help" because I dont want my copyrighted >materials abused?) You are apparently the resident expert on copyright law, so I'm not prepared to get into a legal arguement on this, but do have a few opinions to share. Anyone who posts anything to the Internet should understand that in a real sense they have lost control over that document. To believe otherwise is foolish. Your copyright demand is highly unusual, and merely makes it more difficult for others to quote sections of it out of courtesy to the subsequent reader of the commentary. Wanting to control your material is understandable, but most of those who post their articles don't raise the copyright issue unless their material is abused. Most consider reposting a form of flattery, rather than take offense. Most who post comments and/or articles to the "net" understand that they are offerring it up to commentary from the world, which includes picking it apart. You have chosen to impose restrictions that are unusual to the "net", and that has now become a factor in how you are being perceived by those who don't know you (myself included). The paper that Jean had tried to post was indeed a rebuttle to comments you had made previously, which (as you note) were published on the "net". The point being made was that you were not new to this topic, as at least one person had thought on UPDATES. It really had no direct relation to your recent article, I believe that I noticed a posting from Bruce on UPDATES a few days ago, so I assume that the system is open to postings from non-subscribers. He is aware of the issues that have come up here regarding his material, and has indicated that he will indeed be responding directly, paraphrasing your article as needed to make his point. Steve
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 8 Re: Witness Anonymity From: Penrose Christopher <penrose@sfc.keio.ac.jp> Date: Wed, 8 Oct 97 19:51:22 +0900 Fwd Date: Wed, 08 Oct 1997 08:52:26 -0400 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity >From: "Clark Hathaway" <earthwrk@doitnow.com> >To: <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Witness Anonymity >Date: Tue, 7 Oct 1997 20:30:40 -0700 >>From: Christopher Penrose <penrose@sfc.keio.ac.jp> >>To: updates@globalserve.net >>Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity >>Date: Tue, 7 Oct 97 03:40:30 +0900 >>"Re: Witness Anonymity" is starting to look like this week's "thread >>of shame" on the Area 51 mailing list. UFOlogy is showing its best >>face to the world. >Well, wrong area. This is not the Area 51 Mailing List, nor is it the >"Linda List" either. Please read my two sentences again. I am comparing the Area 51 mailing list and its current fascination with character assassination to this mailing list, which I have to know the name of in order to successfully submit a posting. You are quite trigger happy, and you are missing the target. My text could have been clearer however. I will comment more below. >Now I have a question for you. >Why do you insist on tying UFOs to abduction phenomena when there >exists except in one case, absolutely NO evidence of the physical or >circumstantial variety that they have any connection? It is assumed! You are correct in the final sentence. However, this distinction is not insisted but rather suggested. Your distinction is one the general public does not make, incorrect or not; and I was speaking strictly about how anti-social behavior on UFO updates, and the behavior found on another "alien phenomenae" mailing lists (e.g. the Area 51 mailing list), give a relative newcomer such as myself an extremely negative impression of the communities that are researching "alien phenomenae". Participants appear to be more fascinated with interpersonal drama and the obsessive need to feed their ravenous egos, rather than the exchange of research and ideas. I have a world of contacts that is quite seperate and distant from this community, and I speak to these contacts about my perception of this community. Currently, the perception is very bleak. Perhaps you do not care how you are perceived. >From your rhetoric I gather that you know little of the subject >[abduction]. You are correct again. I am interested in hearing your views on the subject. I am not interested though if they are saturated with vitriol and malice toward others on the list. >Finally Chris ... you may not like metaphysics being introduced >into a forum such as this. Too bad. Straw man. Please continue to discuss metaphysics as I find it interesting. You are more interested in galloping into battle than communication. This is what I criticize, and you have made me into a greater enemy than I am. Christopher Penrose penrose@sfc.keio.ac.jp
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 8 Re: Best UFO Video on the Planet From: jared@valuserve.com (Andromeda.net- Anderson, Jared) Date: Wed, 08 Oct 1997 00:40:33 -0700 Fwd Date: Wed, 08 Oct 1997 08:47:02 -0400 Subject: Re: Best UFO Video on the Planet > From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@ucs.orst.edu> > Date: Thu, 2 Oct 1997 09:54:45 -0700 (PDT) > Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 00:46:01 -0400 > Subject: Re: Best UFO Video on the Planet > I hope you're right, Tom, that we'll all get a chance to view the video > segment. But I have grave doubts that it will air on any of the major > networks, and suspect that I'll need to view it on the Sci-Fi channel or > such. Didn't I see a recent quote here that went: "The stronger the > evidence, the more violent the debunking"? It's quite true. Jim, Usually what happens when this type of evidence crosses the desk of investigative journalists that work with television magazines such as 20/20 or Extra is they immedaitely call CSICOP. They then ask them for their assessment of the evidence and often follow it up with an interview with Joe Nickel or Phil Klass. If the Fox network obtains it and decides to show the footage, they will probably be more likely to broadcast the balanced opinions of the more scientifically minded members of the UFO research community. How the footage is portrayed by the media has nothing to with the footage and accompanying circumstances. It has everything to do with which media agency shows the footage. sad isn't it?
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 8 Re: Witness Anonymity From: ujack@pop3.scrapcity.cnchost.com [Mark Medford] Date: Wed, 8 Oct 1997 08:49:00 +0000 Fwd Date: Wed, 08 Oct 1997 20:05:30 -0400 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity > Date: Tue, 07 Oct 1997 23:49:07 -0400 > To: updates@globalserve.net > From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity > [1] It is claimed that you were "floated through the closed window of > your 12th-storey East Side Apartment" by 2 or more Aliens to rise up > through a beam of blue light to enter a UFO hovering above. > {a} Does this appear to be a normal third dimensional reality > occurrence to you Linda, or one more properly described as > paranormal? Dear Friends, As a new list member, I confess to not being up to speed on this entire thread. I would, however, like to make a comment on the above question. Such an event could have happened, as described, within our third dimensional reality. As we learn more and more about our physical world, our understanding of matter - and our ability to manipulate it - increases. We are, after all, a collection of molecules. A more technologically advanced race, being thousands of years ahead of us on the learning curve, could very well have mastered molecular decomposition, transport and reassembly. Once broken down into its smallest component, matter (still physical, still three dimensional) might then be transported through other matter. Like flour through a sieve, both the flour and the metal mesh are physical, yet one passes through the other quite easily. As to "floating" - dispersed molecules would be far less dense and therefore lighter. We move information along beams of light and can levitate objects (in a vaccum) with sound waves. My point is, some events are only labelled "paranormal" because we have yet to understand them. The label is a temporary one. With knowledge, many magical things have made the transition into everyday reality - fire, magnetism, etc. Not so long ago, the brightest minds of the day believed that the earth was flat. Nothing could go faster than the "speed of horse"! This is not to say that there is no spiritual realm or level of consciousness that we have yet to - or may never - comprehend. Certainly there are dimensions beyond the ones in which we operate daily. I would just caution against categorizing anything that lies outside of our current understanding as metaphysical. What Linda describes, in my opinion, doesn't require - in these days of microwaves, fiber optics and artificial hearts - THAT much of a stretch of the imagination. Best, Mark
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 8 Re: The sky over Roswell From: Ted Viens <drtedv@smart1.net> Date: Wed, 08 Oct 1997 08:02:03 -0700 Fwd Date: Wed, 08 Oct 1997 20:12:51 -0400 Subject: Re: The sky over Roswell > Date: Thu, 2 Oct 1997 17:39:43 -0400 (EDT) > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>, updates@globalserve.net > From: "Michael J. Woods" <mike.woods@sympatico.ca> > Subject: Re: The sky over Roswell > >Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 12:18:46 -0700 > >From: Ted Viens <drtedv@smart1.net> > >To: updates@globalserve.net > >Subject: The sky over Roswell > >5th July 1997 Roswell, New Mexico. The Roswell Alien Crash Street Circus > >and Road Show was winding down for another day. Realizing that this > >Pauper's Pilgrimage to EBE Nirvana would have to find shelter for the > >night, I drove my brother and myself to my selected rest stop for a > >restful overnight sleep in my '81 Toyota Corolla. This was a quiet spot > >some 8,000 feet up the northern side of El Capitan near the base of the > >telco microwave towers. > <<snip>> > >The early night was cloudless and the view of the starry skies was as > >rewarding as could be expected. As the sun dropped below the horizon, > >casual glances through the unobstructed northern sky failed to catch the > >slow glittering sweep of any passing satellite. Local commuter flights > >into the Roswell airfield passed nearly at eye level. > <<snip>> > >Prime satellite viewing time had passed uneventfully. The sky had become dee p > >black from east to west. Sitting on the concrete foundation of the > >microwave tower, I again glanced straight up when, at the zenith, I > >finally saw a light moving in the sky. > <<snip>> > Hello all, > Just a short note on the above. On the evening of July 5th, 1997, > I, my wife Kathy, our cheerful facilitator here, Errol > Bruce-Knapp, the enchanting Sue, John Velez and, if I'm not > mistaken, the crazy Texas gal Rebecca were all gathered at the > pinnacle of dining delight in Roswell, New Mexico known to > gourmands everywhere as the Red Lobster. Errol, Sue, Kathy and I > had also been there the night before, at around the same time, > from around 8pm thru 11pm ish. On the fourth and the fifth there > were VIOLENT thunderstorms, complete with lightning strikes, > thunderboomers and rain that fell parallel to the ground. On the > fifth we definitely left the Red Lobster and found our cars > soaking wet, having watched the storm from inside. > I guess it was a local problem though, since the post above > mentions clear skies etc and no mention of that storm. But > starting around 7 in the evening and going on until midnight on > July 5th there were serious, heavy thunderclouds above the > immediate Roswell area. > Any of the above named who remember different please feel free to > post a big, > Hey-Woods-lay-off-the-recreational-activity-its-burning-out-your-brain notice. > Cheers all, > Michael J. Woods > The truth can STAY out there, send in a good fantasy. Joyfully, truth is stranger than fiction. US highway 380 is the major east-west highway in Denton, TX. Through some strange quirk of synchronicity, it is also the major east-west highway in Roswell, NM. Past midnight friday, following the late finale of the Independence Day fireworks in Denton, I turned onto 380 and drove an uneventful 8 hours to Roswell under clear skies. At eight Saturday morning, Roswell was still in deceptive slumber with scant evidence that I had driven into the heart of the greatest ET celebration in the history of mankind at the midpoint of the festivities. With time to kill, I drove down almost every street and dirt track on the old army air base. The most noteworthy observation of the morning were the large puddles everywhere indicating strong overnight storms that had disappeared completely before I had driven off of the eastern plateaus into the city. Some ten hours later and some fifty miles west of Roswell, I crested the ridge just north of the peak of Mt. Capitan and first saw the broad view of the lands north of the city. As dusk settled, I could see that Roswell was still visible to the east just before the peak of the mountain blocked the view. Through dusk perhaps there were thin clouds on the horizons. As darkness settled in, the hoped for clear skies were more than I deserved. Shortly after the sighting of note, wisps of clouds began to curl up over the short microwave towers I was sitting beneath. For a short time, I returned to the car but soon the skies overhead cleared again. Mountain ridges some mile above the surrounding plains are as wonderful for meteorological studies as they are for star gazing. For much of the night, the vista was clear save for a singular group of thunderheads hovering over Roswell sparkling in a natural Independence Day celebration. Around midnight, the revelers at the all-night crash site party some forty miles north of Roswell began shooting orange flares or fireworks into the sky. It was theatre mundo. Under clear skies, flares burst over the crash site. In metered response, lightning burst from the thunderheads over Roswell. Earlier a light moves strangely in the skies overhead. Bye... Ted..
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 8 Re: The sky over Roswell From: Ted Viens <drtedv@smart1.net> Date: Wed, 08 Oct 1997 07:04:39 -0700 Fwd Date: Wed, 08 Oct 1997 20:10:07 -0400 Subject: Re: The sky over Roswell > From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@cc.UManitoba.CA> > Subject: UFO Updates: Re: The sky over Roswell (or not) > To: updates@globalserve.net (UFO UpDates - Toronto) > Date: Wed, 1 Oct 1997 15:33:19 -0500 (CDT) > > Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 12:18:46 -0700 > > From: Ted Viens <drtedv@smart1.net> > > To: updates@globalserve.net > > Subject: The sky over Roswell > > 5th July 1997 Roswell, New Mexico. The Roswell Alien Crash Street Circus > > and Road Show was winding down for another day. Realizing that this > > The early night was cloudless and the view of the starry skies was as > > rewarding as could be expected. As the sun dropped below the horizon, > > casual glances through the unobstructed northern sky failed to catch the > > slow glittering sweep of any passing satellite. Local commuter flights > > into the Roswell airfield passed nearly at eye level. The passengers > > could almost be seen in the dimly lit cabins. Regional flights passed at > > twice the altitude. And twice again as high, a cross country flight > > could be seen. The telltale blinking flight lights always betraying the > > source. My interest in shortwave listening suffered from the effects of > > black from east to west. Sitting on the concrete foundation of the > > microwave tower, I again glanced straight up when, at the zenith, I > > finally saw a light moving in the sky. It resembled closely the > > brightest stars in size and brilliance. It passed from directly overhead > > to the eastern horizon undiminished and unswerving in about a minutes > > Ho-hum you say. Hum, I thought. So many plausible common explanations, > > Isn't science wonderful. My observation of a distant light moving in a > > straight line high in the night sky over the Roswell Alien Crash Street > > Circus and Road Show seemed at casual glance so easily dismissable. Ah, > > but bring in the simple tools of hard science and things become > > perplexing. The object was self illuminated. It passed from zenith to > > horizon in less than a minute. If in space, it was violating the rules > > of orbital mechanics much to the distress of Kepler and Newton. If in > > the atmosphere, it was exceeding the limits of any known or imagined > > earth aircraft or technology. Its movement only showed it to be a > > powered flight beyond the limits of known science. What could it be? > > Beats the pants off me... > Let me get this straight. You saw a simple NL passing overhead and you > used a satellite emphemeris program to rule out any satellites. You > calculated velocities and transit times of an aircraft. You judged its > luminosity and motion to be unlike anything easily determinable. >Chris, thanks for the critique. > Therefore, a "scientific" analysis shows that the seemingly-explainable > object may in fact be "beyond the limits of known science." > Alas, hyperbole is one of more useful tools and great weaknesses of the > narrative style. > This reminds me of the investigator who said: > "I know everything there is to know about anything, > therefore I am an expert." > Put your pants back on. :) > (As it is of a worthy criticism.) > Could it be that out in the western desert, there are test flights of > military (terrestrial) aircraft with characteristics unknown to you? > Could there have been missing data or a glitch in the satellite > emphemeris, as has been found by some satellite observers on other > occasions? It is not a question of familiarity with the actual characteristics of secret military aircraft. First comes the observation. From the observation comes a range of possible flight characteristics. These characteristics determine the level of response. They can range from known flight characteristics through just past the rumored edge of secret technology to "Good Golly Miss Molly!" I am suggesting that an NL that goes from zenith to horizon in a minute or less is in the "Miss Molly" range. Satellite tracking programs are remarkably reliable. The individual satellite data (two line keplerian element sets) is generated by NORAD with each line secured by a checksum. I get them from a webpage maintained by a NORAD employee who helped design the algorithyms defining satellite tracking. > Just because *you* cannot identify it does *not* mean it is an alien > spaceship, as you imply. That's why serious researchers have a category > called "Unidentified," in which to put observations of objects without > a simple explanation. > Yours was an excellent exercise and shows how complicated UFO > investigation really is, requiring a lot of time and effort even for > the most simple cases. You are to be commended for your thoughtful > approach, but to suggest the UFO was therefore a non-terrestrial or > unconventional phenomenon isn't *quite* warranted. It might have been > wiser and more scientific just to concede it was "unexplained." Thanks for the compliment. Still, I think your criticism displays some of the weaknesses in this greater dialogue. First, I offer my narrative without claims of position or authority. It is not government fiat or church edict. It is offered as a vehicle for both suggesting more study in a specific area and for receiving studied rebuttal. Unfortunately, your sweeping dismissal of the simple science and your inflated portrayal of my conclusions fall somewhat short. I would be perfectly happy for anyone to bring me the sat data showing a satellite passing overhead much faster than my calculated minimum time. And equally elated to learn of a rumored aircraft that could pass within this time limit. Chris, what I think you have failed to grasp is that an NL moving from zenith to horizon in a minute or less IS in the realm of an "unconventional phenomenon." > > A light passes in the sky over Roswell, New Mexico. Simple science > > eliminates the possibility of any known technology. Could it have been a > > commemorative flight? I cannot demonstrate what it might have been. I > > can only rule out what it cannot be. Perhaps other easily dismissed > > distant lights moving in the night sky should be investigated more > > carefully under the scrutiny of hard science. > No, I would not agree with the timbre of that last line. This implies > that dismissal of simple NLs is unwarranted, which may not be true. If > a person reports to me a NL seen in the vicinity of an airport, and > said UFO "hovers" while slowly moving off without showing any > clearly-visible wing lights, it is *still* most likely that the object > is an aircraft. This would be the case *even if* the witness is > "familiar" with aircraft. Mistakes and misinterpretations occur. Or, if > a witness reports an "aircraft on fire, crashing in the field a few > miles away," it's more than likely a bolide, regardless of how close > the UFO "appeared." This type of reduction (as well as deduction) is > gained only through many years experience in UFO report investigation. This is more a reflex response to the deluge of easily explained NL sightings than a reply to what I have actually suggested. Before this incident, I had agreed with a blanket dismissal of all NL sightings if mearly for their in ability to provide any meaningful data. Then, resulting from a little scrutiny, I realized that even for a point source moving in a straight line, there is an envelope of characteristics that rule out ballistic flight or powered flight with any known fuel source or technology. Something as simple as a light moving from zenith to horizon within a minute and without leaving an ionization trail falls within this envelope. To move this quickly at orbital altitudes requires the constant lateral acceleration that a shuttle launch at peak thrust would provide. At black project flight levels, this would be in the range of mach 25 to mach 35. At these speeds, the aircraft would fly into orbit without a side thrust comparable to the flight thrust. The weakness in my report is the lack of hard data. I did not actually time the flight of the NL, nor did I bring a poor man's $10.00 theodolite to permit me to record the AZ/EL at the start and finish of the observation. And, I certainly had not thought to coordinate with another observer to permit triangulation. Although it felt as though the sighting lasted significant less than a minute, a minute was the minimum time resolution I felt confident using. > "Simple science" may have eliminated the possibility of any known > technology, but I would offer that you don't know *all* the technology > out there. Further, "less simple science" may be able to identify the > object, given enough time and resources. Again Chris, this is a casual and somewhat flippant dismissal. I am not pontificating. This narrative gives others the opportunity to educate and enlighten this misguide fool with the hard information that I might be ignorant of. This is how I lessen the fact that I "don't know *all* the technology out there." Science most complex cannot dismiss the fact that a distant object moving from zenith to horizon in a minute or less is operating outside the range of orbital mechanics or publically known flight technology.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 8 Re: Solved Abduction cases? From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net> Date: Wed, 8 Oct 1997 10:04:42 -0400 Fwd Date: Wed, 08 Oct 1997 20:21:56 -0400 Subject: Re: Solved Abduction cases? Dennis asks a question that really has an easy answer. >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net> [Dennis Stacy] >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Solved Abduction cases? >It won't come as a great revelation here, but there is an awful >lot about abductions that don't make sense. For example, if alien >technology is so advanced (the ability to hover invisibly, beam >people through solid objects,etc.), why are the aliens' medical >procedures so little advanced by comparison? Why have to abduct >so many people (if the numbers claimed have any validity) to >obtain sperm and ova samples? Seems to me if you could beam an >entire body up, you could simply beam up the sperm without anyone >being the wiser. Fact is, we seem further along the artificial >insemination and gene manipulation areas of technology than the >aliens allegedly are. It's rather as if we were to land men on >Mars while still trying to send signals back to Earth by >reflecting sunlight off mirrors. C'mon, Dennis, read the abduction literature (and tell Jaques Vallee, who makes the same point, to do some reading, too). You don't need to believe that any of this is real, but it's clear from all the descriptions of alien activities that they need our participation. There's far more than mere sperm-and-egg dancing going on. Supposedly they make women cuddle hybrid babies. They invent games to make children practice telekinesis. They create r elationships, bringing abductees together (Linda and Richard, remember?). They deliver environmental messages, which even if they're not genuine might involve a study of our reactions. They do the procedure David Jacobs labelled "mindscan," fastening their big black eyes on ours, and somehow entering our minds. Again, Dennis...you don't have to believe any of this goes on. But it's all in the abduction literature, and outlines a scenario in which the aliens cultivate relationships with us. They may also be using all the advanced technology you decide they ought to have -- while reverting to elementary procedures to make sure we know what's going on. Time to retire that tired old Vallee argument. Greg Sandow
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 8 Re: Witness Anonymity From: clark@canby.mn.frontiercomm.net [Jerome Clark] Date: Wed, 08 Oct 1997 09:43:49 PDT Fwd Date: Wed, 08 Oct 1997 20:28:24 -0400 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity X-UIDL: ea8dbf9f11e42f0067deb23ca1148d27 > Date: Wed, 08 Oct 1997 01:37:06 -0400 > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > From: Don Allen <dona@totcon.com> > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity > At 09:22 AM 10/7/97 -0400, Linda "Cortile" wrote: > >From: HONEYBE100@aol.com [Linda Cortile] > >Date: Tue, 7 Oct 1997 02:01:58 -0400 (EDT) > >To: updates@globalserve.net > >Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity > >>Date: Mon. 06 Oct 1997 03:59:57 -0400 > >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > >>From: Don Allen <dona@totcon.com> > >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity > >Don Allen wrote: > >>Yes, of course Julie would do well to review all of the posts on > >>this thread. I would even extend that to perusing your original > >>abduction account, the pissing match between Jerry Clark and > >>George Hansen, from a few years back on your story, and the > >>papers written by Stefula, Butler, and Hansen wherein they > >>make a pretty good case of blowing your abduction account to > >>smithereens. > >I think everyone on the list would do well to review, not only the > >posts regarding Witness Anonymity, but also, the papers > >written 5 years ago, by the "Three Stooges" Stefula, Bulter and > >Hansen, before the case was completely researched. I want > >everyone to know what they've tried unsuccessfully to do with > >their adverse propaganda and untruths, while they physically > >and verbally harrassed my family and me. It's there for every- > >one to see. > This is my frank appraisal of your "case" - it's a fictional story > that has key mystery witnesses who disappear very conveniently, > and I _never_ bought into it. As for the "three stooges" as you > put it, they poked plenty of holes into this fictional work of yours. > One of the so-called "stooges" went on to write an extremely > detailed scathing paper on CSICOP, but I doubt you even heard > of that Ms. Napolitano, since you were so busy at the time making > appearances at conferences all over the country hawking > your story as the "abduction case of the century". Cough, > cough. Can you say "over-hyped with no substance" ? > You might not be able to but I sure can. Folks, Here we see a touching expression of the need for certainty in an uncertain world -- a strange posture for a ufologist, I should think but, sadly, not unprecedented. What we don't see is a coherent argument. On one level, the issues between George P. (Torquemada) Hansen and the undersigned amount to a mere "pissing contest." We have scarcely recovered our breath when we learn that Mr. T and associates are the soul of wisdom on the Linda case and who knows what all else. All I know is this: The stuff about me in their debunking paper was made up out of whole cloth. Of all the subjects in the world, the one on which I am the world's leading expert is me, and they got me dead wrong. Therefore I would be a fool not to be skeptical of what they say about others, not least of them Linda. Time, in any event, has not been good to Mr. T and company. Those looking for a more balanced account of the case's pluses and minuses (and many exasperating ambiguities) are urged to read Greg Sandow's two-part series which we published in IUR this year. If, on the other hand, you can't live in any colors except black and white, don't bother. Jerry Clark Search for other documents from or mentioning: clark | dona |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 8 Re: Witness Anonymity From: Don Ledger <dledger@istar.ca> Date: Wed, 08 Oct 1997 15:01:42 +0100 Fwd Date: Wed, 08 Oct 1997 20:45:10 -0400 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity > From: XianneKei@aol.com [Rebecca Schatte] > Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 03:42:29 -0400 (EDT) > To: updates@globalserve.net > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity > >Date: Sun, 05 Oct 1997 22:24:04 +0100 > >From: Don Ledger <dledger@istar.ca> > >To: updates@globalserve.net > >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity > >Everything snipped ........ > >Stanton Friedman once said, "What's in it for the witnesses?" What > >indeed. > Depends on what the witness might want out of it. Hi Rebecca, Let's get this straight from the beginning. When I say witness, I mean my witness. When someone calls me and says they've had a sighting or an experience, I don't believe that gives me the right to immediately call the media and start spreading that person's name around. They've called me because something interesting or frighting or unusual has happened to them and they want answers. So do I and I am just optimistic to think that over the next hundred years or so if enough people come forward with their sightings and other with the expertize to analyse this stuff analyses it, we might come up with some answers. The media are of no benefit here and should be kept of it. Their only value might be to direct persons with sightings to a hopefully "qualified" investigator. NOW if the same person wants to go to the media and report that they saw a flying saucer, look at me, I'm special...then they are on their own and God help them. If they are looking for their 15 minutes of fame, they are probably going to get it. The gray area is what happens when the "experiencer" agrees to go on record in a book for instance with an alias. Some other people are bound to know who the witness is and might leak the name either accidentally or for some personal gain [money, fame,promises or malice]. > >From what I can gather, Linda Cortile has suffered the loss of her > >privacy and now it seems her son's privacy as well. She has probably > >suffered ridicule in her community from those who know who she is and so > >perhaps has her son. She won't have taken abuse from all that know of > >her ordeal because there are those out there that know first hand of > >what she has gone through and still others who will understand > >irregardless. And what of her husband and the rest of her family? What > >will he husband have gone through at his workplace...one can only > >imagine. > Yes, we can imagine. We could also imagine that nothing much > untoward has happened. Was Linda -- or any witness, for that > matter, made aware of the possible consequences of "going > public?" One must wonder about that. I deal with the press on a daily basis and though many people are wary of speaking to them many still do not. They do not realize that opening their mouths in front of a camera can immediatly affect them both legally and personally. A media frenzy is a facinating but terrible thing to watch. If there is a possibilty that what you have to say might favourably affect your TV network's ratings, heighten your visibility as a reporter, make you more money or a heck of a lot more money then whether you wish it or not you are a target. In Linda Cortile's case, for instance, her personal privacy seems to be being invaded more by the inner circle of the UFO community than the public at large. I might be wrong about this but I don't think she is being badgered by the tabloid press or the large networks, although the latter in a more limited sense have had a hand in shining the spotlight on her. I've seen Linda once on a Canadian program with Budd Hopkins and Stan Friedman [he was remoted from a studio in New Brunswick] on a limited cable station. > I had the opportunity to meet Linda, first in Austin at MUFON's > annual conference, a couple of years ago, and again last year in > North Carolina, at another MUFON Conference. She wasn't hiding > behind sunglasses or anything and seemed perfectly willing to > speak to people who came up to her with questions. One has to > wonder why she would subject herself to all of this if she truly > wanted her privacy. No, she didn't introduce herself as anything > other than Linda Cortile. Two reasons. First, maybe she wants to help others who have had the same personal violations as she, letting them know that they are not alone by putting a real face with the story because I know from my own investigations that it is very important to people who have had these experiences to know that they are not the only ones that have experienced these interventions. It gives them great personal relief to know that something this bizzare is not happening only to them. Secondly, probably Linda herself is still looking for answers, and where is she likely to find them but in the communities and the gatherings of those who have had similiar experiences. > I think it's great if witnesses want to "go public" with their > stories. It probably helps the witness and the audience enjoys it > too. But when they serve themselves up, they shouldn't complain > about the attention. I don't remember the exact quote but I > remember Linda saying in North Carolina something like: "I'm > ready for the skeptics." It sounded like a challenge to me. Well, > here we are. Linda said then, "I'm ready for skeptics...." that does not mean it is open season on the rest of her family. Nor does it mean she is ready to receive the whole cockeyed community on the front steps of her building. She said she is ready to answer questions in the context of the UFO community. > [snip] > >So going into any new investigation, I offer those witnesses that I > >interview anonymity right up front..whether they ask for it or not. If > >they don't want it fine, if they do I respect that and work within those > >confines. > And rightfully so. But how do you advise them about talking with > the media? Simple, I advise them about talking to the media, but to be honest, it normally never comes up. > >I find it very objectionable that someone entrusted with a video tape > >allowed in confidence would turn around and sell it for what small value > >it might have. Linda should out the S.O.B. I know, I know.. it's a tough > Don, how do you know that the videotape was entrusted to someone? > How do you know that the person who had a copy of the videotape > didn't have permission to use it? How do you know that it was > sold? On this point I was only going on what I had read here on this thread. I don't really have anything to go on here other than linda's word. > No one, to my knowledge has mentioned any names (other than > Hopkins') and I'm not going to invoke the person's name who had a > copy of the tape either. I first heard this story last week when > a fellow researcher (internet impaired) called me with the story > -- complete with names. I was aghast -- I didn't believe it. But > rather than let this fester, I called some of the folks involved > for direct information. Although, I haven't checked with > everyone, it is my opinion that the videotape was not sold to > anyone. > If we have someone on the list who is fluent in Spanish and would > like to finish interviewing someone with me, maybe we can get to > the bottom of this. Email me, if you are fluent in Spanish and > are located in the United States and we'll do a conference call > with the people involved in this story. > While I still don't have ALL the facts, I would say, that it > probably wasn't prudent for this videotape to be shown anywhere, > but I don't know for sure what qualifications were given when the > videotape was handed over from Budd Hopkins. I'm in the dark where the video is concerned. As Tim the Toolman sez,"I have no opinion." > >world out there, dog eat dog, everybody's trying to make a living...but > >at some one else's emotional expense? That's tabloid style folks, pure > >and simple. If it doesn't bother you then wait until it happens to you > >or worse yet, to your kid. I defy anyone then to sit on their high horse > >and say well, I had it coming because I dared to come forward and ask > >for help. Jesus people, witnesses are our stock and trade. Without them > >we can't investigate. If everyone clammed up where would we be, there > >would be no phenomenon to study. > Witnesses are very important Don. I agree. But we can't stand > behind promises once testimony is out of the bag. If the tapes > weren't to be seen or heard by anyone else, why make them in the > first place? Think about that. All throughout "Witnessed," if you > have read it, Hopkins is making videotapes and claiming it is his > proof to use against the skeptics. He certainly intended on > showing them sometime, don'cha think? Did he NOT tell the people > he was taping what he was going to be doing with this stuff? The > tape of Little Johnny picking "the third man" out of a photo > line-up would be pretty useless if you couldn't see Little > Johnny's face as he was looking at the photos. So far I've never video taped any interviews I've done but I have audio taped most of them with the witnesses permission. This is because I'm a slow writer and half the time I can't even make out what I've written. It's just a crutch for me and a lot more effective for later updates. But let's be real here. I can't be sure of Budd's motives other than what people close to him that I know say and that is that he is an honorable person. If I was in his position, with this case sitting in my lap, I think I would do the same thing for proof later on when dealing with other researchers more knowlegable in the regression field. Proof of the believability of these sessions would be enhanced by good video tapes of the subject's actions and expressions. And don't forget, when Budd started this case, it was another case that he was looking into and became all consumming only after a considerable amount of time had passsed. By then the pattern was set as was with his other cases. > I'm sorry that the tape ended up on a TV program -- it really > doesn't seem right, but someone surely must have dislcosed to > Linda, her husband Steve and Little Johnny that this COULD > happen. Yeah, well you learn as you go along. It might be too late for Linda but it will be a lesson for the next one to come along. But then it will take someone of stout heart to say, "The heck with it..I've got to tell someone about this before I go nuts." Regards, Don Ledger
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 8 Re: Mars Chasm Dwarfs Grand Canyon From: jared@valuserve.com (Andromeda.net- Anderson, Jared) Date: Wed, 08 Oct 1997 12:15:05 -0700 Fwd Date: Wed, 08 Oct 1997 21:00:30 -0400 Subject: Re: Mars Chasm Dwarfs Grand Canyon > From: TotlResrch@aol.com [Kal K. Korff] > Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 03:28:07 -0400 (EDT) > Fwd Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 04:10:41 -0400 > Subject: Mars Chasm Dwarfs Grand Canyon > Mars Chasm Dwarfs Grand Canyon > Scientists say they have discovered a giant chasm on Mars nearly three times > deeper than the Grand Canyon, as well as evidence that an ocean bigger than > the Pacific may once have existed on the planet. The latest Martian findings > come from the Mars Global Surveyor spacecraft, which began orbiting Mars last > month in preparation for a 2 1/2-year mapping operation. Meanwhile, the > scientist in charge of the Mars Pathfinder mission on the planet's surface, > said he believed a communications problem with the craft could be overcome. Kal, Don't know much about the ocean predictions, but the canyon is very old news and has been known since the '70's. The canyon itself is larger than the horizontal expanse of the United States. I can't imagine why NASA would decide to celebrate this as a new finding as my generation was learning about this surface feature back in high school. Jared.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 8 Re: Alfred's Odd Ode #188 From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com> Date: Wed, 08 Oct 1997 14:53:18 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 08 Oct 1997 21:03:05 -0400 Subject: Re: Alfred's Odd Ode #188 Apology to MW #188 (For October 8, 1997) The wife's up my nose so I gotta' be nice to ya'; Smile an' nod, and pretend we're not drunk! Pretend that it's real our contrived waste of power! Pretend that indifference h'aint rotted and stunk!!! "Not like that," she says! And she draws her rolling pen. She swings it, striking swiftly like a mongoose. It glances from my head like a theme in Isaac's physics, And I rebound from the keyboard, a little fuzzy, faint, but footloose. An uppercut is next, and I fly right from my shoes=85 =85Transcribe an arc, and then I fetch up near the wall! Through the stars and little sputniks I can see her panther stalking=85 She wasn't finished yet, I feared; I tried a clever stall=85 "=85You're right, hon=85," I began, and I tried to catch my breath, But her blood was up, and would she understand? "Let me try again," I bargained, "I'm sure I'll hit this time"! So, she settled back into my chair, a tazer in her hand. "Once upon a time -- on a dark and stormy night=85" "There lived a man up on a hill, the richest man in sight. "All enclosed, a golden cell, and away from common plight" "He dines on light fantastic, while the others cheat, and fight." I'd finished up the period when she zapped me with her tazer. She held it 'til the NICADs lost their power! She fed it brand new batteries, and then she held it down again=85 I "slipped the surly bonds" of Earth, and was floating to a tower <?>. I stood atop the structure, and I tried to take it in=85 The wheeling stars in space, a singing choir. The watchers were an orchestra of breathy moaning woodwinds; The planets with their moons co-joined -- brass sections bringing fire. Asteroids and moonlets -- the piano and the strings, Gravity conducting concerts in its sphere. A constant traveling music where the least can move and sing, Like it's sitting in a Fasching tent, and pounding down good beer. The comets are the ushers in this theatre of the night, And their 'tales' smell of cinnamon and cloves. They swing the kind of flashlight that is never in your eyes In a multi colored spectacle that's as good as your whole show. I open eyes I'd shut when the vision got too great, And there she stood again, her hands now empty. Back to Earth I'd fallen like sudden driving rain, But I wasn't where the tower was, and I was hearing Ren and Stimpy. She asked if it was good for me, and I had to laugh out loud. "For where I go, you shouldn't have to ask=85" She wondered at my thinking, that she's kind to grin and bear, Then she sauntered off to finish, some odd, necessary task. Lehmberg@snowhill.com Ok -- so criticism gets a little weird over at my house. Don't try any of that at home. Try this -- if you are into friendly get togethers of around 10 or so, everybody get their hands on a disposable BIC or Cricket lighter and repair to someplace where you can insure complete and utter darkness. Don't light the lighters (in fact it would be preferable if they contained _no_ fuel) but strike them as you move around in the darkness for a quick, bright, single burst of _strobe_ light from the flint. If everyone has one then you get these little bursts of light from different parts of the room for a very unusual and reality distorting, artistic effect. A fast filmed camera left with its shutter open to record this event would take some very odd pictures -- give it a try. A spent lighter is a good flashlight for moving around in a dark backyard, too; it's too quick a flash to destroy the night vision necessary for efficacious and competent UFO detection and observation <g>. I grin -- but I have to report to you that I make every effort to greet predawn morning, evening, and daytime skies for respectful observation, and, in fact, see UFOs. Nothing conclusive, or worth clogging an agency with (or risking attention from) -- but UFOs none the less. I've seen them with my son, =85=85=85.=85sumpin' d'ere in'a sky, bro' 'n sis'! If anybody makes a million from my spent lighter idea, somehow, do me the courtesy of throwing me a bone, and don't play the blackout game if you smell, or expel, any gas <g>. On the other hand, continue, it could add to the spectacle! -- Explore the Alien View? http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/arecibo/46/ "I cleave the heavens, and soar to the infinite. What others see from afar, I leave far behind me." - Giordano Bruno, while burning at the fundamentalist's stake, in a too rational criticism. =B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1= =B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1= =B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1 Government or Social Harassment REPORT - Presently, "ZERO" Personal HARASSMENT; however, the harassment index is infinite for each of us. Consider the people who hate rhyming poetry.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 8 ACC in my face From: jared@valuserve.com (Andromeda.net- Anderson, Jared) Date: Wed, 08 Oct 1997 14:23:41 -0700 Fwd Date: Wed, 08 Oct 1997 21:11:25 -0400 Subject: ACC in my face I've just returned home from a week long vacation in Las Vegas and checking my e-mail here I'm horrified to see my mailbox is jammed with unsolicited e-mail from all kinds of people, (some I know but most I don't) about the American Computer Co. developments. From what I've been able to ascertain there appears to be some kind of internet war going on surrounding this case complete with opposing views from different mailing lists, slanderous accussations, sillines, and name calling. For the record I would like to state the following: I am no longer in touch with anyone at ACC and have rescinded any and all attempts to investigate anything having to do with this company. By viewing this e-mail, you release me from all social, moral, ethical and or brain damage caused by this case EVEN IF YOU CAN'T READ. Now that the icky disclaimer is out of the way, I'm trying to catch up with what's going on and I see that Tom King has announced a development concerning some more interesting Mexican footage which I'm given to understand is being reviewed by Jim Diletosso. Jim said something about their having plans to have a good deal of scrutiny both by members and non-members of the UFO community at several different labs before releasing the film. I've been so impressed with the footage that's been shot to date, that nothing that comes out of the Mexican skys shocks me anymore. Did the Elders family or Jaime mention if there were any witnesses other than the people that shot the footage?...anyone in the buildings?...the interviews on Rense's show were short with limited detail. Jared.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 8 Re: Anyone have Hoagland's e-mail address? From: United Kingdom UFO Network <ufo@holodeck.demon.co.uk> Date: Wed, 8 Oct 1997 22:46:29 +0000 Fwd Date: Wed, 08 Oct 1997 21:16:42 -0400 Subject: Re: Anyone have Hoagland's e-mail address? Does anyone have an e-mail address for: Richard Hoagland or his organisation: The Enterprise Mission. Any replies to my e-mail address please. Many thanks. Dave -------------------------- ufo@holodeck.demon.co.uk United Kingdom UFO Network http://www.holodeck.demon.co.uk --------------------------
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 9 Re: Witness Anonymity From: "Roger R. Prokic" <rprokic@ibm.net> Date: Wed, 08 Oct 97 20:06:34 Fwd Date: Thu, 09 Oct 1997 00:29:40 -0400 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity >Date: Wed, 08 Oct 1997 01:37:06 -0400 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Don Allen <dona@totcon.com> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity >One of the so-called "stooges" went on to write an >extremely detailed scathing paper on CSICOP, but I >doubt you even heard of that Ms. Napolitano, since you >were so busy at the time making appearances at >conferences all over the country hawking your story >as the "abduction case of the century". Cough, >cough. Can you say "over-hyped with no substance" ? Don, I know you didn't mean to post Linda's *REAL* LAST NAME here on the list.... Now be a nice boy and apologize to the nice lady for upsetting her again. Good boy. <g> Roger
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 9 Re: Solved Abduction cases? From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net> Date: Wed, 8 Oct 1997 22:08:27 -0500 (CDT) Fwd Date: Thu, 09 Oct 1997 00:37:30 -0400 Subject: Re: Solved Abduction cases? >From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net> >To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Solved Abduction cases? >Date: Wed, 8 Oct 1997 10:04:42 -0400 >Supposedly they make women cuddle hybrid babies. They invent >games to make children practice telekinesis. They create r >elationships, bringing abductees together (Linda and Richard, >remember?). They deliver environmental messages, which even >if they're not genuine might involve a study of our reactions. They >do the procedure David Jacobs labelled "mindscan," fastening their >big black eyes on ours, and somehow entering our minds. >Again, Dennis...you don't have to believe any of this goes on. But >it's all in the abduction literature, and outlines a scenario in >which the aliens cultivate relationships with us. They may also >be using all the advanced technology you decide they ought to >have -- while reverting to elementary procedures to make sure >we know what's going on. >Time to retire that tired old Vallee argument. >Greg Sandow Greg: Who could forget Linda and Richard? The trouble with Tribbles and the latter, though, is that, aliens and Linda aside, no one else has ever peered deep into his eyes. As for "it's all in the abduction literature"...I would say that's precisely the problem, as opposed to any sort of "solution." Corso is in the UFO literature, too, but that in no way makes him any more believable, even by as much as one little iota. The fact of the matter is that if you go back and read Eddie Bullard's classic study of the then (circa 1987) existing UFO abduction literature, you'll find that it's undergone some not so subtle and significant mutations in the decade since his analysis was published. The most obvious of these is the fact that, in 1987, _there was no such thing as a hybrid baby,_ not one, out of the some 300 cases in the literature that Bullard looked at. In addition, one of the eight stages that Bullard identified, the Tour (of the ship), focused mainly on technological aspects, such as the "bridge" or the power plant. That's now been replaced by the so-called "Nursery." In addition, Bullard's "Examination" stage of the time had little or nothing sexual about it, and we all know what that's been replaced by, don't we? The types (species?) of aliens allegedly involved have exploded exponentially as well. And while I'd have to go back and check my Bullard to be absolutely sure, I suspect the much bruited but never confirmed "implant" falls into the same category. So where did the abrupt -- in less than a decade -- changes come from, the aliens themselves, or a complex interaction between the experiencer and the investigator, with much unbridled hypnosis thrown in for good measure? In other words, do we see a real change in the alien program (progrom?), or do we see influences that were rife throughout society at the same time, ie, child abuse, abortion anxiety, political correctness over sexual abuse, missing children, concerns over global warming, etc., merely reflected, or made manifest in the abduction literature, as any sociologist worth his salt would no doubt argue? The majority of these new elements were introduced into the literature by first Hopkins and then Jacobs. John Mack, for instance, took essentially some of their same case pool and came up with an entirely different "literature," one which included past lives lived as aliens or hybrid aliens. At Roswell this past July, Mack said something to the effect that "15 minutes spent in the presence of the aliens was worth 15 years of meditation." Leo Sprinkle and John Salter (now going under the name of John Hunter Grey, if memory serves) seem to think that being abducted is pretty groovy, too. It's also in the abduction literature that "one in forty of us" has been abducted. Also in the abduction literature: Strieber, Jordan, Boylan, Haley, Wilson, Turner, Hill, Walton, Collings, Jamerson, and so on. So what does "abduction literature" _mean_ -- in any meaningful sense, that is? Do you want me to believe all of it, and then try to make sense of it? Or am I allowed to say, "No, I'm sorry, but both you (the abductee) and you (the nominal investigator) are going to have to come up with something more convincing in the way of circumstantial evidence before I believe any of it"? The problem with the abduction "literature" is, mainly, that it's just that -- literature, stories, anecdotes, tales told by who knows who, full of sound and fury, sex and circumstance, pomp and paranoia, but in the end signifying nothing, nothing that any of us can lay hands on, anyway. As for the real abduction literature, my advice would be to wait for Don DeLillo's next novel. Maybe he'll give it the treatment we've all been waiting for -- and no doubt richly deserve. Dennis
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 9 Re: Best UFO Video on the Planet From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@ucs.orst.edu> Date: Wed, 8 Oct 1997 20:27:22 -0700 (PDT) Fwd Date: Thu, 09 Oct 1997 08:37:30 -0400 Subject: Re: Best UFO Video on the Planet > Date: Wed, 08 Oct 1997 00:40:33 -0700 > From: jared@valuserve.com (Andromeda.net- Anderson, Jared) > To: Updates@globalserve.net > Subject: Re: Best UFO Video on the Planet > Jim, > Usually what happens when this type of evidence crosses the desk of > investigative journalists that work with television magazines such as 20/20 > or Extra is they immedaitely call CSICOP. They then ask them for their > assessment of the evidence and often follow it up with an interview with > Joe Nickel or Phil Klass. > If the Fox network obtains it and decides to show the footage, they will > probably be more likely to broadcast the balanced opinions of the more > scientifically minded members of the UFO research community. > How the footage is portrayed by the media has nothing to with the footage > and accompanying circumstances. It has everything to do with which media > agency shows the footage. > sad isn't it? I guess you're saying that the investigative journalists and TV magazines, etc., will be the first ones to bug Genesis III and Village Labs for the video segment or for it plus its story. But I suppose they could fend them off and when ready give their presentation straight to the Fox network? But if they instead feel that the evidence is so firm that they can risk letting it go to the CSICOP types first, I think they'll instead learn that such types will make whatever kinds of misrepresenntation are necessary to debunk it. The stronger the evidence, the greater the amount of false claims that need to be made against it. Yes, I find it sad also. Jim
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 9 Re: The sky over Roswell From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com> Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 00:53:28 -0700 Fwd Date: Thu, 09 Oct 1997 08:40:42 -0400 Subject: Re: The sky over Roswell > From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>, on 10/8/97 8:10 PM: > Date: Wed, 08 Oct 1997 07:04:39 -0700 > From: Ted Viens <drtedv@smart1.net> > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > Subject: Re: The sky over Roswell >It is not a question of familiarity with the actual characteristics of >secret military aircraft. First comes the observation. From the observation >comes a range of possible flight characteristics. These characteristics >determine the level of response. They can range from known flight >characteristics through just past the rumored edge of secret technology >to "Good Golly Miss Molly!" I am suggesting that an NL that goes from >zenith to horizon in a minute or less is in the "Miss Molly" range. Ted - In the interest of providing some material for discussion, I ran your estimate of 90 degrees of travel in 1 min (1.5 degrees / sec) through my distance / speed spreadsheet for a range of altitudes ranging from 1,300 - 21,000 feet. I used the intermediate angle of 45 degrees elevation to calculate the resulting speeds. I also calculated the speed at 100 and 200 miles. At 1300' = 33.33 mph At 2600' = 66.66 mph At 5280' = 133.32 mph At 10,560' = 266.63 mph At 15,840' = 399.95 mph At 21,120' = 533.27 mph At 100 mi =13,331.69 mph or 21,455.33 km/h At 200 mi = 26,663.39 mph or 42,910.65 km/h Most speeds at aircraft altitudes are not abnormal for aircraft within those ranges. The rate at 100 mi is also not abnormal, since the space shuttle travels at 28,160 km/h at between 100-600 mi altitudes. The shuttle info is from http://tommy.jsc.nasa.gov/~woodfill/SPACEED/SEHHTML/technology.html The following are the equations I used (please feel free to indicate if you think there are any errors): Sight Distance = Ground Distance /cos(Elevation*(@PI/180)) Altitude = tan(Elevation*(@PI/180))*Ground Distance Actual Size =(tan(Angular Size*(@PI/180))*Sight Distance)*5280 Estimated Speed = (tan(Angular Speed Per Second *(@PI/180))* Sight Distance)*3600 :Ground Distance In Feet = Ground Distance *5280 :Sight Distance In Feet = Sight Distance *5280 :Altitude In Feet = Altitude *5280 'Estimated Speed km/h' = Estimated Speed *1.6093472 Because the base and elevation side of the triangle are of the same length, the altitude is the same as the ground distance. ------ Mark Cashman, creator of The Temporal Doorway at http://www.geocities.com/~mcashman - Original digital art, writing, and UFO research - Author of SF novels available at... http://www.infohaus.com/access/by-seller/The_Temporal_Doorway_Storefront ------
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 9 Re: Witness Anonymity From: HONEYBE100@aol.com [Linda Cortile] Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 02:21:31 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Thu, 09 Oct 1997 08:42:31 -0400 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity >Date: Wed. 08 Oct 1997 01:37:06 -0400 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Don Allen <dona@totcon.com> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity Snips Hello Errol & everyone: Don Allen wrote: Snips >This is my frank appraisal of your "case" - it's a fictional story >that has key mystery witnesses who disappear very convenient- >ly, and I never bought into it. As for the "three stooges" as you >put it, they poked plenty of holes into this fictional work of yours. I believe that my previous reply to your last thread was civil, even after I've considered your downright arrogance. This time, you've gone too far and I won't be polite. Don't expect to hear violins be- cause there's gonna be a lot of rock n rolling in this thread. >"Fictional work of yours."> Fictional work of mine? You're calling me a hoaxer. You had better have some proof to back up your accusations, Don. Don't even try to make an attempt to ridicule me because I'm an abductee. I won't stand for it. >Oh, I DO realize what I've written here will upset a lot of people, >but then again, I really don't care. I'm not surprised! People like you usually don't care much for others. >I always calls em' like I smells em'. This one has always smelled >like elderly fish to me. Since I've taken notice that you're completely off of the "Witness Anonymity" subject, I might as well mention that you probably smell elderly fish no matter where you go. Maybe you should bathe more often. <G> >That dog don't hunt. The fact is, Mr. - - - - - - never witnessed >anything concerning your case and has said so repeatedly to >anyone who cared to listen. To claim otherwise makes toast of >your argument. You're very presumptuous too. You seem to assume authority without the right to do so. Aren't you trying to make the people on this list believe that your allegations are a fact? The fact is, you don't know what you're talking about because you weren't there! So, you need a new toaster. Your toast is burned. " Thank God! I can't imagine how life would've been for my family and I, if he had admitted it. Someone up there is watch- ing over us, and you can be sure it isn't an alien." That's right! That's exactly how my family and I feel about the third man's denial. You seem to have a problem with that and I don't give a hoot. >I don't consider fictional stories of your type to be of any entertain- >ment value. Many people on this list might buy into your story at >face value, but I'm not one of them. No, you're not one of the people on this list. You couldn't be, even if you tried. Insinuating that everyone on this list buys my case at face value, is an insult to them. You're just too emotionally charged. And, as a friend of mine said, "it's difficult to respond to people when they're so emotional about things; meanings are changed or misinterpreted." You just didn't like my previous thread, that's all! It was too honest for you to punch holes in. You're such a sore-loser! >Get the violins out...I predict I'll be attacked for speaking my >blunt opinion and skewering another "sacred cow." Oh well, >all in a days work for a non-paid Gov't. Pysop Agent. <g> I suspect that you'll be the one to bring out the violins. Only, I won't be here to listen. Your thread was all in a days work for a debunker, not a Government Agent. Don't flatter yourself! Linda Cortile
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 9 Re: Witness Anonymity From: HONEYBE100@aol.com [Linda Cortile] Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 04:25:33 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Thu, 09 Oct 1997 08:43:43 -0400 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity >From: XianneKei@aol.com (Rebecca Schatte) >Date: Tue. 7 Oct. 1997 17:32:10 -0400 (EDT) >To: updates@globalserve.net >Subject: Fwd: Witness Anonymity Hi Errol & everyone! This is my last post for a couple of weeks. {I can hear the crowd cheering, Hooray!!} <G> My elder son is getting married next week and I haven't even put the hem up on my new dress. So, I had better get started! We're all excited about the wedding and we're going to miss our son. :-( Rebecca wrote: >Do you think you could have benefitted from some advice about >making an appearance at a UFO Conference? I'm not being >snide here. I'm really trying to make a point. Someone NEEDS >to be able to spell these kinds of things out for Abductees. >This is why I think that John Velez' idea of an Abductee Informa- >tion Center is such a good idea! Abductees don't just need >support groups (support groups might not be a good idea in all >cases) but they do need to know the pitfalls and traps of telling >their story. Yes. I certainly would've benefitted by some advice about making an appearance at a UFO Conference, when I had anonymity. Abductees 'should' be told. However, at my first conference in 1992, I wasn't there to make an appearance. I just went to hear Budd speak, not knowing that I was already known. Had I known, I wouldn't have gone. At the time, in my situation, those three debunkers were determined to get my identity out. So, I believe that even if I didn't go to the conference, at that time, my identity would've come out anyway and this is what happened to my youngest son. I think John Velez' idea is a very good one. There should be some sort of information center for abductees. Perhaps, a leaflet could be printed out with all of the pitfalls and warnings, etc. A leaflet could be given to each abductee at a support group meeting, or whatever. But the researcher would have to be willing. If not, then a center should be organized. Support group meetings, though, are very important. >You can't expect to go around the country telling your story and >remain anonymous at the same time. But I'm not anonymous anymore and I haven't been for the last five years. That's why I go to one or two conferences, every other year. In fact, if I didn't have my "family's anonymity" to worry about, I wouldn't care if my family name was public! But I do have a family, and so, I want my real name to stay out of it. Not for me, but for them! "I'm just fighting for my pseudonym" not for any other type of anonymity. There isn't any! So, I'm not complaining about my nonexistent anonymity. I'm aware that I'm out there. <G> The issue here, is that my son's anonymity came out "without his going to conferences, being on TV, going to support group meetings or being interviewed by the press." What has happened here, is a disgrace and I don't want to see it happen again to anyone. It's as simple as that! I believe, a lot of abductees have seen these threads and have learned a very valuable lesson. I've been sitting here, wondering why, only a handful of people under- stood this. Maybe I just didn't make myself clear enough. I don't know...but it's scary. Regards, Linda Cortile
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 9 Re: Witness Anonymity From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 04:31:23 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 09 Oct 1997 08:45:19 -0400 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity >From: Penrose Christopher <penrose@sfc.keio.ac.jp> >Date: Wed, 8 Oct 97 19:51:22 +0900 >To: updates@globalserve.net >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity >>From: "Clark Hathaway" <earthwrk@doitnow.com> >>To: <updates@globalserve.net> >>Subject: Witness Anonymity >>Date: Tue, 7 Oct 1997 20:30:40 -0700 >>>From: Christopher Penrose <penrose@sfc.keio.ac.jp> >>>To: updates@globalserve.net >>>Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity >>>Date: Tue, 7 Oct 97 03:40:30 +0900 >>>"Re: Witness Anonymity" is starting to look like this week's "thread >>>of shame" on the Area 51 mailing list. UFOlogy is showing its best >>>face to the world. >>Well, wrong area. This is not the Area 51 Mailing List, nor is it the >>"Linda List" either. (massive snip) >You are more interested in galloping into battle than communication. >This is what I criticize, and you have made me into a greater enemy >than I am. >Christopher Penrose Hey, did someone open a window? I can swear there is a hint of 'fresh air.' Hope it's not my imagination. Restoring a sense of 'communication' and information sharing/debating would be a welcome relief. There is absolutely no reason why -anyone- on this list should be 'attacked' for any reason. (Self-defense excluded, righteous indignation is just that, righteous!) you guys don't know how lucky you are to have access to some of the folks that participate on this list. Beginning with my battered friend Linda. Think how lucky you are that she (and others) have made themselves available for us to get to know, ask questions, and -communicate- with one another. She has shown what a gutsy and strong woman she is by responding to people whose character demonstrates that they are not worthy to shine her shoes. You'd be surprised how much people loosen up and talk and reveal themselves over a friendly cup of coffee or a glass of wine. How much do you get from someone that you are kicking and spitting on? John Velez, Still learnin' John Velez jvif@spacelab.net Search for other documents from or mentioning: jvif | penrose |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 9 Re: Mars Chasm Dwarfs Grand Canyon From: JJ Mercieca <mufor@maltanet.net> Date: Thu, 09 Oct 1997 09:41:20 +0100 Fwd Date: Thu, 09 Oct 1997 08:46:40 -0400 Subject: Re: Mars Chasm Dwarfs Grand Canyon >Date: Wed, 08 Oct 1997 12:15:05 -0700 >From: jared@valuserve.com (Andromeda.net- Anderson, Jared) >To: Updates@globalserve.net >Subject: Re: Mars Chasm Dwarfs Grand Canyon >> Scientists say they have discovered a giant chasm on Mars nearly three times >> deeper than the Grand Canyon, as well as evidence that an ocean bigger than <snip> >Don't know much about the ocean predictions, but the canyon is >very old news and has been known since the '70's. The canyon >itself is larger than the horizontal expanse of the United Maybe it's a different canyon, not Vallis Marineris. Wasn't this chasm much deeper than 3 times the Grand Canyon? Regards, JJ Mercieca Malta UFO Research http://www.mufor.org/
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 9 Re: Best UFO video on lthe planet From: CFQ2@aol.com [Charles F. Quinn Jr] Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 09:03:59 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Thu, 09 Oct 1997 21:28:02 -0400 Subject: Re: Best UFO video on lthe planet >From:Jim Deardorff<deadorj@ucs.orst.edu> >Date: Thursday 2 October 1997 >Subject; Best UFO video on the planet >snip< >I have grave doubts that it will air on any of the major networks and suspect >that I will need to view it on the Sci-Fi channel... >Jared replies< <snip> >investigative journalists that work with TV magazines like 20/20 >or Extra immediately call CSICOP....and follow it up with an interview >with Joe Nickel or Phil Klass The kiss of death.Is there any way to break the cycle. Is there anyway to obtain copies of the video or to be informed as to when and where it will be viewed CFQ2
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 9 Re: The Decline and Fall of American Ufology From: wlmss@peg.apc.org [Lawrie Williams} Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 22:40:25 +1000 (GMT+1000) Fwd Date: Thu, 09 Oct 1997 21:24:14 -0400 Subject: Re: The Decline and Fall of American Ufology > Date: Sun, 5 Oct 1997 03:01:27 -0400 (EDT) > From: Gordon@home.com > To: updates@globalserve.net > Subject: The Decline and Fall of American Ufology > Everything centers around some of the most dramatic photos > taken of what is alleged to be a UFO, which for months, continued > to buzz Ed Walters and virtually, as reported, harassed him while > he shot the photos...... The Four Axioms of UFO Science ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Does anyone believe the Walters photos are a hoax but telepathy, exotic humanoids, hovering craft and blue beams are axiomatic? Does anyone believe the Walters photos are real but telepathy, exotic humanoids, hovering craft and blue beams are unlikely? I think most people have made up their minds either way by now, and those who believe the photos accept that the other effects do occur, and those who think they are a hoax have real problems believing that the rest of Ed Walters' account is true too. UFO can function as a valid and productive science if those who are involved can agree on axioms. It is clear there are two very distinct groups at this stage in ufology, so each group needs to set its own axioms. Otherwise nobody is ever going to get anywhere! For the skeptical side, the debate might concern itself with the question of elaborate psychopathologies and the identification of earth lights. That these phenomena occur can be accepted as axiomatic and a useful framework of knowledge can be built up from this position. For the believer side, the debate needs to concern itself with the nature of telepathy, the description of UFO crew, the mission of their craft and the technologies these entities deploy. If ufology fails to recognize this great divide, it will be forever at cross-purposes, as we have seen with the Great 1997 UpDates Debate about the 1987 Ed Walters Photos. I was on the earth lights side when I went to an area where a major ufo flap was in progress. I spoke to many witnesses, read newspaper articles galore and had a telepathic experience. You can be sure I came home a believer. Indeed it is amazing how convincing an experience it is once you encounter telepathy, exotic humanoids, hovering craft or blue beams. Yet never do these experiences turn believers into skeptics. Odd thing, that. Since there is a natural progression from skeptic to believer it is proposed that the believer side be identifed as UFO Science and the skeptic branch as a dissident group within UFO Science. Thus there is no need for rancour or further disruption. This ability for any person to visit an area where a UFO flap is on gives UFO science the verifiability and replicatibility that is required for it to qualify as a science. It means hypotheses which have given rise to predictions can be tested. It provides a means of adding to the cumulative data base. UFO science can use the above axioms (telepathy, exotic humanoids, hovering craft and blue matter-energy beams) as a basis for defining its own language. It need not allow itself to be hamstrung by being engaged in a perpetual bitter rear-guard action dealing with people who have not "qualified" themselves by accepting the basic axioms of this field of study. Yet this latter group can remain under the umbrella of ufology where they can conduct a rightful search to disprove any or all of the axioms or to show that there are better ways to account for observed phenomena. Science once refused to accept that rocks fell from the sky. It took a fabulous meteor shower to convince them otherwise. Once it was accepted as axiomatic that rocks did fall from the sky it became respectable to go out and collect and study them. At this time ufology has to deal with a flood of sightings and much detailed witness testimony. If the four axioms are recognized then it will be possible to assemble all the known information, develop hypotheses, make predictions, construct theories from the results of further observations and in this way extend the science of UFOlogy. The birth of a meaningful science never had to wait until everyone got on board, especially if progress is persistently thwarted by a cynical minority. I started the Gulf Breeze discussion with an innocent posting in which I mentioned the implications of these blue transporter beams seen or experienced in many different situations by hundreds of reliable witnesses. The ad hominim attack on Ed Walters and the repetition of all the old discussions ended further useful discussion. One wonders if this was accidental. It is agreed that not all of the mystery surrounding ufology can be ascribed to aliens. If I were assigned to hamstringing the ufology community I'd go to a UFO conference and wait until a skeptic was well into an emotive presentation. At that point I'd release imprinting molecules into the air. Imprinting molecules lock whatever feeling is uppermost firmly into place. i.e. Brainwashing is not needed, just a dash of dye at the right moment! Its fabulously easy and wonderfully effective. But I do not suggest that anyone accept that the above scenario has happened as axiomatic. It just seems probable when compared with other situations where public opinion formation has been given high priority by the U.S. State Department. A realistic objection to adopting UFO science as axiomatic is that the axioms might turn out wrong. But then Newton's Laws of Motion were wrong, yet they served as the foundations of Physics for centuries afterwards. At least there was something to work with. It is ironic that although ufology is not recognized as a science by most people who practice Science, ufology tends to derive its ideas from the main body of science - where it is essentially taken as axiomatic that UFO's do not exist. This is not at all healthy for UFO Science since it must draw on a theoretical framework that clashes with its own in vital places. Certainly UFOlogy will be at first a dissident science. How long it takes to become fully recognized will depend entirely on how well it performs at the theoretical and technical levels. There could be no better time than the present to start. Lawrie Williams_________ Proposed Axioms for UFO Science: 1) Telepathy can occur during UFO contacts 2) Humanoids might be seen when a UFO is near 3) Some UFO's are hovering craft 4) Some UFO's operate a beam that transmits matter
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 9 Re: Solved Abduction cases? From: clark@canby.mn.frontiercomm.net [Jerome Clark] Date: Thu, 09 Oct 1997 10:02:02 PDT Fwd Date: Thu, 09 Oct 1997 21:46:23 -0400 Subject: Re: Solved Abduction cases? > Date: Wed, 8 Oct 1997 22:08:27 -0500 (CDT) > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net> > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Solved Abduction cases? > >From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net> > >To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net> > >Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Solved Abduction cases? > >Date: Wed, 8 Oct 1997 10:04:42 -0400 > >Supposedly they make women cuddle hybrid babies. They invent > >games to make children practice telekinesis. They create r > >elationships, bringing abductees together (Linda and Richard, > >remember?). They deliver environmental messages, which even > >if they're not genuine might involve a study of our reactions. They > >do the procedure David Jacobs labelled "mindscan," fastening their > >big black eyes on ours, and somehow entering our minds. > >Again, Dennis...you don't have to believe any of this goes on. But > >it's all in the abduction literature, and outlines a scenario in > >which the aliens cultivate relationships with us. They may also > >be using all the advanced technology you decide they ought to > >have -- while reverting to elementary procedures to make sure > >we know what's going on. > >Time to retire that tired old Vallee argument. > >Greg Sandow > Greg: > Who could forget Linda and Richard? The trouble with Tribbles and > the latter, though, is that, aliens and Linda aside, no one else > has ever peered deep into his eyes. > As for "it's all in the abduction literature"...I would say > that's precisely the problem, as opposed to any sort of > "solution." Corso is in the UFO literature, too, but that in no > way makes him any more believable, even by as much as one little > iota. > The fact of the matter is that if you go back and read Eddie > Bullard's classic study of the then (circa 1987) existing UFO > abduction literature, you'll find that it's undergone some not so > subtle and significant mutations in the decade since his analysis > was published. The most obvious of these is the fact that, in > 1987, _there was no such thing as a hybrid baby,_ not one, out of > the some 300 cases in the literature that Bullard looked at. In > addition, one of the eight stages that Bullard identified, the > Tour (of the ship), focused mainly on technological aspects, such > as the "bridge" or the power plant. That's now been replaced by > the so-called "Nursery." In addition, Bullard's "Examination" > stage of the time had little or nothing sexual about it, and we > all know what that's been replaced by, don't we? The types > (species?) of aliens allegedly involved have exploded > exponentially as well. And while I'd have to go back and check my > Bullard to be absolutely sure, I suspect the much bruited but > never confirmed "implant" falls into the same category. > So where did the abrupt -- in less than a decade -- changes come > from, the aliens themselves, or a complex interaction between the > experiencer and the investigator, with much unbridled hypnosis > thrown in for good measure? In other words, do we see a real > change in the alien program (progrom?), or do we see influences > that were rife throughout society at the same time, ie, child > abuse, abortion anxiety, political correctness over sexual abuse, > missing children, concerns over global warming, etc., merely > reflected, or made manifest in the abduction literature, as any > sociologist worth his salt would no doubt argue? > The majority of these new elements were introduced into the > literature by first Hopkins and then Jacobs. John Mack, for > instance, took essentially some of their same case pool and came > up with an entirely different "literature," one which included > past lives lived as aliens or hybrid aliens. At Roswell this past > July, Mack said something to the effect that "15 minutes spent in > the presence of the aliens was worth 15 years of meditation." Leo > Sprinkle and John Salter (now going under the name of John Hunter > Grey, if memory serves) seem to think that being abducted is > pretty groovy, too. It's also in the abduction literature that > "one in forty of us" has been abducted. Also in the abduction > literature: Strieber, Jordan, Boylan, Haley, Wilson, Turner, > Hill, Walton, Collings, Jamerson, and so on. > So what does "abduction literature" _mean_ -- in any meaningful > sense, that is? Do you want me to believe all of it, and then try > to make sense of it? Or am I allowed to say, "No, I'm sorry, but > both you (the abductee) and you (the nominal investigator) are > going to have to come up with something more convincing in the > way of circumstantial evidence before I believe any of it"? > The problem with the abduction "literature" is, mainly, that it's > just that -- literature, stories, anecdotes, tales told by who > knows who, full of sound and fury, sex and circumstance, pomp and > paranoia, but in the end signifying nothing, nothing that any of > us can lay hands on, anyway. > As for the real abduction literature, my advice would be to wait > for Don DeLillo's next novel. Maybe he'll give it the treatment > we've all been waiting for -- and no doubt richly deserve. > Dennis Dennis, I admire your apparent certainty that all's right with the world, that we don't have to worry about the abduction phenomenon because it's all messy and the putative aliens don't act as you would have them act, that the novels of Don DeLillo have more to tell us than actual case studies, which presumably include those of Ray Fowler (Allagash), Walt Webb (Hill and Buff Ledge), and other conscientious investigators. Hey, call me weird, but I think these guys, not to mention Eddie Bullard, are the ones I prefer to call on when I'm trying to make sense of what's going on in abduction country.. You might also turn to a paper I've had several occasions recently to mention here: Stuart Appelle's devastating critique of "conventional" explanations for abduction phenomena. Not that I want to turn your attention, don't get me wrong, from DeLillo, admittedly the world's foremost expert on everything. Science has neglected the UFO phenomenon as well as its prodigal stepchild, the abduction phenomenon. Thus most of the research, inevitably, is left to nonprofessionals, of widely varying ability, common sense, or thoughtfulness. Yet curiously, as Bullard has shown (The Sympathetic Ear, published by FUFOR in 1995), investigators seem, by any measurable standard, not to affect the content of abduction narratives much. In other words, Bullard validates formally what investigators have always insisted: that popular debunking mythology aside, it's pretty hard to lead abductees. If one accepts as at least provisionally possible that some abduction reports are of real events, there is no a priori reason to reject the notion of a changing, evolving phenomenon. It may not even be changing or evolving quite so rapidly as we think. After all, John Keel was noting anomalous pregnancies as long ago as the 1960s (as I was surprised to learn when rereading The Mothman Prophecies awhile ago). Moreover, I am continually struck, as I read old (pre-1960) UFO cases, at the occurrence of details which after Hopkins would have been full of resonance. Witnesses would report an odd sense of confusion or dislocation during a sighting. One example: In 1958 a man wrote NICAP about a 1942 sighting in Mississippi; he could not provide a fully coherent account because at one point things got vague and he couldn't understand how things got from point A to point D. I've read enough of these cases (most recently, if memory serves, in Loren Gross' new monograph on the November 1957 wave) that I suspect it has been only in recent years that we've learned what questions to ask. Yet, Dennis, you seem perfectly happy to condemn, without qualification, all who would ask those questions. Not good, my friend. Anyway, I'm giving some thought to compiling a catalog of pre-1960 cases in which phenomena we would now think suggestive of abduction figure. Maybe we'd learn something. I also think we'd have a better handle on what we're dealing with if we were able to discard the noise. Rodeghier, Goodpaster, and Blatterbauer (JUFOS 3, 1991) make a good case that two entirely different populations of abductees exist: those who show up as psychologically "normal" and those who show signs of mental disturbance. Here we have all sorts of opportunities to test hypotheses. Here's one testable hypothesis: The first group are more likely to report abduction experiences for which there is some degree of independent evidence, including multiple participants, the second group significantly less so. What is happening, clearly, is that as abductions attain a high profile in popular culture, paranoids and other disturbed people use them as focuses of fantasy, just as during the Cold War such folk fantasized that Russian spies were persecuting them. That didn't mean, of course, that no Russian spies existed, just as that there weren't nearly so many as reports had it. Yes, abduction research is a messy business, full of complexity, ambiguity, and even absurdity, and there is a lot more intriguing possibility than hard evidence. Nothing in it, however, remotely justifies Dennis' wholesale dismissal. It is depressing to read something like this from someone I like and respect -- and who ought to know a whole hell of a lot better. Put down your DeLillo novel, my friend, and start paying attention. Jerry Clark
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 9 SWISS-AIR UFO & N.T.S.B. Latest From: KY <task@fuse.net> [Kenny Young] Date: Thu, 09 Oct 1997 09:23:23 -0700 Fwd Date: Thu, 09 Oct 1997 21:40:59 -0400 Subject: SWISS-AIR UFO & N.T.S.B. Latest What follows is a reply from NTSB spokesman Pat Cariseo to an inquiry regarding the Aug. 9, 1997 UFO/Balloon incident involving a Swiss jetliner. Below his reply is the question, forwarded initially to Lyn Donaldson. Subject: NTSB Aviation Incident data from AUGUST 9 Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 09:02:35 -0400 From: Cariseo Pat To: "'task@fuse.net'" <task@fuse.net> CC: Donaldson Lyn Kenny Young: The NTSB investigates all civilian aviation incidents and accidents in which there are deaths injuries or substantial damage to aircraft or property. However, the NTSB also decided to look into this sighting by the Swiss Air crew after it was reported to air traffic control because the incident happened over New York airspace. We assigned one of our investigators from our New Jersey office to look into it. He is preparing a brief report which is not yet available. The FAA believes it was a weather balloon because one had been launched that day and the FAA issued a notice to airmen about it. Another airline crew reported seeing a weather balloon about 50 minutes after the Swiss Air crew reported seeing the unidentified object. Although our investigator originally thought it might be a weather balloon, we may not come to that final conclusion. After examining radar data, estimating the speed of the Swiss Air 747, and interviewing the Swiss Air crew, we do NOT believe it was a powered vehicle. It did not show up on radar and we believe that the object may have been stationary or drifting. The crew's observation that the object sped by them may have actually been the jet speeding past the object since the plane was going more than 500 mph.. One crew member described the object as spherical, the other as cylindrical. It could have been some other type of balloon ( a promotional balloon that escaped into the atmosphere, for example.) When we complete the brief, it should show up on our home page under the Aug. 9, 1997 date. [Pat Cariseo, NTSB spokesman] __________________________________ >From: Donaldson Lyn >Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 1997 9:30 AM >To: Cariseo Pat >Subject: FW: NTSB Aviation Incident data from AUGUST 9 > >Pat, can you handle this one? ___________________________________ -----Original Message----- From: Kenny Young [SMTP:task@fuse.net] Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 1997 8:40 AM To: Donaldson Lyn Subject: NTSB Aviation Incident data from AUGUST 9 National Transportation Safety Board: I was hopeful that you could advise me where to turn with my efforts to locate the NTSB summation of an incident happening after a Boeing 747 had taken off from Philadelphia on August 9. The incident involved an unidentified, wingless object which passed 50-yards from the jetliner. NTSB spokesman Pat Cariseo said that the object "was probably a weather balloon." The incident involved a Swissair jetliner, and was disclosed to the public after the Associated Press reported on the event. In review of your web-site which contains a listing of Aviation accidents and incidents, there is no listing available with regards to the disturbance. I was curious to learn why the incident was/is not listed within your database. Enclosed is a copy of the Associated Press article regarding the incident. I was also seeking to review the report on this happening, as well as the information available to NTSB spokesman Pat Cariseo which revealed these findings. Would you be able to kindly assist me with this inquiry and point me in the right direction? I appreciate your time and efforts. Sincerely, KENNY YOUNG task@fuse.net ____________________________________________________________________ Newspaper article: "Weather Balloon Spooks 747" The Associated Press Friday, September 26, 1997 ZURICH, Switzerland (AP) -- The mystery of one UFO has been solved. An unidentified flying object passed dangerously close to a Swissair jetliner traveling between Philadelphia and Boston on Aug. 9, the airline said Friday. Swissair spokesman Erwin Schaerer said the crew reported that an object sped by about 50 yards from the Boeing 747 after the plane had taken off from Philadelphia and had reached 23,000 feet. The pilot told the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board that the object as long and wingless, but the copilot said it was more spherical, he said. And what was it? It probably was a weather balloon, NTSB spokesman Pat Cariseo said Friday. ``(The sighting) does not lead us to believe that was something self-propelled,'' Cariseo added. End of article -- T.A.S.K. UFO Research http://home.fuse.net/task/
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 9 Re: Witness Anonymity From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com> Date: Thu, 09 Oct 1997 13:33:36 -0400 Fwd Date: Thu, 09 Oct 1997 22:01:08 -0400 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity >Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 04:31:23 -0500 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity >>From: Penrose Christopher <penrose@sfc.keio.ac.jp> >>Date: Wed, 8 Oct 97 19:51:22 +0900 >>To: updates@globalserve.net >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity >>>>"Re: Witness Anonymity" is starting to look like this week's "thread >>>>of shame" on the Area 51 mailing list. UFOlogy is showing its best >>>>face to the world. >>>Well, wrong area. This is not the Area 51 Mailing List, nor is it the >>>"Linda List" either. >(massive snip) >>You are more interested in galloping into battle than communication. >>This is what I criticize, and you have made me into a greater enemy >>than I am. >>Christopher Penrose >Hey, did someone open a window? I can swear there is a hint of 'fresh air.' >Hope it's not my imagination. Restoring a sense of 'communication' and >information sharing/debating would be a welcome relief. >There is absolutely no reason why -anyone- on this list should be >'attacked' for any reason. (Self-defense excluded, righteous indignation >is just that, righteous!) you guys don't know how lucky you are to have >access to some of the folks that participate on this list. Beginning with >my battered friend Linda. I thought that Errol had asked that this thread be halted a while back, but I assume that one of the more recent messages had new information that he felt was relevent and deserved further discussion. I am very grateful for the variety of opinions and expertise that we have available to us, and would hope that discussions here would remain above the level of name calling.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 9 Re: 'The Gulf Breeze Paper' From: c549597@showme.missouri.edu Date: Thu, 09 Oct 1997 10:44:41 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 09 Oct 1997 21:56:11 -0400 Subject: Re: 'The Gulf Breeze Paper' COMMENTARY ON THE BARBARA BECKER'S SEPTEMBER, 1997 DISCUSSION OF THE ED WALTERS/GULF BREEZE SIGHTINGS by Bruce Maccabee ..................................................... From: c549597@showme.missouri.edu [Barbara Becker] Date: Sat, 27 Sep 1997 13:36:17 -0500 Subject: 'The Gulf Breeze Paper' ONE PICTURE IS WORTH A THOUSAND WORDS Copyright 1997 Barbara Becker (For the sake of brevity I am only using Maccabee's comments and my responses. I am not including the aforementioned paper. BB ) ------------------------------------------------------------------ MACCABEE: It is important to know that many other witnesses reported UFOs flying around Gulf Breeze in the same time frame and, hence, it is possible that others could have photographed them. This applies in particular to "Believer Bill" (discussed below) who claimed to have photographed UFOs at a location that turned out to be just behind Ed's (old) house. ("Jane", described below, claimed her photos were taken long before the Gulf Breeze flap.) ** BB COMMENT: None came forward before Walters. Myself and others interested in this case have serious doubts about some of the reports. In some cases it was months after Walters' photos appeared in the newspaper that the reports were taken. I personally spoke with Mrs. Art Hufford, an interview which I have on audio tape, where she says that the object she did not have windows, yet Mr. Hufford often says that what he saw looked EXACTLY like Ed Walters UFO. There is always the danger of contamination of witness testimony the longer time goes on. ------------------------------------------------ MACCABEE: Strictly speaking it is "impossible" to know how many pictures Ed took... because he was not being watched 24 hours a day. The reader should not, however, be caught by the implication that he may have taken many more UFO photos. There is no evidence that he took any UFO photos other than what he released in the 1990 book (TGBS) and in the 1997 book (UARHTP). ** BB COMMENT: Very true. It looks like we agree here. Not only was Walters not being watched 24 hours a day but no one knew he had even taken any other photos until December 23, and photo number 18. Bruce continues:) "There is no evidence that he took any UFO photos other than what he released in the 1990 book." That's not true. Have you forgotten he shot two pictures while allegedly huddling under his truck on January 12, 1987 the night of the infamous road shot? Only one of the two was used in the book. In addition... In July 1991 I wrote to Maccabee and asked about the difference in serial numbers on Walters' photos 15 (J712051Z), 16 (H712631Z), and 17 (J712051Z) reported by Bob Oeschler on his on a "Gulf Breeze Serial ID Number Sheet". Maccabee replied that according to Polaroid: "In one batch (of sheet film) there could be very many packs of film. The film is made in one long roll and cut into 'pack size' after each piece is stamped with a 'mark' as follows: 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8- cut-1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8, -cut- etc. Each series of 8...is placed into a separate box and packaged for shipment automatically. There could,... be many (hundreds?) of boxes made from one long roll, that have the same serial numbers." And that is EXACTLY why we have no way of knowing how many photographs Walters actually took. He could have had three (hundreds?) of boxes with identical serial numbers, shot 24 photographs or however many he needed, and patched together the photos, 1 through 8. Making them look sequential. As an example: This is from Oeschler's serial number sheet. Comment Photo serial# Mark Date Comments 20 G715481E xd out 1/16/88 xd out 21 G715481E 7 1/24/88 Slight Add'l P smr Cook A " 8 22 G715481E 5 1/26/88 No P Smr 23 G715481E 6 1/26/88 No P Smr At the bottom of sheet and NOT included w/Walters photos: 14-A G715481E 1 Same S# as Ph# 20-23 above 19-A G715481E 3 ("Mark" refers to the number of the photos in the film pack. There were 8 in a full pack.) If photo 21 is the one Walters took in Cook's presence and used in GBS, then what is 21 A that specifically names Cook? IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO KNOW MANY PHOTOGRAPHS WALTERS TOOK. --------------------------------------------------------- MACCABEE : Tommy Smith did not "come forward" publicly until June, 1990. His testimony about Ed faking photos is about as solid as a Swiss Cheese. Ed told the UFO investigators in January 1988 that a young man had shown Ed UFO photos. The young man had told Ed that he was exploding firecrackers in Gulf Breeze when a UFO had appeared and he had photographed it. He asked Ed if he should be go public? Ed pointed out the problems he (Ed) was having with all the publicity offer his photos and he cautioned against it. The young man did not publicize his sighting and asked for anonymity. Ed respected the young man's wishes and did not tell the UFO investigators the man's name. (Hence there was no investigation of the young man's sighting.) More than 2 years later, in June 1990, after Tommy Smith had gone public with allegations of hoaxing by Ed, Ed stated that the young man was, in fact, Tommy Smith. Ed's testimony was supported by another young friend of Tommy's who told me and other investigators that Tommy had told him, in late 1987, about exploding firecrackers and seeing and photographing a UFO. The person Tommy "came forward" to with his story was his father. According to his father, lawyer Thomas Smith, at a press conference in June, 1990, Tommy told him in late 1987 of a UFO sighting with pictures. According to Thomas Smith, a few days or weeks later Tommy told him the pictures had been faked by Ed. Neither Smith said anything in public about these allegations until June, 1990. At the press conference Mr. Smith was careful to avoid criticizing any of the other Gulf Breeze witnesses, including those who claimed to have seen exactly the same thing that Ed photographed. Tommy's photos were analyzed. Tommy had claimed that Ed had faked them by double exposure methods. However, analysis revealed no evidence of double exposure and, in fact, the photos appeared to be just single exposures, not double exposures as Tommy had indicated. The shape and color of the depicted UFO was consistent with what Ed had photographed. ** BB COMMENT: This is strictly disinformation damage control. In the first week of January 1988, Tommy Smith confessed his role in Walters hoax to his father, who then discussed it with his law partners, Mayor of Gulf Breeze, Ed Gray and Police Chief, Jerry Brown. So there is no lack of credible witnesses to what Tommy said and when. All of whom believed MUFON would discover the hoax and it would go away. It didn't. At this time Tommy cut his ties to Walters. This was when Walters executed his own damage control. He told Ware et al., that he was definitely, "Mr. Ed." and showed the remaining 12 or so photographs he had taken. To my recollection it was Walters who came out with the preposterous story about Tommy Smith. ------------------------------------------------------------- MACCABEE: This discussion about the copyright does not prove Ed created the Bill and Jane photos. Hence Barbara's claim that "this demonstrates his ability...." is also not proven. In contradiction to Barbara's conclusion, many other factors in this case indicate that Ed told the truth because many of the photos he took were beyond his capability to fake. ** BB COMMENT: You can make up any story you want to believe, whatever makes you feel better. But the FACT of law is: IF ED WALTERS OWNS THE COPYRIGHT TO THE BELIEVER BILL AND JANE PHOTOS AS HE DECLARES, THEN HE MUST EITHER HAVE A TRANSFER AGREEMENT, WHICH HE DOESN'T OR BE THE PHOTOGRAPHER. And that DOES validate Tommy Smiths claims whether you like it or not. And that does demonstrate his ability to use other cameras. (As an additional remark regarding copyright. Ed Walters claims that on January 12, 1988 after 5:30 PM, he was chased down, while driving his truck, by light wand carrying aliens, (photo 19. The road shot). He claims he was physically and mentally traumatized. He managed to escape and return home. Commenting that the next day he was still feeling the effects. The copyright for the photographs taken by Edward Daniel Walters, titled UFOS:PROOF POSITIVE, which includes photo19, has a completion date of January 12, 1988. This means that IF we believe Walters actually took photo19 on January 12, as he claims, (but probably didnt) then he xeroxed his photographs, completed the paperwork and got it in the mail in time to be received and registered in Washington DC at the LOC on January 15. I wish I had mail service that was that fast! This seems like rather odd behavior for a man who is claiming he is being stalked by aliens. But it is not odd behavior for a man pulling a hoax and hoping to capitalize on it.) Barbara Becker
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 9 Whose Truth? From: ujack@pop3.scrapcity.cnchost.com [Mark Medford] Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 14:29:00 +0000 Fwd Date: Thu, 09 Oct 1997 22:07:19 -0400 Subject: Whose Truth? Dear Friends, So much of what we are debating is experiential. What a difficult thing to challenge - someone else's experience! No line of argument, no amount of logic, can convince me that I was not touched by an event, if I BELIEVE that I was. Given new information and insights, I might draw a different meaning from the event, but I will never disown the experience itself. The ability to discern is critical. Without it, we free float on a sea of fact and fiction. But what tools do we use to discern? The way that I perceive things in this world is uniquely my own - as is everyone else's. One is no less valid than the other. Although there are many common perceptions, there are also those that have roots in my own emotional, cultural and intellectual history. So... when I encounter information that fits my inner criteria, that feels "right" to me, I embrace it. Likewise, if it doesn't fit, I reject it. I do so with equal passion. Since joining this list, I've read many emotion filled posts. I respect the courage of those who have shared - and I understand the need that others have to react. We are not only pushing boundaries here, we're challenging beliefs. This is always a risky business. Must our responses be so sharp? Can our convictions be tempered with compassion? I would hate to think that this environment, this forum, this community, might be seen as too hostile to join. I would hate to see personal bias bar, emotionally, others from participating. No one wants to be attacked. Perhaps I'm naive. I assume that the information shared here - if not clinically accurate - is at least sincere. My mind is not so open that it's leaking, but, neither is it so closed as to be impermeable. I know that my beliefs, while subject to modification, are not fragile things. I will, when necessary, preserve them in silence. When it comes to sharing experiences that originate within this "new frontier" of UFO's - we're very much like the blind man describing an elephant. Until we are able to study the whole phenomenon, with eyes wide open, who's to say which perception is "correct"? Although I have my own pet theories and gut feelings, I would never presume to serve them up as "truth". I would simply say: this is what happened to me... Respectfully, Mark
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 9 Re: Best UFO Video on the Planet From: Melempire <Melempire@aol.com> [Mel Donovan] Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 14:46:07 EDT Fwd Date: Thu, 09 Oct 1997 22:09:48 -0400 Subject: Re: Best UFO Video on the Planet Hi to you Has anyone seen this video footage ? I may well be Interested in buying the footage, then the T.V. Companies will be dealt with correctly, cautiously Mel
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 9 Re: From: Jacques Poulet <jpoulet@generation.net> Date: Thu, 09 Oct 1997 18:08:30 Fwd Date: Thu, 09 Oct 1997 22:12:01 -0400 Subject: Re: From: Benjamin H. Leblanc <valmont@generation.net> A sociologist at University of Montreal is looking for written testimonies of ufo abduction by experiencers. Every submitted information will remain anonymous. Those interested to participate should send a message to: <valmont@generation.net> A questionnaire will then be sent to them via email. Thank you for your time. Benjamin H. Leblanc University of Montreal, CANADA Jacques Poulet, Directeur SOS OVNI Qu=E9bec Case Postale 143 St-Jean-sur-Richelieu, Qc CANADA J3B 6Z1 http://ww.total.net/~flex01/index.htm (fran=E7ais) T=E9l:(514)536-0140 Fax:(514)536-0141
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 9 Re: Jupiter Moon May Have Life Elements From: RSchatte@aol.com Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 19:26:24 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Thu, 09 Oct 1997 22:15:39 -0400 Subject: Re: Jupiter Moon May Have Life Elements --------------------- Forwarded message: Subj: Jupiter Moon May Have Life Elements Date: 97-10-09 18:04:46 EDT From: AOL News .c The Associated Press By PAUL RECER WASHINGTON (AP) - The discovery of organic compounds on two of Jupiter's moons increases the possibility that all of the elements for life are present on another of the planet's moons, Europa. The finding, from instruments on the Galileo spacecraft orbiting Jupiter, suggests that Europa may have all three of the ingredients scientists consider essential for life: an energy source, liquid water and organic molecules, said planetary scientist Thomas B. McCord of the University of Hawaii. ``This doesn't mean there is life on Europa,'' said McCord, lead author of a study to be published Friday in the journal Science. ``The exciting thing now is the evidence that Europa may have all three of the ingredients.'' Europa is already known to have water and internal heat sources. Dale Cruikshank, a research scientist at NASA's Ames Research Center, said the work of McCord and his team should sharpen the research concentration on Europa, which already ``is the subject of very special interest.'' ``This finding increases the plausibility for life on Europa,'' Cruikshank said. ``It also supports the idea that there were organic molecules streaming throughout the solar system.'' The study of Jupiter's moons is part of a growing effort by astronomers and planetary experts to find evidence of life within the solar system, particularly on Mars. A major goal of NASA's Mars exploration, for example, is to search for the fingerprints of life on the Red Planet. Researchers have determined that Mars once had vast pools of water and there is speculation this could have led to the evolution of life. Some believe there may be evidence of life in frozen underground water. NASA researchers also have found what some believe may be the fossilized remains of microbes in an asteroid that fell to Earth from Mars. The interpretation of that finding, however, is controversial. In the case of Jupiter's moons, instruments on Galileo detected the complex organic molecules on the surfaces of the moons Collisto and Ganymede, suggesting that such organics are also present on Jupiter's other two large moons, Europa and Io. ``What we have on Collisto and Ganymede are some of the kinds of organic molecules that could be the basis for life,'' said McCord. ``These are the basic ingredients.'' And if Collisto and Ganymede have these compounds, said McCord, then it is highly likely that they also exist on Europa. Water and an energy source, said McCord are ``two angles on the triangle of life.'' Now, by finding organics present on two other Jovian moons, there is a strong suggestion that the third angle of the triangle may be present on Europa, he said. Life on Collisto, Io and Ganymede is considered unlikely because they are dry. No organic chemicals have been detected on Europa, but researchers have speculated that there may be a rich organic soup below the moon's ice cap and that this could be a warm, liquid place for the evolution of life. None of the research so far has proven that life exists or has ever existed on any of Jupiter's moons, McCord emphasized. He compared the research progress to how a cake is made. ``We've got the flour and sugar and the water to make the dough,'' said McCord. ``And there's a suggestion that the oven is on.'' But assembling the ingredients does not mean the cake has been made, he said. The organics were detected by Galileo instruments that capture solar radiation reflected off the surface of the moons. The wavelength of the reflection is unique for each molecule, giving an electromagnetic ``signature'' of the surface chemistry. McCord said the findings included various combinations of oxygen, carbon, sulphur, hydrogen and nitrogen that can make up several types of organic compounds. One signature suggested the presence of tholins, an organic ``gunk'' that laboratory experiments have linked to the evolution of life, he said. AP-NY-10-09-97 1757EDT Copyright 1997 The Associated Press. The information contained in the AP news report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or otherwise distributed without prior written authority of The Associated Press.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 9 Maccabee Comments on Becker's '97 Gulf Breeze From: bruce maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com> Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 10:00:20 -0400 Fwd Date: Thu, 09 Oct 1997 21:15:46 -0400 Subject: Maccabee Comments on Becker's '97 Gulf Breeze COMMENTARY ON THE BARBARA BECKER'S SEPTEMBER, 1997 DISCUSSION OF THE ED WALTERS/ GULF BREEZE SIGHTINGS by Bruce Maccabee REVISED version (10/07/97)(B. Becker's paper extracted) (This paper may be circulated freely with proper attribution.) What follows is an analysis of Barbara Becker's recent discussion of the Gulf Breeze/Walters sightings. She claims that Ed Walters had no legal right to reproduce the "Bill" and "Jane" photos in his book "THE GULF BREEZE SIGHTINGS" (TGBS) (W. Morrow Pub, 1990) unless he actually took the pictures. But, if he took the pictures then he faked the "Bill" an "Jane" witness stories to support his other sightings and photos and hence everything is probably a fake. These photos were supplied to the Gulf Breeze SENTINEL newspaper in December, 1987, after Ed's first photos were published there (in Nov., 1987). The photographers were and still are anonymous. "Bill" provided 9 prints, a small 110 format mini-camera he used to take the photos and a letter describing how he happened to take them. From his description investigators later determine that they were taken within a half a mile of the house where Ed lived in 1987. They show one or two UFOs in each picture, although "Bill" said he saw three at once but couldn't get all three into a single photo. (Note: if this were a fake he could have gotten a photo with 3 UFOs in it.) After his 9th photo he said they "began to glow bright white and disappeared straight up." These pictures were taken in the evening of Dec. 22, according to "Bill." He had them developed immediately. He went home and later that evening typed the letter and then went to the SENTINEL office and dropped the camera, photos and letter into a mail slot at about 11:00 PM, according to a second letter he wrote to the SENTINEL two months later. They were found the next morning (December 23, 1987) by the SENTINEL staff. "Bill" said he kept the negatives. Early that same morning (Dec. 23) Ed Walters saw three UFOs in back of his house and he managed to photographed them before they zipped away. This was about 12 hours after "Bill'S" photo. (See photo 18 in TGBS). Ed took this photo to the SENTINEL and admitted he had taken it. (This was the first photo he admitted taking.) The next issue of the SENTINEL presented one of "Bill's" photos (showing two UFOs) and letter along with Ed's photo (showing 3 UFOs) for comparison. Ed reproduced this photo by "Bill" (photo 40 in TGBS) in the book. In early December (weeks before the "Bill" photo) "Jane" sent to the SENTINEL two photos taken with a 35 mm camera. In a letter she said the photos were taken in June, 1986 near Shoreline Park in Gulf Breeze. One of the prints was published in the SENTINEL on Dec. 3. This photo was published in TGBS (photo 39) for comparison with the other photos. Three months later(March 1988) she called Ed and told him how the sighting occurred, but said she was afraid of reprisals from her family and church if she went public. She did not give her real name. Ignoring what is stated in the letters we know the following: the photos provided by "Bill" probably were taken with a 110 format camera, as he said. The prints are quite grainy, consistent with 110 format film blown up to a standard 4x5 print size. The small camera he provided with the film uses the 110 film cassette as part of the camera body (the "camera" is just a tiny lens and a shutter). The "Jane" prints, on the other hand, are not grainy but rather are consistent with 35 mm format camera quality. Ed has been accused of using the old Polaroid camera to create double exposure fake photos. (This is fully described in UFOS ARE REAL, HERE'S THE PROOF by Ed Walters and Bruce Maccabee, Avon, 1997, where I present evidence that contradicts the double exposure explanation.) However, if we assume that Ed faked these "Bill" and "Jane" photos, then we could deduce from this assumption, as Barbara does (see below), that he was capable of faking any number of 110 format and 35 mm format photos as well as the Polaroid photos. But this raises a question: if he was able to fake using a 110 format or 35 mm format camera, why didn't he produce even more such fakes? They would have been much more convincing than the Polaroid pictures he produced since, with the old Polaroid it was very easy to create double exposures, but it would not be so easy to fake 110 and 35 mm camera photos. ..................................................... From: c549597@showme.missouri.edu [Barbara Becker] Date: Sat, 27 Sep 1997 13:36:17 -0500 Subject: 'The Gulf Breeze Paper' ONE PICTURE IS WORTH A THOUSAND WORDS (original version is Copyright 1997 Barbara Becker) ----------------------------------------------------- NOTE TO READER: In the first version of my response to Ms. Becker I reproduced what she had written for the convenience of the reader. However, she has requested that I cease and desist from copying her material. Hence in what follows you will find brief summaries or paraphrases of what she wrote. For her complete paper please look elsewhere. -------------------------------------- SUMMARY of what she wrote in the first paragraph: Barbara says she will present a brief history of the sightings and suggests that the complete account can be found in TGBS. To which I made the following... ------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: The interested reader should also have available the recent book UFOS'S ARE REAL, HERE'S THE PROOF (UARHTP) by Ed Walters and Bruce Maccabee (Avon, 1997) in which there is a discussion of several of the early photos and the difficulty in faking them. Other sightings in Gulf Breeze are described in THE GULF BREEZE SIGHTING (TGBS), which Barbara mentioned, in ABDUCTIONS IN GULF BREEZE (AIGB) by Ed and Frances Walters (Avon, 1994) and in "Gulf Breeze Without Ed" (GBWE), a paper presented at the 1991 MUFON Symposium which concentrates on the hundred or more sightings by other witnesses. It is important to know that many other witnesses reported UFOs flying around Gulf Breeze in the same time frame and, hence, it was POSSIBLE FOR OTHERS TO PHOTOGRAPH THEM. This applies in particular to "Believer Bill". ------------------------------------------------ SUMMARY(Barbara continues with her brief summary of the sightings:) Ed's first sighting was on Nov. 11, 1987 from the front of his home in Gulf Breeze. He saw the strange object moving by and got his Polaroid Colorpak camera. Over a period of several minutes he took 4 photos, then got more film and took a fifth photo. He showed them to his wife Frances and they wondered about what to do with them. Finally a week later Ed decided to take them to the local weekly newspaper published by an acquaintance, Duane Cook. He also presented Cook with a letter written by "Mr. X". These were published in the SENTINEL on Nov. 19. Ed continued to take photos of UFOs until 1 May 1988. "It is impossible" to determine the number of photos Ed actually took, although 38 are published in the book. Also published in the book are two from "allegedly undisclosed sources." Barbara's paper focuses on the legal ramifications of the publication of these two photos from "undisclosed sources." ------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: Strictly speaking it is "impossible" to know how many pictures Ed took... because he was not being watched 24 hours a day. The reader should not, however, be caught by the implication that he may have taken many more UFO photos. There is no evidence that he took any UFO photos other than what he released in the 1990 book (TGBS) and in the 1997 book (UARHTP). --------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY (She continues:) An anonymous person, subsequently called "Jane", sent to the SENTINEL in early December two photos which were the first to apparently corroborate Ed's photos. Then on December 23 the SENTINEL staff found in their mail slot a set of 9 photos, a 110 format "minicamera" and a letter signed "Believer Bill." One of Bill's photos and one of Jane's photos was published in TGBS. Barbara asks, "What do they have to do with Ed Walter other than the prove his story?" She answers the question by stating that the "dispute his story." ------------------------------------------------ COMMENT: Dispute his story? A statement of her opinion, not fact (see below). ------------------------------------------------ SUMMARY(She continues) In early January, 1988 a family friend named Tommy Smith, "came forward" to claim that he had worked with Ed Walters on a "UFO prank." According to Tommy, Ed had asked him to take some fake photos to the SENTINEL and claim that he had taken them during a UFO sighting. However, Tommy refused. Subsequently Tommy claimed that the "Bill" and "Jane" photos were faked by Ed and another friend. ------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: Barbara seems to have her history wrong here. Tommy Smith did not "come forward" publicly until June, 1990. Furthermore, his testimony about Ed faking photos is about as solid as a Swiss Cheese. Ed told the UFO investigators in January 1988 that a young man had shown him (Ed) UFO photos. The young man had told Ed that he was exploding firecrackers in Gulf Breeze when a UFO had appeared and he had photographed it. He asked Ed if he should be go public? Ed pointed out the problems he (Ed) was having with all the publicity over his photos and he cautioned against it. The young man did not publicize his sighting and asked for anonymity. Ed respected the young man's wishes and did not tell the UFO investigators the man's name although he did repeat the story to the investigators. (There was no investigation of the young man's sighting at the time because Ed would not reveal his name.) More than 2 years later, in June 1990, after Tommy Smith had gone public with allegations of hoaxing by Ed, Ed stated that the young man was, in fact, Tommy Smith. Ed's testimony was supported by another young friend of Tommy's, Robert M. (who wishes anonymity), who told me and other investigators that Tommy had told him, in late 1987, about exploding firecrackers and then seeing and photographing a UFO. The only person besides Ed that Tommy "came forward" to with his story was his father. According to his father, lawyer Thomas Smith, at a press conference in June, 1990, Tommy told him in late 1987 of a UFO sighting with pictures. According to Thomas Smith, a few days or weeks later Tommy told him the pictures had been faked by Ed. Neither Smith said anything in public about these allegations until June, 1990. At the press conference Mr. Smith was careful to avoid criticizing any of the other Gulf Breeze witnesses, including those who claimed to have seen exactly the same thing that Ed photographed. Tommy's photos were analyzed. Tommy had claimed that Ed had faked them by double exposure methods. However, analysis revealed no evidence of double exposure and, in fact, the photos appeared to be just single exposures, not double exposures as Tommy had indicated. The shape and color of the depicted UFO was consistent with what Ed had photographed. ------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY(She continues:) Barbara points out that when TGBS was published in 1990 it included the statement (see inside front cover):"Copyright 1990 by Ed Walters and Frances Walters. Clippings on the page following page 256 reprinted with permission of PENSACOLA NEWS JOURNAL." Barbara then asks the question, "Why weren't 'Believer Bill' and 'Jane' acknowledged as the Pensacola News Journal had been?" She wonders how Ed could have used these pictures "without pemission of the photographers." She wrote to the Morrow company to ask who owned the copyright to those photos. "They replied Ed Walters." Barbara says the significance of "this admission" (by Morrow) can be understood by referring to Title 17 of the United States Code, Copyright Act of 1976 which says that the copyright belongs to the originator of the work, in this case, the photographer, up to the time that the copyright expires or the copyright is transferred to someone else via a document called a "transfer agreement." According to Barbara the copyright is in effect even if the originator is anonymous or uses a pseudonym and it is not necessary for the work (writing, photo) to be registered with the Library of Congress. "However, registration is a safeguard against infringement." Hence, Barbara concludes, "Bill" and "Jane", whoever they are, own the copyright to the letters and photos submitted to the SENTINEL. By supplying the photos and letters to the SENTINEL "Bill" and "Jane" were giving the SENTINEL permission to publish them under a "nonexclusive license". Under this license the copyright owner gives permission to use the work (photos, letters) "in a specific way" (e.g., publication in the newspaper) without giving up "any of their own exclusive rights." Under this "permission" Duane Cook could publish the photos and letters "in the SENTINEL or any derivative work in the same series." The publication of the photos in the SENTINEL actually secured the copyright as part of a "collective work," i.e., the newspaper. However mere possession of the photos and letters did not mean that Duane Cook had the right or authority to give them to someone else (Ed, Morrow) for publication. ----------------------------------- COMMENT: It seems that Barbara is making an assumption here. "Bill" an "Jane" didn't include any restictions on the use of their letters and photos. Barbara assumes they intended to retain the original copyright and were merely giving the SENTINEL the "immediate news" rights and the rights to use in following SENTINEL stories. However, suppose their intent was to give up all rights to the photos and letters? I suspect that most people, "Bill" and "Jane" included, are not as familiar with copyright law as Barbara and hence I suspect that they ASSUMED when they turned the photos over to the SENTINEL anonmously they were completely disassociating themselves and were relinquishing ALL THEIR RIGHTS to the photos. Had they given the photos to the paper with no intent to retain any rights, then Duane could have done anything he wanted to with them, including give them to Ed for publication. Of course, there is no documentation on this one way or another, so the question becomes, can Barbara prove that they gave the SENTINEL permission but intended to retain any and all other rights of publication? ------------------------------------------- SUMMARY (She continues:) Barbara lists two ways in which Ed would legally ow the copyright: (a) he could have a transfer agreement from "Bill" and "Jane" or (b) he could be "Bill" and "Jane"(!). To find out exactly who owns the copyright Barbara got the Registration from the Library of Congress for the TGBS (VAU-164-606), which is a public record. Of the two pages in the document she reproduces the following, which is of the form "fill in the blanks:" Question 1) Title: Gulf Breeze Sightings Nature: Photographs Question 2) Name of Author: Edward Daniel Walters Nature of authorship: Photos taken by Edward Daniel Walters Question 4 Copyright claimant(s): Edward Walters / POB 715 / Gulf Breeze, Fl. Transfer: N/A According to the copyright document "If the claimant(s) named here in space 4 (question 4) are different from the author(s) named in space 2, give a brief statement of how the claimant(s)obtained ownership of the copyright". By giving the answer shown above to question 4, "Transfer: Not Applicable," Ed effectively claimed he was the author of the work since there was no transfer agreement. In other words, from the legal point of view, he claimed to be the photographer who took the Bill and Jane photos. In early 1997 Barbara wrote to Ed four letters and received 3 replies. The interesting one is dated March 8, 1997. Barbara asked if Ed were the "rightful owner" of the "Bill" and "Jane" photos. Ed responded, "Ownership was given me by Cook. The reg. copyrights are recorded w/Lib. of Cong. You are still on NOTICE. Signed, Ed Walters. P.S. next day. My copyright attor. assures me I have ownership. (Also copyrighted with Morrow Publishing. I will not address this further.) SEE YOU IN COURT." Thus, says Barbara, "Once again Walters' ownership is confirmed." Ed says he owns the copyright, Morrow says he owns the copyright and Ed's attorney says he owns the copyright. Hence, she writes, "I think it is clear that Ed Walters owns the copyright." The implication is that Ed took the "Bill" and "Jane" pictures and furthermore, "this admission gives credibility to Tommy Smith's claims that Walters took the Bill and Jane photos." She suggests that Tommy Smith's claims should be reevaluated. ------------------------------------------------------------ COMMENT: See the above comment about T. Smith. Anyone who wishes a detailed analysis of Tommy Smith's claims can request it from brumac@compuserve.com. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY (She continues) The copyright evidence makes it clear that Ed took the "Bill" and "Jane" photographs. He used 2 types of cameras: a "Hot Shot" for Bill (110 format film) and a 35 mm for Jane. This is evidence that he was able to use cameras other than the Polaroid Colorpak and to make double exposures. Besides faking the photos and letters he also faked a telephone call from "Jane" (Page 225 in TGBS). Barbara concludes, "It is obvious that Ed Walters is capable of an elaborate and sustained deception. This must at the very minimum cast doubt on everything he has said and done." ---------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: Barbara is missing a point, here. This discussion about the copyright does not prove Ed created the Bill and Jane photos because there are (at least) three possibilities: 1) it is possible that Ed and the lawyers are RIGHT and (gasp!) Barbara is wrong 2) it is possible that Ed is innocent of faking the photos but nevertheless is guilty of VIOLATING THE COPYRIGHT LAW because he got BAD ADVICE FROM HIS LAWYER (and the lawyers at Morrow). This wouldn't be the first time that the professionals screwed up in their profession. In this case someone could, presumably sue in the name of "Bill" and "Jane." 3) it is possible that Ed owns the copyright for the pictures as they appear in the book but does not actually OWN THE PICTURES. That is, if "Bill" or "Jane" ever show up (and prove who they are) Ed has to give them back to Bill and Jane and then Bill or Jane have perfect right to publish the photos any way they want without violating Ed's copyright. 4) It cannot be disproven that "Bill" and "Jane" intended to give away and assumed they were giving away, all rights to the photos and letters when they gave them to the SENTINEL. This is implicitly correct if (1) above is correct. If one of the above suggestions is correct then Barbara's "logical deductions" that (a) Ed created "Bill" and "Jane" stories and photos, (b) he knew how to fake photos with cameras "other than the Colorpak" and (c) Ed is "capable of an elaborate and sustained deception", are not proven. In contradiction to Barbara's conclusion, many other factors in this case indicate that Ed told the truth because many of the photos he took were beyond his capability to fake. -------------------------------------- ENDING COMMENT: At the time of this writing, October 7, 1997, the book UFOS ARE REAL, HERE'S THE PROOF (Avon, paperback) has been available for about 8 months. Within that book are technical arguments which show that Ed's 1987-1988 photos were not faked. The book also includes descriptions of sightings in the last ten years which are even more complex in some ways than the earlier sightings, and these newer sightings were photographed with a Model 600 Polaroid or a 35 mm Canon camea and several were also videotaped. The videos are particularly convincing. Several of these videos, including the "beach video" and the "shadow video" are described in the paper ACCELERATION which can be found on the web site of the National Institute for Discovery Science (NIDS) at www.accessnv.com/nids (click on the "what else" button). Ed is not the only person who has seen UFOs in Gulf Breeze, as everyone knows (including Barbara). There probably have been several hundred (I haven't kept count) sightings there in the last 10 years. TGBS discusses many of the early sightings. A reasonably complete list up to spring 1991 is in the paper GBWE (mentioned above). In that paper I list 93 non-Ed sightings between Nov. 11, 1987 and July 30, 1988 and 82 non-Ed sightings between Aug. 1, 1988 and April 1, 1990. Between April 1 1990 and April 19, 1991 (the last date in the paper) there were 67 sightings, many of which were the "red bubba" type. (A "red bubba" sighting generally involved a single, or sometimes several, red lights moving through the sky which would turn white, flash brightly, and then disappear.) Ed was present at many, but not all, of these, as were dozens of other witnesses. Between November 1990 and July 1992 the Gulf Breeze Research Team (MUFON members in the Gulf Breeze/Pensacola area) logged about 170 sightings of red bubba or rings of light. ( During a ring sighting the witnesses saw a circular or elliptical ring of discrete white or red lights. Sometimes a dark body or structure moving with the ring would block out the stars. Sometimes there were other lights associated with the ring.) There were also a few daylight craft sightings. Some of the bubba sightings are described in AIGB and in UARHTP. In UARHTP there are discussions of 93 sightings in the Gulf Breeze area, 25 of which are Ed's, covering the period Nov. 1987 to Nov. 1995. (This includes the Sept. 16, 1991 ring sighting when I was present along with Ed and 30 other people.) Many of these sightings were of the bubba type. In several cases triangulation was accomplished and speeds were determined. In one case (Feb. 7, 1992) a diffraction grating was used to photograph a "bubba" and a road flare for comparison. The spectra were different. This and the speed calculations ruled out balloon-borne flares, the "standard" explanation, for bubba. UARHTP also includes the discussion of numerous daylight photos and videos by Ed as well as some by other people. Barbara Becker has not discussed the more recent sightings by Ed nor has she discussed the sightings by others (except Bill and Jane, whom she rejects as witnesses). Instead, she has concentrated her effort on disproving the early photos and sightings by Ed. She has spent years trying to prove Ed faked his photos, as shown by her 1990 "Thoughtful Opinion" paper. Now, finally, her ultimate proof that Ed faked his photos seems to be based not on analysis of the sightings themselves, but on a legal technicality involving the publication of Bill and Jane photos. This seems like a slender thread, indeed, on which to support her allegations of what must now be considered a massive hoax/conspiracy/cover-up by more than one person. Or, would she rather have us believe that Ed's early photos were fakes, but the more recent (post 1988) photos (such as the January 8, 1990 photos taken in the presence of other witnesses who saw the UFO and saw Ed photograph it) are real? Conventional skeptical wisdom would say you can't have it both ways. Either Ed faked them all or he faked none. In an early response to the original version of this paper (most of what you have just read) Barbara complained that "All of your commentary on the (her) paper is 'old hat'. You have said the same things before in many places. Why don't you address the new issues I have raised?" I think I have addressed the issues. What do you think?
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 9 Becker Claims Copyright Infringement by Maccabee From: campbell@ufomind.com (Glenn Campbell, Las Vegas) Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 18:59:52 -0800 Fwd Date: Thu, 09 Oct 1997 22:20:02 -0400 Subject: Becker Claims Copyright Infringement by Maccabee Barbara Becker has claimed copyright infringement in an on-line article by Bruce Maccabee posted to this list on Oct. 4. Becker has threatened to file a lawsuit against Glenn Campbell, Bruce Maccabee, Errol Bruce-Knapp and another party to seek "injunctuive, punitive and statuatory damages from Glenn and punitive and statuatory from the rest of you...." In response to Becker's correspondence, below, the offending passages have been edited out of the following documents. http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/1997/oct/m04-004.shtml http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/1997/oct/m04-005.shtml http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/1997/oct/m04-006.shtml http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/1997/oct/m04-007.shtml http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/1997/oct/m04-008.shtml I have kept Maccabee's responses intact. Unfortunately, because of these deletions, the reader cannot know what parts of Becker's text Maccabee is responding to. I have no information on how one may obtain the original article. To my knowledge, Becker has not responded to the challenges raised by Maccabee, only threatened legal action for copyright infringement. Normally, we do not edit messages on the website after they have been sent out on the mailing list. Unless explicit notices appear in the document, as they now appear in the documents above, the reader can be assured that the document appearing on the website is exactly the same text that went out on the mailing list. Glenn Campbell Ufomind Webmaster ====================================================================== From: c549597@showme.missouri.edu Date: Thu, 09 Oct 1997 10:36:55 -0500 To: brumac@compuserve.com CC: updates@globalserve.net, steve@konsulting.com, campbell@ufomind.com Subject: copyrighted paper Bruce: I have requested that Glenn Campbell remove the paper you recently wrote using my 1990 paper. He has refused. I am writing to you to ask you to ask him to remove it. I spoke to a lawyer yesterday (if you wish to call her her number is: 314-647-1200 ask for Annette Heller). Since you are the original infringer she thought I should ask you to ask him to take it off. That seemed reasonable, so that is what I am doing. ASK GLEN TO TAKE IT OFF OF UFOMIND AND ERROL TO TAKE IT OFF OF UPDATES. I have all my E-mail from all of you. AS well as my E-mail from John Gilbert in the UK, which establishes my prior desire to have control of my copyrighted paper. I can demonstrate ownership, and that you ALL know it was my paper. If this gets to court, I can get injunctuive, punitive and statuatory damages from Glenn and punitive and statuatory from the rest of you. Since you are all apparently have assests, and are stable, collecting a judgment will not be difficult. Punitive and statuatory carry fines from $500 to $20,000. Then there is the issue of WILLFULL infringement. That is where I ask Glenn to take it off the website and he tells me to go to hell. That's another $50,000 just from him. I should mention courts costs and lawyers fees can also be asked for. You see the way this works, you wrote the article, Steve forwarded copyrighted materials, Errol allowed it on his list, (that too is willfull since Errol edits the list) and Glenn has refused to remove it. But it all falls back to you. AS long as it is reproduced without my permission YOU are in violation of my copyright. So I think it is important that you have it removed immediately so it is not downloaded and reproduced. All these years we have had a amicable relationship eventhough we dont agree. It would be a shame to mess everything up with a law suit. Sincerely, Barbara Becker ===================================================================== [For the record, I did not exactly tell Beck to "go to hell." Following is my actual response. -- GC] Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 13:40:21 -0800 To: c549597@showme.missouri.edu From: campbell@ufomind.com (Glenn Campbell, Las Vegas) Subject: Re: paper from maccabee >Glenn: > >On Saturday, October 4, a paper was posted by Jean van Gemmert FOR Bruce >Maccabee. (Three parts). Maccabees paper uses copyrighted materials >which he DID NOT have permission to reproduce in any form. I have no >problem with HIS paper as long as he deletes MY text from it. I spoke >with Errol about this and he suggested I contact you. When I discovered >that it had been reproduced on John Gilberts website in the UK I wrote >and asked him to remove it which he graciously did. I would like it >pulled from UFOMIND in its current form. Thank you. > >Barbara Dear Barbara: You are providing us with very little information to respond to. With over 20,000 documents on our site, most of them generated automatically, it is very hard for us to be a policing agency. As a general policy, we do not edit or remove automatically generated documents on our server. We do occasionally remove copyrighted documents upon request of the owner, but this case is more complicated. You did not provide a URL. I assume you are referring to the document that begins at http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/1997/oct/m04-004.shtml I have not read the document in question, only skimmed it. The text used appears to be included only in the context of a legitimate review or analysis -- which is generally exempt from copyright protection. Granted, Maccabee appears to have used a lot of your text, but in each case he does so only to directly respond to it. This is consistent with the way people respond to claims on the internet. The vast majority of the text in the posting appears to be Macabbee's, and he is not trying to take credit for or seek any gain from your material. At the same time, you are providing no information about your copyright. Where was this article first published? Did you register this copyright? (If so, a certificate number would be useful.) Did a copyright symbol appear on the article at the time it was first published? Has the article ever appeared on-line? You also haven't even given your full name or any direct contact information, which is certainly a pre-requisite for copyright protection. We are in a difficult position. If we grant this request, then every time a person responds in this manner -- directly criticizing a quoted piece of text -- then the person being criticized can claim copyright infringement. It will become a means of revenge or suppression for those who are on the losing end of a debate. As it stands, you have not given us enough information to act upon, but should you wish to further respond, I suggest you put your complaint in writing, along with your copyright information. Save a copy for your own records, and send the letter to me at: Glenn Campbell, Director Area 51 Research Center PO Box 448 Rachel, NV 89001 Sending the letter by certified mail is recommended. A copy of the original article would also be helpful. This will give us the basis for conducting further legal research. Glenn Campbell Ufomind Webmaster +------------------------------------------------------------------+ | U F O M I N D - M O T H E R S H I P | | "World's Largest and Best Organized UFO Website" * | | *** | | GLENN CAMPBELL - Moderator & Webmaster ***** | | ******* | | Area 51 Research Center campbell@ufomind.com ********* | | Las Vegas Annex http://www.ufomind.com | +------------------------------------------------------------------+ Index: Barbara Becker Search for other documents from or mentioning: campbell | c549597 |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 10 Re: 'The Gulf Breeze Paper' From: bruce maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com> Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 00:56:20 -0400 Fwd Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 08:46:31 -0400 Subject: Re: 'The Gulf Breeze Paper' MY COMMENTS ON BARBARA BECKER'S COMMENTS ON MY RESPONSE TO HER PAPER, "ONE PICTURE IS WORTH A THOUSAND WORDS" ------------------------------------------------------------------ 1) Here is my comment on her paper: It is important to know that many other witnesses reported UFOs flying around Gulf Breeze in the same time frame and, hence, it is possible that others could have photographed them. This applies in particular to "Believer Bill" (discussed below) who claimed to have photographed UFOs at a location that turned out to be just behind Ed's (old) house. ("Jane", described below, claimed her photos were taken long before the Gulf Breeze flap.) HERE IS BARBARA'S COMMENT on what I said. None came forward before Walters. Myself and others interested in this case have serious doubts about some of the reports. In some cases it was months after Walters' photos appeared in the newspaper that the reports were taken. I personally spoke with Mrs. Art Hufford, an interview which I have on audio tape, where she says that the object she did not have windows, yet Mr. Hufford often says that what he saw looked EXACTLY like Ed Walters UFO. There is always the danger of contamination of witness testimony the longer time goes on. HERE IS MY COMMENT ON HER PAPER: I am aware that the GB skeptics have tried, unsuccessfully, to discredit all the other witnesses. There are about a dozen Gulf Breeze witnesses who say explicitly that they saw what was in Ed's photos. In UFOS ARE REAL, HERE'S THE PROOF (Avon. 1997) thereare photos from people around the world who have seen the same thing. In the case of Mary Hufford and the claim that they saw no windows, here is evidence of a witness not being contaminated! Nevertheless, the shape of the object the described and drew is very similar to the shape of the Ed-type UFO. Perhaps the :"windows" (dark areas) were simply not showing when th Hufford saw it. ------------------------------------------------ 2) Here is another of my comments on her paper: Strictly speaking it is "impossible" to know how many pictures Ed took... because he was not being watched 24 hours a day. The reader should not, however, be caught by the implication that he may have taken many more UFO photos. There is no evidence that he took any UFO photos other than what he released in the 1990 book (TGBS) and in the 1997 book (UARHTP). **Here is Barbara's comment on my comment:: Very true. It looks like we agree here. Not only was Walters not being watched 24 hours a day but no one knew he had even taken any other photos until December 23, and photo number 18. Bruce continues:) "There is no evidence that he took any UFO photos other than what he released in the 1990 book." That's not true. Have you forgotten he shot two pictures while allegedly huddling under his truck on January 12, 1987 the night of the infamous road shot? Only one of the two was used in the book. Here is my reponse:right and wrong. Wrong because the photo which appears in th book was taken while Ed was still in th cab of the truck . While under the truck he took only one photo which, he says, only showed the tire because he couln't aim the camera while under the truck. It is true that no one other than Ed) has ever seen this photos because he said he threw it away when he saw that it didn't show the UFO. Barbara continues In addition... In July 1991 I wrote to Maccabee and asked about the difference in serial numbers on Walters' photos 15 (J712051Z), 16 (H712631Z), and 17 (J712051Z) reported by Bob Oeschler on his on a "Gulf Breeze Serial ID Number Sheet". Maccabee replied that according to Polaroid: "In one batch (of sheet film) there could be very many packs of film. The film is made in one long roll and cut into 'pack size' after each piece is stamped with a 'mark' as follows: 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8- cut-1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8, -cut- etc. Each series of 8...is placed into a separate box and packaged for shipment automatically. There could,... be many (hundreds?) of boxes made from one long roll, that have the same serial numbers." And that is EXACTLY why we have no way of knowing how many photographs Walters actually took. He could have had three (hundreds?) of boxes with identical serial numbers, shot 24 photographs or however many he needed, and patched together the photos, 1 through 8. Making them look sequential. As an example: This is from Oeschler's serial number sheet. Comment Photo serial# Mark Date Comments 20 G715481E xd out 1/16/88 xd out 21 G715481E 7 1/24/88 Slight Add'l P smr Cook A " 8 22 G715481E 5 1/26/88 No P Smr 23 G715481E 6 1/26/88 No P Smr At the bottom of sheet and NOT included w/Walters photos: 14-A G715481E 1 Same S# as Ph# 20-23 above 19-A G715481E 3 ("Mark" refers to the number of the photos in the film pack. There were 8 in a full pack.) If photo 21 is the one Walters took in Cook's presence and used in GBS, then what is 21 A that specifically names Cook? IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO KNOW MANY PHOTOGRAPHS WALTERS TOOK. My comment: Shortly after the first (UFO) photo with Cook Ed took a second photo for comparison. NOTE: The GB investigators have been accused of sloppy work, etc. However, I would like to point out that to make her argument about the photos Barbara has used the very diligent efforts of Bob Oechsler to catalogue every photo related to the UFO sightings that Ed took with that camera. None of the skeptics undertook this effort. --------------------------------------------------------- 3) Here is another of my comments on her paper MACCABEE : Tommy Smith did not "come forward" publicly until June, 1990. His testimony about Ed faking photos is about as solid as a Swiss Cheese. Ed told the UFO investigators in January 1988 that a young man had shown Ed UFO photos. The young man had told Ed that he was exploding firecrackers in Gulf Breeze when a UFO had appeared and he had photographed it. He asked Ed if he should be go public? Ed pointed out the problems he (Ed) was having with all the publicity offer his photos and he cautioned against it. The young man did not publicize his sighting and asked for anonymity. Ed respected the young man's wishes and did not tell the UFO investigators the man's name. (Hence there was no investigation of the young man's sighting.) More than 2 years later, in June 1990, after Tommy Smith had gone public with allegations of hoaxing by Ed, Ed stated that the young man was, in fact, Tommy Smith. Ed's testimony was supported by another young friend of Tommy's who told me and other investigators that Tommy had told him, in late 1987, about exploding firecrackers and seeing and photographing a UFO. The person Tommy "came forward" to with his story was his father. According to his father, lawyer Thomas Smith, at a press conference in June, 1990, Tommy told him in late 1987 of a UFO sighting with pictures. According to Thomas Smith, a few days or weeks later Tommy told him the pictures had been faked by Ed. Neither Smith said anything in public about these allegations until June, 1990. At the press conference Mr. Smith was careful to avoid criticizing any of the other Gulf Breeze witnesses, including those who claimed to have seen exactly the same thing that Ed photographed. Tommy's photos were analyzed. Tommy had claimed that Ed had faked them by double exposure methods. However, analysis revealed no evidence of double exposure and, in fact, the photos appeared to be just single exposures, not double exposures as Tommy had indicated. The shape and color of the depicted UFO was consistent with what Ed had photographed. ** BB COMMENT: This is strictly disinformation damage control. In the first week of January 1988, Tommy Smith confessed his role in Walters hoax to his father, who then discussed it with his law partners, Mayor of Gulf Breeze, Ed Gray and Police Chief, Jerry Brown. So there is no lack of credible witnesses to what Tommy said and when. All of whom believed MUFON would discover the hoax and it would go away. It didn't. At this time Tommy cut his ties to Walters. This was when Walters executed his own damage control. He told Ware et al., that he was definitely, "Mr. Ed." and showed the remaining 12 or so photographs he had taken. To my recollection it was Walters who came out with the preposterous story about Tommy Smith. My comment on her comment: I have never heard of any testimony that in January 1988 Tommy Smith told his father, who told his law partners, the Mayor of Gulf Breeze and the Police Chief. If it is true, that the Police Chief had a witness to a hoax as early as January 1988, then I guess he could be guilty of nonfeasance of duty to inform the public, inasmuch as there was a lot of interest in the sightings at the time. ------------------------------------------------------------- 4) Here is my comment on her paper: This discussion about the copyright does not prove Ed created the Bill and Jane photos. Hence Barbara's claim that "this demonstrates his ability...." is also not proven. In contradiction to Barbara's conclusion, many other factors in this case indicate that Ed told the truth because many of the photos he took were beyond his capability to fake. ** BB COMMENT: You can make up any story you want to believe, whatever makes you feel better. But the FACT of law is: IF ED WALTERS OWNS THE COPYRIGHT TO THE BELIEVER BILL AND JANE PHOTOS AS HE DECLARES, THEN HE MUST EITHER HAVE A TRANSFER AGREEMENT, WHICH HE DOESN'T OR BE THE PHOTOGRAPHER. ____________ My comment: Can you prove the "Bill" and "Jane" didn't intend to abandon all rights to their photos? ---- Barbara: And that DOES validate Tommy Smiths claims whether you like it or not. My comment: quite independent of this argument,,Tommy's Smith's testimony is full of holes. Barbara": And that does demonstrate his ability to use other cameras. My comment: No, it doesn't. Barbara: (As an additional remark regarding copyright. Ed Walters claims that on January 12, 1988 after 5:30 PM, he was chased down, while driving his truck, by light wand carrying aliens, (photo 19. The road shot). He claims he was physically and mentally traumatized. He managed to escape and return home. Commenting that the next day he was still feeling the effects. The copyright for the photographs taken by Edward Daniel Walters, titled UFOS:PROOF POSITIVE, which includes photo19, has a completion date of January 12, 1988. This means that IF we believe Walters actually took photo19 on January 12, as he claims, (but probably didnt) then he xeroxed his photographs, completed the paperwork and got it in the mail in time to be received and registered in Washington DC at the LOC on January 15. I wish I had mail service that was that fast! This seems like rather odd behavior for a man who is claiming he is being stalked by aliens. But it is not odd behavior for a man pulling a hoax and hoping to capitalize on it.) My comment: he had been advised to copyright the photos by the UFO investigatotors so the photos wouldn't be circulating with no control at all. ---------------------------------------------------- ENDING COMMENT: Barbara can argue legalities as long as she likes. I'll stick to the technical aspects combined with the numerous other sightings (which include witnesses to the blue beam). For example, stereo photos and photos which can't be simple double exposure (like #1), etc. And then there is January 8, 1990 when Ed got photos in the presence of other witnesses, two of whom took their own photos (see UFOs ARE REAL, HERE's THE PROOF).
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 10 Re: Becker Claims Copyright Infringement by From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com> Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 01:09:48 -0700 Fwd Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 20:42:05 -0400 Subject: Re: Becker Claims Copyright Infringement by > Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 18:59:52 -0800 > To: updates@globalserve.net > From: campbell@ufomind.com (Glenn Campbell, Las Vegas) > Subject: Becker Claims Copyright Infringement by Maccabee > Barbara Becker has claimed copyright infringement in an on-line > article by Bruce Maccabee posted to this list on Oct. 4. > Becker has threatened to file a lawsuit against Glenn Campbell, > Bruce Maccabee, Errol Bruce-Knapp and another party to seek > "injunctuive, punitive and statuatory damages from Glenn and > punitive and statuatory from the rest of you...." I find this to be a saddening and depressing development. As Glenn points out elsewhere, the use of material on the net for comment and criticism is normal and appropriate. It also seems to be covered by fair use, as indicated in: "The fair use provision of the Copyright Act allows reproduction and other uses of copyrighted works under certain conditions for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching(including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship or research. Additional provisions of the law allow uses specifically permitted by Congress to further educational and library activities. The preservation and continuation of these balanced rights in an electronic environment as well as in traditional formats are essential to the free flow of information and to the development of an information infrastructure that serves the public interest." (http://www.arl.org/scomm/copyright/uses.html) The idea that a participant in the list would even think of suing someone for using material provided to them by this list, or relevant material found on the web, in commentary, research, or critique, suggests that said participant should keep their opinions to themselves, rather than burdening the rest of us with fear that we will be the next one singled out for threat of punitive legal action. We should all perhaps be aware that the very existence of computer networks is sending massive tremors through traditional copyright law. I refer you to http://www.ssrn.com/CyberLaw/lawpaper.html where you can find the paper Dealing With Overlapping Copyrights on the Internet, Author: Mark A. Lemley, Organization: University of Texas School of Law (you will need an Adobe Acrobat reader or plug in to read this document) for more information. Still, let's try to remember in the heat of the moment that the fact that we disagree will not be ended by destroying the fora in which those disagreements are given form. The result will simply be that the world has been made poorer in information. Like most people who joined this list, I accept that what I write leaves my control to some extent. I would hope that those who think that their best recourse in this context is to threat and legality will think again, or go elsewhere. ------ Mark Cashman, creator of The Temporal Doorway at http://www.geocities.com/~mcashman - Original digital art, writing, and UFO research - Author of SF novels available at... http://www.infohaus.com/access/by-seller/The_Temporal_Doorway_Storefront ------
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 10 Re: Becker Claims Copyright Infringement by From: Scott Hale <shale@megalinx.net> Date: Sun, 03 Nov 1996 00:08:46 -0800 Fwd Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 20:50:00 -0400 Subject: Re: Becker Claims Copyright Infringement by General response: Well, we continue to see how bad the UFO research community is getting, don't we? Barbra: Get the original infringer(If you can even prove that) and leave Errol and Glenn out of it. Attacking Errol is sort of like biting the hand that feeds you, don't you think? Next thing you know she'll be suing all of the list members for recieving the article in their inboxes! That we actually have to worry about this sort of thing is truely pathetic! Oh, Barb.. 50,000 for copyright infringment of an article? Yeah right! I know people who had copyrighted movie scripts on their www page, and they were ordered by the court to take it off. "If Ignorance is bliss, why aren't more people happy?" Another Unsolicited Opinion, Scott K. Hale
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 10 Re: Witness Anonymity From: "C Hathaway & J. Presson" <earthwrk@doitnow.com> Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 22:41:28 -0700 Fwd Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 21:13:53 -0400 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity >From: HONEYBE100@aol.com [Linda Cortile] >Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 04:25:33 -0400 (EDT) >To: updates@globalserve.net >Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity >>From: XianneKei@aol.com (Rebecca Schatte) >>Date: Tue. 7 Oct. 1997 17:32:10 -0400 (EDT) >>To: updates@globalserve.net >>Subject: Fwd: Witness Anonymity >Hi Errol & everyone! >This is my last post for a couple of weeks. {I can hear the crowd >cheering, Hooray!!} <G> YES!!!! [...snip trivia on Linda's hemline...] >Rebecca wrote: >>Do you think you could have benefitted from some advice about >>making an appearance at a UFO Conference? I'm not being >>snide here. I'm really trying to make a point. Someone NEEDS >>to be able to spell these kinds of things out for Abductees. >>This is why I think that John Velez' idea of an Abductee >>Information Center is such a good idea! Abductees don't just need >>support groups (support groups might not be a good idea in all >>cases) but they do need to know the pitfalls and traps of >>telling their story. [..snip...] >I think John Velez' idea is a very good one. There should be some >sort of information center for abductees. Perhaps, a leaflet could be >printed out with all of the pitfalls and warnings, etc. A leaflet could >be given to each abductee at a support group meeting, or whatever. >But the researcher would have to be willing. If not, then a center >should be organized. Support group meetings, though, are very >important. First ONLY trained Therapists have any business running support groups for people who have suffered trauma. NOT untrained researchers. >>You can't expect to go around the country telling your story and >>remain anonymous at the same time. >But I'm not anonymous anymore and I haven't been for the last five >years. That's why I go to one or two conferences, every other year. >In fact, if I didn't have my "family's anonymity" to worry about, I >wouldn't care if my family name was public! But I do have a family, >and so, I want my real name to stay out of it. Not for me, but for >them! "I'm just fighting for my pseudonym" not for any other type of >anonymity. There isn't any! This from the woman who filmed her minor child and gave the video to Hopkins, who gave at least one copy out without Linda's approval??? >So, I'm not complaining about my nonexistent anonymity. I'm aware >that I'm out there. <G> The issue here, is that my son's anonymity >came out "without his going to conferences, being on TV, going to >support group meetings or being interviewed by the press." What has >happened here, is a disgrace and I don't want to see it happen again >to anyone. It's as simple as that! I believe, a lot of abductees have >seen these threads and have learned a very valuable lesson. Right they will not trust Hopkins with their home made videos. >I've been sitting here, wondering why, only a handful of people >understood this. Maybe I just didn't make myself clear enough. >I don't know...but it's scary. It is simple, you keep adding to and changing the story. You said you had no idea how the tape got out there in the real world. Then you say you made it gave it to Hopkins, and Hopkins gave out at least one copy. Seems very clear to me....and allot of other people Julie Search for other documents from or mentioning: earthwrk | honeybe100 |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 10 Re: Witness Anonymity From: "C Hathaway & J. Presson" <earthwrk@doitnow.com> Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 23:04:01 -0700 Fwd Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 21:18:04 -0400 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity >>From: Penrose Christopher <penrose@sfc.keio.ac.jp> >>Date: Wed, 8 Oct 97 19:51:22 +0900 >>To: updates@globalserve.net >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity >>>From: "Clark Hathaway" <earthwrk@doitnow.com> >>>To: <updates@globalserve.net> >>>Subject: Witness Anonymity >>>Date: Tue, 7 Oct 1997 20:30:40 -0700 >>>>From: Christopher Penrose <penrose@sfc.keio.ac.jp> >>>>To: updates@globalserve.net >>>>Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity >>>>Date: Tue, 7 Oct 97 03:40:30 +0900 >>>>"Re: Witness Anonymity" is starting to look like this week's "thread >>>>of shame" on the Area 51 mailing list. UFOlogy is showing its best >>>>face to the world. > >>>Well, wrong area. This is not the Area 51 Mailing List, nor is it the >>>"Linda List" either. >(massive snip) >>You are more interested in galloping into battle than communication. >>This is what I criticize, and you have made me into a greater enemy >>than I am. >>Christopher Penrose >Hey, did someone open a window? I can swear there is a hint of 'fresh air.' >Hope it's not my imagination. Restoring a sense of 'communication' and >information sharing/debating would be a welcome relief. I hope it stays open so all the stuff piling up here can have some place to. Yes you heard me. You call your friends continued name calling and insults "communication"? >There is absolutely no reason why -anyone- on this list should be >'attacked' for any reason. (Self-defense excluded, righteous indignation ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >is just that, righteous!) you guys don't know how lucky you are to have >access to some of the folks that participate on this list. Beginning with >my battered friend Linda. Your battered friend. :-) There ARE NO excuses for the flaming Linda has been doing on this list since she started posted. She flames anyone who does not agree with her and calls then names. >Think how lucky you are that she (and others) have made themselves >available for us to get to know, ask questions, and -communicate- >with one another. She has shown what a gutsy and strong woman she >is by responding to people whose character demonstrates that they >are not worthy to shine her shoes. We are lucky to see how dysfunctional Hopkins support groups are I guess. As denial seems to be the BIG red flag of both you and Linda. We "crack pots" don't shine shoes. Weesss from the Noth. When Linda starts communicating like an ADULT them maybe she might be taken seriously. >You'd be surprised how much people loosen up and talk and reveal >themselves over a friendly cup of coffee or a glass of wine. How >much do you get from someone that you are kicking and spitting on? Sorry John, I don't drink and I do NOT have coffee with people who make nasty below the belt pot shots at people I happen to like. What I have noticed is you people have a real tight group and there seems to be a "tude" that it is "you all against the world". Sorry that is not the case. When I come in here and start reading the childish name calling messages posted by Hopkins main attraction, I say something. That is not what this List is for. This is NOT IUFO, and Linda is not Rich Boylan. As for the people on this List, why don't you take a poll and see how many have left, or just stopped posting messages because they are tired of putting up with Linda's childish rants. As well as asking everyone how they like the continued rants of Linda. If anyone questions her about her abduction she blasts them. If they say they do not believe it happened she flames the crap out of them. Now if you all think you are going to play censorship on everyone in this List, you are wrong. Because that is exactly what you are trying to pull. And it just is not going to happen. As for Hopkins he does NOT do valid objective research PERIOD. Does that make him a bad person no. Did he give out the film Linda is wasting bandwidth about YES. What this means is Hopkins is the one responsible for Linda's son being in the public eye. So instead of wasting bandwidth trying to take the focus OFF the person who let the video out. Maybe she needs to go to Hopkins and call him, a user and pest, or a crack pot. That way the rest of us can get back to some meaningful discussion. Julie
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 10 Re: Solved Abduction cases? From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 02:15:31 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 21:20:03 -0400 Subject: Re: Solved Abduction cases? >From: clark@canby.mn.frontiercomm.net [Jerome Clark] >Date: Thu, 09 Oct 1997 10:02:02 PDT >To: updates@globalserve.net >Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Solved Abduction cases? >> Date: Wed, 8 Oct 1997 22:08:27 -0500 (CDT) >> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >> From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net> >> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Solved Abduction cases? >> >From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net> >> >To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net> >> >Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Solved Abduction cases? >> >Date: Wed, 8 Oct 1997 10:04:42 -0400 (snip) >> >Time to retire that tired old Vallee argument. >> >Greg Sandow >> Greg: >> Who could forget Linda and Richard? The trouble with Tribbles (one-a more-a snoop ova heah) >> Dennis Jerry writes, >Dennis, You might also turn to a paper I've had several occasions >recently to mention here: Stuart Appelle's devastating critique of >"conventional" explanations for abduction phenomena. Hi Jerry, Sasquatch, Greg, Jerry, (if) it's not too long a piece, and wouldn't violate any of Stuarts copyrights (and, assuming you have a way to 'scan' the thing) could you please post a copy of Steuart Appelle's paper? Here's hoping, and thanx in advance if you can. John Velez John Velez jvif@spacelab.net Search for other documents from or mentioning: jvif | clark | dstacy |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 10 Re: Whose Truth? From: Dave Everett <deverett@vir.idx.com.au> Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 18:26:35 +1000 Fwd Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 22:03:12 -0400 Subject: Re: Whose Truth? >From: ujack@pop3.scrapcity.cnchost.com [Mark Medford] >To: updates@globalserve.net >Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 14:29:00 +0000 >Subject: Whose Truth? >Dear Friends, >So much of what we are debating is experiential. What a difficult >thing to challenge - someone else's experience! No line of argument, >no amount of logic, can convince me that I was not touched by an >event, if I BELIEVE that I was. Given new information and insights, I >might draw a different meaning from the event, but I will never disown >the experience itself. Well understood. A key point that I've tried to get across over the years, there is 'private proof' and 'public proof'. Your experience constitutes private proof, you experienced it but are unable to transmit the proof that you experienced. I've never knocked anyone for considering their own experience as a private proof. But it's 'public proof' that is of greater importance, take the Na.. oops, Cortile case for example, at best it only meets the private proof criteria and no amount of lectures or foot-stamping is going to move it to public proof. >The ability to discern is critical. Without it, we free float on a sea >of fact and fiction. But what tools do we use to discern? The way that >I perceive things in this world is uniquely my own - as is everyone >else's. One is no less valid than the other. That is why it is imperative to develop more tools that are repeatable. Perception just won't cut it if we want to move forward. >Since joining this list, I've read many emotion filled posts. I >respect the courage of those who have shared - and I understand the >need that others have to react. We are not only pushing boundaries >here, we're challenging beliefs. This is always a risky business. Must >our responses be so sharp? Can our convictions be tempered with >compassion? I would hate to think that this environment, this forum, >this community, might be seen as too hostile to join. I would hate to >see personal bias bar, emotionally, others from participating. No one >wants to be attacked. I know what you're driving at, but I just don't see how there can be room for compassion (except for those requiring therapy). You either want to critically examine UFOs or you don't, there can't really be a middle ground. Dave Everett
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 10 Re: Meteor Lands Near El Paso From: XianneKei@aol.com [Rebecca Schatte] Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 04:11:09 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 22:01:21 -0400 Subject: Re: Meteor Lands Near El Paso Meteor Lands Near El Paso EL PASO, Texas (Reuter) - An apparent meteor streaked across the sky and slammed into Earth near the Texas border city of El Paso Thursday, sparking hundreds of calls to police as flashes and loud sonic booms scared residents. ``I saw a large flash like an explosion in the sky,'' said Steven Marquez, who was in his yard near the Organ Mountains outside Las Cruces in New Mexico. ``Something fell off of it and left a huge cloud of smoke over there by the mountains.'' Robert Simpson, a spokesman for the McDonald Observatory in Texas, said he saw what appeared to be a small meteor flash across the sky at 12:47 p.m. MDT and that it was about as bright as the surface of a setting sun. Las Cruces Police Sgt. Joel Cano said the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) tracked the object as it entered Earth's atmosphere until it fell to the ground about 30 miles east of El Paso. A police command post was set up near the Organ Mountains as U.S. Army Reserve helicopters used infrared sensors to look for pieces of debris from the object. ``What they are looking for is any debris that is still hot or anything that came off the object,'' Cano said. Witnesses said the streak of light left a contrail across southern New Mexico that hung in the sky for about 30 minutes. 22:10 10-09-97
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 10 Re: Whose Truth? From: "C Hathaway & J. Presson" <earthwrk@doitnow.com> Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 23:21:56 -0700 Fwd Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 21:59:42 -0400 Subject: Re: Whose Truth? >From: ujack@pop3.scrapcity.cnchost.com [Mark Medford] >To: updates@globalserve.net >Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 14:29:00 +0000 >Subject: Whose Truth? >Dear Friends, >So much of what we are debating is experiential. What a difficult >thing to challenge - someone else's experience! No line of argument, >no amount of logic, can convince me that I was not touched by an >event, if I BELIEVE that I was. Given new information and insights, I >might draw a different meaning from the event, but I will never disown >the experience itself. No one should have to disown their experiences. >The ability to discern is critical. Without it, we free float on a sea >of fact and fiction. But what tools do we use to discern? The way that >I perceive things in this world is uniquely my own - as is everyone >else's. One is no less valid than the other. Although there are many >common perceptions, there are also those that have roots in my own >emotional, cultural and intellectual history. So... when I encounter >information that fits my inner criteria, that feels "right" to me, I >embrace it. Likewise, if it doesn't fit, I reject it. I do so with >equal passion. Good advice. >Since joining this list, I've read many emotion filled posts. I >respect the courage of those who have shared - and I understand the >need that others have to react. We are not only pushing boundaries >here, we're challenging beliefs. This is always a risky business. >Must our responses be so sharp? Can our convictions be tempered with >compassion? I would hate to think that this environment, this forum, >this community, might be seen as too hostile to join. I would hate to >see personal bias bar, emotionally, others from participating. No one >wants to be attacked. Another good point. No one does want to be attacked, they don't like to have to read them for months on end either. >Perhaps I'm naive. I assume that the information shared here - if >not clinically accurate - is at least sincere. This is the problem, when doing research it is (or should be) required that all said research be done as objectivey as possible. There are ways to do this, but it takes time and an honest desire to find the roots of the abductions that are going on. >When it comes to sharing experiences that originate within this >"new frontier" of UFO's - we're very much like the blind man describing >an elephant. Until we are able to study the whole phenomenon, with eyes >wide open, who's to say which perception is "correct"? Although I have >my own pet theories and gut feelings, I would never presume to serve >them up as "truth". I would simply say: this is what happened to me... I would have to say that is another problem. People forgetting we are sharing OUR VIEW most of the time. That may not be the clearest, and I have noticed after being online since the early 90s the people who do the most name calling and say they are the victims are the ones who have something to hide and usually are looking through fog at the objective perspective. Julie
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 10 Re: More on that Texas Meteor From: RSchatte@aol.com {Rebecca Schatte] Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 04:40:59 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 22:05:02 -0400 Subject: Re: More on that Texas Meteor .c The Associated Press EL PASO, Texas (AP) - A meteor flashing across the sky Thursday sent a ripple of fear through West Texas, where alarmed residents flooded police lines with reports of an explosion, a shuddering boom and a burst of smoke. Many whose homes shook feared it was a plane crash. The meteor appeared at 12:47 p.m. as a streak about as bright as the surface of a setting sun, said Robert Simpson, a spokesman for the University of Texas' McDonald Observatory. Sightings also were reported in New Mexico. ``It was like a chunk of the sun had fallen off and was heading toward the Earth. It might be golf-ball size at best or larger,'' said Simpson, who saw it from his home near Fort Davis, 175 miles southeast of El Paso. A police helicopter flying about 25 miles east of the city spotted about an acre of scorched land that authorities believe might be the area where the meteor hit, police spokesman Bill Pfeil said. It was not clear if any fragments were found. Simpson said the reports from throughout the El Paso area were all consistent with a daytime meteor, also known as a fireball or bolide. ``It shook the whole damn neighborhood,'' said Tom Tyra, a Horizon City resident. ``Everybody came out of their house.'' When he went outside to investigate the noise, he saw a cloud of smoke about 3,000 feet in the air. While some saw a flash of light, others heard only the boom or what sounded like debris raining down on their roofs, though there was nothing to be found on the ground. The sightings varied. ``All I saw was the explosion and the smoke,'' said Enrique Magallanes, assistant chief of the Socorro Fire Department. ``I did call some other agencies and they also had reports, but nobody could confirm anything. We couldn't even send out any fire trucks or anything.'' A meteor is the streak of light that occurs when a meteoroid, a chunk of stony or metallic matter, enters the Earth's atmosphere from space. Friction with the air causes the meteoroid to heat up, creating a glow and leaving a trail of glowing gases. AP-NY-10-09-97 2129EDT
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 10 Re: 'The Gulf Breeze Paper' From: Tim Joiner <tjoiner@flash.net> Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 08:06:29 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 22:07:48 -0400 Subject: Re: 'The Gulf Breeze Paper' > COMMENTARY ON THE BARBARA BECKER'S SEPTEMBER, 1997 > DISCUSSION OF THE ED WALTERS/GULF BREEZE SIGHTINGS > by Bruce Maccabee > ..................................................... > From: c549597@showme.missouri.edu [Barbara Becker] > Date: Sat, 27 Sep 1997 13:36:17 -0500 > Subject: 'The Gulf Breeze Paper' > ONE PICTURE IS WORTH A THOUSAND WORDS > Copyright 1997 Barbara Becker Bruce Maccabee said: *** DELETED DUE TO FEAR OF BEING SUED OVER COPYRIGHT*** To which Barbara Becker replied: *** DELETED DUE TO FEAR OF BEING SUED OVER COPYRIGHT*** Bruce Maccabee's counterpoint was: *** DELETED DUE TO FEAR OF BEING SUED OVER COPYRIGHT*** And Barbara Becker swiftly countered with: *** DELETED DUE TO FEAR OF BEING SUED OVER COPYRIGHT*** To which, I add: Well, that certainly clears it up for me. Thank you. Tim Joiner -- http://www.flash.net/~tjoiner
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 10 Re: Becker Claims Copyright Infringement by From: "WHITE" <mjawhite@digitaldune.net> Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 07:09:36 -0700 Fwd Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 22:17:10 -0400 Subject: Re: Becker Claims Copyright Infringement by To EBK, List, and any who have followed BB's travails regarding her "gulf breeze" paper, and particularly those who may have actually written some commentary on it: >Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 18:59:52 -0800 >To: updates@globalserve.net >From: campbell@ufomind.com (Glenn Campbell, Las Vegas) >Subject: Becker Claims Copyright Infringement by Maccabee >Cc: brumac@compuserve.com, steve@konsulting.com <snip> >Barbara Becker has claimed copyright infringement in an on-line >article by Bruce Maccabee posted to this list on Oct. 4. <snip> >Becker has threatened to file a lawsuit against Glenn Campbell, >Bruce Maccabee, Errol Bruce-Knapp and another party to seek >"injunctuive, punitive and statuatory damages from Glenn and >punitive and statuatory from the rest of you...." Comment: Jeepers. Brad Templeton writes a pretty good general piece on copyright and e-mail; particularly regarding "fair use" and commentary on net postings. http://palimpsest.stanford.edu/mirrors/faq/copyright/myths/part1 For the hardcoreworrywarts, the American Bar Association puts out a real humdinger on copyright at: http://www.abanet.org/intelprop/comm106/106copy.html After I read the Templeton piece, I had a greater appreciation for EBK's posting rules. (Sorry, EBK, about that x-posting I forwarded on Stealth fighters equipped with "alien" technology it won't happen again.) John White mjawhite@digitaldune.net Search for other documents from or mentioning: mjawhite | campbell |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 10 Re: Witness Anonymity From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net> Date: Wed, 8 Oct 1997 18:20:44 -0400 Fwd Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 22:19:55 -0400 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity I've been thinking more about abductions and alien technology. >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net> [Dennis Stacy] >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Solved Abduction cases? >It won't come as a great revelation here, but there is an awful lot about >abductions that don't make sense. For example, if alien technology is so >advanced (the ability to hover invisibly, beam people through solid >objects,etc.), why are the aliens' medical procedures so little advanced by >comparison? Why have to abduct so many people (if the numbers >claimed have any validity) to obtain sperm and ova samples? >Seems to me if you could beam an entire body up, you could >simply beam up the sperm without anyone being the wiser. >Fact is, we seem further along the artificial insemination and >gene manipulation areas of technology than the aliens allegedly >are. It's rather as if we were to land men on Mars while still >trying to send signals back to Earth by reflecting sunlight off mirrors. Why do we get so smug about alien technology we don't know spit about? Here we are, with just 300 years of science behind us, and learning more about our limitations every day, decreeing what a race of more advanced beings will do. Can't we even learn from our mistakes? Two generations ago, more or less, canned foods were introduced, followed by frozen food. This seemed scientific, futuristic. It was progress. If you went to someone in the 1930's, and told them that near the turn of the millennium, farmers' markets would be springing up in every major city, they'd think that you were crazy. "Can't be! It's much more efficient and advanced to eat canned or frozen food!" Well, surprise. Canned and frozen foods just don't taste too good. Free-range chickens taste better than the kind produced in chicken factories, and as for the average modern tomato, bred for durability, so it'll be easy to ship...forget it. You might as well eat cardbo ard. Suppose the aliens have learned these lessons on a larger scale. Suppose they've found that test-tube humans don't have rich and interesting souls. Suppose they've found that sperm and eggs, brought together in a flying saucer lab, produce children that aren't good for much. Suppose, in other words, that they've learned to appreciate free-range humans. (Or, in this case, I guess, free-range hybrids.) So they breed us in as close to the old-fashioned way as they dare. And then our cocky skeptics come along, saying it just isn't possible. "No, the aliens would be way beyond that." As if we knew! Back in the '50s, everybody confidently predicted that, long before the 1990's, we'd all have atom-powered cars. Funny thing, Dennis...I don't see you driving one. Greg Sandow
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 10 Re: The Decline and Fall of American Ufology From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com> Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 12:27:54 -0700 Fwd Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 22:46:08 -0400 Subject: Re: The Decline and Fall of American Ufology > From: wlmss@peg.apc.org [Lawrie Williams} > Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 22:40:25 +1000 (GMT+1000) > To: updates@globalserve.net > Subject: The 4 Axioms of UFO Science. > The Four Axioms of UFO Science > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > Does anyone believe the Walters photos are a hoax but telepathy, > exotic humanoids, hovering craft and blue beams are axiomatic? > Does anyone believe the Walters photos are real but telepathy, > exotic humanoids, hovering craft and blue beams are unlikely? > I think most people have made up their minds either way by now, and > those who believe the photos accept that the other effects do occur, > and those who think they are a hoax have real problems believing that > the rest of Ed Walters' account is true too. I am not sure this is the best way to think of the problem. There are those, such as myself, who accept the photos as true - provisionally. If someone were to come along a provide devastating proof of the hoaxing of the occultation photos or the stereo shots, or if Ed were to admit a hoax, I would, subject to careful examination of any such claim, be willing to accept whatever truth is revealed. This represents the scientific viewpoint. Then we have those who will not accept the photos despite any proof. They have valid reasons for their discomfort. The Walters case displays nearly the full panolpy of UFO-related phenomena, and in most situations, this appropriately raises suspicion. In addition, there are unusual aspects to the object geometry and the absence of normally reported luminosity. And finally, repeaters, like it or not, are more likely to be hoaxers than non-repeaters. Then we have those who would accept the photos in the absence of any special proof. Their position is shakier, and I believe there are not many of them (after all, the detailed analysis by Dr. Maccabee is one of the most compelling things about the case, along with the lack of substantial refutation of the key elements of that proof). However, we know they must exist, since there are those who accept the value of photos of unknown provenance or those which are generally accepted as hoaxes. However, such persons do have some basis for their acceptance, primarily in the apparent realism of the photos. As for the various components you have cited * Hovering "craft" are part of such an enormous percentage of unknowns that it is impossible to maintain that the phenomenon is objectively real and yet deny the existence of unusual objects which hover... and in fact have many other frequently observed properties. * Exotic humanoids are a substantial percentage of the unknowns. If one accepts that unknowns represent a real phenomenon, it is impossible to reject the occupant cases. However, that does not mean that every case with occupants must be considered valid. * Unusual light beams have been reported in many cases, as have effects from those beams. However, there does not seem to be a clear link between beam color and effect, which weakens this part of the pattern; on the other hand, this may be accounted for by variations in human color perception. * Telepathy, on the other hand, is a relatively rare part of the entire phenomenon. The first case in the Magonia catalog does not occur until 1957: 396 Jul. 25, 1957 1910 Mr. Joao Guimaraes, who is a professor at the Catholic Faculty of Law in Santos, was sitting near the shore when he saw a hat-shaped, luminous craft approach from the sea and land near him. From it came a metallic stairway. Two normal men with long, fair hair hanging to their shoulders, a youthful appearance and wearing one-piece suits, came down, gave no verbal answers to his questions, but invited him "telepathically" to come aboard the craft. Inside the illuminated compartment, he sat on a circular seat with the crew. The machine rose for a short flight. On his return, Guimaraes found that his watch no longer worked. Sao Sebastiao (Brazil). (Humanoids 36; FSR 57, 6) 43 Nov. 18, 1957 1500 Mrs. Cynthia Appleton, 27, mother of two, saw the figure of a man appear near her fireplace while a whistling sound was audible. He was tall and fair, wore a tight fitting plastic garment, and seemed to communicate with her through telepathy, indicating he was looking for titanium and was coming from a world of peace and harmony. Suddenly he disappeared. Mrs. Appleton had subsequent contacts with similar entities. Aston (Great Britain). (Humanoids 4). The next case with "telepathy" in the Magonia catalog does not occur for 9 years: 804 Nov. 02, 1966 1925 W. Derenberger, sales- man, saw a dark object ahead of him on the road. It was flat on the bottom and rounded on top. As he stopped, the object came within 20 cm of the road surface, and a man of dark complexion, dressed with a shirt and ordinary trousers, both a shiny blue color, came out, smiled at the witness who then thought that he received a message, although no word was spoken. The message described a hypothetical "other world" and suggested that the observation be reported to authorities. The man also promised to return. Several people who drove by the witness did report seeing a man speaking to him, as well as a strange vehicle nearby. Parkersburg (West Virginia). (169; FSR 67, 1). Of the 923 Magonia cases, only these 3 contain mention of telepathy. This represents 0.32% (not 32%) of landing cases in the catalog. In most cases, the occupants departed without any attempt at communication. In some cases gestures were made, interpreted sometimes as friendly, sometimes as warning, sometimes as threatening. In other cases, the occupants made unusual sounds or spoke in a language unknown to the witness. In a fairly small percentage of cases (still much larger than the telepathy percentage) the occupants spoke in a language known to the witness, sometimes with a strange accent, sometimes in broken speech, sometimes mixing languages. It may be no accident that the only "telepathy" cases are those which one might term either "higher-strangeness" cases or "less-reliable" cases, depending on one's inclination. At any rate, the evidence substantiating "telepathic" communication is certainly small at best, and possibly marginal in quality. In addition, one must consider that perception of "telepathy" does not necessarily substantiate the existence of telepathy. I think we still have relatively little knowledge of the psychological effects resulting from what is in many cases a traumatic event, and certainly confabulations, or illusory voices, etc, cannot be ruled out a priori. Or, we may be seeing the presence of a technology which simply emits sounds translated from non-vocal utterances by the occupants, which the witness interprets as telepathy. In short, one can accept or reject "telepathy" without necessarily accepting or rejecting the Walters case or any of its elements. > For the skeptical side, the debate might concern itself with the > question of elaborate psychopathologies and the identification of > earth lights. That these phenomena occur can be accepted as axiomatic > and a useful framework of knowledge can be built up from this position. > For the believer side, the debate needs to concern itself with the > nature of telepathy, the description of UFO crew, the mission of > their craft and the technologies these entities deploy. > If ufology fails to recognize this great divide, it will be forever > at cross-purposes, as we have seen with the Great 1997 UpDates > Debate about the 1987 Ed Walters Photos. I'm afraid I cannot accept that this is the right way to deal with the data. While no one desires conflict, it needs to be recognized that science is, much like the legal process, an adversarial system. Hypotheses will be advanced, challenged, accepted, defeated, etc. But the choice is not between skepticism and belief. It is between science and belief (and that means belief adamantly opposed to an objectively existent UFO phenomenon, belief in ETs, or any other kind of unsupported "faith"). The adversarial part of the process is never over. People still carry out experiments which may invalidate parts of general relativity, and still challenge other well-accepted theories with new hypotheses, data, and experiments. That is why a debate on Gulf Breeze ten years after the case occurred is still relevant. ------ Mark Cashman, creator of The Temporal Doorway at http://www.geocities.com/~mcashman - Original digital art, writing, and UFO research - Author of SF novels available at... http://www.infohaus.com/access/by-seller/The_Temporal_Doorway_Storefront ------
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 10 Communication, Science and Cydonia From: JJ Mercieca <mufor@maltanet.net> Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 17:31:09 +0100 Fwd Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 22:52:32 -0400 Subject: Communication, Science and Cydonia COMMUNICATION, SCIENCE, AND CYDONIA Where is the "Candle in the Dark?" by Stanley V. McDaniel http://www.mcdanielreport.com/harpendn.htm
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 10 Re: The Decline and Fall of American Ufology From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 11:04:46 +0100 Fwd Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 22:59:07 -0400 Subject: Re: The Decline and Fall of American Ufology >From: wlmss@peg.apc.org [Lawrie Williams} >Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 22:40:25 +1000 (GMT+1000) >To: updates@globalserve.net >Subject: The 4 Axioms of UFO Science. >The Four Axioms of UFO Science >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >I think most people have made up their minds either way by now, and >those who believe the photos accept that the other effects do occur, >and those who think they are a hoax have real problems believing that >the rest of Ed Walters' account is true too. Hi Lawrie, Hi Errol, Hi All A thought occured to me whilst I was reading all this Gulf Breeze Stuff. 1)If you believe that the whole Gulf breeze thing is all a hoax does that mean you automatically believe that the Alien Autopsy is a hoax? 2)Or If you believe that the whole Gulf Breeze thing is genuine does that automatically believe that the Alien Autopsy is also genuine?? 3)Or is it that is no such thing as automatically assuming anything with these two cases? One _could_ be genuine whilst the other _could_ be false??? Just my tuppence worth. There are things in the universe billions of years older than our human race. They are vast, they are timeless. If they are aware of us at all we are of no more consequence to them as ants are to us. Sean Jones http://www.tedric.demon.co.uk/ http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Zone/1745/Index.htm
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 10 Re: Solved Abduction cases? From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net> [Dennis Stacy] Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 17:18:37 -0500 (CDT) Fwd Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 23:05:09 -0400 Subject: Re: Solved Abduction cases? >From: clark@canby.mn.frontiercomm.net [Jerome Clark] >Date: Thu, 09 Oct 1997 10:02:02 PDT >To: updates@globalserve.net >Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Solved Abduction cases? >Dennis, >I admire your apparent certainty that all's right with the world, >that we don't have to worry about the abduction phenomenon >because it's all messy and the putative aliens don't act as you >would have them act, that the novels of Don DeLillo have more to >tell us than actual case studies, which presumably include those of >Ray Fowler (Allagash), Walt Webb (Hill and Buff Ledge), and other >conscientious investigators. Another one of my points you apparently missed re: the rapid "evolution" of the abduction scenario. Are there hybrid babies and implants in the Allagash, Hill and Buff Ledge cases? >In other words, Bullard validates formally what investigators have always >insisted: that popular debunking mythology aside, it's pretty hard to lead >abductees. I like Eddie, too. The question here is what does "pretty hard" mean? If you want to see a blatant example of leading, you have only to re-read John Mack. At one point, one of his witnesses won't go up a ramp during a hypnosis session, so he tells her to imagine she's a remote-controlled video camera and go up the ramp -- which she promptly does. It's all there in black & white, my friend, leaving the question: Is Mack part of the abduction literature, what with his Pulitzer prize, or not? (I don't dare ask if Bullard, an academic folklorist, is qualified to pronounce, as opposed to comment, on the verities and vagaries of clinical hypnosis. But at least that remark will give you something to vent on if you don't want to address the other issues raised.) >I also think we'd have a better handle on what we're dealing with if >we were able to discard the noise. I couldn't agree with you more, Jerry, which is why I raised the issue in my previous post: What IS the "abduction literature" to which Greg Sandow referred? Does it include the spectrum from Strieber to John Salter, or just the respectable (Bullard, Appelle) material you deem respectable? Which is not to say or imply, of course, that Mssrs. Bullard and Appelle _aren't_ respectable. But if we have to decide the issue of respectability on a case-by-case basis, who's in charge of same? Is "Witnessed" respectable, whereas "Alien Jigsaw" isn't? I'm addressing abduction literature as a whole, whereas you're seemingly making exclusions at the start. If it's good it is, and if it ain't, it ain't, and you get to decide what's good and what isn't. You know as well as I do that the conclusion of the Roper Report as adopted and promoted by both Hopkin and Jacobs is absolutely, totally and incontrovertibly flawed and unsupported by the evidence. Yet who could dispute the fact that it is now part of the abduction literature, never to be eradicated, and only occasionally to be corrected? Obliquely -- as in "One in Forty" -- it's even popped up as the title of a book. >Yes, abduction research is a messy business, full of complexity, >ambiguity, and even absurdity, and there is a lot more intriguing >possibility than hard evidence. Nothing in it, however, remotely >justifies Dennis' wholesale dismissal. It is depressing to read >something like this from someone I like and respect -- and who >ought to know a whole hell of a lot better. Put down your >DeLillo novel, my friend, and start paying attention. >Jerry Clark First off, I don't think my comments were a wholesale dismissal, my good friend. Perhaps you should go back and reread them. When you say "nothing" here, however, you over-generalize. There are plenty of prima facie "somethings" that would cause anyone to wonder whether the experience is wholly and literally physical -- or something else. The abduction literature, for example, is now replete with claims of hybrid babies that involve "missing fetuses." To my knowledge, not _one_ case of a missing fetus has been medically documented. The literature is similarly replete with claims of "implants." Again, to my knowledge, not _one_ implant case has been medically documented to the extent of an extraordinary or anomalous nature. Both are fundamental, testable, hypotheses associated with the abduction literature (and phenomenon) -- and both remain manifestly undemonstrated, even though they should be considered the "easy" stuff. Unless, of course, you want to admit Mssrs. Leir & Sims into the literary fold. Finally, there is the question of why abductions didn't turned up in the medical and scientific literature _prior_ to the advent of ufologists (or urologists, for all you spell-checker fans out there). After all, if the phenomenon were as widespread (or only half as widespread) as its advocates are always claiming, one would expect that the occasional psychologist and psychiatrist here and there (if not in the US, then in Europe) would have encountered one, been perplexed by same, and written a case history of it -- if only for the recognition of having been first. Doubly true, given the tendency to claim that abductions now stretch back over the decades and generations and typically begin at an early age, ie, as children. By all lights, in other words, the medical professionals should have discovered the abduction phenomenon long before the ufologists did, arguably before Arnold. But then that would have resulted in a whole other literature altogether, wouldn't it? Dennis
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 10 Re: Solved Abduction cases? From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net> Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 11:48:02 -0400 Fwd Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 22:57:40 -0400 Subject: Re: Solved Abduction cases? Dennis, I think you've missed my point. > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net> > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Solved Abduction cases? > Who could forget Linda and Richard? The trouble with Tribbles and > the latter, though, is that, aliens and Linda aside, no one else > has ever peered deep into his eyes. > As for "it's all in the abduction literature"...I would say > that's precisely the problem, as opposed to any sort of > "solution." Corso is in the UFO literature, too, but that in no > way makes him any more believable, even by as much as one little > iota. > The fact of the matter is that if you go back and read Eddie > Bullard's classic study of the then (circa 1987) existing UFO > abduction literature, you'll find that it's undergone some not so > subtle and significant mutations in the decade since his analysis > was published. {snips] > The problem with the abduction "literature" is, mainly, that it's > just that -- literature, stories, anecdotes, tales told by who > knows who, full of sound and fury, sex and circumstance, pomp and > paranoia, but in the end signifying nothing, nothing that any of > us can lay hands on, anyway. > As for the real abduction literature, my advice would be to wait > for Don DeLillo's next novel. Maybe he'll give it the treatment > we've all been waiting for -- and no doubt richly deserve. I wasn't saying the things described in the abduction literature really happen. That's another discussion. Instead, I was responding to your earlier sally. You'd said, in effect: "The abduction literature says the aliens do this, this, and this, including taking our sperm and eggs to make babies. That doesn't make any sense; they'd have more advanced technological ways to produce hybrid kids." I'm meeting you on your hypothetical ground. I'm saying: "No, the stuff in the abduction literature might make perfect sense. You can't write it off because you're sure the aliens would operate differently." And I tried to give reasons why this might be so. Whether the aliens REALLY are here, and really are doing all those things is quite a different conveersation. Let's not shift the terms of the debate. As for Don DeLillo (funny, I just started reading "White Noise" yesterday), we'll probably wait a while for his next. He's probably still worn out from the 800+ pages of the novel he just published. (Unless, of course, he's had his 15 minutes with the aliens!) Greg Sandow
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 10 Re: Becker Claims Copyright Infringement by From: Jim Griebel <71541.2124@compuserve.com> Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 19:21:54 -0400 Fwd Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 23:09:49 -0400 Subject: Re: Becker Claims Copyright Infringement by >Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 18:59:52 -0800 >To: updates@globalserve.net >From: campbell@ufomind.com (Glenn Campbell, Las Vegas) >I have no information on how >one may obtain the original article. Uh, right here, at /updates/1997/sep/m27-016.shtml. This is Becker's original article, posted, as far as I can see, by Becker. At the bottom it says: >(Permission is granted for this paper to be reproduced >electronically in its ENTIRETY. Reproduction in any other medium >without the permission of the author will constitute infringement.)
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 10 Re: Becker Claims Copyright Infringement by From: Skye Turell <turel33@west.net> Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 19:25:59 -0700 Fwd Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 23:19:13 -0400 Subject: Re: Becker Claims Copyright Infringement by >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com> >Subject: re: UFO UpDate: Becker Claims Copyright Infringement by Maccabee >Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 01:09:48 -0700 >The idea that a participant in the list would even think of suing someone >for using material provided to them by this list, or relevant material >found on the web, in commentary, research, or critique, suggests that >said participant should keep their opinions to themselves, rather >than burdening the rest of us with fear that we will be the next one >singled out for threat of punitive legal action. <snip> > >Still, let's try to remember in the heat of the moment that the fact that >we disagree will not be ended by destroying the fora in which those >disagreements are given form. The result will simply be that the world >has been made poorer in information. > >Like most people who joined this list, I accept that what I write leaves >my control to some extent. I would hope that those who think that their >best recourse in this context is to threat and legality will think again, >or go elsewhere. Couldn't agree more, Mark. While the Internet has its faults, the positive aspects center around the ability to distribute massive amounts of information to a massive audience at virtually no cost. To me these benefits far outweigh the lack of control on quality of information (although we in this field know better than most just what the results of this "quality control" in traditional media has been), and the ability for some people to duplicate and distribute one's work without compensation. (Of course, some work is not worthy of compensation, and that's why it ends up on the Internet, rather than at Random House. <g>) If you really want compensation, then get published. If you want to participate in the rapid proliferation of ideas and transformation in thinking on a global scale (my personal preference), then make use of the Internet. To some degree, one can accomplish both, but as Mark suggests, if you're gonna haul out the legalese at every possible moment, perhaps you are not terribly interested in ideas or transformation -- are much more interested in search-for-the-guilty and other such once-popular games -- and there are likely more comfortable places for you to hang out. While you are making up your mind, any of you who feel there's a viable choice to be made here, please let those of us who are operating in the spirit of the Internet proceed in peace. Skye Turell <turel33@west.net>
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 10 CURRENT-ENCOUNTERS: Filer's Files #40 From: George Filer <Majorstar@AOL.COM> Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 11:34:42 -0400 Fwd Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 23:30:15 -0400 Subject: CURRENT-ENCOUNTERS: Filer's Files #40 Filer's Files #40 MUFON Skywatch Investigations From George A. Filer: MUFON Eastern Director, 10 October 1997 Majorstar@aol.com (609) 654-0020 American Computer Company claims aliens have landed and we're using alien technology.(See page 3) GEORGIA: Case 97/03/01, 1 p.m., MUFON's Jeff Sanio, conducted photoanalysis of photo taken in late February or early March in Georgia. The photographer used a Kodak 35mm Camera, 34mm focal length, f/5?,1/1000 exposure? ASA400 Kodak Gold film. Three witnesses saw two "fuse-shaped" objects meeting each other and flying in a V formation. One drifted slowly; the other displayed fantastic motion. One photo was obtained of one UFO, which appeared similar to the other. The UFO image is centered in the photo, as expected for an object of interest (as opposed to the random position of a film defect), and appears as a linear object, darker in the middle. In the blue, the UFO is darker in the upper and lower middle than the sky, precluding a double-exposure or reflection-on-glass as methods of faking this photo. The UFO is otherwise invisible in the blue. Comparing the focus of the UFO against a known distant object, a tree branch, (graphs below; since the branch is dark and the UFO light, the UFO image is inverted for ease of comparison) shows that the UFO focus is consistent with a distant object. Photogrammetry indicates the UFO is about 40 feet across, assuming (for no particular reason) a mile distance. The closest conventional object that would resemble this would be an airliner with landing lights; an airliner would appear as two points, not a line. Also landing lights would not be so visible in sunlight. Beyond a complex and pointless fraud, I find no conventional explanation for this photo. Thanks to Jeff Sainio, MUFON Staff Photoanalyst Note: The rod/missile shaped objects are being photographed in NJ, NM, CO and GA. They are being reported by pilots as near misses to our aircraft. NEW YORK MUFON investigators from NJ, NY, MA, VA, CT visited the Pine Bush, NY area for evidence of UFOs and earth light energy. We had a great time, but were not entertained with a significant sighting. Numerous aircraft fly over the area at fairly low altitudes approaching Stewart and Orange County Airports. On October 4th at 10:30 p.m. a strange sounding aircraft flew close to our position over looking the Wall Kill River. The plane glowed with numerous warning and strobe lights. Strangely at 100 feet below the aircraft's position our video's captured a second set strobe lights. These mirror like strobe lights hanging well below the aircraft may have been caused by some electrical phenomena or a reflections on a thin cloud layer not apparent to us. The Wall Kill Valley seems charged and with some type of extraordinary electromagnetic energy. We talked with local police and residents who had also observed unusual lights and craft. The ancient geology of the area, and its granite rocks made me feel we were observing some of the Earth's most primordial forces. The area needs further detailed research that could result in a remarkable new energy source and help in solving the UFO mystery. We hope to return with enhanced instrumentation to pinpoint areas of glowing ionised gas, plasmas, and UFO activity. INDIANA: Kenny Young wrote: On Wednesday night, October 1st between 8:00 and 8:30 p.m., EST a Naval Officer working at the Reserve Station in Indianapolis, Indiana, saw what he believed to be a UFO. The officer is a Vietnam and Gulf War veteran, and was twice interviewed on October 4th and 5th regarding the sighting. It was from his vantage point on the outskirts of Indianapolis (city of Greenwood, Johnson County), that the Naval Officer (whose name will not be disclosed for this report) witnessed the aerial anomaly that he could not identify. The officer was looking to the southeast and a brightly-lit object 75 to 80-degrees in the sky caught his attention. The object looked like a star, but extremely intense and appeared to be moving upward. The 'pure-white' light was so intense that the officer stated 'he couldn't believe it.' The object stayed within a small area, according to the officer, as it continued moving upward before eventually appearing as nothing more than a dim star. The object was at its brightest for 15-seconds. From: Kenny Young, T.A.S.K. UFO Research <task@fuse.net> Note: The Russian MIR and US Shuttle were in orbit together during this time period. NORTH DAKOTA: John Thompson, sent the following ISUR encounter report. On October 3, 1997, Lee M. Brady of Fargo, ND was driving on highway I-94 a 1/2 mile west of Gackle, ND at 10:23 p.m. Lee reports: "A meteorite-like object off to the left appeared to stop and hover. Other meteorites were observed at the same time. The car radio seemed to go out of range. There were multiple vehicles on the road at the time that may have also seen object. > Lee's phone is 701-231-8442 and his E-mail address is: (LeBrady@badlands.nodak.edu) John Thompson, further commented. "Lee, thanks for the report. The radio going silent is very interesting. We had a so-called meteorite here once make a strong FM radio signal go silent as a giant meteorite/UFO passed over. An astronomer at Georgia State University told me he had never heard of a meteorite causing this effect but said it was technically possible--I agree. You may have seen a meteorite; you may not have seen one. We have had no other reports of this incident." Best Regards, John C. Thompson ISUR/MUFON State Director. PHOENIX SIGHTINGS UPDATE Bill Hamilton, the Director of Skywatch International reports: I have two items of interest to those who have followed the story on the Phoenix sightings of March 13, 1997. 1) I have finally received the statement published in Tucson Weekly on those A-10s from Maryland. "Lt. Keith Shepherd, public information officer at Davis- Monthan Air Force Base, confirms that an eight-plane squadron of A-10 fighter-bombers from the 175th Fighter Wing, based in Baltimore, Maryland, landed at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base at approximately 8:30 p.m. on March 13, returning from the Phoenix area. The Baltimore unit was in Arizona to conduct training exercises." and "Shepherd says an initial check at Davis-Monthan revealed that all of the planes permanently stationed at the Air Force base had landed before 6 p.m. on March 13. It was a recent report from a Marana Air National Guard unit that inspired a deeper look at the records." (Tucson Weekly 21 July 24-30, 1997) When this was published in the Arizona Republic, some facts got changed including the time of landing. This caused some skeptics to proclaim that the videos of the Phoenix Lights taken close to 10 p.m. that night were the flare drops from these A-10s that had landed an hour-and-a-half earlier! These flare drops, accomplished before 8:30 p.m. on that night, do not account for the horizontally moving formation of lights seen over Phoenix at around 8:30 p.m. We are back to "unidentifieds". 2) One of the sightings on March 13 was of a formation of amber lights (more than a mile in span) that was seen by a retired airline pilot, Trig Johnston, at about 10:20 p.m. moving south above Scottsdale Blvd. A second witness, named Curtis, has now come forward and given the same description as Trig from a different viewing location. This second witness claims to have videotaped those moving lights from his roof. He says that he was going to deliver this tape to City Councilwoman Frances Barwood after talking to her on the phone. The day he grabbed the tape to go to the post office with it, he heard a knock on the door. He says, two men dressed in black suits, black ties, black business hats and wearing sun glasses were at the door stating they had come from Barwood's office. They collected the tape, saying they would deliver it for him. When they went to walk away, one turned asking Curtis if he had made a copy for himself, and Curtis replied that he did not whereby the MIB said, "good"! Was Curtis telling the truth about this incident? We do not know yet. His recounting of the sighting matches our pilot witness, but the bizarre MIB element has finally reared up on this case. Why he did not make a copy of this tape is something we cannot answer at this time. If any MIBs out there have this tape, we would appreciate a copy please and would also like you to correctly identify yourself. (FAT CHANCE). Thanks to Bill Hamilton Executive Director Skywatch International MARS: The Courier Post of Cherry Hill, NJ on October 9th reported from Pasadena, Calif. The Mars Pathfinder has yielded what scientists said Wednesday is the strongest evidence yet that Mars, like Earth, has a crust, a mantle and an iron core-lending support to the theory that the Red Planet might once have been hospitable to life. The evidence that the planet is not merely a solid ball of rock came from analyzing radio signals from Pathfinder as Mars spins on its axis. Having enough heat to create these distinct layers gives weight to the theory that Mars once may been warm and wt enough for life to evolve as it did on Earth. Mars formed 4 billion years ago. ... Scientists still remain a long way from finding another component of life-water. But they have detected signs that the surface once teemed with water flowing in streams and deep channels that carried rocks from place to place. Pathfinder yielded close-up images of Martian rock conglomerations that shoed small spheres, probably pebbles smoothed by water. Note: Expect further revelations of ancient life on Mars. ALIEN TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER TO BELL LABS, NJ: The American Computer Company Website is making extraordinary claims that ET has arrived. This is a genuine New Jersey company. After putting this information on the web, its front entrance mysteriously exploded and the company was visited by Air Force OSI. Here in part is what the American Computer Company has to say: "YOU ARE READING THE AMERICAN COMPUTER COMPANY STORY ABOUT THE ROSWELL INCIDENT ON JULY 7, 1947 and one person's story about the transfer of Alien Technology to Bell Laboratories. RUMOR and CONVENTIONAL FOLK LORE have claimed that a UFO crash landed in Roswell, New Mexico, in September, 1947 near a Nuclear Research Center maintained by the US Air Force at its airbase in Roswell. Supposedly, authentic reports of the crash were suddenly covered up by the Air Force -- because the information unwisely released by base PR personnel, might constitute a threat to national security. Anecdotal reports have since claimed that Aliens, killed in the wreck, or afterward, were subsequently autopsied by the Surgeon General's office, and that the Surgeon General insisted that the autopsy be filmed. Supposedly: their bodies are now being stored by the US Army. Much more recently, stories have begun surfacing about what the Army or Air Force supposedly did with the downed Alien Spacecraft in September and October of 1947. Nuclear Powered Engines and Advanced Communications and Computing devices, all of which were a hundred years beyond post-World War II technology, were taken from the Alien wreck and purportedly made their way to The Bell System's "Bell Laboratories", then located in Murray Hill, New Jersey -- it has been alleged. There, they were studied, dissected, microanalyzed and pieces tested. One piece was supposedly found to have unique potential, an Alien switching device composed of Silicon and Arsenic, arranged in a microscopic array much more complicated than even now have been assembled by Humankind, hundreds of years ahead. It became the priority focus object of Bell Labs' and The US Department of Defense's analysis and scientific research. It was discovered by the researchers, that the unusual electronic [Image] Alien device could act as both a high speed electronic switch and as an Amplifier. They decided to call it the "Transfer Resistor", because it could be made to resist or accept power flow at much higher or lower currents than were applied to it, depending upon unique application of electron flows. Rumors have been flying in UFO-logy circles that, in 1948 and 1949, realizing that Aliens might not take lightly to this research, fearing attack not from the Soviet Union -- but from Aliens of unknown origin -- the U.S. Government hurriedly erected anti-missile batteries in the surrounding Watchung Mountains of New Jersey... near Bell Lab's Murray Hills facility, to protect it from space invasion!! It is not known if this is any indication that the Department of Defense accidentally shot down the space craft and feared a reprisal. The alleged Space Defense Anti-missile Batteries, along the Lookout Mountain Ridge north of Bell Labs, is now abandoned and partly overbuilt by a regional high school. On the "Lookout Mountain Nike Base" there were, supposedly, frequent "alien anti-invasion" readiness exercises and drills throughout the 50's, 60's and the early 70's, notably: their frequency reportedly increased any time UFO sightings were reported to the US Air Force -- particularly in the New Jersey flight corridors, or so it has been alleged ! According to one account: the Alien Silicon "amplifier / switch", evaluated in October and November of 1947, was discovered to have enormous implications. The Alien device was allegedly a hundred years beyond the then simple "junction diodes" commonly in use at the time by military electronics. Yet it was reportedly determined at the time that simplified versions of the Alien devices could be manufactured by the effecting of several upgrades to existing technology. Then President Harry S. Truman ordered the devices "cloned" and a cover story manufactured. He was supposedly quoted as saying: "We can't keep so earthshaking a technological advance out of the hands of mankind. It just isn't right !" -- with classic Harry S. Truman sobriety. So, according to the story leaked by a reliable source to UFO-logy circles: in mid-December of 1947, to effect a plausible cover story, the DOD and Bell Labs purportedly manufactured a series of Press Releases, to whit: that after a "2 Year Long Extensive Research Effort" --discovery of the Transistor had "at last" been accomplished, supposedly by clever Bell Labs researchers (Drs. Shockley, Bardeen and Brattain, at Bell Lab's Electronic Circuits Research Center, under the aegis of maverick Bell Labs Vice President John "Jack" Morton). Since that time, The Bell System, and Bell Labs, in the hands of successor company AT&T and its partly owned subsidiary, Lucent Technologies, have continued to maintain the "Transistor Story" for all of posterity, while quietly covering up the real tracks that led the Alien devices to Bell Labs. [Image] UFO-logy sources say, however, that the device in the famous "transfer resistor test rig" at Bell Labs was, in fact, an actual piece of the original Alien integrated circuit array of transistor-like circuit pieces -- found in one of the Alien communication devices at the Crash Site in Roswell, N.M. It has allegedly been reported that it took a year or more for Bell Labs to then figure out how to commercially produce the miracle devices. Reportedly, subsequent technology obtained over the course of the next 10 years by Bell Labs, from the pieces of , included the Laser, enhanced solid state circuit components, large scale switching control systems and high definition imaging devices... However, some devices from the downed Alien spacecraft, not fully understood to this day, allegedly include a high energy microwave amplifier that has the secondary effect of decomposing solid objects into their molecular components, a form of circuitry that runs on other than electronic power: using particles thought to have very short half-life's in the natural universe ("muons"), and a huge induction generator-like coil system some 50 feet in diameter which appears to implement part of some aspect of the vehicle's ability to perform unique flying characteristics and aerobatics - some think it might be a "gravity nullifying" device. What do you think?? Do YOU have any thing to add, such as an abduction experience, or a theory about Alien Visitations to our Planet? Did you work at Bell Labs during the 50's, 60's, 70's or in recent times, and notice anything unusual which might confirm or rebut these rumors? Thanks to American Computer Company Website at: http://www.american-computer.com/roswell.htm Note: Although, the above claims are difficult to prove. We have learned that Bell Labs is believed to have owned the best UFO Research library in the world for private use by its employees. It is a well known fact, that Bell Labs worked closely with the Air Force on amazing technological developments far ahead of other nations. In 1951, Bell helped in the plans for the final organization of the Air Force's. Air Research and Development Command (ARDC) at Wright Patterson Air Force Base . This is the logical place for focusing all advanced alien research in the Air Force. In another coincidence, Bell Telephone Laboratories Vice President, Donald A. Quarrels was made Secretary of the Air Force between 1955 to 1957. Search for other documents from or mentioning: majorstar | task |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 10 BWW Media Alert 971010 From: BufoCalvin@aol.com Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 20:08:11 -0700 (PDT) Fwd Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 23:35:14 -0400 Subject: BWW Media Alert 971010 Bufo Calvin, P O Box 5231, Walnut Creek, CA 94596 E-mail: BufoCalvin@aol.com Website: http://members.aol.com/bufocalvin ( <A HREF="http://members.aol.com/ BufoCalvin/index.html">BufoCalvin's Home Page</A> ) TAP (The Address Project) Bufo's WEIRD WORLD e-zine Bufo's WEIRD WORLD Media Alert Bufo's WEIRD WORLD Books ( <A HREF="http://members.aol.com/weirdware/books.ht ml">Bufo's WEIRD WORLD Books</A> ) ALL RIGHTS RESERVED (permission is granted to reproduce or redistribute this edition of Bufo's WEIRD WORLD Media Alert provided that attribution is made to http://members.aol.com/bufocalvin. It is good etiquette to check with strangers before you e-mail them something. If you forward this, please make sure it is clear that you are forwarding it). October 10, 1997 Added significantly to the website, including a page on abductions ( <A HREF= "http://members.aol.com/Weirdware2/bwwb-ufo-abductions.html">UFO Books - Abduc tions</A> ), one on El Chupacabras ( <A HREF="http://members.aol.com/Weirdware 2/bwwb-cz-elchup.html">Cryptozoology - El Chupacabras</A> ), and one on parapsychology videos ( <A HREF="http://members.aol.com/Weirdware2/bwwb-ps-vid eos.html">Parapsychology Videos</A> ). The selection is good (although I have more to add), and many items are discounted. Anyway...The Learning Channel has a block of UFO and alien programs on Sunday (re-running the "Alien Week" ones from this week). I know I'm not covering fictional programs right now, but I thought I'd mention that the Men-in-Black cartoon series debuts on the WB this week. Pre-empts this week include MYSTERIES, MAGIC AND MIRACLES on Monday (for a FOREVER KNIGHT marathon) and SIGHTINGS on Thursday (for a LOST IN SPACE marathon). I do expect to start sending out a once a month listing on books and periodicals. If you don't want to get it, please let me know. Oh, and the new mailing system should be set up soon, which I hope will improve the service (I know that can be a euphemism, but I really think it will :) ). On to the listings! ON-LINE OMNI MAGAZINE (http://www.omnimag.com Omni Magazine ) is back to do real time conferences. The regular night for our kind of stuff is Tuesday 7:00 PM to 8:00 PM Pacific. No details available. UK.UFO.NW (tons of irc addresses, the channel is #UFO...you can get there through http://www.holodeck.demon.co.uk/ultrachat.html), 3:00 PM (Pacific), Saturday. No details available. RADIO AND TELEVISION SYNDICATED RADIO: END OF THE LINE is now SIGHTINGS ON THE RADIO. This has resulted, among other things, in a new website: http://www.sightings.com. SIGHTINGS ON THE RADIO Next week's guests not known (except for Michael Lindemann ...he'll be on at 6:00 PM Wednesday as I write this, but you can check their website on Monday. It can also be heard on your computer. Airtimes: M-F 7-10 PM Pacific (times given here are generally Pacific),. Sunday 8-11 PM Pacific. Archives of earlier shows are also available, so you can hear my previous broadcasts through this site. SYNDICATED TV: LOOKING BEYOND --Messengers (I assume this is the book about angel contactee Nick Bunnick, < A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0671016865/bufosweirdworldA/">T he Messengers : A True Story of Angelic Presence</A> ); UFO sighting in Salida, Colorado; a family that is psychic; hybrids (human/alien?); "angel board"; near-death experiences (that's a page I need to set up...I do have several titles listed) PSI-FACTOR (see http://www.psifactor.com for stations and airdates and other info). This series is supposedly based on real cases. --WISH I MAY: two brothers come back from the dead Saturday, October 11 RADIO: THE EDGE OF REALITY, 5:00 PM -8:00 PM Pacific. Also available on Satcom C5, Transponder 23, SEDAT Channel 24. The specific spots have to be considered tentative, and the station in your area may run it tape-delayed. I've found out recently that the one in my area even runs it out of order, running the third hour first! This show is a repeat, due to the holiday. 5:00 PM, Melanie Votaw, hypnosis and past lives (she regresses host Ken Dashow); 6:00 PM, Ruffin Prevost, the creator of Parascope (http://www.parascope.com); Dr. Harold Widdison, author of The Eternal Journey: How Near-Death Experiences Illuminate Our Earthly Lives ( <A HREF="ht tp://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0446520543/bufosweirdworldA/">The Eternal Journey</A> ) 2:30 PM, THE DISCOVERY CHANNEL, ARTHUR C. CLARKE'S MYSTERIOUS WORLD: THE DOOM OF THE DINOSAURS 6:00 PM, THE LEARNING CHANNEL, MYSTERIES OF THE MILLENIUM 7:00 PM, THE LEARNING CHANNEL, MYSTERIOUS ORIGINS OF MAN Sunday, October 12 SYNDICATED RADIO, 7:00 PM, ART BELL'S DREAMLAND: Art interviews Glen Grant, whose most recent book is Obake Files : Ghostly Encounters in Supernatural Hawaii ( <A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=1566471001/bufosweir dworldA/">Obake Files : Ghostly Encounters in Supernatural Hawaii</A> )on Hawaiian ghosts(see website at http://www.artbell.com) LOCAL TELEVISION, KRCB in the San Francisco area, THINKING ALLOWED, ACTIVATING YOUR INTUITION: YOUR SIXTH SENSE, with Belleruth Naparstek, author of Your Sixth Sense: Activating Your Psychic Potential ( <A HREF="http://www. amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0062514938/bufosweirdworldA/">Your Sixth Sense: Ac tivating Your Psychic Potential</A> ) LOCAL TELEVISION, KING COUNTY WASHINGTON, CHANNEL 29, 7:00 PM: JOURNEY: Brenda Roberts produces. 11:00 AM, THE SCI-FI CHANNEL, SIGHTINGS (#5064): Case Closed! (psychic detectives); Ouija boards (do you know how it got its name, incidentally? It's a "yes-yes" board, from French and German); Angel of Death! (author John Ronner (( The Angels of Cokeville: And Other True Stories of Miraculous Interventions)) ((( <A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=09329454 30/bufosweirdworldA/">The Angels of Cokeville: And Other True Stories of Mirac ulous Interventi</A>ons))) paranormal places; Restless Spirits! (haunting); The Call of Sasquatch! 1:00 PM, THE LEARNING CHANNEL, CLOSE ENCOUNTERS OF THE FIFTH KIND 2:00 PM, THE LEARNING CHANNEL, E.T. PLEASE PHONE EARTH 3:00 PM, THE LEARNING CHANNEL, UFOS AND OTHER CLOSE ENCOUNTERS 4:00 PM, THE DISCOVERY CHANNEL, DISCOVERY SUNDAY, ANATOMY OF AN ALIEN 4:00, THE LEARNING CHANNEL, UFO 4:00 PM, THE SCI-FI CHANNEL, SIGHTINGS (#5064): Case Closed! (psychic detectives); Ouija boards (do you know how it got its name, incidentally? It's a "yes-yes" board, from French and German); Angel of Death! (author John Ronner (( The Angels of Cokeville: And Other True Stories of Miraculous Interventions)) ((( <A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=09329454 30/bufosweirdworldA/">The Angels of Cokeville: And Other True Stories of Mirac ulous Interventi</A>ons))) paranormal places; Restless Spirits! (haunting); The Call of Sasquatch! 5:00 PM, THE LEARNING CHANNEL, ALIEN ENCOUNTER 6:00 PM, THE DISCOVERY CHANNEL, ARTHUR C. CLARKE'S MYSTERIOUS WORLD: GIANTS FOR THE GODS (Nazca, etc.) 6:30 PM, THE DISCOVERY CHANNEL, INTO THE UNKNOWN: GIANT SNAKE 10:00 PM, THE SCI-FI CHANNEL, SIGHTINGS (#5064): Case Closed! (psychic detectives); Ouija boards (do you know how it got its name, incidentally? It's a "yes-yes" board, from French and German); Angel of Death! (author John Ronner (( The Angels of Cokeville: And Other True Stories of Miraculous Interventions)) ((( <A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=09329454 30/bufosweirdworldA/">The Angels of Cokeville: And Other True Stories of Mirac ulous Interventi</A>ons))) paranormal places; Restless Spirits! (haunting); The Call of Sasquatch! Monday, October 13 SYNDICATED TV, MONDAY, STRANGE UNIVERSE: (see website at http://www.strangeuniverse.com (( Strange Universe )) for stations and playtimes in your area.) LOCAL TELEVISION, SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON, 3:00 PM: JOURNEY: Brenda Roberts produces. Tuesday, October 14 PBS, KRATT'S CREATURES: The boys look for the thylacine (the "Tasmanian Tiger") SYNDICATED TV, TUESDAY, MAURY POVICH: psychic and author (Proud Spirit: Lessons, Insights and Healing From "The Voice of the Spirit World" (( <A HREF= "http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0688149987/bufosweirdworldA/">Proud Sp irit : Lessons, Insights & Healing from 'the Voice of the Spirit</A> )) Rosemary Altea SYNDICATED TV, TUESDAY, STRANGE UNIVERSE: (see website at http://www.strangeuniverse.com for stations and playtimes in your area) 10:01 AM, THE SCI-FI CHANNEL, MYSTERIES, MAGIC AND MIRACLES (#30): Miracle Healing; The Evil Influence; Spirits in Our Midst Wednesday, October 15 SYNDICATED TV, WEDNESDAY, STRANGE UNIVERSE: (see website at http://www.strangeuniverse.com for stations and playtimes in your area) 10:01 AM, THE SCI-FI CHANNEL, MYSTERIES, MAGIC, AND MIRACLES (#31): Dracula; Cryptozoology; Bushmen 5:00 PM, THE HISTORY CHANNEL, IN SEARCH OF HISTORY: ATLANTIS Thursday, October 16 SYNDICATED TV, THURSDAY, STRANGE UNIVERSE: (see website at http://www.strangeuniverse.com for stations and playtimes in your area) 10:01 AM, THE SCI-FI CHANNEL, MAGIC, MYSTERIES AND MIRACLES (#32): Doppelganger; Superstions; Jenny Cockell 7:00 PM, A&E, THE UNEXPLAINED, HAUNTINGS 9:00 PM, THE DISCOVERY CHANNEL, INTO THE UNKNOWN, GIANT LIZARD (Rex Gilroy, author of Mysterious Australia (( <A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/I SBN=064625393X/bufosweirdworldA/">Mysterious Australia</A> )) looks for giant goannas 11:00 PM, A&E, THE UNEXPLAINED, HAUNTINGS Friday, October 17 LOCAL RADIO, 8:00 PM (Pacific Time) WGBB 1240 AM, New York: THE JOYCE KELLER SHOW: the host is a psychic who helps callers. Phone number is 516-955-1240 SYNDICATED TV, FRIDAY, STRANGE UNIVERSE: (see website at http://www.strangeuniverse.com for stations and playtimes in your area) 12:00 AM, THE DISCOVERY CHANNEL, ARTHUR C. CLARKE'S MYSTERIOUS WORLD, 10:01 AM, THE SCI-FI CHANNEL, MAGIC, MYSTERIES AND MIRACLES (#33): Savant Syndrome; Marilyn's Death; Mummies This is Bufo saying, "If =everything= seemed normal, that =would= be weird!" ____________________________ You can stop receiving this from me just by asking (note: it is commonly redistributed, and I can't control you getting it from those sources) by e-mail at BufoCalvin@aol.com. You can also subscribe or unsubscribe to Bufo's WEIRD WORLD (which covers theories and happenings) the same way. Also, please let me know if there is something in the media you think I should cover. Deadline is Tuesday, the week before. _____________________________ **OPUS is the Organization for Paranormal Understanding and Support. I am an Executive Boardmember, and Director of the OPUS Educational Institute. OPUS encourages its officers and Network Associates to express their own opinions: however, it is important to note that I do not speak for OPUS in this piece or others presented under my own name. The new OPUS phone number is (510) 689-4198 ______________________________ Bufo's WEIRD WORLD BOOKS ( <A HREF="http://members.aol.com/weirdware/books.htm l">Bufo's WEIRD WORLD Books</A> ) I'm very excited about this! Some of you know, I ran a bookstore for years, and it has always been a love of mine. I get asked often to recommend books (I do write reviews for several publications) on these topics, and now I can do it and actually give you a source for them at the same time! This is being done in association with Amazon.com, which has an outstanding reputation for the five "S"s of internet shopping: selection, searchability, service, savings, and security. If there is any specific book you want (or topic in which you are interested), let me know and I will do the research and e-mail you a link you can use to check it out more (and order it if you want). I will be linking to books within the Media Alert, to make it more efficient for you. If you click on the link, you will be sent to that title on Amazon. You do =not= have to buy it at that point! You may, but the option is yours.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 11 Brookings Report - The NY Times, Thursday, From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 00:38:19 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 00:38:19 -0400 Subject: Brookings Report - The NY Times, Thursday, From: http://www.netis.com/members/millennium/mp/tword07c.htm Brookings Report Dateline: The New York Times, Thursday, December 15, 1960 Mankind is Warned to Prepare For Discovery of Life in Space - Brookings Institution Report Says Earth's Civilization Might Topple if Faced by a Race of Superior Beings Washington. Dec 14 (UPI) -- Discovery of life on other worlds could cause the earth's civilization to collapse, a Federal report said today. This warning was contained in a research report given to the National Aeronautical and Space Administration with the recommendation that the world prepare itself mentally for the eventuality. The report, prepared by the Brookings Institution, said "while the discovery of intelligent life in other parts of the universe is not likely in the immediate future, it could nevertheless, happen at any time." Discovery of Intelligent beings on other planets could lead to an all-out effort by earth to contact them, or it could lead to sweeping changes or even the downfall of civilization, the report said. Even on earth, it added, "societies sure of their own place have disintegrated when confronted by a superior society, and others have survived even though changed." Responding to Crisis "Clearly, the better we can come to understanding the factors involved in responding to such crisis the better prepared we may be." The agency's 100-page report, prepared at a cost of $86,000 was for the space agency's committee on beings-in-space studies. The members, headed by Donald M. Michael also recommended further study of other space activities, including the symptomatic and propaganda effects and the implications of communications and weather satellites. On the question of life in outer space, the report said that if intelligent or super-intelligent beings were discovered in the next twenty years they would probably be found by radio communications with other solar systems. Evidence of such existence "might also be found in artifacts left on the moon or other planets," it said. An attempt already has been made to contact outer space. Government scientist at Greenbank, West Virginia used radio astronomy in an effort to pick up signals that might have been beamed by intelligent beings. They concentrated on a star about fifteen light years away. Signals were sent from Greenbank were of a kind that would show to anyone receiving on other planets that they were man-made and not natural phenomena.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 11 Re: Becker Claims Copyright Infringement by From: Penrose Christopher <penrose@sfc.keio.ac.jp> Date: Sat, 11 Oct 97 12:45:20 +0900 Fwd Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 08:57:19 -0400 Subject: Re: Becker Claims Copyright Infringement by >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com> >Subject: re: UFO UpDate: Becker Claims Copyright Infringement by Maccabee >Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 01:09:48 -0700 >> Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 18:59:52 -0800 >> To: updates@globalserve.net >> From: campbell@ufomind.com (Glenn Campbell, Las Vegas) >> Subject: Becker Claims Copyright Infringement by Maccabee >> Becker has threatened to file a lawsuit against Glenn Campbell, >> Bruce Maccabee, Errol Bruce-Knapp and another party to seek >> "injunctuive, punitive and statuatory damages from Glenn and >> punitive and statuatory from the rest of you...." >I find this to be a saddening and depressing development. As Glenn >points out elsewhere, the use of material on the net for comment and >criticism is normal and appropriate. It also seems to be covered by >fair use, as indicated in: It is natural for me to find Barbara's actions rather contemptible, particularly because I am quite a radical regarding information "ownership". My ideal position is that "intellectual property" is a debilitating, inefficient corporate construct designed to promote individual wealth rather than to promote the intellectual growth of society. Given what Mark has said regarding "Fair Use" and the scholarly nature of Maccabee's paper, I say to Glenn and Errol: "hold the line". Research the law a teeny bit and repost the paper with a public announcement as to why. Also, did she not post the paper herself to UFO updates? I saw several postings of the initial paper, did Barbara post one herself or were these postings mediated by others? Here looks like a good place for some more of my bloated, "goodbye copyright" rhetoric: "All creative efforts and products are affected by histories which are greater in scope than the history of any individual or corporate body; thus, what society conveniently and inaccurately labels as a creator is but a single, among many, contributor to the history of a particular creation. All restrictions upon information, through institutions based on the notion of individual or corporate ownership are invalid. Creation is a collective cultural cooperation; it is not an isolated, ownable achievement." Oh yeah: "information wants to be free." Christopher Penrose penrose@sfc.keio.ac.jp BTW: My John Velez sighting report, which is nearing completion, will be posted in the public domain. Anyone can comment upon it using the text from my initial posting. You can even make poetry out of it. Search for other documents from or mentioning: penrose | mcashman |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 11 Stills of the Mexican Footage From: jared@valuserve.com (Andromeda.net- Anderson, Jared) Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 20:58:50 -0700 Fwd Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 08:59:19 -0400 Subject: Stills of the Mexican Footage Somebody put up some stills of the recent Mexican footage at this location: http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Rampart/5430/ After seeing this my first assumption was that if the video is authentic, there had to be a lot of witnesses to this event on the ground. Jared.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 11 Re: Solved Abduction cases? From: Skye Turell <turel33@west.net> Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 21:47:34 -0700 Fwd Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 09:02:13 -0400 Subject: Re: Solved Abduction cases? >Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 17:18:37 -0500 (CDT) >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net> [Dennis Stacy] >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Solved Abduction cases? >>From: clark@canby.mn.frontiercomm.net [Jerome Clark] >>Date: Thu, 09 Oct 1997 10:02:02 PDT >>To: updates@globalserve.net >>Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Solved Abduction cases? >I like Eddie, too. The question here is what does "pretty hard" >mean? If you want to see a blatant example of leading, you have >only to re-read John Mack. At one point, one of his witnesses >won't go up a ramp during a hypnosis session, so he tells her to >imagine she's a remote-controlled video camera and go up the ramp >-- which she promptly does. Without actually going back and rereading Mack, I fail to see why using the camera device, *once the hypnosis subject has already identified the presence of a ramp*, constitutes leading. Skye Turell <turel33@west.net>
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 11 Re: Becker Claims Copyright Infringement by From: xalium@netwrx.net (Tom King) Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 22:38:10 EST Fwd Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 09:10:33 -0400 Subject: Re: Becker Claims Copyright Infringement by >>Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 18:59:52 -0800 >>To: updates@globalserve.net >>From: campbell@ufomind.com (Glenn Campbell, Las Vegas) >>Subject: Becker Claims Copyright Infringement by Maccabee >>Cc: brumac@compuserve.com, steve@konsulting.com > <snip> >>Barbara Becker has claimed copyright infringement in an on-line >>article by Bruce Maccabee posted to this list on Oct. 4. > <snip> >>Becker has threatened to file a lawsuit against Glenn Campbell, >>Bruce Maccabee, Errol Bruce-Knapp and another party to seek >>"injunctuive, punitive and statuatory damages from Glenn and >>punitive and statuatory from the rest of you...." She must be from California, they sue everybody for nearly everything. BTW: The Internet is full of cases for copyright infringement lawsuits. Either its photos, videos, or text files. Once they get posted to several thousand people isn't it public domain? Can anyone site a case were someone sued and won damages because of the net? I haven't heard of any successful cases yet... The photos and video from Mexico City could be a new case, but it would never go to court. Tom King, Skywatcher Arizona Skywatch director AZ Skywatch http://personal.netwrx.net/xalium/skywatch/skywatch.htm OVNI Chapterhouse at http://personal.netwrx.net/xalium/ufovideo.htm Search for other documents from or mentioning: xalium | campbell |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 11 Re: Becker Claims Copyright Infringement by From: "WHITE" <mjawhite@digitaldune.net> [John White] Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 22:14:14 -0700 Fwd Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 09:15:32 -0400 Subject: Re: Becker Claims Copyright Infringement by -----Original Message----- From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> To: updates@globalserve.net <updates@globalserve.net> Date: Friday, October 10, 1997 7:01 PM Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Becker Claims Copyright Infringement by Maccabee <snip all> To all: This List is for neat stuff on UFOs. Copyright law is neat stuff for the players, ( http://www.fplc.edu/tfield/copynet.htm and http://fairuse.stanford.edu/multimed/ ). Gulf Breeze photo pros and cons fit the categoy of neat stuff on UFOs. Collateralizing the thread with threats of a player's suit begs the question of the photo arguments, and weakens an otherwise interesting set of observations by the main participants. Good advocacy outs the truth better than a dozen preachers swearing on a stack of bibles, and resorting to the "law" to stop the bleeding on an argument on the "facts" is usually a dead giveaway to weak facts and a bogus argument. The archives are gone. What's next? Us? John White mjawhite@digitaldune.net
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 11 Re: Solved Abduction cases? From: clark@canby.mn.frontiercomm.net [Jerome Clark] Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 00:31:28 PDT Fwd Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 09:26:10 -0400 Subject: Re: Solved Abduction cases? > Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 17:18:37 -0500 (CDT) > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net> [Dennis Stacy] > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Solved Abduction cases? > >From: clark@canby.mn.frontiercomm.net [Jerome Clark] > >Date: Thu, 09 Oct 1997 10:02:02 PDT > >To: updates@globalserve.net > >Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Solved Abduction cases? > >Dennis, > >I admire your apparent certainty that all's right with the world, > >that we don't have to worry about the abduction phenomenon > >because it's all messy and the putative aliens don't act as you > >would have them act, that the novels of Don DeLillo have more to > >tell us than actual case studies, which presumably include those of > >Ray Fowler (Allagash), Walt Webb (Hill and Buff Ledge), and other > >conscientious investigators. > Another one of my points you apparently missed re: the rapid > "evolution" of the abduction scenario. Are there hybrid babies > and implants in the Allagash, Hill and Buff Ledge cases? Your point being? > >In other words, Bullard validates formally what investigators have always > >insisted: that popular debunking mythology aside, it's pretty hard to lead > >abductees. > I like Eddie, too. The question here is what does "pretty hard" > mean? If you want to see a blatant example of leading, you have > only to re-read John Mack. At one point, one of his witnesses > won't go up a ramp during a hypnosis session, so he tells her to > imagine she's a remote-controlled video camera and go up the ramp > -- which she promptly does. It's all there in black & white, my > friend, leaving the question: Is Mack part of the abduction > literature, what with his Pulitzer prize, or not? (I don't dare > ask if Bullard, an academic folklorist, is qualified to > pronounce, as opposed to comment, on the verities and vagaries of > clinical hypnosis. But at least that remark will give you > something to vent on if you don't want to address the other > issues raised.) Dennis, READ Bullard's monograph, which obviously you have not done, and also his conclusions, based on the sort of empirical study so conspicuously absent in the abduction-bashing literature, on the role, or nonrole, of hypnosis in the shaping of abduction narratives. You might start with his paper in JUFOS 1 (1989). For my views on Mack, read IUR, March/April 1994. > >I also think we'd have a better handle on what we're dealing with if > >we were able to discard the noise. > I couldn't agree with you more, Jerry, which is why I raised the > issue in my previous post: What IS the "abduction literature" to > which Greg Sandow referred? Does it include the spectrum from > Strieber to John Salter, or just the respectable (Bullard, > Appelle) material you deem respectable? Which is not to say or > imply, of course, that Mssrs. Bullard and Appelle _aren't_ > respectable. But if we have to decide the issue of respectability > on a case-by-case basis, who's in charge of same? Is "Witnessed" > respectable, whereas "Alien Jigsaw" isn't? I'm addressing > abduction literature as a whole, whereas you're seemingly making > exclusions at the start. If it's good it is, and if it ain't, it > ain't, and you get to decide what's good and what isn't. As I stated in my earlier posting, the abduction literature, like the UFO literature of which it is a small part, is of widely and wildly varying quality. I was addressing your obsession with the worst of that literature. Certainly the worst of it deserves to be criticized, and indeed I've criticized it myself. I now urge you to try to address the issues raised in the best of it. > You know as well as I do that the conclusion of the Roper Report > as adopted and promoted by both Hopkin and Jacobs is absolutely, > totally and incontrovertibly flawed and unsupported by the > evidence. Yet who could dispute the fact that it is now part of > the abduction literature, never to be eradicated, and only > occasionally to be corrected? Obliquely -- as in "One in Forty" > -- it's even popped up as the title of a book. So? Pointed critiques also have been published in the abduction literature. > >Yes, abduction research is a messy business, full of complexity, > >ambiguity, and even absurdity, and there is a lot more intriguing > >possibility than hard evidence. Nothing in it, however, remotely > >justifies Dennis' wholesale dismissal. It is depressing to read > >something like this from someone I like and respect -- and who > >ought to know a whole hell of a lot better. Put down your > >DeLillo novel, my friend, and start paying attention. > First off, I don't think my comments were a wholesale dismissal, > my good friend. Perhaps you should go back and reread them. When > you say "nothing" here, however, you over-generalize. There are > plenty of prima facie "somethings" that would cause anyone to > wonder whether the experience is wholly and literally physical -- > or something else. The abduction literature, for example, is now > replete with claims of hybrid babies that involve "missing > fetuses." To my knowledge, not _one_ case of a missing fetus has > been medically documented. The literature is similarly replete > with claims of "implants." Again, to my knowledge, not _one_ > implant case has been medically documented to the extent of an > extraordinary or anomalous nature. Both are fundamental, > testable, hypotheses associated with the abduction literature > (and phenomenon) -- and both remain manifestly undemonstrated, > even though they should be considered the "easy" stuff. I have repeatedly made the point that no medically documented case of a missing fetus exists. It does not automatically follow, however, that no medically documented case is possible. We certainly ought to criticize proponents who make this extraordinary claim without documenting it properly, without mindlessly assuming that ends the question. Here we may be dealing with a failure of documentation, not of (potential) evidence. You're using the inadequacy of the investigation so far as an excuse not to conduct competent investigation in the future. David Pritchard has written interestingly on the complex problem of implants. Again, Dennis, all of this is in the abduction literature. Again, you seem strangely obsessed with the worst, the stuff that, on the surface anyway (beneath the surface, as Bullard shows, things get more complicated), is most easily shrugged or laughed off. In any conflict on the margins of science, I shouldn't have to tell you, it's the best evidence, not the worst, that is at issue. > Unless, of course, you want to admit Mssrs. Leir & Sims into the > literary fold. > Finally, there is the question of why abductions didn't turned up > in the medical and scientific literature _prior_ to the advent of > ufologists (or urologists, for all you spell-checker fans out > there). After all, if the phenomenon were as widespread (or only > half as widespread) as its advocates are always claiming, one > would expect that the occasional psychologist and psychiatrist > here and there (if not in the US, then in Europe) would have > encountered one, been perplexed by same, and written a case > history of it -- if only for the recognition of having been > first. Doubly true, given the tendency to claim that abductions > now stretch back over the decades and generations and typically > begin at an early age, ie, as children. By all lights, in other > words, the medical professionals should have discovered the > abduction phenomenon long before the ufologists did, arguably > before Arnold. But then that would have resulted in a whole other > literature altogether, wouldn't it? Again, as I observed earlier, maybe the right questions weren't being asked. For that matter, why aren't there psychiatric records, pre- Arnold, of non-abduction UFO sightings and close encounters? Or would you have us believe that the absence of accounts in the pre-1947 medical literature of other kinds of UFO encounters (including CE3s) amounts to evidence that nobody had UFO experiences -- then or now? C'mon, Dennis. Jerry Clark
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 11 New EM cases added to Project 1947 EM effects From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com> Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 02:03:49 -0700 Fwd Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 09:53:57 -0400 Subject: New EM cases added to Project 1947 EM effects The following new cases have been added to the Project 1947 EM Effects catalog (consisting of several hundred EM effect cases) at http://www.geocities.com/~mcashman/47emecat.htm Oct 29 1957; 2230; Selma, AL (?); An unusual amount of static on a portable radio was noticed by a pilot/Captain in the USAF (500 combat hours) when another person called his attention to an object outside which had been seen for 5 mins. Object was an ellipse estimated to be 150� long, 30� high at altitude of 5000�, 2 mi away (all estimates are probably only relatively reliable); object glowed yellow at center shading to orange-red at edge. Object wobbled through 30 deg deflection for 10 secs and then began to pulsate at 1-2 sec per pulse; object became completely orange during each pulse; this lasted for 20-30 secs. Then object moved, wobbled, stopped. A move/wobble/stop/pulsate cycle occurred 4-5 times. After 20 mins, during which the object moved 45 deg azimuth, it moved away, accelerating, until it was indistinguishable from the stars. It was noticed that a flourescent lamp flickered during (but not before or after) sighting; incandescent lights were not affected. Five or six radios were checked - all exhibited unusual static. Object was first observed near power lines.; ; Jan Aldrich 10/97; Loren Gross �UFOs: A history, 1957; 10/1 to 11/2� Oct 30, 1957; 9PM; Casper, WY; Two witnesses in car observed an object blocking the road which was described as a disk �big as a house� (15� high, 30� long), with two peaks. The object seemed made of aluminum halfway up its side but was also self-luminous, providing a dim glow. As they tried to turn around, the car (new 1957 model) engine began to act up, cutting out, and operating sluggishly. As they gained distance, the engine operated normally. At first sight, the object was 250� distant.; ; Jan Aldrich 10/97; Loren Gross �UFOs: A history, 1957; 10/1 to 11/2� Oct 30, 1957; 5:45PM; Carbonado, WA; �Sixteen year old twin brothers reported seeing a �big and blue� flying object that made a strange noise... The object knocked out TV and radio broadcasting and caused the house lights to dim and pulsate. �As the noise got louder the TV got dimmer,� said David Welcome... �Then the TV, radio and house lights went out.� The brothers said they saw the object pass over their home and then disappear behind a hill several thousand feet away. His parents and other brothers heard the noise and saw the light too, David said.; ; Jan Aldrich 10/97; Loren Gross �UFOs: A history, 1957; 10/1 to 11/2� Oct 31, 1957; 8PM; Lumberton, NC; Multiple witnesses observed a huge red-glowing object hovering above a road. Object was either 200� long or at 200� estimated altitude. Object �raised straight up and then flamed�, then shot up out of sight. When the object �flamed� Mrs. Stokes car stalled.; ; Jan Aldrich 10/97; Loren Gross �UFOs: A history, 1957; 10/1 to 11/2� Apr 4, 1966; ; Bourke�s Flat Vic. Australia; A disk shaped object rose from the ground as car neared, the headlights bent toward the object and back in a V-shape; colorful light beams were emitted by the object and a depression was later found on the ground; ; Jan Aldrich 10/97; MUFON Journal 192 p 14 (Richard Hall) originally 190-15 Oct 26,1977; ; near Abeline, TX; A bright red sphere hovered in front of a plane, departing in a rapid vertical climb after affecting navigation instruments and radio (static); the witnesses were the USAF T-38 crew and separate witnesses; ; Jan Aldrich 10/97; Richard Hall MUFON Journal 192, originally 181-6 Jan 21 1979; ; Kuwait; Object with dome landed in oil field. Automatic pumping equipment stopped , restarted when UFO left.; ; Jan Aldrich 10/97; Richard Hall MUFON Journal 192, originally 181-6 May 29, 1979; ; near Hailey, ID; 5 orange objects in a line which moved to the left of the plane - the plane was then affected - compass and ADF malfunctioned, engine ran rough; object performed vertical and other manuvers; ; Jan Aldrich 10/97; Richard Hall MUFON Journal 192 p14, originally 186-12 March 18, 1980; ; Texarkana, AR; Red and white lights hovered moved along ridge, approached neighbor�s house; there was a power failure before the UFO sighting; power returned after UFO departure.; ; Jan Aldrich 10/97; Richard Hall, MUFON Journal 192, p14, originally 172-6 Aug 21, 1980; ; East Texas; Circular object with rows of body lights see low above car after car affected; abduction case; ; Jan Aldrich 10/97; Richard Hall, MUFON Journal 192, p14, originally 167-3 Jan 14, 1981; ; Wadesboro, NC; 16 round objects with body lights manuvered overhead; witness noted TV effects at the same time; ; Jan Aldrich 10/97; Richard Hall, MUFON Journal 192, p14, originally 158-14 Feb 3, 1981; ; Reepsville, NC; A yellowish object dropped behind a hill and silhoetted trees while TV effects, and animal effects were noted; ; Jan Aldrich 10/97; Richard Hall, MUFON Journal 192, p14, originally 158-14 May 12, 1981; ; Clatskanie, OR; Orange flashing lights in a triangular formation followed a truck, a light was beamed on the witness; the witness did not notice the UFO until after the engine was affected.; ; Jan Aldrich 10/97; Richard Hall, MUFON Journal 192, p14, originally 167-15 June 12, 1981; ; Alice, TX; A bright, disc-shaped object with dark rings hovered over a tank truck (water); engine interference and radio effects noted; the water in the tank was found to have vaporized; ; Jan Aldrich 10/97; Richard Hall, MUFON Journal 192, p14, originally 167-8 Aug 8, 1981; ; near San Jose, CA; A teardrop shaped object with a spinning ring paced a plane off the left wing; after the object was first seen, equipment failures occurred, but these effects ended when the object departed upwards; the aircraft disappeared from the FAA radar during the encounter; ; Jan Aldrich 10/97; Richard Hall, MUFON Journal 192, p14, originally 168-4 Aug 30, 1981; ; El Cajon, CA; A disk-shaped object close ahead of the car illuminated the interior, witness digital watch malfunctioned after encounter; proto-abduction case; ; Jan Aldrich 10/97; Richard Hall, MUFON Journal 192, p14, originally 177-13 Nov 24, 1981; ; near Marshall, TX; A domed disk with body lights passed L to R just above trees, hovered; lights were beamed into the cab; the alternator and battery were found affected the next day.; ; Jan Aldrich 10/97; Richard Hall, MUFON Journal 192, p14, originally 170-6 Jan 31, 1982; ; Mechanicsville, VA; Ax-head shaped object with body lights at low altitude was seen at about the same time as a power failure; a loud roar was heard from the object; ; Jan Aldrich 10/97; Richard Hall, MUFON Journal 192, p14, originally 170-10 Feb 24, 1982; ; Fleetwood, PA; A bright round lighted object flew over a car, its passage accompanied by radio effects; ; Jan Aldrich 10/97; Richard Hall, MUFON Journal 192, p14, originally 173-13 Apr 10, 1983; ; Ross, OH; A large bright white light approached two separate cars; engine and lights affected, associated landing traces, power failure, and animal reactions; ; Jan Aldrich 10/97; Richard Hall, MUFON Journal 192, p14, originally 186-3 Oct 15, 1983; ; near Altoona, PA; A bright, silvery disc passed over a car from right to left after witness heard a loud humming; the car levitated, the lights flashed on and off, and there were physiological aftereffects; ; Jan Aldrich 10/97; Richard Hall, MUFON Journal 192, p14, originally 189-3 ------ Mark Cashman, creator of The Temporal Doorway at http://www.geocities.com/~mcashman - Original digital art, writing, and UFO research - Author of SF novels available at... http://www.infohaus.com/access/by-seller/The_Temporal_Doorway_Storefront ------
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 11 Re: Witness Anonymity From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 03:41:40 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 10:04:20 -0400 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity >From: "C Hathaway & J. Presson" <earthwrk@doitnow.com> >To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity >Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 22:41:28 -0700 >>From: HONEYBE100@aol.com [Linda Cortile] >>Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 04:25:33 -0400 (EDT) >>To: updates@globalserve.net >>Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity >>>From: XianneKei@aol.com (Rebecca Schatte) >>>Date: Tue. 7 Oct. 1997 17:32:10 -0400 (EDT) >>>To: updates@globalserve.net >>>Subject: Fwd: Witness Anonymity >>Hi Errol & everyone! >>This is my last post for a couple of weeks. {I can hear the >crowd >>cheering, Hooray!!} <G> >YES!!!! You take pleasure in some very odd things Julianne. I just thought it worthy of note to mention the 'negative' nature of this joy you exhibit. Kind of like the joy some children take in pulling the wings off of flies. What's even stranger is the sense of pride that you exude when you soil yourself publicly. <VBG> >This from the woman who filmed her minor child and gave the video >to Hopkins, who gave at least one copy out without Linda's approval??? I wish you'd read the posts that you're commenting on! Linda clearly stated in an earlier post that she consented to the video at the behest of Budd on the grounds that it would be an important research document. Although I am a firm believer that young and impressionable children should not be involved in any form of 'public' activity with regard to abduction, I can understand how Linda might have felt that she was contributing something important to the information pool (for future generations as she was told by Budd) Shoot when viewed from certain angles her action may even be considered courageous and noble. Although, as attested to by the outcome, one that was extremely ill advised. My perception of Linda is almost diametrically opposed to your own, but then I've known her for several years, we've broken bread together at my table, and have become close enough to share 'life stuff' that is usually reserved for trusted friends. I know what I'm about to say will never pass through that fortress of a wall that you've constructed,... but, - You're wrong about Linda - She's a very open, honest and direct person. Unlike an awful lot of other people I've met, with Linda WYSIWYG. >Right they will not trust Hopkins with their home made videos. You may want to direct more of your venom at Budd for having suggesting it, and worse yet giving a copy to someone else. (Who I believe was a high ranking MUFON official. I'd like him taken to task as well for this blatant disregard of Linda's child and any negative effect that this may have created for him) Linda is simply the wrong person to blame. You are attacking the victim not the perpetrators. Shame on you. And, do your homework! All I had to do was make a couple of well placed calls and I got the whole 'poop' on the situation. You're so busy feeding on the carrion of Linda's carcass, that you completely missed the trail left by the ones that did her in. Your posts sound so bitter and so personal that I wonder if it's worth talking to you at all. I hope some of this gets through so you can move on to more pressing issues. Budd made a request he should never have made,...( boner number one!) Linda (unfortunately, ill advisedly) complied. Budd leaked the tape,...( boner number two!) The guy he leaked it too, leaked it to the world! ( boner number three and the by far the worst of the lot. Although I won't excuse it, I can almost understand Budd's reasons for wanting such a document. What I can't understand is the - "third man" <G> - allowing it to be distributed by the media! Linda gets royally screwed. (By boner/bonehead number one, two, and three!) How do you figure that it's Linda that you should be ragging so. Your energies are so misdirected, and so obviously personal in nature that in essence you disqualify yourself from conducting any kind of a constructive discussion with Linda. Nothing fruitful will ever come of the tack you've taken with her. You've created one of the _nastiest_ threads on the list and that's no lie. You seem very smug and self-confident that you are "looking very good" here. Reality check Julianne, you're not! With every new 'poison pen letter' that you post you reveal a very nasty and condescending side of yourself. Those energies would be better spent hiding those traits, or dare I suggest it, mastering/overcoming them! >It is simple, you keep adding to and changing the story. You said >you had no idea how the tape got out there in the real world. Then >you say you made it gave it to Hopkins, and Hopkins gave out at >least one copy. >Seems very clear to me....and allot of other people There's only "one thing" that is "clear" Julianne, and oddly enough it has nothing to do with Linda! <G> If you can't conduct a civil dialog with Linda then _PLEASE_ step off and let someone with better interpersonal skills take over, I'm more than a little sick of sitting back quietly and watching you spray venom at Linda unchecked. Well,... Schachmat! John Velez, US Chess Federation Member since 1972 ;) John Velez jvif@spacelab.net Search for other documents from or mentioning: jvif | earthwrk |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 11 Help Needed From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 11:40:56 +0100 Fwd Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 10:15:13 -0400 Subject: Help Needed Hi Errol, Hi All I wonder if there is anyone in Texas who can help me please. I have had a woman email me from my webpage asling if I would like to investigate her case only I live in the UK and she lives in Dallas, Texas. Is there any of you here that live in that vicinity that could help me please? There are things in the universe billions of years older than our human race. They are vast, they are timeless. If they are aware of us at all we are of no more consequence to them as ants are to us. Sean Jones http://www.tedric.demon.co.uk/ http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Zone/1745/Index.htm
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 11 Press Release SSE/UFOs From: Patricia Mason <pmason@ee.net> Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 08:35:06 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 10:27:31 -0400 Subject: Press Release SSE/UFOs Sorry, I don't have a date for this. It was sent to me courtesy of Robert Collins <fidelio@ix.netcom.com>. ----- Press Release There may be more to UFO evidence than just verbal reports of what people see in the sky. Some UFO evidence may be worthy of scientific investigation. This is the tentative conclusion of a panel of scientists convened by the Society for Scientific Exploration to examine this matter. The panel of nine scientists met at a conference center near New York from September 29 to October 3. The panel reviewed evidence presented by eight UFO investigators, and will issue a report within a few months that summarizes the workshop activities and makes recommendations for further research. The panelists were drawn from France, Germany and the United States. The investigators came from France, Germany, Norway and the United States. The strong representation from France is due to the fact that France is the only country that has an unclassified on-going official investigation into UFO reports. This program, at CNES the French Space Agency in Toulouse, is headed by Jean-Jacques Velasco who was a participant in the workshop. Velasco described damage to soil and vegetation associated with a strange object that was seen to land at a farm in Trans-en-Provence in France, departing within about one minute. This evidence has been analyzed by scientists in France on behalf of CNES. Other evidence presented and critically reviewed at the workshop included photographs, video records, spectroscopic data, radar records, reports of malfunctions of automobile and aircraft equipment, material specimens, and radiation-type injuries to witnesses. "We made no effort to solve the UFO problem," said Von Eshleman of Stanford University and Thomas Holzer of the High Altitude Observatory, Co-Chairs of the Review Panel. "We had a far more modest goal. We were here only to inform ourselves about claimed evidence, and to try to decide if further scientific study of such evidence is likely to significantly advance the resolution of the UFO problem." The "UFO problem" was defined by Peter Sturrock of Stanford University, direct or of the workshop, as the problem of understanding the cause or causes of UFO reports. "Honest people report strange observations. Not all reports have obvious explanations. So what are the not-so-obvious explanations? I would like to see scientists play a more active role in helping to unravel this 50-year old mystery. I see the workshop as a small step in this direction." Other members of the panel were Randy Jokipii of the University of Arizona, Francois Louange from France, Jay Melosh of the University of Arizona, James Papike of the University of New Mexico, Guenther Reitz from Germany, Charles Tolbert from the University of Virginia, and Bernard Veyret from France. For further information, contact Peter Sturrock, Stanford University, 650-723-1438. SSE web site: http://www.jse.com/index.html [[[[[[[[[[[[ UNUSUAL RESEARCH ]]]]]]]]]]]]] http://users1.ee.net/pmason/index.html [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 11 Re: Witness Anonymity From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 04:27:08 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 10:13:23 -0400 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity >From: "C Hathaway & J. Presson" <earthwrk@doitnow.com> >To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity >Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 23:04:01 -0700 >>>From: Penrose Christopher <penrose@sfc.keio.ac.jp> >>>Date: Wed, 8 Oct 97 19:51:22 +0900 >>>To: updates@globalserve.net >>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity >>>>From: "Clark Hathaway" <earthwrk@doitnow.com> >>>>To: <updates@globalserve.net> >>>>Subject: Witness Anonymity >>>>Date: Tue, 7 Oct 1997 20:30:40 -0700 >>>>>From: Christopher Penrose <penrose@sfc.keio.ac.jp> >>>>>To: updates@globalserve.net >>>>>Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity >>>>>Date: Tue, 7 Oct 97 03:40:30 +0900 >>>>>"Re: Witness Anonymity" is starting to look like this week's "thread >>>>>of shame" on the Area 51 mailing list. UFOlogy is showing its best >>>>>face to the world. >>>>Well, wrong area. This is not the Area 51 Mailing List, nor is it the >>>>"Linda List" either. >>(massive snip) Hello (unfortunately) again Julianne, You spat, >We are lucky to see how dysfunctional Hopkins support groups are I >guess. As denial seems to be the BIG red flag of both you and >Linda. Jeez, we are feeling judgemental (again) today aren't we? Get up on the wrong side of the web again? <VBG> >We "crack pots" don't shine shoes. Weesss from the Noth. "Crackpot" is a term I've never used but I accept that you apply it to yourself! <G> >Sorry John, I don't drink and I do NOT have coffee with people who >make nasty below the belt pot shots at people I happen to like. Then what in Hell do you call what _you've_ been doing? In every case with Linda the flame started with someone else! From what I've seen she has reacted (granted poorly at times) to sucker punches initiated by others. >What I have noticed is you people have a real tight group and >there seems to be a "tude" that it is "you all against the world". >Sorry that is not the case. When I come in here and start reading >the childish name calling messages posted by Hopkins main >attraction, I say something. That is not what this List is for. >This is NOT IUFO, and Linda is not Rich Boylan. "You people!!!" Are _you_ for real? We're not "negroes" from the old south Julie. And please, don't ever tell me that some of your 'best friends' are abductees! (ROFLMAO) Your comment is a really good example of what I meant by people 'revealing' themselves. Again you demonstrate profound prejudice and ignorance by calling us a "tight knit group" We don't have a "group!" Budd assembles fifteen or twenty folks three or four times a year (different folks each time) there is always someone there from the 'counselling trade' and afterwards we split up and each one goes their own way. I only have two or maybe three people (that I've met through Budd) that I stay in touch with. Your rather 'racist' and extremely insulting insinuation about us shining Budds shoes is so low and off base that I'm not even going to dignify it with a response. I'll just let it stand as the pure stinking turd that it is. >As for the people on this List, why don't you take a poll and see >how many have left, or just stopped posting messages because they >are tired of putting up with Linda's childish rants. As well as >asking everyone how they like the continued rants of Linda. I'm 48 Julie and I've been out of high school for many long years. I don't conduct 'popularity polls' my name is Velez not Roper! _You_ take a poll and we'll all hold our breath waiting for the results, OK? >If anyone questions her about her abduction she blasts them. If >they say they do not believe it happened she flames the crap out >of them. Now if you all think you are going to play censorship on >everyone in this List, you are wrong. Because that is exactly what >you are trying to pull. And it just is not going to happen. What's really nice is that I've always been perfectly honest and candid in ALL of my posts and I am confident that the only one who thinks I'm trying to "pull something" is you! (And maybe your crony Mr Magoo!) <G> >As for Hopkins he does NOT do valid objective research PERIOD. Opinions are just that - opinions >Does that make him a bad person no. Did he give out the film Linda >is wasting bandwidth about YES. What this means is Hopkins is the >one responsible for Linda's son being in the public eye. So >instead of wasting bandwidth trying to take the focus OFF the >person who let the video out. Maybe she needs to go to Hopkins and >call him, a user and pest, or a crack pot. That way the rest of us >can get back to some meaningful discussion. Julie if you can call ANYTHING that has come out of _you_ on this thread "meaningful" my hat is off to you. <EG> John (nobodys fool) Velez John Velez jvif@spacelab.net Search for other documents from or mentioning: jvif | earthwrk |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 11 Skywatch: - Direct Cydonia/Giza Equation - From: "Michael Lawrence Morton" <wrinchique@hotmail.com> Date: Thu, 09 Oct 1997 17:54:41 PDT Fwd Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 10:54:00 -0400 Subject: Skywatch: - Direct Cydonia/Giza Equation - MORE INFORMATION RE: CYDONIA/GIZA DIRECT CONNECTIONS INVOLVING PRECISE LATITUDES AND LONGITUDES OF 5 STRUCTURES Here I will present detailed information on the precise latitudes and longitudes of two major 'structures' at Cydonia (on Mars) and the three main pyramids at Giza (Egypt), based on the calculations of Carl P. Munck, which will reveal an obvious and very direct relationship among these five structures. Hopefully, this will help everyone interested in this subject to better-understand this particular mathematically- based 'grid matrix', which was evidently designed in very deep antiquity ... and which has been re-discovered by Carl P. Munck. It is my hope that this will also help to create additional public interest in having the Mars Surveyor probe take comprehensive high-resolution photos of the entire Cydonia region on Mars. SOME BRIEF BACKGROUND: A number of years ago (early 1990s or so) Carl P. Munck became involved in looking at the detailed mapping of Cydonia done by professional cartographer Erol Torun, who on his own free time (he is employed at the Defense Mapping Agency) mapped Cydonia using NASA photos from the Mars Viking probe which were taken in 1976. Torun had been working with Richard C. Hoagland, and others, on an analysis of these NASA Viking photos of Cydonia ... which showed apparently anomalous 'artificial-looking' large 'objects' or 'structures'. Munck, based on what he was seeing on Erol Torun's map, proposed that an ancient Martian Prime Meridian had passed through the center of what became known as 'The D&M Pyramid'. The Earthly analogue to 'The D&M Pyramid', Munck proposed, was The Great Pyramid of Giza ....which, according to his findings from his own research ... once marked a Prime Meridian. MUNCK'S PRECISE LATITUDES AND LONGITUDES... FOR 5 STRUCTURES UNDER DISCUSSION: (Bear in mind that Torun used the DMS system (degrees-minutes-seconds) .... relative to the size of Mars.) Cydonia Face .... LONGITUDE; 6.890283706 Mars minutes E. of Prime Meridian as marked by D&M Pyramid .... LATITUDE; 41 (Mars degrees) x 11 (Mars minutes) x 10.03080581 (Mars seconds) = 4523.893421 North = (1440 x Pi) .... GRID POINT VALUE; 4523.893421 / 6.890283706 = 656.56127 = 36/Pi RADIANS The D&M Pyramid .... LONGITUDE; 360 (Mars degrees) .... LATITUDE; 40 (Mars degrees) x 52 (Mars minutes) x 4.773646584 (Mars seconds) = 9929.184894 North .... GRID POINT VALUE; 9929.184894 / 360 = 27.58106915 The Great Pyramid .... LONGITUDE; 360 (degrees) .... LATITUDE; 29 (degrees) x 58 (minutes) x 53.09041428 (seconds) = 89298.07682 North = 2880 x (Pi Cubed) .... GRID POINT VALUE; 89298.07682 / 360 = 248.0502134 = (2Pi) Cubed The Chephren Pyramid .... LONGITUDE; 11.77245771 seconds W. of Prime Meridian as marked by Great Pyramid .... LATITUDE; 29 (degrees) x 58 (minutes) x 40.34387712 (seconds) = 67858.40132 North = (21600 x Pi) (Note: polar circumference of Earth is 21600 nautical miles. There are 21600 arc- minutes on the circumference of any Circle or Sphere) .... GRID POINT VALUE; 67858.40132 / 11.77245771 = 5764.166072 The Mycerinus Pyramid .... LONGITUDE; 20.67085112 seconds W. of Prime Meridian as marked by Great Pyramid .... LATITUDE; 29 (degrees) x 58 (minutes) x 27.79807592 (seconds) = 46756.3637 North = 480 x (Pi Squared) x (Pi Squared) .... GRID POINT VALUE; 46756.3637 / 20.67085112 = 2261.946711 = 720 x Pi I have developed the following equation which shows a very direct, specific relationship among all five structures: Cydonia Face(656.56127) x D&M Pyramid(27.58106915) x 5760 x (Pi Cubed) = Great Pyramid(248.0502134) x Chephren Pyramid(5764.166072) x Mycerinus Pyramid(2261.946711) = 3234137343.552 Notice that the number 5760 refers to the year of the ancient Hebrew calendar which is the year 2000 A.D. on the 'modern' calendar. The 'year' 5760 is discussed at length in the book "The Bible Code" ... author Michael Drosnin, published by Simon and Schuster 1997. The number 5760 is an even multiple of 360 and (of course) of 720 .... and so, it is resonant with spherical and tetrahedral geometry. (There are 720 degrees of corner-angle on the surface of any tetrahedron). Pi is a universal constant of Circle/Sphere math ...being the ratio of Circumference divided by Diameter. Munck has shown convincingly that Pi is an integral part of this planetary grid matrix. CONCERNING 360 DEGREES ON A CIRCLE OR SPHERE: Recently, it was 'pointed-out' to me that 360 degrees on a Circle originated "with the measure of time units" .... as in certain celestial angles (in astronomy) being equal to certain numbers of minutes, hours, etc. But this simply transfers the 'mystery' of origin to the 'measure' of time! I say, again, that 360 is 6 x 60 and that the number 60 is very "geometric" .... it is evenly divisible by 2,3,4,5, 6,10,12,15,20,and 30. Zecharia Sitchin, in his work, devotes quite a lot of space to explaining the "sexigesimal" system .... a hybrid of base-ten and base-60 .... which was used prominently in the ancient Middle East. I think the designers of this planetary grid matrix had Nature in Mind, because 360 seems to be a 'natural' for the number of equal segments on a Circumference. The implications of this relationship among specific 'ancient structures' on two separate planets .... are enormous, to say the least. This also supports the work which has already been done by researchers such as Richard C. Hoagland, Erol Torun, Mark Carlotto, and others .... including Zecharia Sitchin. This directly supports the work of Carl P. Munck, of course. Again; I hope that this will help to bring-about more public interest in having the Mars Surveyor probe comprehensively photograph the entire Cydonia region on Mars. (c) copyright 1997 by Michael Lawrence Morton ---------------------------------------------- Skywatch International and this list service are not responsible for authenticity of posts. ---------------------------------------------- Skywatch International, Inc. skywatch@wic.net "Strange is sometimes stranger when it's true" For latest UFO and Paranormal information Site: http://www.wic.net/colonel/ufopage.htm ----------------------------------------------
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 11 Re: Stills of the Mexican Footage From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 12:24:30 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 12:41:50 -0400 Subject: Re: Stills of the Mexican Footage >Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 20:58:50 -0700 >From: jared@valuserve.com (Andromeda.net- Anderson, Jared) >To: Updates@globalserve.net >Subject: Stills of the Mexican Footage >Somebody put up some stills of the recent Mexican footage at this location: >http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Rampart/5430/ >After seeing this my first assumption was that if the video is authentic, >there >had to be a lot of witnesses to this event on the ground. >Jared. Hi Jared hi All, I want to thank the brave and anonymous cowboy that acquired and posted these single frame captures for us. This, is what it's all about, get it out to the people. Hey Magoo, after you spend the next three days counting the pixels in the UFO I'd be real interested in seeing how you are going to apply your 'glitch theory' to this puppy! <G> To quote a friend from the orient, this one looks like "paydirt!" the nice thing about having truth on your side is that vindication is always just a matter of time. He who guffaws last, guffaws best! John Velez, Ahhhh! Gettin there. John Velez jvif@spacelab.net
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 11 Re: Solved Abduction cases? From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net> Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 12:25:15 -0500 (CDT) Fwd Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 14:24:54 -0400 Subject: Re: Solved Abduction cases? >Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 21:47:34 -0700 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Skye Turell <turel33@west.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Solved Abduction cases? >>I like Eddie, too. The question here is what does "pretty hard" >>mean? If you want to see a blatant example of leading, you have >>only to re-read John Mack. At one point, one of his witnesses >>won't go up a ramp during a hypnosis session, so he tells her to >>imagine she's a remote-controlled video camera and go up the ramp >>-- which she promptly does. >Without actually going back and rereading Mack, I fail to see why >using the camera device, *once the hypnosis subject has already >identified the presence of a ramp*, constitutes leading. >Skye Turell <turel33@west.net> Because it compels the "witness" to "see" or report something that they may or may not have seen. Now, we will never know for sure, will we? Dennis
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 11 Re: Solved Abducction cases From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net> Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 12:25:22 -0500 (CDT) Fwd Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 14:29:09 -0400 Subject: Re: Solved Abducction cases >From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net> >To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity >Date: Wed, 8 Oct 1997 18:20:44 -0400 >I've been thinking more about abductions and alien technology. Greg: Be careful! That kinda stuff can get you in trouble! For instance, doesn't this discussion belong on that other thread, Solved Abduction Cases? >Back in the '50s, everybody confidently predicted that, long before >the 1990's, we'd all have atom-powered cars. Funny thing, Dennis...I >don't see you driving one. >Greg Sandow Greg, you need to get out of the city more. Next time you're out west, we'll go out to the ranch and wheel around in my old '57 Plutonium. I keep her in a lead-lined, underground garage there, for all the obvious reasons. It's a pity, too, because she's a real beaut. The dashboard cigarette lighter was a true innovation at the time, but the Pluto's best feature wasn't even mentioned in the user's manual: No headlights. Seems the damn chrome bumpers glow in the dark! >Well, surprise. Canned and frozen foods just don't taste too good. >Free-range chickens taste better than the kind produced in chicken >factories... At this point in time, the technology that results in the chicken, be it free-ranging or caged, is still the biological egg. It's what's done with the byproduct afterwards that determines it's final taste and texture. That's not a technology per se, so much as a process. >Suppose the aliens have learned these lessons on a larger scale. >Suppose they've found that test-tube humans don't have rich and >interesting souls. Suppose they've found that sperm and eggs, brought >together in a flying saucer lab, produce children that aren't good >for much. >Suppose, in other words, that they've learned to appreciate >free-range humans. (Or, in this case, I guess, free-range hybrids.) >So they breed us in as close to the old-fashioned way as they dare. Humans are already artifically inseminated and I don't see anyone arguing that they have less of a soul than people produced the good old fashioned (and fun) way. We even have methods whereby some slaughterhouses try not to instill panic in the cattle so that they won't inject certain hormones, adrenaline, etc., into the bloodstream and thereby taint the product. I supect -- although of course I can't prove it -- that highly advanced aliens would have come up with a less traumatic way of extracting sperm and ova if they were concerned about "soul" issues and "rich, interesting" hybrids. So I'm simply saying that the, ah, genetic acquisition techniques reported in the UFO literature seem somewhat crude and archaic in light of other advances ascribed to the aliens. You apparently are saying that I can't say that because, I think, it would be to limit their options. But to do that, you have to imagine a reason for them to behave the way they do, which is to psychoanalyze them and their motives. In a "perfect" world I suppose I wouldn't be allowed to make an observation about purported alien technology -- but neither would you be permitted a guess about alien psychology. In which case -- no UFO lists! So come on down, pod'nuh, and we'll take the ol' Pluto for a spin. Don't fergit yer lead underwear! SA Sasquatch
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 11 Kevin O'Keefe, Vision tv producer to discuss UFOs From: "Yvonne Hedenland" <VONNI_H@classic.msn.com> Date: Sat, 11 Oct 97 19:29:17 UT Fwd Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 18:00:07 -0400 Subject: Kevin O'Keefe, Vision tv producer to discuss UFOs On Tuesday, October 14th, at 6pm, PT, Project: watchfire and UFO Forum will host a live chat with Kevin O'Keefe,The producer for Canada's Vision tv Skylight program.The topics for discussion will be UFO's and Religion, and his recent interview with Dr. Barry Downing. The chat is accessible through http://watchfire.msn.com/watchfire.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 11 Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 21:07:44 +0100 Fwd Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 18:28:21 -0400 Subject: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills >Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 20:58:50 -0700 >From: jared@valuserve.com (Andromeda.net- Anderson, Jared) >To: Updates@globalserve.net >Subject: Stills of the Mexican Footage >Somebody put up some stills of the recent Mexican footage at this location: >http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Rampart/5430/ >After seeing this my first assumption was that if the video is authentic, there >had to be a lot of witnesses to this event on the ground. >Jared. Hi Jared, Hi Errol, Hi All I've had a good look at this pic and the first one has a nimbus, or glow around it, gravatic distortion? Second observation It looks awfly likeone of bob Lazars "sportster models". A picture of one can be found at http://www.ufomind.com/catalog/l/lp/ Now this either adds to Lazars credibility or "its one of our". This is only a quick observation I'm still open to more experienced opinions. There are things in the universe billions of years older than our human race. They are vast, they are timeless. If they are aware of us at all we are of no more consequence to them as ants are to us. Sean Jones http://www.tedric.demon.co.uk/ http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Zone/1745/index.htm
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 11 Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 18:29:00 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 18:29:00 -0400 Subject: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills >Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 21:07:44 +0100 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> >Subject: UFO UpDate: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills [snip] >I've had a good look at this pic and the first one has a nimbus, or glow >around it, gravatic distortion? [snip] Actually, _everything_ has the 'glow' around it/them. Video-artifacting
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 11 Re: Solved Abduction cases? From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com> Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 16:45:55 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 18:21:40 -0400 Subject: Re: Solved Abduction cases? >Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 12:25:15 -0500 (CDT) >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Solved Abduction cases? >>Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 21:47:34 -0700 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >>From: Skye Turell <turel33@west.net> >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Solved Abduction cases? >>>I like Eddie, too. The question here is what does "pretty hard" >>>mean? If you want to see a blatant example of leading, you have >>>only to re-read John Mack. At one point, one of his witnesses >>>won't go up a ramp during a hypnosis session, so he tells her to >>>imagine she's a remote-controlled video camera and go up the ramp >>>-- which she promptly does. >>Without actually going back and rereading Mack, I fail to see why >>using the camera device, *once the hypnosis subject has already >>identified the presence of a ramp*, constitutes leading. >>Skye Turell <turel33@west.net> >Because it compels the "witness" to "see" or report something that they may >or may not have seen. Now, we will never know for sure, will we? >Dennis Absolutely true, which is one of the reasons that hypnosis is such a controversial tool. But the technique employed by Dr. Mack in the above comment is a relatively common one. Terrible memories are often difficult to confront, and many people learn to push them into the deep recesses of their mind. When trying to help someone deal with an "issue" in their past, it is sometimes necessary to tap their imagination to help in digging for the truth. Keep in mind that Dr. Mack was approaching this from a therapudic perspective, rather than investigative. While in Roswell this past summer I spoke with a psychologist who had used hypnotism in the past and said it was both informative and unreliable. He had been involved in an accident investigation where a pedestrian had been struck and run over by a hit and run driver. After the car passed over her, she leaned up from the pavement to look at the car, but the authorities were not able to locate the car. The psycholgist was brought in and used hypnotism to help add details to her recollection of the vehicle and they managed to obtain a license plate number that proved to be the key. In the end they found the car with that license plate and tests showed that blood on the undercarriage of the car matched the victem. On the face of it, this would seem to validate hypnotism as a good tool, but it turns out that the license plate number was the only detail that she had gotten correct. Her description of the car's color, body style and manufacture were all completely wrong.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 11 Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 18:29:26 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 18:29:26 -0400 Subject: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 21:34:39 +0100 To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Stills of the Mexican Footage >Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 20:58:50 -0700 >From: jared@valuserve.com (Andromeda.net- Anderson, Jared) >To: Updates@globalserve.net >Subject: Stills of the Mexican Footage >Somebody put up some stills of the recent Mexican footage at this location: >http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Rampart/5430/ >After seeing this my first assumption was that if the video is authentic, there >had to be a lot of witnesses to this event on the ground. Hi All Another things has cropped up. In The News of the World(28/9/97) a UK paper they had a report in it about a sighting in Moscow (1990 October 13th). And in it they had this pic Content-Description: notw.jpg Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="notw.jpg" Content-MD5: 4P32OtchUSdRIkuph3Ineg==
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 11 Re: Stills of the Mexican Footage From: Ed Stewart <egs@netcom.com> Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 17:18:51 -0700 Fwd Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 21:21:17 -0400 Subject: Re: Stills of the Mexican Footage > Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 12:24:30 -0500 > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Stills of the Mexican Footage John Velez is quoted saying: > Hey Magoo, after you spend the next three days counting the pixels in the > UFO I'd be real interested in seeing how you are going to apply your > 'glitch theory' to this puppy! <G> First of all, I have been waiting since the 25th of September for you to either quote me where you claim I have stated or implied that your pixels over Queens were either a video artifact, or as you now state in your ufological wisdom "glitch theory". Back on 9/25 I also claimed that you would not be able to do so, since the above is a strawman argument that only has validity within your personal reality and is not based on anything that I have written to your video thread. Consequently, there is no "glitch theory" for me to try to apply to the Mexico video. The only question that still needs to be resolved is the one about your integrity and intellectual honesty. Either produce the actual quote and or quotes that would establish your strawman argument not to be a strawman argument, or admit that you are so emotionally wrapped-up into this subject that it has prevented you from being able to understand and properly read the King's English. Below is one of the challenges that I made for you to back-up your argument. I have been waiting since 9/25/97. Failure on your part to do that will expose you as intellectually dishonest and someone that has to revert to straw man arguments in order to try to muster gallery support for what was a totally inadequate jpeg image posted to the Internet in the first place. The following was a response of mine to Chris Penrose posted to this mailing list on 9/25/97: >>Chris Penrose >Ed Stewart > > Also, it would be more informative if > > we had access to an image that was not stored in the > > lossy JPEG format. Better still, to have several > > consecutive frames of video footage. > In today's day and age, nothing short of the original is necessary for > any accurate interpretation and analysis to be made. That is impossible > to have in this medium and that is why any such thread under the guise > of analysis is pure noise. This thread is not about analysing John > Velez's video since it can't be done over the internet, but it is all > about John Velez's personal interpretations about what he thinks the > video represents and in that process he has found time to slur other > types of research into the UFO problem and that is what brought into ************************* > this discussion, not his video. ****************************** > > It is true that this "object" may be a video artifact, ... > But, it is not a claim I have made in this thread. It originated as a > strawman argument directly from John Velez that felt mandated to > attribute to me. This thread is archived. I have asked John Velez to > quote me specifically where such a claim was ever made. He can't because > it is a fabrication on his part. And also from 9/25/97, here is my direct response to "Honest" John Velez also posted to this mailing list on the same date: > Ed Stewart >> John Velez > John Velez is overheard making the astonishing claim to Chris: > > I need the second (or better yet) third set of eyes on this > > stuff. In spite of Ed Stewarts insistance that these are video > > artifacts we know what we saw, and there _was something_ buzzing > > around up there that ain't one of ours. Unless the US Airforce > > is producing silent, silver, hamburger bun shaped crafts! <G> > What kind of strawman argument/claim is this? At no time in this thread > have I ever made anly claims as to what your blotches, or pixels were > --- much less ever insist that they were "video artifacts". Prove me > wrong and quote exactly from the thread where I ever made any such claim > regarding your pixels? You can't, but I doubt you will ever admit it for > after all that would be tantamount to admitting that you are so > self-centered and emotionally involved with the outcome of your pixels > that it has kept you from being able to read and properly comprehend the > simple King's Engliah! > The fact of the matter is that nothing can be conclusively said from the > analysis of your generational jpeg images and any such "analysis" is a > total waste of time. Especially since it should be quite apparent from > anyone looking at the jpeg image that whatever was captured will never > be able to be identified from the original point, or blotch, or pixels > on the jpeg image. And for any chance of a real analysis that may bring > some fruitful information about the image would of necessity have to > have access to the original video. That is an impossibility in this > medium which relegates all discussions related to the analysis of these > jpeg, or BMP, or tiff, or whatever to simple posturing on your part for > at best all that can be portrayed on this medium are generational > copies. > Also, it is quite apparent to me now that John Velez missed the entire > slant and direction of my initial cynicism. It was not so much directed > at his pixels, but at his remarks categorizing disciplined historical > research as something totally useless and not needed. A remark that he > felt compelled to make even though it had nothing to do with the > original thread. > So let's add strawman arguments to his wantom use of ad hominem slurs as > part of John Velez's repertoire in his bag of tools to be employed by > the new ufology in leading people to the "truth". > Are your pixels that weak that apparently you need to distract attention > from your "evidence" by employing ad hominems and strawman arguments > instead? > Ed Stewart Back to the present message, "Honest" John Velez says: > To quote a friend from the orient, this one looks like "paydirt!" the nice > thing about having truth on your side is that vindication is always just a > matter of time. He who guffaws last, guffaws best! > John Velez, Ahhhh! Gettin there. Strawmen arguments are not "having truth on your side". It is a logical fallacy employed by people who at worst are intellectually dishonest, or at best don't have the necessary critical thinking skills to mount logical arguments against criticism. Ed Stewart ps. Mr. Magoo is of the high hopes in lieu of compelling evidence that you will have the intellectual integrity to fess up to the fact that your strawman argument direct at Ed Stewart was a simple mistake of attribution on your part and not related to anything that Ed Stewart has posted on your Queen's video thread. Ed Stewart has beat Mr. Magoo a dollar that you don't have the intellectual integrity to make such a public statement. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Ed Stewart egs@netcom.com | So Man, who here seems principal alone, There is Something | Perhaps acts second to some sphere unknown. Going On! ,>'?'<, | Touches some wheel, or verges to some goal, Salvador Freixedo ( O O ) | 'Tis but a part we see, and not a whole. --------------ooOO-(_)-OOoo------- Alexander Pope, Essay on Man -------
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 12 No Absolutes? From: ujack@pop3.scrapcity.cnchost.com [Mark Medford] Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 00:05:39 +0000 Fwd Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 10:21:53 -0400 Subject: No Absolutes? Dear Friends, One of the goals in UFO and abduction investigation is to define the criteria by which we determine witness credibility.This is a tough one - especially in a field of study so full of variables. While there are many constants, event-traits that appear to repeat from encounter to encounter, it seems that there are nearly as many elements that don't. I'm curious as to whether or not anyone has come up with "formula" for this. It would be interesting to see what percentage of the experience is repeatable and what is not. It's the events that fall outside of the standard, those requiring more individual interpretation, that cause the most debate. These elements force us to examine more closely the emotional, religious, etc. make up of the individual witness. Still, finding a way to see the event beyond these personal "filters" may be close to impossible. When all is said and done, until such time as an event is mirrored by another experiencer, it all comes back to interpretation. Its a bit like dream analysis! How, then, do we measure the credibility of the event? Might we say, for instance: if an encounter fits 60% (or whatever) of the established profile, it's "credible" - allowing room for those aspects that are - understandably - subject to one's unique perspective. I think it's important to keep in mind the ambiguous nature of the phenomenon. Even with the common cold, six different people can suffer (or not) in a hundred different ways! They still have a cold... Can there be compassion, along with a healthy dose of skepticism in our aggressive pursuit of the truth? Yes, in the tone of our debate. I accept that there are those whose sole intent is to perpetrate a hoax - for fame, money, ego, etc. When this becomes apparent, based on hard evidence, we need to be critical, they should be made to answer for their actions. All I'm saying is this - let's be as sure as possible about an individuals motives before assuming deception. I just don't want to see us jump on people who are honestly trying to share their experiences - no matter how odd or how far outside of our own acceptance criteria their "facts" fall. No matter how much we might like to push it into the background (because traditional science has dictated as much), perception is a very big part of reporting. Observation is the act of seeing -perception is how we understand what we see. Best, Mark
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 12 New and Wondering From: ujack@pop3.scrapcity.cnchost.com [Mark Medford] Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 00:05:39 +0000 Fwd Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 10:22:51 -0400 Subject: New and Wondering Dear Friends, I'm new to this list and wondering about all of the negative posts. Would someone be willing to give me a nutshell version of what the raging battle is about? It seems, to my newbie eyes, primarily focused on a conflict of personalities. I'm sure the current fuss has it's root in some specific question. Just curious.... Thanks, Mark
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 12 Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills From: Michael Christol <mchristo@mindspring.com> Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 00:25:02 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 10:27:08 -0400 Subject: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills >Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 21:34:39 +0100 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Stills of the Mexican Footage >>Somebody put up some stills of the recent Mexican footage at this location: >>http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Rampart/5430/ >>After seeing this my first assumption was that if the video is >>authentic, there had to be a lot of witnesses to this event on >>the ground. >Hi All >Another things has cropped up. >In The News of the World(28/9/97) a UK paper they had a report in it >about a sighting in Moscow (1990 October 13th). And in it they had this >pic >Content-Description: notw.jpg >Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="notw.jpg" >Content-MD5: 4P32OtchUSdRIkuph3Ineg== >Content-Type: image/jpeg >Pretty damn similer aint it, both the background and the UFO. I dont' think the Russian photo looks anything like the Mexico City pic. The Russian UFO looks more like a "hubcap" tossed in the air, photographed and superimposed over a picture or drawing of an apartment building. Just my opinion.... REgards, Mike
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 12 Re: Stills of the Mexican Footage From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 02:36:21 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 10:33:14 -0400 Subject: Re: Stills of the Mexican Footage >Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 17:18:51 -0700 >From: Ed Stewart <egs@netcom.com> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Stills of the Mexican Footage >> Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 12:24:30 -0500 >> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >> From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Stills of the Mexican Footage >John Velez is quoted saying: >> Hey Magoo, after you spend the next three days counting the pixels in the >> UFO I'd be real interested in seeing how you are going to apply your >> 'glitch theory' to this puppy! <G> >First of all, I have been waiting since the 25th of September for you to >either quote me where you claim I have stated or implied that your >pixels over Queens were either a video artifact, or as you now state in >your ufological wisdom "glitch theory". Hi Ed hi All, Keep waitin for it Ed. One day you'll 'get it'! <VBG> Juan Velez, Strawman John Velez jvif@spacelab.net
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 12 Re: The sky over Roswell From: Ted Viens <drtedv@smart1.net> Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 22:27:07 -0700 Fwd Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 11:10:01 -0400 Subject: Re: The sky over Roswell > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com> > Subject: re: UFO UpDate: Re: The sky over Roswell > Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 00:53:28 -0700 > > From: Ted Viens <drtedv@smart1.net> > >It is not a question of familiarity with the actual characteristics of > >secret military aircraft. First comes the observation. From the observation > >comes a range of possible flight characteristics. These characteristics > >determine the level of response. They can range from known flight > >characteristics through just past the rumored edge of secret technology > >to "Good Golly Miss Molly!" I am suggesting that an NL that goes from > >zenith to horizon in a minute or less is in the "Miss Molly" range. > Ted - > In the interest of providing some material for discussion, I ran > your estimate of 90 degrees of travel in 1 min (1.5 degrees / > sec) through my distance / speed spreadsheet for a range of > altitudes ranging from 1,300 - 21,000 feet. I used the > intermediate angle of 45 degrees elevation to calculate the > resulting speeds. > I also calculated the speed at 100 and 200 miles. > At 1300' = 33.33 mph > At 2600' = 66.66 mph > At 5280' = 133.32 mph > At 10,560' = 266.63 mph > At 15,840' = 399.95 mph > At 21,120' = 533.27 mph > At 100 mi =13,331.69 mph or 21,455.33 km/h > At 200 mi = 26,663.39 mph or 42,910.65 km/h > Most speeds at aircraft altitudes are not abnormal for aircraft > within those ranges. The rate at 100 mi is also not abnormal, > since the space shuttle travels at 28,160 km/h at between 100-600 > mi altitudes. > The shuttle info is from > http://tommy.jsc.nasa.gov/~woodfill/SPACEED/SEHHTML/technology.html > The following are the equations I used (please feel free to > indicate if you think there are any errors): > Sight Distance = Ground Distance /cos(Elevation*(@PI/180)) > Altitude = tan(Elevation*(@PI/180))*Ground Distance > Actual Size =(tan(Angular Size*(@PI/180))*Sight Distance)*5280 > Estimated Speed = (tan(Angular Speed Per Second *(@PI/180))* > Sight Distance)*3600 > :Ground Distance In Feet = Ground Distance *5280 > :Sight Distance In Feet = Sight Distance *5280 > :Altitude In Feet = Altitude *5280 > 'Estimated Speed km/h' = Estimated Speed *1.6093472 > Because the base and elevation side of the triangle are of the same > length, the altitude is the same as the ground distance. Very good work, Mark. A few weeks ago I prepared a spreadsheet of the very same material as a tool for skywatchers but I have been too lazy to type it in yet. Let us examine two different cases of a ninety degree overhead pass. One will be a pass from 45 degrees before zenith to 45 degrees past zenith just as you have calculated above. The other will be a pass from zenith to horizon which more represents the sighting that I had. We will arbitrarily use a constant 100 mile altitude for the bogey. First, passing from 45 degrees before zenith to 45 degrees past zenith. The object passes just a hair over 200 miles (some 1.409 degrees) which in a minutes time would be some 12,000 miles an hour. Second, passing from zenith to horizon. From observer to horizon intercept to earth center makes a nice right triangle. Arccos (radius of earth/ radius to flight path) equals some 12.734 degrees. This indicates some 903.63 miles of travel in a minute or some 54,217.8 miles an hour. This mostly illustrates how treacherous trig can be if you don't define the situation well.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 12 Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Still From: "WHITE" <mjawhite@digitaldune.net> [John White] Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 05:42:34 -0700 Fwd Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 11:14:01 -0400 Subject: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Still >Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 21:34:39 +0100 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Stills of the Mexican Footage snip Sean, noting the Mexico City Stills posted at >>http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Rampart/5430/ by Jared, shares some Moscow footage for comparison: >In The News of the World(28/9/97) a UK paper they had a report in it >about a sighting in Moscow (1990 October 13th). And in it they had this >pic >Content-Description: notw.jpg >Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="notw.jpg" >Content-MD5: 4P32OtchUSdRIkuph3Ineg== >Content-Type: image/jpeg >Pretty damn similer aint it, both the background and the UFO. >Scan and info curtesy of Jerry Andeson UFOMEK ><http://www.tedric.demon.co.uk/ufomek.htm> snip Demon Sean <g>: There is a similarity in the architecture of the buildings. The pufos (putative ufos) look to be even more similar: I printed out both pics and held them up to the light, alternately superimposing one on the other, and as I near as I can tell, the pufos have the same shape and dimensions, but are oriented differently to their respective buildings. If I had better pics, (or thinner paper in my printer), superimposing the buildings on one another would be easier, but, some of the windows seem to me to match in size and spacing between the two buildings. So, using the limited technology at my disposal, (analogous to photo comparison work of astronomer folks) it would seem, Sean, that the points of comparison have a dimensional similarity, which, if calibrated by finer equipment than John's eyes, a 60 watt bulb, and cheapo printer paper, might show that there is an amazing coincidence: the photographers in Mexico City and in Moscow were located at about the same distance and orientation relative to the objects and the buildings. (None of which says much about the substantive nature of the pufos and buildings involved: they either is or ain't from the same photo shoot.) There's something really neat about coincidence: it can frame great truth and untrue great frames. The Phoenix folks will be able to put paid to it. Thanks for the Moscow pic, John White mjawhite@digitaldune.net
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 12 Alfred's Odd Ode #189 From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com> Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 07:59:12 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 11:15:31 -0400 Subject: Alfred's Odd Ode #189 Apology to MW #189 (For October 12, 1997) It's a task to look up into bottomless skies. It's work on many levels most revile and despise. It's toil to stand with a crick in your neck, And it's a job to be there watching as some laugh behind your back. Regret is a bitch that can hide in the wings. She has bells on her toes, and she carries a sting. She appears near the end of your time on the stage; Despair is much more possible, then, inured against your rage. Will I regret the time I've spent=85peering into space? Will I despair the wasted moments in a mirror of my face? Will I sadly shake my head if I find I've been un-cool, And the evidence is in, that I was wrong, unfit, a fool? I would worry more, but history, as taught to me's distorted. From reconstruction to Viet Nam, an errant's tool -- contorted. What went before? A fantasy that supports a white man's dream, And what comes after is up to you -- to just how loud you scream! What am I to think, when at the bottom of the food chain. What am I to think, as I resist my culture's brain drain. What am I to think, when breathing air so thick with lies, That I shan't 'see' the inexplicable when I look into our skies. It's the learning to think critically -- that's the real bottom line. When you "lays your money down" -- when you read the print that's fine. When you string it all together and the pieces rather fit=85 Well -- you've got yourself a model, and you see this might be it! That why it chaps my ass, and steams me good -- this concept "Founding Father"! Or if you believe you're standing on those "giant's shoulder's", bother! Doesn't Mr. Bennett know=85 or even read his books; That these 'god-like' MEN were psychopathic, malfeasance working crooks! These were men who beat their wives, whored around=85made dishonest dollars. Sure enough I broad brush, but the truth precludes your collar. Paul Revere never made his ride, if he DID he was a coward! Our presidents were Klansmen in traditions of Moe Howard. Don't sanctify, or deify, or sanitize it, Bennett! You make life tragicomic as directed by Mack Sennett. It's you that keeps our eyes from looking where they'd get their fill. It's you that=92s keeps us in our caves in darkness we don't will. So it's hard to look up into seasonal skies. The deck has been stacked by elite who decry. Ridicule is painful, credibility is stressed, And you find that it's just asking questions that makes a dangerous pest. I'll still look up, my neck in pain, what else am I to do? There are answers in that vastness that belie what's been construed. It's the price of critical thinking to know the lies been told, And when history is suspect, then the liars get more bold. It's the church, unlawful government, with Law enforcement mal-entrusted, And where media is controlled by some, with lawyers -- we're encrusted. We're at, and always have been, at the not so tender mercies Of hyper rich, affecting weave in ways beyond the cursory. It's arbitrary and repressive how our culture eats its young. And they say they're open minded, as they deride, ignore, and stun. And I scoff their claim that they have held the higher moral ground; If they don't spawn the new idea it's attacked to bring it down. Not to test, or exercise, or to get to murky bottoms! But for conflict and denial, for blind eyes, and ear cotton! Most don't even know they're blinded to that starry, starry night! They've lost their will in awful ignorance to a landed upper right! Lehmberg@snowhill.com Our founding fathers would most likely be in jail today, put there for egregious crimes against humanity, or strung up as radical by the bunch providing them the most hero worship today=85yeah=85 a broad brush -- but enough paint sticks to illustrate the point. I've seen 'em in the morning=85 seen 'em in the evening=85 seen 'em at supper time! The skies are filled with strangeness, and it freshens up my rhyme. <g> -- Explore the Alien View? http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/arecibo/46/ "I cleave the heavens, and soar to the infinite. What others see from afar, I leave far behind me." - Giordano Bruno, while burning at the fundamentalist's stake. He ignored their laughter until it became fear and rage, and they killed him for it. =B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1= =B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1= =B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1 Government or Social Harassment REPORT - Presently, "ZERO" Personal HARASSMENT; however, the harassment index is infinite for each of us. Consider the "founding father" myth.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 12 Re: Help Needed From: LMitch7056@aol.com Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 02:47:57 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 11:40:50 -0400 Subject: Re: Help Needed >Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 11:40:56 +0100 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> >Subject: Help Needed >Hi Errol, Hi All >I wonder if there is anyone in Texas who can help me please. I have had >a woman email me from my webpage asling if I would like to investigate >her case only I live in the UK and she lives in Dallas, Texas. >Is there any of you here that live in that vicinity that could help me >please? Would love to investigate her case. Larry Mitchell State Section Director Mufon Field Investigator Texas LMitch7056@aol.com 281-383-3986
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 12 Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills From: Orca <pwedel@neptune.on.ca> [Paul Wedel] Date: Sat, 11 Oct 97 23:27:29 -0000 Fwd Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 11:43:45 -0400 Subject: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills >Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills >Sent: 10/11/97 10:27 PM >Received: 10/11/97 10:53 PM >From: UFO UpDates - Toronto, updates@globalserve.net >To: Errol Bruce-Knapp, updates@globalserve.net >Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 21:07:44 +0100 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> >Subject: UFO UpDate: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills >>Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 20:58:50 -0700 >>From: jared@valuserve.com (Andromeda.net- Anderson, Jared) >>To: Updates@globalserve.net >>Subject: Stills of the Mexican Footage >>Somebody put up some stills of the recent Mexican footage at this location: >>http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Rampart/5430/ >>After seeing this my first assumption was that if the video is authentic, >>there had to be a lot of witnesses to this event on the ground. >>Jared. >Hi Jared, Hi Errol, Hi All >I've had a good look at this pic and the first one has a nimbus, or glow >around it, gravatic distortion? >Second observation >It looks awfly likeone of bob Lazars "sportster models". >A picture of one can be found at >http://www.ufomind.com/catalog/l/lp/ >Now this either adds to Lazars credibility or "its one of our". >This is only a quick observation I'm still open to more experienced >opinions. Greetings all, I have only seen (2) of the captured stills from this video in black and white. I do not know much about the video and am wondering if it is in color, and if anyone has seen it, could they please tell me if there is any color(s) change on the underside of the craft. If _that_ is the case, what type of color(s) are visible, and how do they change (if they do at all). Many thanks, Paul. "Must get moose and squirrel!" ..Boris Badenov
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 12 Re: PUFORI UFO News Issue From: "Anthony Chippendale" <ufos@chipp.clara.net> Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 10:02:48 +0000 Fwd Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 14:58:57 -0400 Subject: Re: PUFORI UFO News Issue First, apologises if you have received issue 2 of PUFORI UFO News as a file attachment. It has gotten too big to send out with email. To see Issue 2 please go to http://www.chipp.clara.net/news2.html Thanks, Anthony Chippendale, Editor.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 12 Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@ucs.orst.edu> Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 09:34:36 -0700 (PDT) Fwd Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 17:47:28 -0400 Subject: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills > From: "WHITE" <mjawhite@digitaldune.net> [John White] > To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net> > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills > Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 05:42:34 -0700 > >Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 21:34:39 +0100 > >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > >From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> > >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Stills of the Mexican Footage > Sean, noting the Mexico City Stills posted at > >>http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Rampart/5430/ > by Jared, shares some Moscow footage for comparison: > >Pretty damn similer aint it, both the background and the UFO. > Demon Sean <g>: > There is a similarity in the architecture of the buildings. The > pufos (putative ufos) look to be even more similar: > [...] > John White mjawhite@digitaldune.net It's about time that someone in Mexico City identify the several buildings shown in those saucer photos, then estimate which other building the video was taken from, go there, take his own photos, and post them on the web. Jim Deardorff Search for other documents from or mentioning: deardorj | mjawhite |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 12 UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 2, Number 39 From: Masinaigan@aol.com Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 13:32:57 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 18:33:36 -0400 Subject: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 2, Number 39 UFO ROUNDUP Volume 2, Number 39 October 12, 1997 Editor: Joseph Trainor ANOMALOUS TRACKS PHOTOGRAPHED ON MARS On Monday, October 6, 1997, a startling photograph from the Mars Global Surveyor was posted on the Astronomy Picture of the Day website. The photo, taken by Surveyor from an altitude of 250 miles (400 kilometers), shows a subsided rift valley ten miles (16 kilometers) long in the Vallis Nigral region of Mars. The rift valley is similar to the one in East Africa here on Earth. The rimrock on the valley's rim shows clear evidence of water erosion. Towards the photo's center, just above a square depression in valley floor, is a line of uniform tracks extending for an estimated distance of just over two miles (3.7 kilometers). One observer estimated that, based on the formula that one Surveyor pixel equals 30 feet (9 meters), the tracks are 415 feet (126 meters) wide. This suggests that the tracks were made by an immense vehicle, perhaps similar to the one used by the Jawas in the movie "Star Wars." The age of the tracks is unknown. However, it appears that they are recent and appeared after the great dust storm on Mars back in the early 1970s. The photo can be found at the following URL-- http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap971006.html (Many thanks to Twitch and Chris for pointing out this Surveyor photo.) EARTH CONTROLLERS LOSE CONTACT WITH PATHFINDER On Thursday, October 9, 1997, the mainstream news media reported, "Pathfinder, which landed in July, has become mired in technical problems. Communications from its main transmitter resumed Tuesday (October 7) for 15 minutes after having been shut down since Sept. 27. Yesterday (Wednesday, October 8) controllers tried to get some new engineering data from the spacecraft but were not able to get a signal from the transmitter." (See the Providence, R.I. Journal-Bulletin for Thursday, October 9, 1997, page 4) Pathfinder's last successful transmission was on Saturday, September 27, at 3:23 a.m. The next scheduled transmission was to take place that day at 11:15 p.m. but "no signal was received." On Monday, September 29, at 1:30 a.m., the Jet Propulsion Lab "ordered Pathfinder to send a carrier signal to Earth on the low-gain and high-gain antennae. Neither signal was received." On Tuesday, September 30, they tried again with the low-gain antenna. "The attempt was done at Mars noon in order to ensure maximum power on the solar arrays in order to power the S/C transmitter. No signal was received." When they tried on Wednesday, October 1, there was no signal at first, "but at approximately 4:23 p.m. a signal was received that lasted for about 20 minutes." On Thursday, October 2, the JPL team attempted to retrieve digital data from Pathfinder's auxiliary transmitter. "The signal turned off at approximately 11:30 (a.m.) solar time." The team ordered Pathfinder to divert some data to conserve battery power. "It is not clear whether these commands were received." On Friday, October 3, the team again tried to pass digital data through the auxiliary transmitter. No data was received. Commands were then sent "to put Pathfinder in the safest state possible for a non- operational battery. There was no signal indicating that these commands executed on the S/C." (Many thanks to Erik Beckjord and Patrick Bailey for the day-by-day narrative.) (Editor's Comment: The battery's insulation could have been torn loose or otherwise damaged during Pathfinder's rough landing. Martian cold may be draining the battery faster than the solar arrays can replenish it. Either that, or something is jamming JPL's radio signals to the spacecraft.) PACACCINI DISPUTES SOUSA'S TALE OF SAUCER CRASH Brazilian ufologist Vitorio Pacaccini, author of the book INCIDENTE EM VARGINHA, says he and fellow ufologists Claudeir Covo and A.J. Gevaerd have their doubts about Carlos Sousa's story of a UFO crash at Tres Coracoes on January 13, 1996. Sousa claims that he was driving on the Fernando Dias Highway from Sao Paulo to Belo Horizonte at 8 a.m. that Saturday morning when he saw a damaged UFO fly slowly overhead. He further claims he followed the object to a farm field 8 kilometers (5 miles) north of Tres Coracoes, a city 25 kilometers (15 miles) south of Varginha, Minas Gerais, where he saw Brazilian Army troops collecting crash debris. "I know the highway well," Pacaccini said, "Like the palm of my hand. I have been riding on the highway for over 15 years, going to southern Minas Gerais to visit my mother. She lives in Tres Coracoes." Pacaccini pointed out that the Fernao Dias Highway is one of the most heavily traveled thoroughfares in Brazil, with constant 24-hour traffic between Sao Paulo (population 8 million) and Belo Horizonte (population 2 million). He said it's unlikely that the highway would be deserted on Saturday morning at 8 a.m. As he followed the UFO, Pacaccini added, Carlos Sousa "passed by three big gas stations which are also bus stops" and right through the industrial district of Tres Coracoes. "Why didn't he stop and call somebody to see the UFO, too? Were all the places empty, deserted, nobody there? That's impossible!" Pacaccini added that he personally visited the alleged crash site, "a big open pasture with only one big tree in the middle." From there, one can see three other farms, one of which belongs to a family friend of Pacaccini's, Senhor Laercio. Pacaccini said Sousa claims to have seen "two army trucks, one army ambulance, one army helicopter, about 30 soldiers and five or six civilian cars," noting that the pasture is only 200 meters (660 feet) from the farmhouse of the owner, Senhor Maiolini. "How come nobody heard or saw anything on Mr. Maoilini's farm, Mr. Laercio's farm or on the other two farms nearby?" he asked. "On a Saturday morning, they were all working, taking care of many farm activities such as miling the cows, feeding the cattle, cleaning the stables etc. I've been there, talking to every person on the farm. They were all working that day, and they didn't hear or see anything. Especially the helicopter, which is a noisy thing." Pacaccini noted that "Mr. Carlos Sousa only appeared in September 1996--after we had released much information about our research to the press," and alleged that Sousa used this information "to fit himself into the (Varginha) story." (Muito obrigado a Vitorio Pacaccini por eso caso.) IRISH UFOLOGIST SAYS SAUCER CRASHED NEAR BOYLE Irish ufologist Rory Thornton claims that a saucer from a planet called Sunas crash-landed in a wooded area north of Boyle, near the border of County Sligo and County Roscommon, in Eire back in May 1996. According to Thornton, a self-described ufologist and clairvoyant who operates a health clinic in Newcastle, County Galway, "the full story has been kept under wraps" by the government in Dublin. The UFO "got into trouble and crash-landed in a woodland" just outside of Boyle, approximately 192 kilometers (120 miles) northwest of Dublin, Thornton told the newspaper Irish Sunday Mirror. "It clipped the tops off the trees as it drifted down to earth. The whole area was cordoned off by authorities, and American Jeeps (military vehicles-- J.T.) were still spotted there six months after the crash." Thornton "alleges that the local Gardai (Irish police--J.T.) were told by Dublin government officials to 'keep their nose out of it.'" An unidentified Garda in Boyle told the Irish Sunday Mirror that "there had been reports of a landing there last year. They checked it out but denied that any landing had taken place." "The whole town of Boyle saw something going over in the sky," Thornton said. "It happened in a lonely place. The aliens misjudged the landing and hit the tops of the trees before splashing down in the lake. The area was blocked off for six months. Boyle was full of Americans, but they wouldn't say what they were doing there. But there were at least six American Jeeps in the area. Nobody was allowed in or out, and there was a guard at the cabin for 24 hours each day." Thornton's story was backed up by at least one resident of Boyle. "There has been a lot of activity in the forest," said Padraich O'Hearne. "The authorities want to keep it quiet, but there has been so much activity that it is obvious that something big happened there that night. I didn't see the spacecraft, but folks around Boyle are full of talk about ET and his friends landing." Daev Walsh, publisher of the online newsletter Nua Blather, however, doubts that the Boyle incident was a saucer crash. He said it seems "to be more of a NATO cockup that anything 'extraterrestrial.'" (See the Irish Sunday Mirror for September 21, 1997, page 4. Many thanks to Daev Walsh for forwarding this story.) MEXICAN TV AIRS VIDEO OF HOVERING SAUCER On Sunday, September 28, and on the following Sunday, October 5, 1997, from 7 to 8 p.m., Mexican TV anchorman Jaime Maussan aired videotape of a hovering UFO on his show "Tercera Milenio" (Third Millenium). The videotape was shot on August 6 in a residential neighborhood of Mexico City. Twenty- five seconds of video shows the clearly-detailed UFO in a cloudy, smoggy sky. The UFO is gray and metallic and has no blinking lights. However, it does have a strange rotating motion. The scene shows the object motionless in the sky. Then it moves from left to right on the TV screen, hovers for many seconds, then zips away at a high rate of speed. For a look at stills from the Mexican UFO video, go to this URL--http://www.digiserve.com/ufoinfo/news/ mexico.html "Tercera Milenio" has a website at this URL-- http://www.televisa.com/3milenio/index.htm (Muchas gracias a Fernando Camacho para esas informaciones.) UFOs SIGHTED OVER SICILY AND SARDINIA On Sunday, September 14, 1997, three flights of three UFOs each passed over Italy's neighboring island of Sardinia. The UFOs flew slowly over the island's west coast and were seen in the seaport cities of Sassari, Oristano and Cagliari at 8:30 p.m. In Cagliaritano, a few minutes after the first flyover, people reported seeing "passing in the same direction about 15 lights of various colors and intensities." The case is being investigated by ufologist Antonio Cuccu of the Centro Italiano di Studi Ufologici (CISU). A week later, on Sunday, September 28, 1997, at 3 p.m., ten people having dinner at the Ristorante Mezzoiuso (cafe) in Palermo, capital and seaport city on the north shore of Sicily "spotted a black rectangular object that was emitting a strong light from its stern." The UFO descended suddenly, seeming to come within a few dozen feet of the Palermo/Agrigento highway "and then zipped away at an insane velocity towards the mountain, leaving behind a luminous trail." This case is being investigated by ufologist Antonio Blanco of CISU. (Grazie a Edoardo Russo di CISU.) MYSTERY METEOR CAUSES A BIG STIR IN EL PASO, TEXAS On Thursday, October 9, 1997, at 12:47 p.m., an unusual meteor flashed through the sky over El Paso, Texas, creating a massive explosion that shook homes from El Paso to Las Cruces, New Mexico. Robert Simpson, spokesman for the McDonald Observatory in Texas, said the explosion was caused "by what appeared to be a small meteor...about as bright as the surface of the setting sun." The meteor was thought to have impacted in the West Texas "brush country" desert, south of the Hueco Mountains, about 30 miles east of El Paso. "A police helicopter flying 25 miles east of the city spotted about an acre of scorched ground that might be the area where the meteor hit." "A police command post was set up in the Organ Mountains as U.S. Army Reserve helicopters used infrared sensors to look for pieces of debris from the object. What they are looking for is any debris that is still hot or anything that came off the object." (Many thanks to Rebecca Schatte for forwarding this item.) "Las Cruces (N.M.) police Sgt. Joel Cano said the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) tracked the object as it entered Earth's atmosphere until it fell to the ground 30 miles east of El Paso." (See Reuters story for October 9, 1997.) The explosion triggered "hundreds of calls" to El Paso police and other law enforcement agencies. Most witnesses saw a "dark contrail" or "black smoke" or a "lightning flash in the sky." (Editor's Comment: NORAD tracked the "meteor" all the way down, and then the Army Reserve choppers scrambled to retrieve it. I've seen lots of meteors fall, and I have yet to see a helicopter strike team show up looking for it afterward. Does anyone else think there may be more to this El Paso case than was reported by AP and Reuters?) ANOTHER UFO IN TUCSON On Friday, October 3, 1997, at 10:25 p.m., a girl sighted a UFO near her home in Tucson, Arizona (population 330,537). Tucson is located on Highway 10 approximately 117 miles (187 kilometers) southeast of Phoenix. Carmen A. was outside when she "noticed these multi-colored lights flashing. I looked closely because I thought it was a plane or a star. No, it wasn't a plane or a star. I got a better look through my dad's binoculars. It was a round object with lights flashing around it. Red, green and white. It wasn't moving. I looked at it for better than 15 minutes." (USENET Item) UFO SEEN BY MOTORIST OVER GACKLE, NORTH DAKOTA On October 3, 1997, at 10:23 p.m., Lee M. Droney of Fargo, North Dakota, was driving on Interstate Highway I-94 a half-mile (0.8 kilometers) west of Gackle, N.D. (population 456) when he spied a UFO. Droney reported seeing "a meteorite-like object off to the left appeared to stop and hover...The car radio seemed to (suddenly) go out of range. There were other vehicles on the road at the time which could have seen the object." (See Filer's Files #40 for October 10, 1997) Gackle is located on North Dakota Highway 46 approximately 126 miles (202 kilometers) southwest of Fargo. (Many thanks to George A. Filer of MUFON for this report.) BRIGHT UFO APPEARS OVER MISSISSIPPI RIVER PORT On Tuesday, September 30, 1997, at 10;35 p.m., Elizabeth Macready was sitting on her front porch in Natchez, Mississippi (population 22,015). Natchez is a famous Mississippi River town located 72 miles (119 kilometers) downriver from Vicksburg. "While sitting on my porch--I sit every night--I saw what I thought was a large bright star," Elizabeth reported. "I realized at the same time that I had never seen it before. It either beamed brightly or moved forwards, then moved backward to the west and dropped (into the river--J.T.). I am on a hill, and the object was a little above the highest electrical wires. Sky not too clear." She described the UFO as a "white star-shaped bright light." (Email Interview) NAVY MAN SEES UFO IN SUBURB OF INDIANAPOLIS On Wednesday, October 1, 1997, at 8 p.m., CPO Ethelred Sharkey, USN, a veteran of the Vietnam and Persian Gulf wars, was working at the Navy Reserve Station in Greenwood, Indiana (population 19,327), about 12 miles (18 kilometers) south of Indianapolis. Chief Sharkey "was looking to the southeast and a brightly-lit object 75 to 80 degrees in the sky caught his attention. The object looked like a star but (was) extremely intense and appeared to be moving upward. The 'pure white' light was so intense that he 'couldn't believe it.'" "The object stayed in a small area as it continued moving upward before eventually appearing as nothing more than a dim star. The object was at its brightest for 15 seconds." Chief Sharkey described the object as similar to "construction night lights" on a highway which "blind you to look at them." (Many thanks to Kenneth Young of the Tri-States Advocates for Scientific Knowledge, T.A.S.K., for this report.) UFO FLIES OVER KENTUCKY On Thursday, October 2, 1997, at 2:22 a.m., an employee of Kroger Supermarket in Frankfort (population 25,973), Kentucky's capital city, spotted something unusual in the sky. The man sighted "a light in the sky to the west of his location." (i.e. over downtown Frankfort. Kroger Supermarket is on the east side of the city-- J.T.) The UFO "moved from side to side so fast that it left a noticeable streak. The object departed by blinking and climbing straight up." Frankfort is 23 miles (37 kilometers) northwest of Lexington, in northern Kentucky. (Many thanks to Kenneth Young of T.A.S.K. for this report.) TRIANGULAR UFO SPOTTED IN WESTERN OKLAHOMA On Saturday, October 4, 1997, at 7:15 p.m., Jim Hickman "observed an unusual object in the sky over Elk City, Oklahoma (population 9,579)." Elk City is located on Highway 40 approximately 109 miles (174 kilometers) west of Oklahoma City. The UFO was also observed by Elk City police, Hickman reported, "I went outside with my 10X50 binoculars and my camera. I saw to my southwest a large bright object that appeared to be roughly triangular in shape with what I took to be a hole in the center. The object was three fingers (10 degrees) above the horizon at arm's length. The object was at least twice as bright as the moon. I took several 35mm pictures at this time." Another UFO appeared at 7:35 p.m. above the original triangular object. "The original object did not move at all during this...Both 'triangles' went slowly west and disappeared over the horizon." (Many thanks to Steve Wilson Sr. for this report.) from the UFO Files... 1947: ARIZONA'S ROSWELL CASE Roswell wasn't the only saucer crash. Fifty years ago this week, two men reported seeing a SECOND downed saucer at Cave Creek, near Phoenix, Arizona. Here is their story: "In early October 1947, 22-year-old Selman Graves and his 16-year-old brother-in-law Bob Malody were rabbit-hunting and exploring mines in what is now known as the Cave Creek Recreational Area north of Phoenix." "At one point Graves and Malody climbed to the top of the most prominent hill in the area and looked south back at the ranch house of their friend Walt Salyer. They could see Salyer's house, his corral, and even his water tank. But when Graves looked west of the property he witnessed a scene that made no sense then and still haunts him five decades later." "What he saw can best be described as 'a large aluminum dome-shaped thing sitting upright in the desert,' Graves said, 'I thought it might be some kind of observatory dome, except why should a dome be down at that elevation?'" "Graves also remembered seeing five men and two trucks near the dome. One of the trucks was of the military (2.5-ton) type, capable of carrying personnel or equipment. 'But I didn't see any equipment like cranes or anything like that,' Graves said, 'And the men didn't seem to be doing any work. I could not identify a uniform.'" Using Salyer's ranch for size and distance perception, Graves estimated that the dome was 36 feet (11 meters) in diameter and maybe a mile away." "Graves never considered that he might have witnessed the crash of an extraterrestrial craft until 1952, after he read BEHIND THE FLYING SAUCERS, a book by pioneer ufologist Frank Scully (no relation to Dana--J.T.). In the book, Scully wrote about the Cave Creek incident and cited an informant who told him that two humanoid bodies about four and a half feet (1.4 meters) were retrieved, one sitting inside the craft and the other halfway out the hatch." (See the newspaper Newsday of Melville, N.Y. for July 6, 1997. Many thanks to Lou Farrish of UFO Newsclipping Service for forwarding this news story.) That's it for this week. If you have a UFO news story to share, email it to us at Masinaigan@aol.com. Or clip it out of your local newspaper and send it to UFO ROUNDUP, Box 16, 126 Toll Gate Road, Warwick, Rhode Island, USA 02886. Join us next Sunday for more saucer news from "the paper that goes home--UFO ROUNDUP." See you then! UFO ROUNDUP: Copyright 1997 by Masinaigan Productions, all rights reserved. Readers may post items from UFO ROUNDUP on their websites or in newsgroups provided that they credit the newsletter and its editor by name and list the date of issue the news item first appeared.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 12 Re: Solved Abduction cases? From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net> Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 12:49:06 -0500 (CDT) Fwd Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 18:37:44 -0400 Subject: Re: Solved Abduction cases? >Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 02:15:31 -0500 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Solved Abduction cases? >Jerry writes, >>Dennis, >You might also turn to a paper I've had several occasions >>recently to mention here: Stuart Appelle's devastating critique of >>"conventional" explanations for abduction phenomena. >Hi Jerry, Sasquatch, Greg, >Jerry, (if) it's not too long a piece, and wouldn't violate any of Stuarts >copyrights (and, assuming you have a way to 'scan' the thing) could you >please post a copy of Steuart Appelle's paper? >Here's hoping, and thanx in advance if you can. >John Velez Dear John, List, et al: Stuart Appelle's paper which Jerry mentions, "The Abduction Experience: A Critical Evaluation of Theory and Evidence," takes up 50 pages of fine print in the Journal of UFO Studies, New Series, Vol. 6, 1995/1996, and would represent a serious scanning commitment on someone's part, copyright issues aside. You might check the CUFOS web page to see if it's there, although I would suspect not. Otherwise, the issue is available for $21 from CUFOS, which includes postage, at 2457 W. Peterson Avenue, Chicago, IL 60659, ph: (312) 271-3611. Orders outside the US include $3.00. I doubt seriously that Mr. Apelle himself would characterize what is a measured, thoughtful consideration of all sides of a controversial subject "a devastating critique of 'conventional' explanations of abduction phenomena," as Jerry Clark does. The UFO research and literature, in general, is found just as wanting as the blinkered, skeptical approach. Here's a sample (note I do not imply typical) quote from Appelle: "If the evidence offered so far cannot completely explain the abduction experience in prosaic terms, other explanations are required. The most prominent alternative is the ET hypothesis. But here again, there is as yet no evidence that requires this explanation. And in the absence of such evidence, the argument that abduction experiences are veridical strains credulity on many fronts." (p. 66) Jerry seems to object when I make essentially the same statement, perhaps because I'm not as quite as eloquent as Mr. Appelle, although I would point out that this is e-mail, not a learned journal. Dennis
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 12 Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net> Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 14:04:39 -0700 Fwd Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 18:38:59 -0400 Subject: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills Michael Christol wrote: > Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 00:25:02 -0500 > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > From: Michael Christol <mchristo@mindspring.com> > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills [snip] > I dont' think the Russian photo looks anything like the Mexico > City pic. The Russian UFO looks more like a "hubcap" tossed in > the air, photographed and superimposed over a picture or drawing > of an apartment building. A side-by-side comparison of the buildings indicates that they are not the same building. And the hubcaps are of a different type. One looks like a '48 Ford while the other is a '88 Lazar. <G> Terry
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 12 Re: Witness Anonymity From: Peregrine Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 16:04:37 -0400 Fwd Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 18:46:25 -0400 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity The Duke of Mendoza presents his compliments. >Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 04:27:08 -0500 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity I was going to refrain from comment on this thread until Linda returned from her son's nuptials, but this is getting out of hand. >In every >case with Linda the flame started with someone else! From what >I've seen she has reacted (granted poorly at times) to sucker >punches initiated by others. I dunno quite how you define a flame, but I think you'll find that the pattern of events is generally that whenever a hard question or a criticism is directed at Linda, she responds with gratuitous insults, bizarre gibes and no facts or explanations. Go check the archive and see if that's not so more often than not. Her classic response is to refuse to answer at all. Certainly some of the criticism has been trenchant, but (as I am getting tired of saying and no doubt everyone else is even more weary of hearing) Linda is entangled with very large claims. If she chooses to believe what emerges out of her mouth when under hypnosis, that's her privilege, but also her problem. It doesn't release her (and her cohorts, such as Budd Hopkins) from an essential principle of dealing with claims that fly in the face of common sense (let alone scientific or judicial practice). Which is that it's up to *her* (and company) to provide the watertight proof of the claims. That also means that if someone falls over laughing at the "case" and splutters "Linda, you're a hoaxer", she's the one who has to prove she's not, *not* the other way round. Good manners, but nothing else, would suggest that anyone making the accusation should explain why they reach that conclusion, but it doesn't alter the burden of proof. Not many ufologists seem to know that. >Your rather 'racist' and extremely insulting insinuation about us >shining Budds shoes is so low and off base that I'm not even >going to dignify it with a response. I'll just let it stand as >the pure stinking turd that it is. John, this does not become you. Nor does it become this List. Mockery is one thing; this is another. You may recall that it was Linda who first introduced the concept of turds into this polylogue. As for shining *her* shoes, I understand this task has been delegated to the Secret Service, who leave little billets doux when the job is done. >>As for Hopkins he does NOT do valid objective research PERIOD. >Opinions are just that - opinions And some are better informed than others. Julie *is* qualified to comment, and her opinion carries weight. "Witnessed" is larded with examples of how not to conduct hypnosis, as the couple of medically trained hypnotists on this side of the water to whom I've shown the book heartily (and with some outrage) have agreed. And if you know a bit more about the case than appears there it is perfectly obvious that Budd's "research" was top-down, looking for evidence to fit his preconceptions. I'm not the first to comment that the first proper object of his scrutiny should have been Linda, but even from the very early moment in their acquaintance when she claimed to have had something rather funny up her nose, he failed to take the most basic steps to verify her account (or if he did, he doesn't say). So it goes on throughout the whole tedious book, which follows a pattern of presumption, bad logic and incompetence well-established in his previous writings. By all means object to this, or any other deconstruction of Our Lady of the Sands. Demanding my liver for summary consumption along with your world's-best fries in the process is just fine. But it or anyone else's criticism, no matter how offensively *they* may put it, *doesn't* justify the kind of language you used to Julie. It puts you on a par with Linda's explosive irrationality, and you are above that, when you want to be. best wishes Pensive D. Musing Garlic Merchant
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 12 Re: New and Wondering From: stenger@spindle.net (stenger@spindle.net) [Sharolyn Stenger] Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 16:01:23 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 18:51:15 -0400 Subject: Re: New and Wondering >From: ujack@pop3.scrapcity.cnchost.com [Mark Medford] >To: updates@globalserve.net >Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 00:05:39 +0000 >Subject: New and Wondering >Dear Friends, >I'm new to this list and wondering about all of the negative posts. >Would someone be willing to give me a nutshell version of what the >raging battle is about? It seems, to my newbie eyes, primarily >focused on a conflict of personalities. I'm sure the current fuss has >it's root in some specific question. Just curious.... >Thanks, >Mark Dear Mark and Friends, Amen! I have so often wondered the same thing. One would think that a subscription list with the name, 'UFO Updates', would be exactly that - updated news of UFO sightings, activity, etc. And, to be fair, there IS some good information shared. But you have to wade through a tremendous amount of spleen-venting to find it. I cannot imagine why any extraterrestrial society would want to interact with human beings. We are jealous, spiteful, inconsiderate, impolite, stubborn, and hateful. At the same time we can be generous, kind, witty, considerate, helpful, and some- what intelligent. If I were a cartoonist I would draw a group of people wearing nametags that say "Hello. I am a UFO Researcher. I am always right." They would be outdoors, engaged in a huge melee of hitting, biting, scratching and name-calling - while UFOs silently glide over their heads, unnoticed. Sharolyn
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 12 Re: New and Wondering From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 19:02:19 -0400 Fwd Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 19:02:19 -0400 Subject: Re: New and Wondering >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: stenger@spindle.net (stenger@spindle.net) [Sharolyn Stenger] >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: New and Wondering >Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 16:01:23 -0500 >>From: ujack@pop3.scrapcity.cnchost.com [Mark Medford] >>To: updates@globalserve.net >>Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 00:05:39 +0000 >>Subject: New and Wondering >>Dear Friends, >>I'm new to this list and wondering about all of the negative posts. >>Would someone be willing to give me a nutshell version of what the >>raging battle is about? It seems, to my newbie eyes, primarily >>focused on a conflict of personalities. I'm sure the current fuss has >>it's root in some specific question. Just curious.... >>Thanks, >>Mark >Dear Mark and Friends, >Amen! I have so often wondered the same thing. One would think >that a subscription list with the name, 'UFO Updates', would be >exactly that - updated news of UFO sightings, activity, etc. No. You might expect a list with the name 'UFO _News_ UpDates' to be such. 'UpDates' allows for re-hashing, possible trashing, peer-bashing and above all (as is quite apparent) forthright, informed 'discussion' - all without bothersome 'civilians' interfering >And, to be fair, there IS some good information shared. But you >have to wade through a tremendous amount of spleen-venting to >find it.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 12 Re: The Decline and Fall of American Ufology From: wlmss@peg.apc.org [Lawrie Williams] Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 07:38:14 +1000 (GMT+1000) Fwd Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 20:39:48 -0400 Subject: Re: The Decline and Fall of American Ufology > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com> > Subject: re: UFO UpDate: Re: The Decline and Fall of American Ufology > Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 12:27:54 -0700 >> I think most people have made up their minds either way by now, and >> those who believe the photos accept that the other effects do occur, >> and those who think they are a hoax have real problems believing that >> the rest of Ed Walters' account is true too. I am not sure this is the best way to think of the problem. Maybe not. But it is a practical approach. > There are those, such as myself, who accept the photos as true - > provisionally. If someone were to come along a provide devastating > proof of the hoaxing of the occultation photos or the stereo shots, > or if Ed were to admit a hoax, I would, subject to careful > examination of any such claim, be willing to accept whatever truth > is revealed. This represents the scientific viewpoint. Surely 10 years is long enough for any decent challenge to arise. Instead there have been more witnesses, more photos! Becker's case was the last best chance for anyone to debunk the extraordinary evidence about UFOs at Gulf Breeze. The fact that the debunker community has resorted to distraction and legal noises shows that we owe Becker deep gratitude. Gulf Breeze has been well and truly confirmed! From now on attempts to debunk this and similar events might just as well be ignored as a waste of time, energy and bandwidth. From here on in I certainly will not be bothering with those who want to argue about minutae, or who "get personal". There is more than a little evidence that abductees, perhaps as a result of their experiences or perhaps because that is the kind of people UFOs go for, are fairly emotionally labile. I advocate that all of us, abductees definitely included, look forward so we can tackle the UFO mystery and the possible threats it poses - together. Don't get dragged into debunker-type bickering. > Then we have those who will not accept the photos despite any proof. > They have valid reasons for their discomfort. The Walters case displays > nearly the full panolpy of UFO-related phenomena, and in most > situations, this appropriately raises suspicion. Yes, and in 1994 I was treated to a smorgasbord of paranormal events immediately after a UFO visitation. This is a very real aspect of the UFO phenomenon, not an indicator of fraud. > In addition, there are unusual aspects to the object geometry and > the absence of normally reported luminosity. And finally, repeaters, > like it or not, are more likely to be hoaxers than non-repeaters. If by "repeaters" you mean return visits, you are totally wrong and have demonstrated unfamiliarity with this field of study. UFOs do come back to the same people, and to their offspring, and theirs. [stuff about photo validity deleted as anyone who wants can go and see UFOs and photograph them so it is no longer relevant] [stuff about "Hovering 'craft'" deleted as it confused me no end.] > * Exotic humanoids are a substantial percentage of the unknowns. If > one accepts that unknowns represent a real phenomenon, it is > impossible to reject the occupant cases. However, that does not > mean that every case with occupants must be considered valid. Agreed. But on the evidence it is most likely it is valid and that is what is important. > * Unusual light beams have been reported in many cases, as have > effects from those beams. However, there does not seem to be a > clear link between beam color and effect, which weakens this > part of the pattern; on the other hand, this may be accounted for > by variations in human color perception. Blue and green are often mixed. The Walters photos show an electric blue. An aqua colour has been described to me. In dim light conditions either will seem to be white. > * Telepathy, on the other hand, is a relatively rare part of the entire > phenomenon. I doubt this very much. It is likely this is not reported often because it can be used to discredit both witness and incident. Thanks Mark for the three incidents from the Magonia catalog from 1957, 1957 and 1966. We can add two incidents in Gulf Breeze in 1987. Also mine in 1995. None of these involved face-to-face encounters at that point in time, maybe we should look at cases where a ufo is nearby, pre contact and post contact for a richer trove of telepathy testimony. If anyone else knows of telepathic encounters, please post them. Telepathy also gets mention several times in the context of Roswell. We also have to consider that telepathy comes in a variety of forms. One is that of hearing a voice "grinding" in the head, such as Ed Walters reported, which struck a strong chord with me. Another is of not hearing a voice but of apperceiving a situation directly. Another is of hearing familiar spirits as a child, apparently after a UFO visitation and *perhaps* through an implant. And many adults report similar experiences, and many sane people report a presence in their head that converses with them, even though they recall no initial contact experience. Up to 3% of people reportedly have this. I can tell you that in my 1975 abduction I do not know if I was conversing with my "interviewer" via mouth or mind, or indeed whether he was an alien or one of Scott Jones' team. > In other cases, the occupants made unusual sounds or spoke in a > language unknown to the witness. In a fairly small percentage of > cases (still much larger than the telepathy percentage) the > occupants spoke in a language known to the witness, sometimes with > a strange accent, sometimes in broken speech, sometimes mixing > languages. In some of these cases it is quite possible that telepathy has been reported as speech, either a rationalization by the witness or an attempt not to seem totally crazy. I have seen scenes on TV where the actor is not moving his lips but his speech has been dubbed in. We all tend to "edit" what we perceive which is how post production video-editors can sometimes get away with inadequate footage. My case is especially curious, I feel. For some months before the May 1995 contact I had been striving to analyse the correlatons between Norlitic speech, Greek mythology and modern UFO observations. (I still am.) It is quite likely this was on my mind in the hours leading up to the "message", almost as if there was an attempt to answer my question. > It may be no accident that the only "telepathy" cases are those > which one might term either "higher-strangeness" cases or > "less-reliable" cases, depending on one's inclination. At any > rate, the evidence substantiating "telepathic" communication is > certainly small at best, and possibly marginal in quality. I respectfully resent that. Witness testimony is considered reliable enough to convict a person of murder, yet you declare it in ufology to be "marginal in quality". I invite you to explain that. I have to point out you are addressing a person who is just such a witness, its not second or third hand testimony. I am answerable. It has happened to me several times in my life and at no other time have I heard "voices in my head" even remotely resembling these effects. I've also established that apart from ADD (or because of it) I am in splendid mental health. Too many people play amateur psychiatrist and say: "Voice in your head? Oh well, you must be mad!" I hope you clarify your statement there Mark, and soon. > In addition, one must consider that perception of "telepathy" does > not necessarily substantiate the existence of telepathy. I think we > still have relatively little knowledge of the psychological effects > resulting from what is in many cases a traumatic event, and > certainly confabulations, or illusory voices, etc, cannot be ruled > out a priori. I give you my word I rigorously considered all of these before making my claim. Nothing a priori about it. And Ed Walters' account shows us that he did the same. Lets face it, no matter how exhaustively we eliminate all the options, some debunkers will always claim the reported phenomena are not for real because they are reported. > Or, we may be seeing the presence of a technology which simply emits > sounds translated from non-vocal utterances by the occupants, which > the witness interprets as telepathy. Not a chance. Even while I was hearing the pounding sound and the voice I tried the radio (static) and wound the window up and down (road noise) but the sound within my head did not vary one iota. I get the impression that some ufologists have a profoundly dim view of their fellow humans. Yet the ghost rockets turned out to be real, they have turned out to be craft, they did have occupants, they are contacting people, they are operating on people. The vast majority of witnesses 1932 to 1997 WERE telling the truth. This resistence to honest testimony is not realistic skepticism, it is bloody-minded obstruction of scientific progress. After a span of 65 years it is time that all the doubters remove the encrusted egg from their faces and offered some positive help for a change. (Not you, Mark, I know you are on the right wavelength.) > In short, one can accept or reject "telepathy" without necessarily > accepting or rejecting the Walters case or any of its elements. I suppose you can. The initial point I have made is that my case and the Ed Walters case and many others combined together amount to enough data for a few elementary things to be accepted as axiomatic. I have also emphasized that if people wish to be irrational and unscientific they can reject good data and cling to total disbelief. Its a free world. But some of us are prepared to move ahead! lw>> For the skeptical side, the debate might concern itself with the >> question of elaborate psychopathologies and the identification of >> earth lights. That these phenomena occur can be accepted as axiomatic >> and a useful framework of knowledge can be built up from this position. >> For the believer side, the debate needs to concern itself with the >> nature of telepathy, the description of UFO crew, the mission of >> their craft and the technologies these entities deploy. >> If ufology fails to recognize this great divide, it will be forever >> at cross-purposes, as we have seen with the Great 1997 UpDates >> Debate about the 1987 Ed Walters Photos. > I'm afraid I cannot accept that this is the right way to deal with the data. > While no one desires conflict, it needs to be recognized that science is, > much like the legal process, an adversarial system. As I have pointed out, the legal process would long since have accepted the axioms I have proposed based on their own time-honoured procedures. In ufology it seems to demand more than that. It seems the propaganda has created a fanatical refusal to accept witness evidence. We have seen that on the UpDates List, where out of sour grapes the loser in the debate over the Walters photos has turned to legal threats. We are also seeing personal attacks on Linda Cortile, who in my opinion has strived to be objective and patient. So here are two witnesses right here on this list! You have your evidence. BTW If some lawyer wanted to litigate over copyright material posted to the internet, I'd love to know how they could prove this person or that person did it! There is just no case, it is a form of cheap intimidation. > Hypotheses will be advanced, challenged, accepted, defeated, etc. Great stuff. But impossible without axioms. And useless if the debunkers and skeptics keep moving the goalposts. > But the choice is not between skepticism and belief. It is between > science and belief (and that means belief adamantly opposed to an > objectively existent UFO phenomenon, belief in ETs, or any other > kind of unsupported "faith"). Holy hell, you have changed the meaning of "belief" as used in the ufological sub-culture! That is a recipe for confusion. Maybe the next step, now we have axioms and are moving forward, is to develop a reliable common glossary of words and terms. > The adversarial part of the process is never over. Agreed. Any credible researcher must do this all the time, and he must be subject to questioning by others who must make sure he has dotted the "t's" and crossed the "i's" (if a skeptic) or vice versa if he is a believer. : ) > People still carry out experiments which may invalidate parts of > general relativity, and still challenge other well-accepted theories > with new hypotheses, data, and experiments. That is why a debate on > Gulf Breeze ten years after the case occurred is still relevant. Yes, and what a wonderful result. We have been able to prove that UFO's did visit Gulf Breeze and that humanoid crew did employ telepathy and blue beams. The adversarial system has triumphed with all due credit to Bruce Mc and Barbara B. Thanks for you input and general support, Mark. Lawrie Williams________________
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 12 Re: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills From: xalium@netwrx.net (Tom King) Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 15:41:44 EST Fwd Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 21:25:33 -0400 Subject: Re: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills >Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 21:34:39 +0100 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Stills of the Mexican Footage >>Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 20:58:50 -0700 >>From: jared@valuserve.com (Andromeda.net- Anderson, Jared) >>To: Updates@globalserve.net >>Subject: Stills of the Mexican Footage >>Somebody put up some stills of the recent Mexican footage at this location: >>http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Rampart/5430/ >>After seeing this my first assumption was that if the video is >>authentic, there had to be a lot of witnesses to this event on >>the ground. There are witnesses to this sighting. >Another things has cropped up. >In The News of the World(28/9/97) a UK paper they had a report in it >about a sighting in Moscow (1990 October 13th). And in it they had this >pic >Content-Description: notw.jpg >Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="notw.jpg" Trying to compare to superimpose the "notw.jpg" to the Mexico City jpgs are a complete waste of time. These are not the same sightings or buildings. Having a background in the construction business I will add this. Most high rise construction is basically I-Beams, concrete, and glass. Many highrises are sqare shaped and look the same. If the highrise is designed to be a "low dollar" building, you get a generic structure as seen in these images. Most "high dollar" buildings will appear different because of cosmetics of glass panels covering the complete sides of the building. Over all they have the same basics into them, I-Beams, concrete, and glass are the basic bulding blocks of them. The real issue is: Why was this footage broadcast internationally over Televista Television last week, and not anything here. Will it be handed to the news and shown all over U.S. tv for little if any payment, or will it wait until a huge check is written until its broadcast by Bob Kiviat or an equallent producer? It appears the U.S. showing is being surpressed until D.B. Coopers money bag falls into the right laps. If it takes to long the video will be on the net before tv. Tom King, Skywatcher Arizona Skywatch director AZ Skywatch http://personal.netwrx.net/xalium/skywatch/skywatch.htm OVNI Chapterhouse at http://personal.netwrx.net/xalium/ufovideo.htm
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 12 Re: UFO Sighting Trenton, Ontario, Canada From: John Koopmans <john.koopmans@sympatico.ca> Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 18:14:34 -0700 Fwd Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 21:31:43 -0400 Subject: Re: UFO Sighting Trenton, Ontario, Canada > Date: Mon, 22 Sep 1997 03:39:08 +0100 > From: Don Ledger <dledger@istar.ca> > To: updates@globalserve.net > Subject: Re: UFO Sighting Trenton, Ont. Can. > Hello Errol and List, > I thought this was important enough to warrent an immediate posting so > as to alert local investigators. It looks like a solid hit. > The Weather Channel, of all places, reported moments ago [approx. 2:00 > AM Atantic Daylight Time] that an object as large as the moon, but red > in colour has been reported in the Trenton area of Ontario, Canada. > Personnel at CAF Trenton were alerted and one of the personnel contacted > stated that he had seen the object as well. Same at local police station > who also stated that one of their own had witnessed the object. Other > information sketchy. Red object apparently moved across the sky moving > erratically from side to side. Many witnesses reported to local police > and CAF Trenton. > Don Ledger As an update, the October 6, 1997 issue of The Millbrook Times reported the following article by Denni Russel: Close Encounters of the Millbrook kind Not so long ago mysterious crop circles baffled the world. Where did they come from? Were they the artistic work of an alien life form preparing the earth for a hostile take-over? Were they the handiwork of a group of high-tech pranksters? Or were they made by chocolate covered panut butter candies? Perhaps no one will ever know the truth. Residents of Millbrook, Barrie and Ohio State now have their own 'alien' pheeenomena to quarry over. Sunday, September 21 at approximately 7:00 p.m. an "incredibly huge" object floated over a field south east of Millbrook for about one hour. The same object was sighted three hours earlier outside of Barrie. It continued on its straight lined sout easterly course and was reportedly seen in Ohio three days later. Just what did people see? According to Drew Williamson of MUFON, the Mutual UFO Network of Ontario, the object was bright looking and it took on a reddiish tint near twilight. Reports say that approximately 30 people saw it in Barrie. Approximately five people near Millbrook witnessed the 'close encounter of some kind'. The length of time the object remained stationary outside of Millbrook has led some to speculate that perhaps it was an atmospheric weather balloon. Mr. Williamson is pursuing this line of questioning. He too suspects a balloon to be the culprit. When asked how many UFO sightings MUFON has dealt with in Ontario recently, there were too many to count. MUFON speculates that television shows like the X-Files and the recent controversy surrounding the Roswell inciident in the United States, "has caused people to look up at the stars for the first time". Never the less, according to Environment Canada's atmospheric Sciences Division, they don't know anything about it. Apparently Environment Canada doesn't even release their balloons this far south. And so, the case of the mysterious UFO remains unsolved. I contacted Mr. Drew Williamson four days after the article appeared in the newspaper, and specifically asked him what the status of the investigation was, and whether he had any updates that he could share. He replied that he had made a few phone calls mostly to Environmnt Canada with no results, and that he had tried to e-mail the Canada Weather Service but that it was bounced back. He also mentioned that he was extremely busy with work and that he couldn't pursue this at this time. He did not provide any further details. John K.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 12 Rense Interviews Shulman From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose) Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 00:55:38 +0100 Fwd Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 21:33:43 -0400 Subject: Rense Interviews Shulman On October 8 "Sightings On The Radio" host Jeff Rense interviewed Jack Shulman, president Of American Computer Company, concerning ACC's recent claims that Bell Laboratories illegally obtained the patent rights for the transistor in 1948 and 1949. According to Shulman the technology came from one of the extraterrestrial craft that crashed in the Roswell area in New Mexico. Bell Labs was given a piece of the wreckage by US military authorities, thus lying when alleging that the "invention" was due to Bell's own research. The very exciting and, if true, revolutionary evidence is presented by Shulman in a 2-hour interview, which can be heard in Real Audio at http://www.audionet.com/shows/endoftheline/9710/end1008.ram Note: The first 46 minutes of the 2 hrs. 40 min. long audio file feature Michael Lindemann of CNI news, presenting his weekly UFO update. Enjoy! Stig Agermose
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 12 Re: PUFORI UFO News Issue From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com> Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 21:01:42 -0400 Fwd Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 21:44:18 -0400 Subject: Re: PUFORI UFO News Issue >Comments: Authenticated sender is <chipp@mail.clara.net> >From: "Anthony Chippendale" <ufos@chipp.clara.net> >Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 10:02:48 +0000 >Subject: Re: PUFORI UFO News Issue 2 >First, apologises if you have received issue 2 of PUFORI UFO News as >a file attachment. It has gotten too big to send out with email. To >see Issue 2 please go to http://www.chipp.clara.net/news2.html >Thanks, >Anthony Chippendale, >Editor. Anthony- I got a "File Not Found" error when I tried the URL you mentioned. I'll keep trying. Steve
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 12 Re: No Absolutes? From: "C Hathaway & J. Presson" <earthwrk@doitnow.com> Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 16:41:44 -0700 Fwd Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 21:37:54 -0400 Subject: Re: No Absolutes? >From: ujack@pop3.scrapcity.cnchost.com [Mark Medford] >To: updates@globalserve.net >Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 00:05:39 +0000 >Subject: No Absolutes? >Dear Friends, Hello Mark, You make some very good points here. [...] >These elements force us to examine more closely the emotional, >religious, etc. make up of the individual witness. This is very important and there needs to be a team of people that work together as well as a pool of professionals (MDs, Mental Health, etc.) that are used as a blind study to see if the results of testing match. I will go into this more in a few days as Clark is still in the hospital and not doing to well. SO I AM kinda tired and stressed to the max right now. >Still, finding a way to see the event beyond these personal >"filters" may be close to impossible. When all is said and done, >until such time as an event is mirrored by another experiencer, >it all comes back to interpretation. Its a bit like dream >analysis! It all comes back to interpretation no matter how many people see or experience an event. As for getting past the "filters" that is not as hard as you might think. I AM a Clinical Hypnotherapist (since 1987) and there is a way to do hypnosis so that you get past the subconscious and speak with want is called "The Silent Observer". The S.O. is the objective part of the human mind that records every event without emotion. It is very interesting to work with this part of the human mind. There is also something called "Parts Therapy" where you talk with the individual parts of the human mind that chooses different experiences and find out what that "parts" reason for making the choice was. >How, then, do we measure the credibility of the event? As for the credibility of an "event" that should not be the concern of those who are gathering data from tests and observations. When they get into dealing with credibility then they are no long objective about the findings. You gather, and gather, and gather more and more data until you have a LARGE enough sampling to case studies to see what the "norm" is (if there truly is one). Then you go from there. >Can there be compassion, along with a healthy dose of skepticism >in our aggressive pursuit of the truth? Compassion and respect for the subjects yes, on the professional level. A team doing case studies should not be concerned with "any ONE truth". They should be concerned with the gathering of information. It may sound cold but that is how scientific research is done. And I can not stress enough the GREAT need for blind studies to be done as well. You can not get a clear view of what is going on with out the blind study. Julie
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 12 Abduction Sat 4 Oct 1997 From: wlmss@peg.apc.org [Lawrie Williams] Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 07:36:06 +1000 (GMT+1000) Fwd Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 20:34:33 -0400 Subject: Abduction Sat 4 Oct 1997 Abduction Oct 4 1997 My informant is D, aged 16. She has a girlfriend K, also 16. I interviewed D on Oct 3 1997 and reported to the Internet that she had seen an orange glow in a nearby paddock a week earlier. On Sat night Oct 4 1997 the girls D and K were sleeping in a room at the home of D. K awoke to a light, departing. She awoke D, who also saw it. K had seen it in more detail. D sketched it for me as K had described it to her. It had a central light and nine lesser lights around it in a square. Sparks or lights were streaming outwards from the inner light to the lesser lights. K remembered more. Through the past week she has kept insisting that it was not a dream. She says she was on a "spaceship". She says was on an operating table surrounded by small beings. She saw them slice her belly open crosswise, then she was running through the woods with her baby, and they were chasing her, trying to take it off her. I told D that she could reassure her friend she would come to no harm. I was told J is not afraid, just very curious. Neither girl would dream of trying to tell their parents about this. I told her in my opinion the visitation was by an actual craft with humanoids, because this is consistent with similar incidents taking place around the world. I said the experience would have slipped into a dream, like the part about running through the woods. I told D that K could expect a phantom pregnancy, but that it would be ended with another visitation. I said this could be three months, but that perhaps someone on the Internet could give me a more likely "term". (K is unlikely to be pregnant by any human, so it looks like a classic potential "maiden birth", what is mistakenly known as "virgin birth" since ancient times - a mistranslation.) I told her that it could be possible that the purpose of all this was to make hybrids, half like us and half like them. Because K is of a fairly strong Christian background, I warned D about the dangers of K being attracted into a cult which uses the old ideology and paints it onto a framework that includes spaceships and other modern terminology. I said that if this girl now develops an inner voice it is likely to claim to be a saint she is familiar with. I said that she could also expect some of a wide range of known paranormal effects like clairvoyance, clairaudience, astral travel, oob's, levitation or long-striding. We agreed the levitation would be the most fun. The girls are not overly familiar with current UFO mythology and were unaware that K's experience seems to be a classic abduction of its type. I confess I was fairly bemused to hear almost a stereotyped description but I am sure it is authentic. My informant was also startled to see a tiny person dash across her bedcovers. She seemed to think it was an actual hallucination rather than an illusion, after I described the perceptual difference between the two. I told her that calling it an hallucination did not mean a humanoid had actually not been there. This happened days after the actual visitation. (Note: I have heard this type described as a Ma Lei, they are not directly associated with the UFO. I have not quite figured out just what their role might be. I think they supervise the breeding stock more carefully than we might imagine.) Note that this is not something that happened a year ago or to a FOAF. I am right here following this one, with care and respect and more than a little awe. I'm tempted to have a go at capturing the craft when it comes back as it most certainly will. I know exactly what to do and it is infallibly low tech. It would be something of a challenge, mainly enduring mosquitoes and boredom waiting for it to turn up. So I think I'll give it a miss. I'd do it for money of course. : ) BTW D and K are not their real names. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - D reviewed the above file and said it was OK. I also have met her mother who mentioned that D was very frightened every night. She seemed to want me to reassure her daughter. I said I could not do that honestly, save to say she was probably not going to be harmed that the perceived phenomena would fade over a few months, indeed they were likely to suddenly come good and seem benevolent. The mother knew more than I expected. The mother challenged me to suggest what "they" could want with her daughter. In light of the conversation I'd earlier had with D, and as D made no suggestion, I had to say I did not know. I just quoted Charles Fort: "We are farmed." D also claims that the "scar" behind her ear that she got after the childhood visitation has returned. Both she and her boyfriend attest that it was not there before last weekend. I saw three brown blobs there like normal skin discoloration you see in blonde people. But I took a photo of it anyway. On the night of 6 Oct 1997 I slept with the curtain removed from my window. Next morning while having a shower all my neck muscles had a spasm and I could hardly move it for two days. A tradesman in a nearby town had the same thing happen to him. It seems like fibrositis and I suspect mosquito bite but it seemed an unusual coincidence. I mention it in case there is an association. I recall accounts from about 1995 where women did in fact give birth to a "grey". I guess this could happen if for some reason the UFO responsible could not return or the implanted mother should be removed. I wonder what the upshot of these incidents were. I'll say this. Life is not boring. Anyone who thinks it is should pull their head out of their ass. Naturally I shall have to spare no effort to protect these girls from exposure and intimidation, however I have already been in touch with several local UFO groups to let them know this is going on. I shall report further, and seek to make a direct interview with K if it seems warranted. I hope I have done right so far. Lawrie Williams_______________________
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 13 Re: Witness Anonymity From: James Easton <pulsar@compuserve.com> Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 22:08:54 -0400 Fwd Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 11:40:20 -0400 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity Clearing down some archive CompuServe material, I notice that on the MUFON forum, Joe Stefula once addressed the subject of royalties from "Witnessed" and wrote of Linda Cortile: "I have copies of her telephone calls to Rich Butler in which she stated she gets 50% of all money made by Hopkins on her story". If that should be inaccurate, hopefully Linda will correct Joe's claim. The question of witness anonymity should be straightforward, but seems to be more complex when an alleged abuse victim and perhaps the nature of the abuse itself, acquires something of a celebrity status. This may be mutually exclusive and detrimental to those who genuinely believe themselves to be such victims. I also note that Joe Stefula mentioned, "Linda was selling her picture with lips impressions on the bottom". If true, it might be argued that is tantamount to kissing the sympathy vote goodbye, particularly if in the first instance the story is perceived by many to be somewhat more dramatised than traumatised. In stark contrast, I'm reminded of Henry, who I met three years running at an annual UFO conference. Henry had a story to tell, but would always stop short of actually telling it. "I've been up in the light", he would reluctantly confide. Even that seemed a painful exercise. Henry was a plumber from Glasgow, where men are men and sheep are eternally grateful. You just don't get abducted by aliens in Glasgow. Not if you've any sense. As I was born and bred in Glasgow, Henry and I shared a lot of stories, laughs and not a few pints. Under normal circumstances, that would have sufficed. "I know what it's like. I've been on the slab", was all Henry would confess in his weakest moments. Henry told me that had been his last conference. He had returned in search of an explanation, but was going home to throw out all his UFO books and magazines. "There are no answers for me here", he said, with customary sincerity. James. E-mail: pulsar@compuserve.com
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 13 Re: Solved Abduction cases? From: clark@canby.mn.frontiercomm.net [Jerome Clark] Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 21:01:19 PDT Fwd Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 11:36:40 -0400 Subject: Re: Solved Abduction cases? > Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 12:49:06 -0500 (CDT) > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net> > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Solved Abduction cases? > >Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 02:15:31 -0500 > >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> > >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Solved Abduction cases? > >Jerry writes, > >>Dennis, > >You might also turn to a paper I've had several occasions > >>recently to mention here: Stuart Appelle's devastating critique of > >>"conventional" explanations for abduction phenomena. > >Hi Jerry, Sasquatch, Greg, > >Jerry, (if) it's not too long a piece, and wouldn't violate any of Stuarts > >copyrights (and, assuming you have a way to 'scan' the thing) could you > >please post a copy of Steuart Appelle's paper? > >Here's hoping, and thanx in advance if you can. > >John Velez > Dear John, List, et al: > Stuart Appelle's paper which Jerry mentions, "The Abduction Experience: A > Critical Evaluation of Theory and Evidence," takes up 50 pages of fine print > in the Journal of UFO Studies, New Series, Vol. 6, 1995/1996, and would > represent a serious scanning commitment on someone's part, copyright issues > aside. > You might check the CUFOS web page to see if it's there, although I would > suspect not. Otherwise, the issue is available for $21 from CUFOS, which > includes postage, at 2457 W. Peterson Avenue, Chicago, IL 60659, ph: (312) > 271-3611. Orders outside the US include $3.00. > I doubt seriously that Mr. Apelle himself would characterize what is a > measured, thoughtful consideration of all sides of a controversial subject > "a devastating critique of 'conventional' explanations of abduction > phenomena," as Jerry Clark does. The UFO research and literature, in > general, is found just as wanting as the blinkered, skeptical approach. > Here's a sample (note I do not imply typical) quote from Appelle: > "If the evidence offered so far cannot completely explain the abduction > experience in prosaic terms, other explanations are required. The most > prominent alternative is the ET hypothesis. But here again, there is as yet > no evidence that requires this explanation. And in the absence of such > evidence, the argument that abduction experiences are veridical strains > credulity on many fronts." (p. 66) > Jerry seems to object when I make essentially the same statement, perhaps > because I'm not as quite as eloquent as Mr. Appelle, although I would point > out that this is e-mail, not a learned journal. > Dennis Dennis, With all due respect, you are not making the same point. Appelle's point, given the current status of the evidence (at the bare beginning of what is surely going to be a long, complicated investigation into a difficult, elusive phenomenon), is one with which most reasonable persons, including the undersigned, would find no reason to quarrel. In fact, at this stage of the discussion, you could even respond, "But of course." Your point seems to be that the phenomenon is so obviously a product of social pathology and ufological credulity that only fools think otherwise. You've even suggested that a novelist with no known background in this subject -- Don DeLillo -- is the one to whom we ought to turn for wisdom in the matter. A suggestion I find pretty strange, even as rabble-rousing -- or, as I hope, tongue-in-cheek -- hyberbole. Appelle's argument, which cannot be reduced to the short paragraph you quote, is that social, psychological, and other conventional theories about abductions do not explain the phenomenon; in other words, the explanations that to you are so obvious are not so at all when examined closely. (Eddie Bullard comes to the same conclusion from a different starting point.) Appelle writes, entirely reasonably, that the alternative explanation -- that abductions are event-level interactions with ETs -- requires far more and better evidence than we have seen to date. It logically follows, I should think, that objective inquiry is a more logical next step than inflated rhetoric -- on either side -- and so is a modest acknowledgement that the abduction question is still wide open, not closed shut in a cell guarded day and night by psycho- socially inclined ufologists and debunkers. Only one thing seems obvious at this moment: abductions are a phenomenon in search of an explanation. In the meantime, agnosticism, anyone? Jerry Clark
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 13 Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills From: XianneKei@aol.com [Rebecca Schatte] Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 22:35:08 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 12:22:09 -0400 Subject: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills From: xalium@netwrx.net (Tom King) Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 15:41:44 EST Fwd Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 21:25:33 -0400 Subject: Re: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills > It appears the U.S. showing is being surpressed until D.B. > Coopers money bag falls into the right laps. Being suppressed by whom? I listened to the Elders on Sightings on the Radio, and they made no bones about the fact that this was going to highest bidder. No, they aren't gonna do the video thing, they are going for TV. It sounds like Lee and Britt Elders have the rights to the footage in the US and until they get through doing whatever it is they do footage, we'll see it on TV. Rebecca
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 13 Re: Witness Anonymity From: Don Allen <dona@totcon.com> Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 23:39:30 -0400 Fwd Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 12:24:01 -0400 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity At 10:13 AM 10/11/97 -0400, John Velez wrote: >Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 04:27:08 -0500 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity >>From: "C Hathaway & J. Presson" <earthwrk@doitnow.com> >>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net> >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity >>Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 23:04:01 -0700 >>We are lucky to see how dysfunctional Hopkins support groups are I >>guess. As denial seems to be the BIG red flag of both you and >>Linda. >Jeez, we are feeling judgemental (again) today aren't we? Get up >on the wrong side of the web again? <VBG> I have watched time and time again when someone would ask Linda NAPOLITANO (for that IS her real name and not the bogus "Cortile" alias, let's get real folks) a question or challenge her on an issue that she would get extremely rude. I have expressed my frank appraisal of her case and she has called me a "debunker". Yes, I DO happen to have this nasty habit of challenging bunk in UFOlogy where it's warranted. It doesn't make me any friends but then, I'm not in UFOlogy to make friends or kiss anyone's ass. I'm here to get to the raw truth. I despise frauds, con men and people who set themselves up as "authority figures" as Budd Hopklins has done, and who isn't even a licensed mental health professional. Just because Linda claims the bizarre events as truth in her case and that her story is supported by Budd Hopkins, Jerry Clark, Walt Andrus and her buds _doesn't_ necessarily make it an established factoid in UFOlogy. It might to you and a very few select others, but not to everyone else. I say she's fabricated her case completely out of thin air and there's not shred of truth to it whatsoever. I've talked to Joe Stefula and George Hansen on the phone extensively about this a few years back. I believe they were completely on the mark with their brutally frank assessment on her "story". With that said, I hereby CHALLENGE Linda, or any one or her supporters to prove her case as having any validity to it as being real. Let's see the substantiation of her evidence. Let's see the indisputable FACTS that conclusively proves _her story_ as the "abduction case of the century". IOW, I'm calling her supporters out - put up or shut up. Don
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 13 Re: Abduction Sat 4 Oct 1997 From: Skye Turell <turel33@west.net> Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 20:50:05 -0700 Fwd Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 12:24:54 -0400 Subject: Re: Abduction Sat 4 Oct 1997 >From: wlmss@peg.apc.org [Lawrie Williams] >Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 07:36:06 +1000 (GMT+1000) >To: starfriends@esosoft.com, updates@globalserve.net >Subject: Abduction Sat 4 Oct 1997. >I told her in my opinion the visitation was by an actual craft >with humanoids, because this is consistent with similar incidents >taking place around the world. I said the experience would have >slipped into a dream, like the part about running through the >woods. >I told D that K could expect a phantom pregnancy, but that it would >be ended with another visitation. I said this could be three months, >but that perhaps someone on the Internet could give me a more likely >"term". (K is unlikely to be pregnant by any human, so it looks like >a classic potential "maiden birth", what is mistakenly known as >"virgin birth" since ancient times - a mistranslation.) >I told her that it could be possible that the purpose of all this >was to make hybrids, half like us and half like them. Lawrie, I'm not sure it's a good idea to tell the girls what they should expect to experience. Let them have their own experiences and tell you. If it seems like they have common sorts of occurances, then tell them that others have done likewise, but don't plant ideas. That might lead them and it certainly will scare them. They will allow the information through that they are capable of integrating, and not more than that. That's a failsafe mechanism and you shouldn't try to override it...IMO. Skye Turell <turel33@west.net> Search for other documents from or mentioning: turel33 | wlmss |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 13 Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills From: "WHITE" <mjawhite@digitaldune.net> [John White] Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 21:28:55 -0700 Fwd Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 12:26:22 -0400 Subject: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills To List, et al., >Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 09:34:36 -0700 (PDT) >From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@ucs.orst.edu> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills Jim points out that we're dancing around the issue when we compare the "Moscow" footage with the "Mexico" footage and note its similarity..... >It's about time that someone in Mexico City identify the several buildings >shown in those saucer photos, then estimate which other building the video >was taken from, go there, take his own photos, and post them on the web. But what I find interesting, given Sean Jones' forwarded post of the London newspaper picture of the 1990 Moscow photo, is that the Phoenix folks working on the Mexico footage haven't weighed in on it by saying, "Yes/No, the 'Moscow' photo is/isn't a still from the Mexico video." But maybe they haven't seen the post, and when they do, they'll let us know. Best, John White mjawhite@digitaldune.net
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 13 'Sighting' 21st September, '97, Lake Ontario From: JJ <JJ@mail.per.to> [Jennifer Jarvis] Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 00:49:11 -0400 Fwd Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 12:28:42 -0400 Subject: 'Sighting' 21st September, '97, Lake Ontario Dear Errol and list, I was standing on the north shore of Lake Ontario on Sunday, 21st September, at a location in Oakville. I was filming the "usual evening activities" out over the lake, when my friend drew my attention to a red object due south-east of us. The object was at approximately 25 degrees elevation, and apparently over the area of St. Catharine's. My friend said that it was a red object. On looking through the viewfinder of my camera (x66) it appeared to be the Maple Leaf - it was a large Canadian flag, or a blimp of some sort, displaying the Maple Leaf. The timing on this event was 19.18 hrs. D.S.T. and the object appeared to drift slowly in a slightly easterly direction. I am wondering if this is related to the sightings reported in other locations near the lake around that time. Best wishes. Jennifer Jarvis
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 13 Re: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 2, Number 39 From: kwyatt3@juno.com (Keith E Wyatt) Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 00:27:56 pdt Fwd Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 12:42:33 -0400 Subject: Re: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 2, Number 39 On Sun, 12 Oct 1997 18:33:36 -0400 UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> writes: It would be nice if the writer of UFO roundup would better clarify the source, Date of Publication and other identifying information. >MYSTERY METEOR CAUSES A >BIG STIR IN EL PASO, TEXAS > > On Thursday, October 9, 1997, at 12:47 p.m., an >unusual meteor flashed through the sky over El Paso, >Texas, creating a massive explosion that shook homes >from El Paso to Las Cruces, New Mexico. Does anyone have a photograph of the impact zone for this meteor impact? > Another UFO appeared at 7:35 p.m. above the >original triangular object. "The original object did not >move at all during this...Both 'triangles' went slowly >west and disappeared over the horizon." (Many thanks >to Steve Wilson Sr. for this report.) > >from the UFO Files... A while back there was a photograph in a UK UFO publication that showed a KC 135 refueling a triangle shaped aircraft. Does anyone know if there was an analysis of this photograph or the negative? > >1947: ARIZONA'S ROSWELL > CASE > > "Graves also remembered seeing five men and >two trucks near the dome. One of the trucks was >of the military (2.5-ton) type, capable of carrying >personnel or equipment. 'But I didn't see any >equipment like cranes or anything like that,' Graves >said, 'And the men didn't seem to be doing any >work. I could not identify a uniform.'" > Using Salyer's ranch for size and distance >perception, Graves estimated that the dome was >36 feet (11 meters) in diameter and maybe a mile >away." This is most likely a Project Mogul activity. If the account is true then it is very likely that Armed Forces were conducting Mogul activities in the Arizona area. Keith ---------------------------------------------- Keith Wyatt <kwyatt3@juno.com> http://www.teleport.com/~kewyatt/yaufowp.html PGP Key available on request --------------------------------------------------
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 13 Re: Abduction Sat 4 Oct 1997 From: Michael Wayne Malone <wayne@fly.HiWAAY.net> Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 06:14:49 -0500 (CDT) Fwd Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 13:01:42 -0400 Subject: Re: Abduction Sat 4 Oct 1997 > From: wlmss@peg.apc.org [Lawrie Williams] > Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 07:36:06 +1000 (GMT+1000) > To: starfriends@esosoft.com, updates@globalserve.net > Subject: Abduction Sat 4 Oct 1997. > Abduction Oct 4 1997 > I told D that she could reassure her friend she would come to no > harm. I was told J is not afraid, just very curious. Neither girl > would dream of trying to tell their parents about this. > I told her in my opinion the visitation was by an actual craft > with humanoids, because this is consistent with similar incidents > taking place around the world. I said the experience would have > slipped into a dream, like the part about running through the > woods. > I told D that K could expect a phantom pregnancy, but that it would > be ended with another visitation. I said this could be three months, > but that perhaps someone on the Internet could give me a more likely > "term". (K is unlikely to be pregnant by any human, so it looks like > a classic potential "maiden birth", what is mistakenly known as > "virgin birth" since ancient times - a mistranslation.) > > I told her that it could be possible that the purpose of all this > was to make hybrids, half like us and half like them. WHY DID YOU DO THIS????????????????????? From this point on, any further data gained from these subjects is tainted. If they have any experiances that in any way match what you told them, there is no way of knowing the real from the imaginary planted by you. This is a typical example of BAD fieldwork. Search for other documents from or mentioning: wayne | wlmss |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 13 Re: Alien Autopsy Film From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net> Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 09:03:11 -0700 Fwd Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 13:04:02 -0400 Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy Film Hi List, I don't know how many of you know Theresa Carlson; but, she was my co-Section Leader on the MUFON sections of CompuServe. She has sent me what is the most compelling evidence to date that the Alien Autopsy Film is a hoax. She has given me permission to speak publically about it; and, is compiling a proof package which will be published soon. If you look at the still of the first autopsy at: http://www.uforeport.com/stills.html which is mis-labeled "butt shot" and compare this image with some of the beginning footage of the second autopsy film, you will see that there are some remarkable similarities of the two bodies. It appears that the Santilli Unknown Entity (SUE) and the Santilli Alien Less Leg Injury (SALLI) are either the same "body" or cast from the same mold. SALLI and SUE must be artifical creations. I must admit that I have been flip-flopping since the beginning about SUE being an alien body. I even once was convinced it was real. Theresa maintained an open mind and researched this endlessly in frame-by-frame reviews. When she gained access to these SALLI images and compared certain aspects of the bodies, she forwarded this to me. I am now convinced that this film is a hoax. I am bringing this out now because I fear that others might claim credit for her research. She or I will let you know where to find her research package once it is published. Terry
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 13 Re: Witness Anonymity From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 05:15:37 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 12:58:59 -0400 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity >Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 16:04:37 -0400 >From: Peregrine Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> >Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >The Duke of Mendoza presents his compliments. >>Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 04:27:08 -0500 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity >I was going to refrain from comment on this thread until Linda >returned from her son's nuptials, but this is getting out of >hand. Hello Mendoza. I was too, and jumped in for the very same reason, I thought it was getting out of hand myself. The diffrence is that I'm trying to redcross for a friend that I know has been through a lot in the last few years. For a moment,...assume that Linda is telling the truth. Can you imagine what it's been like for her? The stresses and all of melodrama that has surrounded the case, etc.etc.etc. Crap like that would take a toll on the best of us. It has with Linda. Her responses are almost 'symptomatic' of it. Someone who has just had it with explaining, and constantly being challenged and accused of all manner of low activity. Again assuming that all of the above is true, do her quick defensive responses and frayed nerves still seem such a mystery to you. But that's assuming that she is telling the truth. If you assume the opposite is true then yes, you are left with unexplainable behavior and responses. You're a bright guy Peter, surely you see my point. I make no excuses for her or her responses. I don't have to, I didn't write the stuff. I'm only asking that you consider this from (all) angles. And that would include the possibilty that Linda is telling the truth. Same goes for all abductees. Depending on which 'tack' you take you will see what you will see. Capiche' paisan? <G> >I dunno quite how you define a flame, but I think you'll find >that the pattern of events is generally that whenever a hard >question or a criticism is directed at Linda, she responds with >gratuitous insults, bizarre gibes and no facts or explanations. >Go check the archive and see if that's not so more often than >not. Her classic response is to refuse to answer at all. I agree Peter. I have never stated otherwise in any of my e-mails about it. Again if viewed from the perspective that we may be dealing with a person that has endured the trials that Linda has, even her frayed nerves responses make sense. When viewed from any other angle explanations for it are hard to come by. >Certainly some of the criticism has been trenchant, but (as I am >getting tired of saying and no doubt everyone else is even more >weary of hearing) Linda is entangled with very large claims. If >she chooses to believe what emerges out of her mouth when under >hypnosis, that's her privilege, but also her problem. It doesn't >release her (and her cohorts, such as Budd Hopkins) from an >essential principle of dealing with claims that fly in the face >of common sense (let alone scientific or judicial practice). >Which is that it's up to *her* (and company) to provide the >watertight proof of the claims. That also means that if someone >falls over laughing at the "case" and splutters "Linda, you're a >hoaxer", she's the one who has to prove she's not, *not* the >other way round. Good manners, but nothing else, would suggest >that anyone making the accusation should explain why they reach >that conclusion, but it doesn't alter the burden of proof. Not >many ufologists seem to know that. I'll leave the arguement over burden of proof to another time and another thread. I'll just say, that when I first went to Budd it wasn't to get involved in proving anything to anyone other than to myself. It was only after I became convinced that something real was going on that I turned my attention toward reporting publicly. If the Red Chinese were to attack Kent in the morning and you happened to be driving by and saw the troops amassing for an attack I daresay that you'd risk life and limb (not to mention mere reputation or public image) to warn as many Englishmen as you could muster. That's why I'm so 'public' about having been abducted. I have offered myself up like a sacrificial lamb to the 'God of science' repeatedly. (Something I'll never do again BTW) Each time the offer was ignored or dismissed as unworthy of persuit. NOVA being a prime example of this. So screw proving anything to anyone, they DON'T WANT TO KNOW THE TRUTH. Whatever that 'truth' may be. I don't get it, you'd think they'd jump at the opportunity to get one of us and "do the science." But you and I know how much real science is being done in abduction research don't we. <G> I can just as smugly demand that you prove abductions have any other explanation. Can you? Or can anyone else. Why, in the last twenty plus years hasn't ANYONE conclusively proven that abductions are something else. There's a lot of talk and mutually exclusive theories bandied about but nothing conclusive,...-ON EITHER SIDE!- Sometimes it comes down to simple human trust and openmindedness. We can't ALL be insane or concocting the stories or any of the other ten thousand 'explanations.' Of the many thousands, how many would you say are just ordinary people reporting the simple truth of their own experiences. Knowing you I think you'd say none. But then that's not looking at ALL the possible explanations. Why isn't "maybe they are just telling the truth" one of the scientific possibilities. Why isn't 'that little theory' given as much creedence as say Persinger or Loftus. I'm afraid it is simply a matter of minds too small to consider all possibilities. Minds unwilling to explore anything that does not fit into the box marked, "known." No, one of the possibilities that must always be foremost on the table is the possibility that a majority may be telling the truth. Do the science to determine if it is so or not. But all there is is armchair critisizm of those who -do- attempt the work (whether they do it well or not) while no-one who _is_ qualified is willing to risk doing it. Catch 22 >And some are better informed than others. Julie *is* qualified to >comment, and her opinion carries weight. >By all means object to this, or any other deconstruction of Our >Lady of the Sands. Demanding my liver for summary consumption >along with your world's-best fries in the process is just fine. >But it or anyone else's criticism, no matter how offensively >*they* may put it, *doesn't* justify the kind of language you >used to Julie. It puts you on a par with Linda's explosive >irrationality, and you are above that, when you want to be. Correction, when I -need to be- I can throw hands with the very best of them and I'm not afraid to do so. I spoke to Linda about my thoughts concerning her posts, but she's a 'big girl' and has to live her own life her own way. But I'm also very aware of her as a person and I'm not going to let the likes of a Julie Presson (who 'raves' every bit as good as Linda) go unchecked. I didn't want any part of this either Peter. Like I said, I got in for the same reason you did. Let's hope this sucker levels off or dies a quiet death,...but what it was, just had to stop. It was becoming embarassing for -all- concerned. We're sounding like two aging, battle weary knights who find themselves fully armed and dressed for battle and wondering why they were ever fighting to begin with. I know that I do. Here's hoping for higher ground Mendoza. I open my helmet and lower my lance. (Nothing phallic intended! <G>) As always, I remain, your friend. Don Juan Rodriguez De Velez John Velez jvif@spacelab.net
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 13 Re: Abduction credibility From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com> Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 12:01:26 -0700 Fwd Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 13:15:44 -0400 Subject: Re: Abduction credibility > From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>, on 10/12/97 10:21 AM: > From: ujack@pop3.scrapcity.cnchost.com [Mark Medford] > To: updates@globalserve.net > Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 00:05:39 +0000 > Subject: No Absolutes? > How, then, do we measure the credibility of the event? Might we > say, for instance: if an encounter fits 60% (or whatever) of > the established profile, it's "credible" - allowing room for those > aspects that are - understandably - subject to one's unique > perspective. I think it's important to keep in mind the ambiguous > nature of the phenomenon. Even with the common cold, six different > people can suffer (or not) in a hundred different ways! They still > have a cold... I think Hynek's standard for credibility stands us in good stead here. If only a single witness reports an event, its credibility can be no more than 3, no matter how credible the witness may be. ------ Mark Cashman, creator of The Temporal Doorway at http://www.geocities.com/~mcashman - Original digital art, writing, and UFO research - Author of SF novels available at... http://www.infohaus.com/access/by-seller/The_Temporal_Doorway_Storefront ------
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 13 Re: The sky over Roswell and estimates of speed From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com> Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 12:11:16 -0700 Fwd Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 13:35:04 -0400 Subject: Re: The sky over Roswell and estimates of speed > From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>, on 10/12/97 11:10 AM: > Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 22:27:07 -0700 > From: Ted Viens <drtedv@smart1.net> > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: The sky over Roswell > > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > > From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com> > > Subject: re: UFO UpDate: Re: The sky over Roswell > > Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 00:53:28 -0700 > > In the interest of providing some material for discussion, I ran > > your estimate of 90 degrees of travel in 1 min (1.5 degrees / > > sec) through my distance / speed spreadsheet for a range of > > altitudes ranging from 1,300 - 21,000 feet. I used the > > intermediate angle of 45 degrees elevation to calculate the > > resulting speeds. > > I also calculated the speed at 100 and 200 miles. > > At 1300' = 33.33 mph > > At 2600' = 66.66 mph > > At 5280' = 133.32 mph > > At 10,560' = 266.63 mph > > At 15,840' = 399.95 mph > > At 21,120' = 533.27 mph > > At 100 mi =13,331.69 mph or 21,455.33 km/h > > At 200 mi = 26,663.39 mph or 42,910.65 km/h > Very good work, Mark. A few weeks ago I prepared a spreadsheet > of the very same material as a tool for skywatchers but I have > been too lazy to type it in yet. Let us examine two different > cases of a ninety degree overhead pass. (snip) > Second, passing from zenith to horizon. From observer to horizon > intercept to earth center makes a nice right triangle. Arccos > (radius of earth/ radius to flight path) equals some 12.734 > degrees. This indicates some 903.63 miles of travel in a minute > or some 54,217.8 miles an hour. > This mostly illustrates how treacherous trig can be if you don't > define the situation well. I think I must not have communicated very well what was being measured. I selected a point halfway between zenith and horizon, and measured the actual speed of an object at that point traveling 1.5 degrees in the span of one second, and then multiplied that speed by the seconds per hour, resulting in the mph of an object crossing the sky at 1.5 degrees per sec. I believe this is close to what is called the "instantaneous speed". Since the size of a degree does not vary from horizon to zenith, the speed should be the same at any point on the arc. Since your observation was of an object travelling approx. 1.5 degrees per second across the sky, I believe that my estimates are correct, but I look forward to any further comments. ------ Mark Cashman, creator of The Temporal Doorway at http://www.geocities.com/~mcashman - Original digital art, writing, and UFO research - Author of SF novels available at... http://www.infohaus.com/access/by-seller/The_Temporal_Doorway_Storefront ------
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 13 Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills From: "WHITE" <mjawhite@digitaldune.net> Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 09:42:02 -0700 Fwd Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 13:40:03 -0400 Subject: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: xalium@netwrx.net (Tom King) >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills >Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 15:41:44 EST <snip> Big thank you to Tom who wrote: >Trying to compare to superimpose the "notw.jpg" to the Mexico >City jpgs are a complete waste of time. These are not the same >sightings or buildings. <snip> >The real issue is: Why was this footage broadcast internationally >over Televista Television last week, and not anything here. >Tom King, Skywatcher >Arizona Skywatch director >AZ Skywatch http://personal.netwrx.net/xalium/skywatch/skywatch.htm >OVNI Chapterhouse at http://personal.netwrx.net/xalium/ufovideo.htm I had tried superimposing the photos, and they were similar, within the limits of my printer and poor quality printer paper. I'm glad to hear they aren't from the same footage. That needed to be said by someone who knew. Again, "Big Thank You, Tom." As to why the footage was broadcast internationally on Televista and not here..... Televista checked out the Mexico City site and the witnesses, had its video engineers vet the original tape, decided it was OK, and went with it as a serious story? Or maybe it was just first with the checkbook, and used it as filler? So, now, how do we get to see it? Either way it probably belongs solely to Televista, and if they won't permit it to be shown by a US station, then are we going to be left with some fuzzy stills and an open question? This is frustrating. (By the way, I hear tell, that Televista, Mexico's big broadcaster, cut a satellite deal with Hughes Communication not too long ago; it also sold a 49% interest in Cablevisi=F3n, one of its subsidiaries, to Tele-Communciations Inc., (TCI), and then TCI inked a deal with Gates to use Microsoft programs for interactive TV. So, who knows, maybe the footage was a picture of a Hughes satellite cable-laying machine wiring Mexico City apartment complexes for interactive tv..... a little humor from a reality-challenged, terminally-perplexed person.) Just another Monday morning, Best all, John White mjawhite@digitaldune.net
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 13 Re: Russian UFO Picture [was Aug '97 Mexico City From: Michael Christol <mchristo@mindspring.com> Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 12:09:19 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 13:49:38 -0400 Subject: Re: Russian UFO Picture [was Aug '97 Mexico City >Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 14:04:39 -0700 >From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills >Michael Christol wrote: >> Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 00:25:02 -0500 >> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >> From: Michael Christol <mchristo@mindspring.com> >> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills >[snip] >> I dont' think the Russian photo looks anything like the Mexico >> City pic. The Russian UFO looks more like a "hubcap" tossed in >> the air, photographed and superimposed over a picture or drawing >> of an apartment building. >A side-by-side comparison of the buildings indicates that they are not >the same building. And the hubcaps are of a different type. One looks >like a '48 Ford while the other is a '88 Lazar. <G> >Terry Grin...I hear you. The problem I had with the post was that the buildings looked more like a drawing than an actual photograph. They looked very washed out... and regardless what else was said, the UFO over Mexico City did look like the Meier or Lazar vehicle, but the Object in the Russian photo was a different angle and it appeared "thick" on the edges with the coupla almost recessed within the object. Thus, it appears more like a hubcap to me. I would like to see the origional photo. I might be able to get a better view that way. REgards, Mike
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 13 Re: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 2, Number 39 From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net> Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 11:28:25 -0700 Fwd Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 13:50:58 -0400 Subject: Re: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 2, Number 39 >From UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 2, Number 39: > From: Masinaigan@aol.com > Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 13:32:57 -0400 (EDT) > To: updates@globalserve.net > Subject: Fwd: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 2, Number 39 > UFO ROUNDUP > Volume 2, Number 39 > October 12, 1997 > Editor: Joseph Trainor > ANOMALOUS TRACKS > PHOTOGRAPHED ON MARS [snip] > One observer estimated that, based on the > formula that one Surveyor pixel equals 30 feet (9 meters), > the tracks are 415 feet (126 meters) wide. This > suggests that the tracks were made by an immense > vehicle, perhaps similar to the one used by the Jawas > in the movie "Star Wars." > The age of the tracks is unknown. However, it appears > that they are recent and appeared after the great dust > storm on Mars back in the early 1970s. > The photo can be found at the following URL-- > http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap971006.html > (Many thanks to Twitch and Chris for pointing out this > Surveyor photo.) [snip] Those aren't tracks. Those are sand dunes. Terry
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 13 Re: Abduction Sat 4 Oct 1997 From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com> Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 12:51:06 -0700 Fwd Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 13:44:58 -0400 Subject: Re: Abduction Sat 4 Oct 1997 > From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>, on 10/12/97 8:34 PM: > From: wlmss@peg.apc.org [Lawrie Williams] > Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 07:36:06 +1000 (GMT+1000) > To: starfriends@esosoft.com, updates@globalserve.net > Subject: Abduction Sat 4 Oct 1997. I hope no one will take undeserved offense, but it seems to me as a researcher and investigator that this account of an "investigation" represents much of the problem I have with abduction "research". I will also say as a parent that this is the kind of thing that worries me the most about parents and investigators who uncritically accept abduction as reality. What psychological effect the actions by the investigator will have can hardly be determined, but they are unlikely to be positive. > My informant is D, aged 16. She has a girlfriend K, also 16. > I interviewed D on Oct 3 1997 and reported to the Internet > that she had seen an orange glow in a nearby paddock a week > earlier. > K remembered more. Through the past week she has kept insisting > that it was not a dream. She says she was on a "spaceship". She > says was on an operating table surrounded by small beings. She > saw them slice her belly open crosswise, then she was running > through the woods with her baby, and they were chasing her, > trying to take it off her. > I told D that she could reassure her friend she would come to no > harm. I was told J is not afraid, just very curious. Neither girl > would dream of trying to tell their parents about this. So the child has either a) Had a horrifying real experience or b) A terrifying dream But the investigator reassures them that "no harm will come to them". On what basis? Still, this is far better than what is to come. I am also very concerned that the witnesses are not sharing this information with parents, and I wonder whether the investigator has encouraged them to do so. > I told her in my opinion the visitation was by an actual craft > with humanoids, because this is consistent with similar incidents > taking place around the world. I said the experience would have > slipped into a dream, like the part about running through the > woods. Consistency is not sufficient to determine reality. The investigator should know that. At least, the investigator should follow the primary principle of objective investigation and not contribute information to the witnesses which could corrupt later accounts. > I told D that K could expect a phantom pregnancy, but that it would > be ended with another visitation. I said this could be three months, > but that perhaps someone on the Internet could give me a more likely > "term". (K is unlikely to be pregnant by any human, so it looks like > a classic potential "maiden birth", what is mistakenly known as > "virgin birth" since ancient times - a mistranslation.) This is even worse. Now the "investigator" has laid out the entire scenario for the witnesses. If a hoax is in progress, it will be improved. If the experience was a dream or psychological in origin, it will lead to additional problems. And if the experience was real, we will never know, since it has been corrupted beyond repair. > I told her that it could be possible that the purpose of all this > was to make hybrids, half like us and half like them. > Because K is of a fairly strong Christian background, I warned > D about the dangers of K being attracted into a cult which uses > the old ideology and paints it onto a framework that includes > spaceships and other modern terminology. I said that if this > girl now develops an inner voice it is likely to claim to be > a saint she is familiar with. > I said that she could also expect some of a wide range of known > paranormal effects like clairvoyance, clairaudience, astral travel, > oob's, levitation or long-striding. We agreed the levitation would > be the most fun. The girls are not overly familiar with current > UFO mythology and were unaware that K's experience seems to be a > classic abduction of its type. I confess I was fairly bemused to > hear almost a stereotyped description but I am sure it is authentic. > My informant was also startled to see a tiny person dash across her > bedcovers. She seemed to think it was an actual hallucination rather > than an illusion, after I described the perceptual difference between > the two. I told her that calling it an hallucination did not mean a > humanoid had actually not been there. This happened days after the > actual visitation. The unethical behavior of this "investigator" is astonishing to me. I hope that the names of the abductees will be made available to the major organizations so that if this tale finds its way into the files, serious researchers will know how contaminated it is. > Note that this is not something that happened a year ago or to a > FOAF. I am right here following this one, with care and respect > and more than a little awe. Too bad a little care and respect for the witness and for the research community didn't enter into this "investigation". I can only tenuously hope that if the witness has psychological problems either caused by or resulting from the alleged "event", that their parents will notice, seek professional help, and isolate these teenagers from this "investigator". > D reviewed the above file and said it was OK. I also have met > her mother who mentioned that D was very frightened every night. > She seemed to want me to reassure her daughter. I said I could > not do that honestly, save to say she was probably not going to > be harmed that the perceived phenomena would fade over a few > months, indeed they were likely to suddenly come good and seem > benevolent. The mother knew more than I expected. Well, at least the mother knows something. But the investigator seems blissfully unaware of the potential psychological effects of comments and information provided to the witnesses and the mother. Also, one wonders whether the investigator is aware of the "Stockholm Syndrome" and its effect on witness perspective. > The mother challenged me to suggest what "they" could want with > her daughter. In light of the conversation I'd earlier had with > D, and as D made no suggestion, I had to say I did not know. I > just quoted Charles Fort: "We are farmed." That's a calming, helpful comment (sarcasm). > D also claims that the "scar" behind her ear that she got after > the childhood visitation has returned. Both she and her boyfriend > attest that it was not there before last weekend. I saw three > brown blobs there like normal skin discoloration you see in > blonde people. But I took a photo of it anyway. Signs of confabulation ignored by the investigator. > Naturally I shall have to spare no effort to protect these girls > from exposure and intimidation, however I have already been in > touch with several local UFO groups to let them know this is > going on. Maybe these girls need to be protected from investigation. > I shall report further, and seek to make a direct interview > with K if it seems warranted. I hope I have done right so far. You haven't. A reputable investigator wouldn't treat an NL case as shabbily as this case has been treated. The data are worthless, because the investigator has told the witnesses the entire profile of the phenomenon. Any psychological impact of a real event or psychological cause of a non-real event has been made worse by lightly considered comments which could be extremely frightening. Basic things seem to have been overlooked: Has any effort been made to determine if the witnesses have any psychological problems? Yes, this must be a first step in checking an abduction. Reference to a reputable psychologist with no particular interest in UFOs might even be considered essential, regardless of the truth or reality of the account. If the account is true, psychological counseling is needed. If the account is not true, but stems from psychological problems or incipient problems, then a psychologist is needed to determine that. Has any effort been made to determine the level of familiarity the witness has with the abduction literature (access to The Learning Channel is even sufficient, now)? This must be done to help determine the probability of a hoax. Has any effort been made to investigate the background of the witnesses and their families? This helps both to determine credibility and the possibility of a hoax. Has any effort been made to determine if there are any corroborating sightings in the area of these events at the time of these events? This is essential to determine the reality of the event - conformance to profile is not sufficient in this regard. I try to keep a level head in these matters, but psychological mistreatment of children, which is what this "investigation" seems clearly to represent, outrages me. Teenage girls, just developing sexual attitudes that will affect the rest of their life, are essentially being told that they have been raped by aliens, will experience a pregnancy, and then their child will be taken by those same aliens. The effects of this are incalculable. ------ Mark Cashman, creator of The Temporal Doorway at http://www.geocities.com/~mcashman - Original digital art, writing, and UFO research - Author of SF novels available at... http://www.infohaus.com/access/by-seller/The_Temporal_Doorway_Storefront ------ Search for other documents from or mentioning: mcashman | wlmss |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 13 New Doty Interview From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose) Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 20:34:46 +0100 Fwd Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 15:04:08 -0400 Subject: New Doty Interview Forwarded from http://www.mcs.com/~kvg/smear/v44/ss970901.htm ***************************** OFFICIAL PUBLICATION OF THE SAUCER & UNEXPLAINED CELESTIAL EVENTS RESEARCH SOCIETY EDITOR AND STILL SUPREME COMMANDER: James W. MoseleyNON-SCHEDULED NEWSLETTER Volume 44, No. 8 September 1st, 1997MAILING ADDRESS: P. 0. Box 1709 Key West, FL 33041 (snipped) TELEPHONE INTERVIEW WITH THE SEMI-MYSTERIOUS SGT. RICHARD DOTY: While in New Mexico recently, we telephoned former Sergeant Richard Doty, who, before retiring from the Air Force, worked for several years in their Office of Special Investigations (OSI). It was during that period, in the 1980s, that he knew William (Bill) Moore, and some say that he helped Moore and Jaime Shandera forge the notorious MJ-12 documents. Doty, who is now with the New Mexico State Police, told us that he was investigated by the FBI in 1987, which would be very shortly after Moore first made the "Presidential Briefing Document" public. Obviously, Doty was a suspect. He took and passed a lie detector test, he says. Doty is far from being a UFO skeptic. He believes that there was an MJ-12, perhaps under a different name, and that the information in the MJ-12 documents is generally true even if they are not authentic. Doty believes also that there were two UFO crashes in New Mexico in 1947, and that alien bodies were involved. He does not accept the two recent Air Force reports about the Roswell Incident, and as for Santilli's recent alien autopsy video, he feels that the film shows "non-humans but not aliens", whatever that means. On the other hand, Doty does not believe in abductions. He says that he investigated 17 abduction cases in New Mexico around 1981, and found that they were all hoaxes, except for one case that impressed him somewhat favorably. We did not ask Doty enough about his relationship with Bill Moore, and we have been trying to call him back for more information. He told us that he has known Moore since about 1980, but has been out of touch with him for several years. Originally, he was called upon to investigate Moore for the OSI. Moore later became a source or conduit, but was "terminated" as a source in 1986. Doty did not say why. Rumor has it that, while in the Service, Doty got into trouble regarding other questionable documents - not just the MJ-12 series, and it is known that before the end of his enlistment, he was reassigned out of Intelligence into the commissary ( = food). As a New Mexico State Policeman, he seems to be doing well. We do hope to talk to him again... (snipped)
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 13 Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Still From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 19:09:55 +0100 Fwd Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 15:13:21 -0400 Subject: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Still >From: "WHITE" <mjawhite@digitaldune.net> [John White] >To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills >Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 05:42:34 -0700 >>Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 21:34:39 +0100 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >>From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Stills of the Mexican Footage >Demon Sean <g>: Hiya John >There is a similarity in the architecture of the buildings. The >pufos (putative ufos) look to be even more similar: This is Jerry's conclusion but that is as far has he has commented. >I printed >out both pics and held them up to the light, alternately >superimposing one on the other, and as I near as I can tell, the >pufos have the same shape and dimensions, but are oriented >differently to their respective buildings. If I had better >pics, (or thinner paper in my printer), superimposing the >buildings on one another would be easier, but, some of the >windows seem to me to match in size and spacing between the two >buildings. So, using the limited technology at my disposal, >(analogous to photo comparison work of astronomer folks) it would >seem, Sean, that the points of comparison have a dimensional >similarity, which, if calibrated by finer equipment than John's >eyes, a 60 watt bulb, and cheapo printer paper, might show that >there is an amazing coincidence: the photographers in Mexico City >and in Moscow were located at about the same distance and >orientation relative to the objects and the buildings. That is what we both commented on, they seem to be taken from roughly the same angle and the buildings are roughly the same dimension. The buildings are similar but that is as far as it goes. The Moscow building has a "out house" type of thing on top whilst the Mexico building does'nt, also the wondows whilst similar are also different. Basically the pics are _similar_ but that is as far as it goes full stop, period etc. :-) >(None of >which says much about the substantive nature of the pufos and >buildings involved: they either is or ain't from the same photo >shoot.) >There's something really neat about coincidence: it can frame >great truth and untrue great frames. The Phoenix folks will be >able to put paid to it. I certainly hope we get some results soon. >Thanks for the Moscow pic, No problem, :-) >John White mjawhite@digitaldune.net There are things in the universe billions of years older than our human race. They are vast, they are timeless. If they are aware of us at all we are of no more consequence to them as ants are to us. Sean Jones http://www.tedric.demon.co.uk/ http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Zone/1745/index.htm
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 13 Re: New and Wondering From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 16:27:29 -0400 Fwd Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 16:27:29 -0400 Subject: Re: New and Wondering This one, for some reason, got away from me last night and ended up being sent to the List, un-proofed and incomplete. Caused some understandable consternation..... (sigh!) >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: stenger@spindle.net (stenger@spindle.net) [Sharolyn Stenger] >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: New and Wondering >Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 16:01:23 -0500 >>From: ujack@pop3.scrapcity.cnchost.com [Mark Medford] >>To: updates@globalserve.net >>Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 00:05:39 +0000 >>Subject: New and Wondering >>Dear Friends, >>I'm new to this list and wondering about all of the negative posts. >>Would someone be willing to give me a nutshell version of what the >>raging battle is about? It seems, to my newbie eyes, primarily >>focused on a conflict of personalities. I'm sure the current fuss has >>it's root in some specific question. Just curious.... >>Thanks, >>Mark >Dear Mark and Friends, >Amen! I have so often wondered the same thing. One would think >that a subscription list with the name, 'UFO Updates', would be >exactly that - updated news of UFO sightings, activity, etc. No. You might expect a list with the name 'UFO _News_ UpDates' to be such. 'UpDates' allows for re-hashing, possible trashing, peer-bashing and above all (as is quite apparent) forthright, informed 'discussion' - all without bothersome, uninformed 'civilians' of the news.group type. With a soupcon of personality manifestation. >And, to be fair, there IS some good information shared. But you >have to wade through a tremendous amount of spleen-venting to >find it. What UpDates does do is to allow those of us who are: informed, un-informed, fence-sitters, eager to learn, sharers, or quibblers a forum to either voice or merely read without too much 'noise'. While there are those who take offence at the 'noise' that sometimes rises to an annoying level, others will observe the 'loudspeakers' and either have their suspicions confirmed change their minds about those individuals or simply grin and trash. Lets continue with some further observations..... There's a certain degree of difficulty in moderating a forum such as this List. 99% of posts to this address actually make it to your mailbox, almost all of it intact. Yes, some editing _is_ done - on occasion 'nasties' are removed. Less frequently, one is missed and there ensues the reason for removing those 'nasties'. I'm sure you're aware of what I'm referring to. The past couple of weeks have been a tad difficult. There was major indignation over my terminating the 'Witness Annonimity' thread. Several subscribers felt that by cutting it when I did I had impeded some up-coming 'revelations'. My concern at the time was that by not invoking foreclosure, several subscribers would end up embarrassing themselves in the heat of debate. Seems I should have stuck to my initial decision..... and where, by the way, _are_ those 'revelations'? My insistence that in order to participate in discussions here those with access to the Net should subscribe to the List brought forth more indignation. The rule from the outset here has been just that - you don't subscribe, your stuff doesn't get posted. Not because I'm being a hard-nosed bastard but to keep this List on a relatively even keel. The amount of crap that comes in this direction has to be seen to be believed. Plus, just because someone _has_ subscribed doesn't guarantee access to your mailbox. More filtering of "I believes", 'phenomenal theories', breathless observations, Channelers, blatant commercialism..... Everyone has a trash can and having to read everything is not a subscription-prerequisite. I'm told that 'filter' settings are an inordinately useful piece of coding. Threads, such as the ACC posts have become tedious and clouded in stupidity. Because I returned some of them - see 'Posting Rules' this List was branded as being part of the 'conspiracy', in league with 'big-business', etc., etc. Shades of Ed K. and Boylan! Perhaps, when 'ACC' becomes less clouded by 'facts'..... It's interesting that the 'Gulf Breeze Paper' discussion seems to have fizzled - surely the threats of litigation have not cowed the List? Barbara, Bruce? Thanksgiving comes early in Canada, Sue and I are off to do 'nasties' to some turkey we don't know. To Canadian readers we hope that your harvest has been good this year, to our 'cousins' to the south, you'll get yours in a couple of weeks, to those across the 'pond' Harvest Home is an expression I've not used for almost thirty-years, but gobble-gobble to you too..... ["Martha! - lessee what pudding gets the wrong end of _this_ schtick!"] ebk
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 13 Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@ucs.orst.edu> Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 12:40:02 -0700 (PDT) Fwd Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 23:10:37 -0400 Subject: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills > From: "WHITE" <mjawhite@digitaldune.net> [John White] > To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net> > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills > Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 21:28:55 -0700 > >Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 09:34:36 -0700 (PDT) > >From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@ucs.orst.edu> > >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills > Jim points out that we're dancing around the issue when > we compare the "Moscow" footage with the "Mexico" footage and > note its similarity..... > >It's about time that someone in Mexico City identify the several buildings > >shown in those saucer photos, then estimate which other building the video > >was taken from, go there, take his own photos, and post them on the web. > But what I find interesting, given Sean Jones' forwarded post of > the London newspaper picture of the 1990 Moscow photo, is that > the Phoenix folks working on the Mexico footage haven't weighed > in on it by saying, "Yes/No, the 'Moscow' photo is/isn't a still > from the Mexico video." But maybe they haven't seen the post, > and when they do, they'll let us know. Hi John, Either that, or they're convinced the Mexico City footage was indeed taken in August, 1997, so that a 1990 still couldn't be taken from it. But besides that, Mike Christol has noted the differences in the two scenes. Jim Deardorff
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 13 Project Watchfire - Chat with Phoenix Councilwoman From: "Yvonne Hedenland" <VONNI_H@classic.msn.com> Date: Mon, 13 Oct 97 19:45:47 UT Fwd Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 23:13:17 -0400 Subject: Project Watchfire - Chat with Phoenix Councilwoman A politician with guts? Or a real government employee who doesn't get bogged down in the politics so she can better represent her people? Join us on Thursday, October 17th at 5pm, PT in the Briefing Room for a chat with the Councilwoman who asked the hard questions regarding the Phoenix lights. This chat is co sponsored with the MSN Current Events Forum which is reachable at http://forums.msn.com/politics.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 13 Re: Mexican stills panorama now available From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com> Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 16:09:05 -0700 Fwd Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 23:30:02 -0400 Subject: Re: Mexican stills panorama now available I have constructed a panorama of the four stills currently available on the web from the 1997 Mexican video. This may be of some assistance in understanding what's going on in the video, or perhaps in assessing its validity. The panorama pieces together all four frames using background reference points for alignment; thus, the object appears at four locations in the landscape - once from each frame, but there is only one continuous background. The panorama has been posted at my website, and can be found at http://www.geocities.com/~mcashman/ufomex.htm Some brief comments on the image are provided. Be patient, since the image is a 100+K JPEG. Every attempt was made to preserve the integrity of the image, so no lossy compression was used. I look forward to any comments. ------ Mark Cashman, creator of The Temporal Doorway at http://www.geocities.com/~mcashman - Original digital art, writing, and UFO research - Author of SF novels available at... http://www.infohaus.com/access/by-seller/The_Temporal_Doorway_Storefront ------
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 13 Re: Witness Anonymity From: clark@canby.mn.frontiercomm.net [Jerome Clark] Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 15:01:34 PDT Fwd Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 23:20:09 -0400 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity > Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 23:39:30 -0400 > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > From: Don Allen <dona@totcon.com> > Subject: Witness Anonymity - open challenge > At 10:13 AM 10/11/97 -0400, John Velez wrote: > >Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 04:27:08 -0500 > >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> > >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity > >>From: "C Hathaway & J. Presson" <earthwrk@doitnow.com> > >>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net> > >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity > >>Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 23:04:01 -0700 > >>We are lucky to see how dysfunctional Hopkins support groups are I > >>guess. As denial seems to be the BIG red flag of both you and > >>Linda. > >Jeez, we are feeling judgemental (again) today aren't we? Get up > >on the wrong side of the web again? <VBG> > I have watched time and time again when someone would ask Linda > NAPOLITANO (for that IS her real name and not the bogus "Cortile" > alias, let's get real folks) a question or challenge her on an issue > that she would get extremely rude. I have expressed my frank > appraisal of her case and she has called me a "debunker". Yes, > I DO happen to have this nasty habit of challenging bunk in > UFOlogy where it's warranted. It doesn't make me any friends > but then, I'm not in UFOlogy to make friends or kiss anyone's > ass. I'm here to get to the raw truth. I despise frauds, con men > and people who set themselves up as "authority figures" > as Budd Hopklins has done, and who isn't even a licensed > mental health professional. Just because Linda claims the > bizarre events as truth in her case and that her story is > supported by Budd Hopkins, Jerry Clark, Walt Andrus and > her buds _doesn't_ necessarily make it an established factoid > in UFOlogy. It might to you and a very few select others, > but not to everyone else. I'd say you're pretty good at fabricating bunk yourself. I do not "support" Linda Cortile's story. I challenge you to find anything I have written about this case that could fairly be characterized as support. The evidence for ANY conclusion, pro or con, is simply not sufficient, as I have stated repeatedly; therefore, it's useless for any larger evidentiary or rhetorical purpose. At this stage, and maybe forever, the Linda case is no more than a curiosity, like many other unproven reports over the course of UFO history, and nothing to lose sleep over -- unless your life is spectacularly devoid of anything more meaningful. Let me repeat: I suspend judgment. Thus, I am skeptical in the classic sense. In the meantime, I do not have the compulsion, as apparently you do, to demonize Linda Cortile. I always marvel at those who decree certainty when such manifestly does not exist -- making debunkers like you as misguided as the truest of believers, and effectively the same. For those who can stand to face the profound uncertainties and ambiguities that characterize this case in humble reality (in other words, as opposed to the case as reinvented in the simplistic, and overbearingly self- righteous [see above], nostrums of the debunkers), read Greg Sandow's marvelously balanced treatment in the Spring and Summer 1996 issues of IUR. Meantime, Don, you might lighten up. I think you'd live a lot longer. Linda Cortile, after all, is not the focus of all evil in the universe, or even its ufological equivalent. Cheers, Jerry Clark Search for other documents from or mentioning: clark | dona | jvif |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 13 Re: Solved Abduction cases? From: Ktperehwon@aol.com [Karl Pflock] Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 16:24:46 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 23:34:21 -0400 Subject: Re: Solved Abduction cases? HOWDY, JERRY, & GREETINGS TO THE LIST-- >From: clark@canby.mn.frontiercomm.net [Jerome Clark] >Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 21:01:19 PDT >To: updates@globalserve.net >Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Solved Abduction cases? >> Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 12:49:06 -0500 (CDT) >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >>From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net> >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Solved Abduction cases? >> >Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 02:15:31 -0500 >> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >> >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Solved Abduction cases? >Only one thing seems obvious at this moment: abductions are a >phenomenon in search of an explanation. In the meantime, >agnosticism, anyone? Bravo, Jerry! Any thoughts on whether or not the "abduction phenomenon"/"abductology" as we know it today is even properly a subset of ufology? Please note well I'm making a distinction here twixt the whole abduction enchilada and the few cases which clearly belong in the ufology box--as for example, the Hills' experience, which as you know, I take very, very seriously--as one of the best pieces of evidence for the ETH. -- Cheers to all, KARL PFLOCK, Currier of Favor with the UFOlogical Elite (so dubbed recently by Bob Todd) Search for other documents from or mentioning: ktperehwon | clark |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 13 Re: Solved Abduction cases? From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net> [Dennis Stacy] Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 15:29:51 -0500 (CDT) Fwd Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 23:38:42 -0400 Subject: Re: Solved Abduction cases? >From: clark@canby.mn.frontiercomm.net [Jerome Clark] >Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 21:01:19 PDT >To: updates@globalserve.net >Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Solved Abduction cases? >Dennis, <snip> >Your point seems to be that the phenomenon is so obviously a >product of social pathology and ufological credulity that only fools >think otherwise. You've even suggested that a novelist with no known >background in this subject -- Don DeLillo -- is the one to whom we >ought to turn for wisdom in the matter. A suggestion I find pretty >strange, even as rabble-rousing -- or, as I hope, tongue-in-cheek -- >hyberbole. Jerry: You are sooo serious. You are also putting words in my mouth. But if you don't like DeLillo, stick with John Fowler. >Appelle's argument, which cannot be reduced to the >short paragraph you quote, is that social, psychological, and >other conventional theories about abductions do not explain the >phenomenon; <snip> I never implied or said that it could. I simply quoted a statement that I agreed with. I also told everyone how to get a copy of the article if they wanted it. Both partly by way of pointing out that you mischaracterized Appelle's article in the first place. >Appelle writes, entirely reasonably, that the alternative explanation >-- that abductions are event-level interactions with ETs -- requires >far more and better evidence than we have seen to date. It >logically follows, I should think, that objective inquiry is a more >logical next step than inflated rhetoric -- on either side -- and so is >a modest acknowledgement that the abduction question is still wide >open, not closed shut in a cell guarded day and night by psycho- >socially inclined ufologists and debunkers. Only one thing seems >obvious at this moment: abductions are a phenomenon in search >of an explanation. In the meantime, agnosticism, anyone? >Jerry Clark Agnosticism is fine with me, as long as it leads to the investigation of all possibilities. If hoax, however, to cite but one example, isn't in a particular investigator's lexicon, then how agnostic (as opposed, say, to forgiving) is that investigator? Appelle also lists ten research areas that need to be pursued in depth, with which I wholly agree. The question here is how long do we keep referring to abductionology as nascent, and using that as a rationale to argue in ET's favor? As I said before in an earlier post, implants and missing fetuses should be the "easy parts" to document (compared, say, to passing through solid matter and emerging unscathed on the other side), but it's been 32 years since the Hill case was made public and 16 going on 17 since "Missing Time" was published, and there is no compelling documentation for either. As someone once said of nocturnal lights, how many more abduction cases do we need to collect (and publish)? It's not enough to applaud Appelle as an example of the good UFO literature while at the same time some of the leading lights in the field appear not to have read (let alone heeded) him, and continue turning out abduction potboilers. Simultaneously criticizing science for not getting involved. It's the application of agnosticism that troubles me. Is there really anyone out there who seriously thinks the medical profession wouldn't be intrigued by obvious cases of missing fetuses? And that cases of same would routinely surface _without regard to the UFO abduction literature at all_? Sonograms are as routine nowadays as tongue depressors. If nothing else, a missing fetus from one sonogram to another would prompt those involved to contact social or law enforcement officials if not other medical personnel at the very least. Even alleged female abductees making this claim should have unambiguous medical documentation of their status. Yet we routinely accept such stories -- "Oh, those aliens! You haven't seen the half of it, doc." Or maybe the doctor lost her records or moved away and couldn't be located by the dedicated investigator intent on gathering evidence that would document alien intervention. Or maybe ET stole 'em. But be agnostic about such cases -- hey, it coulda happened -- and pretty soon you can be agnostic about anything, including claims made by leading UFO lights that something like 4 million Americans alone have been abducted. That's a LOT of potential missing fetuses (and/or implants) in my book. (And even a very small percentage would still be a very large lot.) Could we see some documentation for just one? Dennis
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 13 Re: Abduction Sat 4 Oct 1997 From: Orca <pwedel@neptune.on.ca> [Paul Wedel] Date: Mon, 13 Oct 97 16:41:54 -0000 Fwd Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 23:43:25 -0400 Subject: Re: Abduction Sat 4 Oct 1997 Hello Lawrie, Skye, Errol, et al, >Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Abduction Sat 4 Oct 1997 >Sent: 10/13/97 4:23 PM >Received: 10/13/97 4:06 PM >From: UFO UpDates - Toronto, updates@globalserve.net >To: Errol Bruce-Knapp, updates@globalserve.net >Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 20:50:05 -0700 >To: updates@globalserve.net >From: Skye Turell <turel33@west.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Abduction Sat 4 Oct 1997 >>From: wlmss@peg.apc.org [Lawrie Williams] >>Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 07:36:06 +1000 (GMT+1000) >>To: starfriends@esosoft.com, updates@globalserve.net >>Subject: Abduction Sat 4 Oct 1997. Lawrie wrote: >>I told her in my opinion the visitation was by an actual craft >>with humanoids, because this is consistent with similar incidents >>taking place around the world. I said the experience would have >>slipped into a dream, like the part about running through the >>woods. >>I told D that K could expect a phantom pregnancy, but that it would >>be ended with another visitation. I said this could be three months, >>but that perhaps someone on the Internet could give me a more likely >>"term". (K is unlikely to be pregnant by any human, so it looks like >>a classic potential "maiden birth", what is mistakenly known as >>"virgin birth" since ancient times - a mistranslation.) >>I told her that it could be possible that the purpose of all this >>was to make hybrids, half like us and half like them. Skye wrote: >Lawrie, I'm not sure it's a good idea to tell the girls what they should >expect to experience. Let them have their own experiences and tell you. >If it seems like they have common sorts of occurances, then tell them that >others have done likewise, but don't plant ideas. > >That might lead them and it certainly will scare them. They will allow the >information through that they are capable of integrating, and not more than >that. That's a failsafe mechanism and you shouldn't try to override >it...IMO. Dear Lawrie, I must agree with Skye. I think it's admirable that people wish to help others and take on such unusual work. Perhaps if at a time they ask you your thoughts in the future, you present them as one of many theories. For we do not know _for_sure_ why any of this is happening. With respect to aliens farming us. This in itself could generate undue fear in a "newbie" (please excuse the colloqualism). I have interviewed several Mohawk and Innuit Medicine people who do not think these beings are evil at all. - Without going too far off topic, I just wanted to suggest that we all have theories, and perhaps it is best in a research situation to keep our theories close to our hearts during the intial phase of the investigation. This may just be the beginning for your witnesses. As Skye states, it is important for them to remember only what they are comfortable remembering. There are internal mechanisms in place from a neurological point of view (and goodness knows what else) to allow them to deal with the shock. Leading them on (even unintentionally) will not yield accurate data. Regards, Paul. "Must get moose and squirrel!" ..Boris Badenov Search for other documents from or mentioning: pwedel | turel33 | wlmss
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 13 Re: Witness Anonymity From: Orca <pwedel@neptune.on.ca> [Paul Wedel] Date: Mon, 13 Oct 97 17:08:28 -0000 Fwd Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 23:53:05 -0400 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity Greetings List, >Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity >Sent: 10/13/97 4:23 PM >Received: 10/13/97 4:22 PM >From: UFO UpDates - Toronto, updates@globalserve.net >To: Errol Bruce-Knapp, updates@globalserve.net >Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 23:39:30 -0400 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Don Allen <dona@totcon.com> >Subject: Witness Anonymity - open challenge >At 10:13 AM 10/11/97 -0400, John Velez wrote: >>Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 04:27:08 -0500 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity >>>From: "C Hathaway & J. Presson" <earthwrk@doitnow.com> >>>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net> >>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity >>>Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 23:04:01 -0700 The Hathaway/Pressons wrote: >>>We are lucky to see how dysfunctional Hopkins support groups are I >>>guess. As denial seems to be the BIG red flag of both you and >>>Linda. Johnny wrote: >>Jeez, we are feeling judgemental (again) today aren't we? Get up >>on the wrong side of the web again? <VBG> Don wrote: >I have watched time and time again when someone would ask Linda <snip> > a question or challenge her on an issue >that she would get extremely rude. I have expressed my frank >appraisal of her case and she has called me a "debunker". Don I must apologize because I have not read those threads between you and Linda. And if that is the case then you are right. That would be rude. I know from interviewing people in the field they do not react well to not being believed and more often than not react negatively and not always fairly to questions of not being accurate in their reports. Even if we are sincere in our disbelief of their case. It's hard not to be hurt by harsh words when we know there are other options in the way we express ourselves. <snip> > I believe they were completely on >the mark with their brutally frank assessment on her "story". >With that said, I hereby CHALLENGE Linda, or any one or her >supporters to prove her case as having any validity to it as >being real. Let's see the substantiation of her evidence. >Let's see the indisputable FACTS that conclusively proves >_her story_ as the "abduction case of the century". >IOW, I'm calling her supporters out - put up or shut up. >Don Unfortunately Don I don't have public proof to give you. I can only say that I used my own personal resources to attempt to verify Linda's story for myself. Given that, I loose your argument. You have every right to not believe a persons story, especially if it is based on the data you have gathered. As a friend of Linda's, I'm not here to prove her story, nor do she and I agree on everything. I'm sorry I can't present verifiable evidence as per your request. But then, that's usually the case for a lot of reports. Would it be alright if we agree to disagree. Sincerely, Paul. "Must get moose and squirrel!" ..Boris Badenov
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 13 Re: Update On Mexican Footage + New Image Grabs From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 23:49:10 -0400 Fwd Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 23:49:10 -0400 Subject: Re: Update On Mexican Footage + New Image Grabs From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose) To: updates@globalserve.net Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 22:41:25 +0100 Subject: Update On Mexican Footage + New Image Grabs Fernando Camacho reports on Jaime Maussan's further investigations, e.g. his interview of several witnesses who confirm the event. URL: http://www.digiserve.com/ufoinfo/news/mexico.html The page has links to the two images already discussed on Updates plus two new ones. Stig **************** MEXICO CITY SIGHTINGS 6th August 1997 This page accompanies the "Mexico City" report in UFO Roundup Vol.2 No.39 Click on an image to view full size. This report was submitted to UFOINFO by Fernando Camacho The images I am attaching were extracted from a video broadcasted the 28th of September 1997 in Tercer Milenio hosted by Jaime Maussan. This program is on every weekend here in Mexico. Maussan is a well-respected Mexican Ufologist. On this broadcast he was noticeably excited about the video. He said that he received it on Friday the 26th. Then he proceeded to read a letter that came accompanying the video. After that he showed an amazing piece of footage. On it you see a huge UFO hovering over a building. He estimated its size at 20 meters. You can clearly see the UFO is rotating over its axis. It has a very peculiar motion, as if earth�s gravity is affecting it as it flies. For a few seconds the UFO stays fairly static, then it begins to move. It travels from left to right and goes behind a building, reappearing again on top of the same building. It keeps traveling at a slow pase until it goes behind a second building and we never see it again. On the audio you can hear the voices of two guys very excited, shouting and screaming as they tape the UFO.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 13 Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills From: BOB SHELL <76750.2717@compuserve.com> Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 09:02:32 -0400 Fwd Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 13:05:57 -0400 Subject: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills >Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 00:25:02 -0500 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Michael Christol <mchristo@mindspring.com> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills >>Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 21:34:39 +0100 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >>From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Stills of the Mexican Footage >>>Somebody put up some stills of the recent Mexican footage at >>>this location: >>>http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Rampart/5430/ >>>After seeing this my first assumption was that if the video is >>>authentic, there had to be a lot of witnesses to this event on >>>the ground. >>Hi All >>Another things has cropped up. >>In The News of the World(28/9/97) a UK paper they had a report in it >>about a sighting in Moscow (1990 October 13th). And in it they had this >>pic >>Content-Description: notw.jpg >>Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="notw.jpg" >>Content-MD5: 4P32OtchUSdRIkuph3Ineg== >>Content-Type: image/jpeg >>Pretty damn similer aint it, both the background and the UFO. >I dont' think the Russian photo looks anything like the Mexico >City pic. The Russian UFO looks more like a "hubcap" tossed in >the air, photographed and superimposed over a picture or drawing >of an apartment building. >Just my opinion.... >REgards, Mike Mike, One of the magazines I occasionally do photography for is Sporting Clays, a magazine for shotgun enthusiasts who shoot at "clay pigeons". I've photographed a number of these, which are basically clay frisbees which a machine shoots up in the air, and the shotgun folks try to shoot them to smithereens. This thingskie in the Russian photo looks EXACTLY like one of them. Since they are readily available and cheap, and can be thrown by hand, I think this is what is in this photo. As for the Mexico photos, I find it damned convenient that the video cameraman was in exactly the right place for this dramatic "Ed Wood" shot of the saucer cruising behind the building. Reminds me of the convenient placement of the camera in a certain crop circle video! It certainly bears investigating, but I'm a little more skeptical because it looks too good. Bob Search for other documents from or mentioning: 76750.2717 | mchristo |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 13 Re: The Decline and Fall of American Ufology From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com> Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 13:36:17 -0700 Fwd Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 14:03:31 -0400 Subject: Re: The Decline and Fall of American Ufology > From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>, on 10/12/97 8:39 PM: > From: wlmss@peg.apc.org [Lawrie Williams] > Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 07:38:14 +1000 (GMT+1000) > To: updates@globalserve.net, weirdscience@integral.org > Subject: Telepathy and UFO Axioms. > Surely 10 years is long enough for any decent challenge to arise. > Instead there have been more witnesses, more photos! The Mount Clemens photo hoax was not confessed for 9 years. The Cottingly Fairy photo hoax was not confessed for much longer. I agree that there is strong evidence in the Gulf Breeze case, but as any scientifically minded person should, I am open to a new approach which manages to invaidate the strongest (not the weakest) evidence. > > Then we have those who will not accept the photos despite any proof. > > They have valid reasons for their discomfort. The Walters case displays > > nearly the full panolpy of UFO-related phenomena, and in most > > situations, this appropriately raises suspicion. > > Yes, and in 1994 I was treated to a smorgasbord of paranormal events > immediately after a UFO visitation. This is a very real aspect of the > UFO phenomenon, not an indicator of fraud. Most UFO cases do not contain all of these elements. I can assure you of this from my work with the catalogs for which I am responsible, and decades of familiarity with the literature. Those which do are suspect, like it or not. Witnesses do lie occasionally (about 2% of the time for conventional UFO reports, a greater percentage of the time in photo cases and an unknown percentage of the time in "high-strangeness reports"). When they lie, they often rely on the available literature, and if they are going for sensationalism, they pile as many "high-strangeness effects" together as possible. > If by "repeaters" you mean return visits, you are totally wrong and > have demonstrated unfamiliarity with this field of study. UFOs do > come back to the same people, and to their offspring, and theirs. Please, I realize the assertion of inter- and intra- generational abduction exists. I am still not convinced, but I remain open-minded. However, recall that the first "repeaters" were Admaski and his ilk. It cannot be surprising that repeaters must be considered to be, at least initially, of lower credibility than non-repeaters. Again, looking at the body of case lore, repeaters are the exception, not the rule. Magonia, I believe, has 2 or 3 repeaters representing maybe ten cases out of nearly a thousand (.1%). > [stuff about photo validity deleted as anyone who wants can go > and see UFOs and photograph them so it is no longer relevant] This isn't very illuminating. What do you mean that "anyone who wants can go and see UFOs and photograph them"? It seems clear to me that despite assertions to the contrary, validated UFO cases remain scarce. One should read the recent issue of IUR to find out more about competent investigators' views on this. > > * Exotic humanoids are a substantial percentage of the unknowns. If > > one accepts that unknowns represent a real phenomenon, it is > > impossible to reject the occupant cases. However, that does not > > mean that every case with occupants must be considered valid. > Agreed. But on the evidence it is most likely it is valid and that is > what is important. I don't know what this means. Many occupant cases have been found to be invalid. > > * Unusual light beams have been reported in many cases, as have > > effects from those beams. However, there does not seem to be a > > clear link between beam color and effect, which weakens this > > part of the pattern; on the other hand, this may be accounted for > > by variations in human color perception. > Blue and green are often mixed. The Walters photos show an electric > blue. An aqua colour has been described to me. In dim light conditions > either will seem to be white. There are red beams and green beams, blue beams, and white beams. A variety of effects accompany the beams regardless of color. Certainly some of this may be confusion resulting from differences in human color perception. Paralysis and force effects from white, blue and violet beams: 29 Oct. 20, 1954 night Renzo Pugina, 37, had just put his car in the garage when he saw a strange being covered with a "scaly" luminous suit, about 1. 3m tall, standing near a tree. The creature aimed the beam from a sort of flashlight at him, and he felt paralyzed, until a motion he made when clenching his fist on the garage keys seemed to free him. He attacked the intruder, who rose and fled with a soft whirring sound. An oily spot was found at the site. Panavicino d'Erba (Italy). (77;Magonia). 311 Oct. 26, 1954 evening Aime Boussard, 47, a farmer, was suddenly confronted with an individual of normal height (1. 60 m) wearing a sort of diving suit with a pale green light on either side of the helmet. The individual aimed at the witness the beam of two blue lights, and he was thrown backward. No craft was observed. La Madiere (France). (92). 356 Dec. 19, 1954 300 Jose Parra, an 18 year old jockey, saw six small creatures loading stones into a disk-shaped machine hovering about 3 m above ground. He tried to run away but was paralyzed by a violet beam aimed at him by one of the creatures. All the creatures entered the craft, and it took off. Valencia (Venezuela). (Lor. I 52). Red beams cause stalling and burns: 341 Nov. 14, 1954 night A strange beam of red light, apparently from some flying source, was reported sweeping the countryside. As it illuminated two tractors, one oft hem stalled, but the other, a diesel, continued. The beam was seen for about one hour by a large number of persons. Forli (Italy). (M 211). 583 Oct. 12, 1963 0330 E. Douglas, while driving a truck through a violent rainstorm, had to stop when he encountered a large, blinding object, 35 m high, from which three giants, 3 m tall, wearing luminous clothes and strange helmets, emerged. Douglas fired at them, as a red beam burned him. He ran away and found shelter in Monte Maiz. He suffered burns similar to ultraviolet exposure. Footprints of large dimension were found at the site. Monte Maiz (Argentina). (COD-OVNI 1963; Austr; FSR 8; Magonia). Red and white beams cause heat: 584 Oct. 21, 1963 2130 Six strange objects were observed for 40 min causing a local panic. One was hovering at ground level above some railroad tracks, while another, showing a dome and portholes, was near a house. When witnesses flashed a light, the house was flooded with a strong beam. Temperature rose and a sulphurous odor was noted. Figures were seen in the vicinity of the first disks. All six objects had a white and a red light beam, measured 8 m in diameter, and left a cloud of white smoke. Trancas (Argentina). (145;LDLN 66). White beam causes physical damage and unconsciousness: 641 Mar. 15, 1965 0100 In the Everglades, 30 km east of Big Cypress, James Flynn, 45, who was hunting, saw a huge, lighted object 1 m above the swamp surface. He watched it for 40 min, observing that it was conical, twice as wide as it was high, and seemed built from metal sections over one square m each. It showed four rows of square windows, 70 cm wide. Estimated diameter: 25 m. A yellow light shone through the windows, and the object made a sound of a transformer and wind. Flynn got within 2 m of it and made a gesture. A beam of light from the underside of the object struck him between the eyes and he lost consciousness for 24 hours. He had lost vision in the right eye, saw poorly with the left, went to a doctor in Fort Myers, and spent five days in the hospital. Fort Myers (Florida). (Fate Sep. , 65). In short, specific effects from specific colors do not seem to be fully established. > > * Telepathy, on the other hand, is a relatively rare part of the entire > > phenomenon. > I doubt this very much. It is likely this is not reported often > because it can be used to discredit both witness and incident. One can doubt whatever one likes, but the literature is clear on this. It is not scientific to attempt to determine how many cases contain this feature but have ommitted it for fear of ridicule without evidence. > Thanks Mark for the three incidents from the Magonia catalog from > 1957, 1957 and 1966. > We can add two incidents in Gulf Breeze in 1987. Also mine in 1995. > None of these involved face-to-face encounters at that point in time, > maybe we should look at cases where a ufo is nearby, pre contact > and post contact for a richer trove of telepathy testimony. If > anyone else knows of telepathic encounters, please post them. None of this changes the percentage a significant amount. > Telepathy also gets mention several times in the context of Roswell. So are a lot of other things which are not well-substantiated. > In some of these cases it is quite possible that telepathy has been > reported as speech, either a rationalization by the witness or an > attempt not to seem totally crazy. I have seen scenes on TV where > the actor is not moving his lips but his speech has been dubbed in. > We all tend to "edit" what we perceive which is how post production > video-editors can sometimes get away with inadequate footage. You seem to be willing to accept witness testimony when it supports your position, and discount it when it does not. I try to avoid this, and prefer to rely on the available cases for deriving conclusions. > > It may be no accident that the only "telepathy" cases are those > > which one might term either "higher-strangeness" cases or > > "less-reliable" cases, depending on one's inclination. At any > > rate, the evidence substantiating "telepathic" communication is > > certainly small at best, and possibly marginal in quality. > I respectfully resent that. Witness testimony is considered reliable > enough to convict a person of murder, yet you declare it in ufology > to be "marginal in quality". I invite you to explain that. I have to > point out you are addressing a person who is just such a witness, its > not second or third hand testimony. I am answerable. It has happened > to me several times in my life and at no other time have I heard > "voices in my head" even remotely resembling these effects. I've > also established that apart from ADD (or because of it) I am in > splendid mental health. Too many people play amateur psychiatrist > and say: "Voice in your head? Oh well, you must be mad!" I hope > you clarify your statement there Mark, and soon. My statement is based on the fact that only a tiny percentage of cases in the Magonia catalog reference "telepathy". The cases which do, have elements which indicate that they are less reliable. So-called "high-strangeness cases" are typically witnessed by a single witness. By Hynek's probability rating, such cases can receive no more than a 3 out of 10. I believe this conservative approach is appropriate. Others disagree and accept all cases at face value. That's fine if one does not feel a responsibility to researchers who will later come along and rely on one's investigation. > > In addition, one must consider that perception of "telepathy" does > > not necessarily substantiate the existence of telepathy. I think we > > still have relatively little knowledge of the psychological effects > > resulting from what is in many cases a traumatic event, and > > certainly confabulations, or illusory voices, etc, cannot be ruled > > out a priori. > I give you my word I rigorously considered all of these before making > my claim. Nothing a priori about it. And Ed Walters' account shows us > that he did the same. Lets face it, no matter how exhaustively we > eliminate all the options, some debunkers will always claim the > reported phenomena are not for real because they are reported. This isn't entirely clear to me, but at any rate, without being a psychiatrist or psychologist, I am not sure that anyone can properly assess the effects I mentioned, and I am certain that one can arrive at a personal conclusion which is valid for them, but for the sake of research, an independent assessment must be made. > I get the impression that some ufologists have a profoundly dim view > of their fellow humans. Yet the ghost rockets turned out to be real, > they have turned out to be craft, they did have occupants, they are > contacting people, they are operating on people. To the best of my knowledge, there is no evidence that ghost rocket cases included occupants or abductions. > The vast majority of > witnesses 1932 to 1997 WERE telling the truth. The vast majority of initial reports, 1932-1997 are well known in the research community to be misperceptions of otherwise normal phenomena (I consider 70-90% to be a vast majority). While only 2% or so of reporters were "lying", many were mistaken. We lose sight of this at our peril. The 10-30% of solidly investigated reports which passed muster by experts and objective investigators are what we are interested in. > > I'm afraid I cannot accept that this is the right way to deal with the > > data. > > While no one desires conflict, it needs to be recognized that science is, > > much like the legal process, an adversarial system. > As I have pointed out, the legal process would long since have accepted > the axioms I have proposed based on their own time-honoured procedures. > In ufology it seems to demand more than that. It seems the propaganda > has created a fanatical refusal to accept witness evidence. We have seen > that on the UpDates List, where out of sour grapes the loser in the debate > over the Walters photos has turned to legal threats. We are also seeing > personal attacks on Linda Cortile, who in my opinion has strived to be > objective and patient. So here are two witnesses right here on this list! > You have your evidence. Actually, my entire post represented a discussion of how "axiomatic" ("fundamental" would be more appropriate, since the technical meaning of axiomatic requires a need to use the assertion to disprove it) these were. But I think the status of agreement on your postulates is highly varied, and I have shown reasons why it should reasonably be. If we had to poll this list to determine axioms, we might find acceptance of: 1) Many initial reports can be identified. 2) Some percentage of initial reports remain unidentified. 3) Unidentified reports contain many credible accounts of strange structured objects, occupants, and effects. 4) Some (unknown) proportion of abduction accounts may represent an objective physical phenomenon. But beyond that, the controversy begins. ------ Mark Cashman, creator of The Temporal Doorway at http://www.geocities.com/~mcashman - Original digital art, writing, and UFO research - Author of SF novels available at... http://www.infohaus.com/access/by-seller/The_Temporal_Doorway_Storefront ------
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 14 UMO (=Unkown Mars Objects) From: koch@wad.berlin.fido.de (Joachim Koch) Date: 14 Oct 97 00:31:00 +0000 Fwd Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 00:13:06 -0400 Subject: UMO (=Unkown Mars Objects) Date: 08 May 97 19:43:00 GMT From: koch@wad.berlin.fido.de <Joachim Koch> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> Subject: UMO (=Unkown mars Objects) > Subj:UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 2, Number 39 > Date: 97-10-12 12:48:02 EDT > From: Masinaigan > To: updates@globalserve.net > UFO ROUNDUP > Volume 2, Number 39 > October 12, 1997 > Editor: Joseph Trainor > ANOMALOUS TRACKS > PHOTOGRAPHED ON MARS > On Monday, October 6, 1997, a startling photograph > from the Mars Global Surveyor was posted on the > Astronomy Picture of the Day website. > The photo, taken by Surveyor from an altitude of > 250 miles (400 kilometers), shows a subsided rift valley > ten miles (16 kilometers) long in the Vallis Nigral region > of Mars. The rift valley is similar to the one in East > Africa here on Earth. The rimrock on the valley's rim > shows clear evidence of water erosion. > Towards the photo's center, just above a square > depression in valley floor, is a line of uniform tracks > extending for an estimated distance of just over two > miles (3.7 kilometers). > One observer estimated that, based on the > formula that one Surveyor pixel equals 30 feet (9 meters), > the tracks are 415 feet (126 meters) wide. This > suggests that the tracks were made by an immense > vehicle, perhaps similar to the one used by the Jawas > in the movie "Star Wars." > The age of the tracks is unknown. However, it appears > that they are recent and appeared after the great dust > storm on Mars back in the early 1970s. > The photo can be found at the following URL-- > http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap971006.html > (Many thanks to Twitch and Chris for pointing out this > Surveyor photo.) Hello! I have watched this photograph and -- to be honest -- I think I have only seen small dunes in the sand of the valley bottom. Much more interesting for me was a structure a bit away from the upper rim of the valley above the pictures center. It is a small nearly rectangular depression with a more diagonal orientation which looks nearly artificial compared with the rest of the visible natural Mars surface. The right rim of this structure is brightened by the sunlight while the left side is in shadow. I do not have the software to look for this left shadowy rim to see if it fits its right counterpart in orientation, depth and length. Is it a channel which once came down from the structure above it which today looks like an eroded hill (think of ancient Egyptian pyramid and temple sites) or is it the rest of an impact scar -- or just nothing? Greetings Joachim Koch Internet: koch@wad.berlin.fido.de Homepage Internationale Roswell Initiative, Germany: http://ourworld.compuserve.com/Homepages/JKoch1 Update of October,12,1997: *Roswell, Lesotho, Crop Circles, New* *Discoveries in Betty Hill's Star Map, Links* (UFO, NASA, MARS), *VRIL*
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 14 Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills From: Michael Christol <mchristo@mindspring.com> Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 20:39:43 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 00:25:31 -0400 Subject: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills >Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 09:02:32 -0400 >From: BOB SHELL <76750.2717@compuserve.com> >Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >>Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 00:25:02 -0500 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >>From: Michael Christol <mchristo@mindspring.com> >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills >>I dont' think the Russian photo looks anything like the Mexico >>City pic. The Russian UFO looks more like a "hubcap" tossed in >>the air, photographed and superimposed over a picture or drawing >>of an apartment building. >>Just my opinion.... >>REgards, Mike >Mike, >One of the magazines I occasionally do photography for is Sporting >Clays, a magazine for shotgun enthusiasts who shoot at "clay pigeons". >I've photographed a number of these, which are basically clay frisbees >which a machine shoots up in the air, and the shotgun folks try to shoot >them to smithereens. Hi Bob. Yes, I know exactly what you are describing. I have seen them. I use to watch the ABC Wide World Of Sports, years ago, and they had sport shooting on there a couple of times. I also watched some people shoot clay targets from the rear of the "Big Red Boat," on a three day cruise to the Bahammas and back to Orlando, Florida, back in Jan. 95. You are correct, I think the photo does look like one of those clay pigeons. Thanks Bob. >This thingskie in the Russian photo looks EXACTLY like one of them. Since >they are readily available and cheap, and can be thrown by hand, >I think this is what is in this photo. Yep... >As for the Mexico photos, I find it damned convenient that the video >cameraman was in exactly the right place for this dramatic "Ed Wood" >shot of the saucer cruising behind the building. Reminds me of the >convenient placement of the camera in a certain crop circle video! Yes, it is convenient, however, sometimes, the best things in life seem to just happen that way. I will remain neutral at this time, and wait and see what comes of this. Oh, btw, did you pick up the message I posted in Sept. about the earliest known Crash? July...., 1941...South Pacific? If you know this place and time, I need not be any more specific... >It certainly bears investigating, but I'm a little more skeptical >because it looks too good. >Bob Yep, I know what you mean. But at some point, Bob, these things must start coming closer and closer to us, rather than stay at the limits of our focal range, if they are gradually conditioning us for first contact. REgards, Mike
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 14 Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 01:20:20 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 09:06:11 -0400 Subject: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills >Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 09:02:32 -0400 >From: BOB SHELL <76750.2717@compuserve.com> >Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >>Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 00:25:02 -0500 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >>From: Michael Christol <mchristo@mindspring.com> >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills >>>Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 21:34:39 +0100 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >>>From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> >>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Stills of the Mexican Footage >>>>Somebody put up some stills of the recent Mexican footage at >>>>this location: >>>>http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Rampart/5430/ >>>>After seeing this my first assumption was that if the video is >>>>authentic, there had to be a lot of witnesses to this event on >>>>the ground. >>>Hi All >>>Another things has cropped up. >>>In The News of the World(28/9/97) a UK paper they had a report in it >>>about a sighting in Moscow (1990 October 13th). And in it they had this >>>pic >>>Content-Description: notw.jpg >>>Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="notw.jpg" >>>Content-MD5: 4P32OtchUSdRIkuph3Ineg== >>>Content-Type: image/jpeg >>>Pretty damn similer aint it, both the background and the UFO. >>I dont' think the Russian photo looks anything like the Mexico >>City pic. The Russian UFO looks more like a "hubcap" tossed in >>the air, photographed and superimposed over a picture or drawing >>of an apartment building. >>Just my opinion.... >>REgards, Mike >Mike, ======================== Bob shell writes, >One of the magazines I occasionally do photography for is Sporting >Clays, a magazine for shotgun enthusiasts who shoot at "clay pigeons". >I've photographed a number of these, which are basically clay frisbees >which a machine shoots up in the air, and the shotgun folks try to shoot >them to smithereens. >This thingskie in the Russian photo looks EXACTLY like one of them. Since >they are readily available and cheap, and can be thrown by hand, >I think this is what is in this photo. >As for the Mexico photos, I find it damned convenient that the video >cameraman was in exactly the right place for this dramatic "Ed Wood" >shot of the saucer cruising behind the building. Reminds me of the >convenient placement of the camera in a certain crop circle video! I was talking to Errol about that very thing today and one of the possible scenarios is that it was photographed from an apartment or house opposite the site. We won't know for sure untill more details are available, but it seems to me that it was shot from a "high" (elevated) vantage point. Did it give you that impression as well? Like the cameraman/woman was standing on high ground almost shooting down at the UFO. Just an impression. >It certainly bears investigating, but I'm a little more skeptical >because it looks too good. The reason for that (may be) because it _is_ the real thing! Let's wait and see what develops! <(bad photographic pun intended, sorry. <G>) John Velez John Velez jvif@spacelab.net Search for other documents from or mentioning: jvif | 76750.2717 |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 14 Re: Becker Claims Copyright Infringement by From: RGates8254@aol.com [Robert Gates] Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 01:13:05 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 09:03:49 -0400 Subject: Re: Becker Claims Copyright Infringement by In a message dated 97-10-10 13:03:13 EDT, you write: > Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 18:59:52 -0800 > To: updates@globalserve.net > From: campbell@ufomind.com (Glenn Campbell, Las Vegas) > Subject: Becker Claims Copyright Infringement by Maccabee > Cc: brumac@compuserve.com, steve@konsulting.com > Barbara Becker has claimed copyright infringement in an on-line > article by Bruce Maccabee posted to this list on Oct. 4. > Becker has threatened to file a lawsuit against Glenn Campbell, > Bruce Maccabee, Errol Bruce-Knapp and another party to seek > "injunctuive, punitive and statuatory damages from Glenn and > punitive and statuatory from the rest of you...." ><brevity snip> > From: c549597@showme.missouri.edu > Date: Thu, 09 Oct 1997 10:36:55 -0500 > To: brumac@compuserve.com > CC: updates@globalserve.net, steve@konsulting.com, campbell@ufomind.com > Subject: copyrighted paper > Bruce: > I have requested that Glenn Campbell remove the paper you recently wrote > using my 1990 paper. He has refused. I am writing to you to ask you to > ask him to remove it. > I spoke to a lawyer yesterday (if you wish to call her her number > is: 314-647-1200 ask for Annette Heller). Since you are the original > infringer she thought I should ask you to ask him to take it off. > That seemed reasonable, so that is what I am doing. ASK GLEN TO TAKE IT > OFF OF UFOMIND AND ERROL TO TAKE IT OFF OF UPDATES. > I have all my E-mail from all of you. AS well as my E-mail from John > Gilbert in the UK, which establishes my prior desire to have control of > my copyrighted paper. I can demonstrate ownership, and that you ALL > know it was my paper. > If this gets to court, I can get injunctuive, punitive and statuatory > damages from Glenn and punitive and statuatory from the rest of you. > Since you are all apparently have assests, and are stable, collecting a > judgment will not be difficult. > Punitive and statuatory carry fines from $500 to $20,000. Then there is > the issue of WILLFULL infringement. That is where I ask Glenn to take it > off the website and he tells me to go to hell. That's another $50,000 > just from him. I should mention courts costs and lawyers fees can also > be asked for. > You see the way this works, you wrote the article, Steve forwarded > copyrighted materials, Errol allowed it on his list, (that too is > willfull since Errol edits the list) and Glenn has refused to remove it. > But it all falls back to you. AS long as it is reproduced without my > permission YOU are in violation of my copyright. So I think it is > important that you have it removed immediately so it is not downloaded > and reproduced. > All these years we have had a amicable relationship eventhough we dont > agree. It would be a shame to mess everything up with a law suit. > Sincerely, > Barbara Becker Barbara and all, If this is true it sounds an awful lot like sour grapes. From what YOU allegedly have said, it seems that YOU want to unload all manner of interpretations about others BUT when they post a response to your interpretations instantly we are going to sue, threaten legal action blah blah blah. Personally, at best I thought your story was just the same old allegations (nothing new and incredible) being rehashed for the 100th time in the last 10 years, and at worst just a cheap attempt at publicity. You might try and do something constructive where you can received the glory and credit you deserve for a change.....like fdisking your hard drive. :) Cheers, Robert Search for other documents from or mentioning: rgates8254 | campbell |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 14 Re: Witness Anonymity From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 02:13:04 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 09:10:13 -0400 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity >Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 23:39:30 -0400 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Don Allen <dona@totcon.com> >Subject: Witness Anonymity - open challenge >At 10:13 AM 10/11/97 -0400, John Velez wrote: >>Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 04:27:08 -0500 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity >>>From: "C Hathaway & J. Presson" <earthwrk@doitnow.com> >>>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net> >>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity >>>Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 23:04:01 -0700 >>>We are lucky to see how dysfunctional Hopkins support groups are I >>>guess. As denial seems to be the BIG red flag of both you and >>>Linda. >>Jeez, we are feeling judgemental (again) today aren't we? Get up >>on the wrong side of the web again? <VBG> >I have watched time and time again when someone would ask Linda >NAPOLITANO (for that IS her real name and not the bogus "Cortile" >alias, let's get real folks) Don, I have NEVER in any of my posts (check the archives) defended Linda's 'case.' I have defended -Linda- as a person, there is a difference. And for Christs sake if you have something to tell Hopkins then contact him and tell it to Budd, he wrote the book! I don't have to explain or prove anything to anybody! Budd Hopkins Intruders Foundation PO Box 30233 New York, NY, 10011 If you want to investigate _me_ that's different, let's talk. But Linda's case is Linda's case, and any explaining or proving should be directed to her and to Budd. Not that he needs it from me but, I am not Budd's mouthpiece, appendage, or any other such nonsense. Even when I worked with him I have always spoken my mind and never involved myself in defending (any) of his many cases. What makes you think I'll suddenly be interested in a change of heart? I can only speak for my own set of circumstances Don. BTW, I am also not a part of -any- "group." That goes for abductee, political or, theater group, so you and anyone else who enjoys labeling people and lumping them together without knowing the person(s) could leave me out of it. Thank you very much. Got a beef with Hopkins? take it up with him! Got a beef with Linda? Take it up with her! Got a beef with me? Then direct it to me and make it specific to me. I cannot/will not speak for -anyone- elses "case". I can only address details pertaining to my own. Re-read this if you still have any questions (or in this case, challenges) for me about Linda's (or any other abductees) case. BTW, you should go to the archive and read Greg Sandows posts regarding the "Mahdi" (Not sure if it's Butler or Hansen who -now heads- a mystical UFO/alien cult based somewhere out west and has titled himself the "Grand Mahdi!") and Stefula. It's eye opening stuff. Greg took the time to look into that stuff in great detail and wrote several excellent posts about them. Check it out, but that's only if you're interested in other points of view. Sounds to me like you've thrown out the baby with the bath water and made up your mind that it's all bull--it because that's all it could possibly be. Not very objective Don. Any personal or intellectual limitations you may have are not my problem or my responsibility. You already know which mail -slot you can use- to insert your "challenge" to Budd and to Linda's case right? <G> (mailing address above) Anything _I_ can answer or do for you in relation to my own case and abduction reports Don? If not, leave me out of your Hopkins/Linda contest, not my business, and not interested. John Velez, There's a sucker born every minute and the honor befell the poor guy born right before me,...I am nobodys fool. John Velez jvif@spacelab.net
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 14 Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills From: JJ Mercieca <mufor@maltanet.net> Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 10:21:43 +0100 Fwd Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 17:13:42 -0400 Subject: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills Hi all, Since I'm not a video analyst I will not comment on the reality or otherwise of the Mexican ufo footage. Has anyone noted that on each still frame there is a bar (from top to bottom of the image) of lighter film colouration where there is the ufo? What could be causing this? I have seen lots of ufo films where the ufo is always travelling in parallel (moving across the screen, left or right, up or down) to the eyewitness. Does film exist of UFOs travelling towards or away from the eyewitness, getting visibly larger or smaller? Regards, JJ Mercieca Malta UFO Research http://www.mufor.org/
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 14 Re: More on the Gulf Breeze copyright issue From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com> Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 02:27:05 -0700 Fwd Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 17:19:48 -0400 Subject: Re: More on the Gulf Breeze copyright issue On p 134 of the MUFON Symposium proceedings, 1988... "In early December, the National Enquirer contacted Duane Cook about buying rights for a one-time publication of the photos he had published. The Enquirer offered Duane several thousand dollars for these rights. Since Mr. X had indicated that Duane could have the photos, Duane accepted the offer." I think there are two things clear from this about journalistic attitude toward copyright with regard to anonymous photos. 1) Cook believes that the Sentinel owns such photos and can legally sell rights pertaining to them, and 2) the Enquirer agrees, since they contacted Cook to make the deal. Note that these are not the Believer Bill or Jane photos - Cook actually has a contact with regard to these photos, unlike the situation with Bill or Jane where total anonymity is the case. Yet Cook still accepts the offer. This would tend to substantiate that he would believe he would have the right to assign copyright to Ed. ------ Mark Cashman, creator of The Temporal Doorway at http://www.geocities.com/~mcashman - Original digital art, writing, and UFO research - Author of SF novels available at... http://www.infohaus.com/access/by-seller/The_Temporal_Doorway_Storefront ------
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 14 Re: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 2, Number 39 From: JJ Mercieca <mufor@maltanet.net> Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 10:21:45 +0100 Fwd Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 17:16:12 -0400 Subject: Re: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 2, Number 39 >To: updates@globalserve.net >Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 00:27:56 pdt >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 2, Number 39 >From: kwyatt3@juno.com (Keith E Wyatt) >A while back there was a photograph in a UK UFO publication >that showed a KC 135 refueling a triangle shaped aircraft. Does >anyone know if there was an analysis of this photograph or >the negative? If I recall correctly, that "photograph" was an artist's impression of Aurora. Someone then copied it from UFO Magazine and published it elsewhere as the real thing. Regards, JJ Mercieca Malta UFO Research http://www.mufor.org/
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 14 Re: Re: Alien Autopsy Film From: "Roger R. Prokic" <rprokic@ibm.net> Date: Tue, 14 Oct 97 05:46:39 Fwd Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 17:29:41 -0400 Subject: Re: Re: Alien Autopsy Film >Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 09:03:11 -0700 >From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net> >To: updates@globalserve.net >Subject: Alien Autopsy Film >which is mis-labeled "butt shot" and compare this image >with some of the beginning footage of the second >autopsy film, you will see that there are some >remarkable similarities of the two bodies. Give Theresa a hello from me. Ask her how she can prove that these "aliens" aren't twins.... I'd hate to think she overlooked it in her quest to be the one to prove it a hoax... Roger
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 14 Skywatch: Edgar Mitchell & UFO crashes From: William.Hamilton@pcsmail.pcshs.com Date: 13 Oct 1997 20:00:08 UT Fwd Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 16:57:33 -0400 Subject: Skywatch: Edgar Mitchell & UFO crashes I participated in a panel with six other panelists on Saturday at the Prophet's Conference in Phoenix. One of the other panelist was Edgar Mitchell. He was quoted in the Sunday Arizona Republic: PHOENIX (AP) - A former astronaut who walked on the moon says he think aliens have crash-landed on Earth. Edgar Mitchell, the sixth man to walk on the moon, said he believes some military and other planes use technology derived from alien spacecraft that have been captured and disassembled. The purported secret project has been going for decades under a parallel government administration, separate from the president and the highest-ranking members of the Pentagon, Mitchell said. On Saturday, Mitchell called for congressional hearings on whether the United States has captured alien craft and studied them to produce new technologies. By listening to Dr. Mitchell and Dr. Steven Greer (also on the panel) I found I was listening to echoes of what I wrote and spoke about six and seven years ago. Dr. Greer mentioned the Alien Reproduction Vehicles that were on display at Norton AFB in 1988. I had learned of this story shortly after in 1989-90 timeframe and included it in my book COSMIC TOP SECRET published in 1991. I could never verify this story to my satisfaction, but Dr. Greer and Dr. Mitchell heard this story from the same source I did. What they don't know is that I have had an additional source of this information, but I am still not satisfied with its authenticity. Dr. Greer mentions that a famous senator was present during this presentation. Since that was blurted out publicly some years back and others checked into it -- I might say that that senator was Alan Cranston of California. Dr. Mitchell does indeed support a congressional investigation of this matter and believes, like Dr. Greer, that reverse engineering alien technology is in the hands of some renegade shadow government. Perhaps. This are of inquiry has recently been bolstered by the publication of Colonel Corso's book and has stimulated new controversies over the development of our own technologies. I still believe, from a review of UFO historical developments, that our own Department of Defense establishment is behind the cover-up of retrieved alien craft and certain UFO incidents and that this accountability cannot be shirked by foisting it off on some shadow government. I will shortly post another message relative to the Phoenix sightings and the Air Force. Sincerely, Bill Hamilton Exec Director Skywatch International ---------------------------------------------- Skywatch International and this list service are not responsible for authenticity of posts. ---------------------------------------------- Skywatch International, Inc. skywatch@wic.net "Strange is sometimes stranger when it's true" For latest UFO and Paranormal information Site: http://www.wic.net/colonel/ufopage.htm ---------------------------------------------- Search for other documents from or mentioning: william.hamilton |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 14 Analysis of Mexico City Stills and NOTW Photograph From: Chris Penrose <penrose@sfc.keio.ac.jp> Date: Tue, 14 Oct 97 19:30:12 +0900 Fwd Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 17:28:36 -0400 Subject: Analysis of Mexico City Stills and NOTW Photograph ANALYSIS RESULTS OF MEXICO CITY STILLS AND NEWS OF THE WEIRD PHOTOGRAPH I have spent way too much time on this. But I believe strongly that people on the list who suggest that the buildings in the Mexico City footage bear a curious resemblence to this News of the Weird photograph really need to look at the buildings much much more carefully. Please don't make such coincidental judgements without bothering to scrutinize your evidence. Such ill-formed judgements only embarass you and the ufology community. I have hyperopia (farsightedness), which indicates that I must strain my eye muscles far more than the average person to focus on objects nearby. Reading a book for an extended period is very difficult. Despite this condition, I see glaring differences in the buildings and I don't understand how an average person can't notice them. My hypothesis is that PEOPLE ARE NOT LOOKING CAREFULLY. I did a side-by-side comparison of one of the Mexico City frames with the extremely noisy News of the Weird photograph. I can see how someone might initially confuse these buildings, particularly after only a casual glance. However, the initial similarities between the buildings disappear very quickly. Also, even with a first impression, I can't see how someone could perceive the two "ufo" objects as being remotely similar beyond their classic disc-like proportion. Being the son of an architect, I am embarassed by some of my parlance deficiencies in the field. Please bear with them. PLEASE READ THE NEXT PARAGRAPH CAREFULLY (it begins with "First of all"). I will make a statement about each photograph. The statement holds ONLY for the specific photograph I am talking about in each sentence. First of all, there are two large buildings in the foreground of the Mexico City picture. And we find two buildings in the Moscow picture also. The two buildings in the Mexico City photograph appear to have the same basic architecture, the building to the right is in the foreground to the building on the left. The two buildings in the Moscow photograph appear to have the same basic architecture, the building to the right is in the foreground to the building on the left. These are the similarities. They are probably the similarities that people are identifying. They end here. If the buildings are the same, which is highly unlikely given other factors (see below), the two pictures do not depict the same side of the building. In other words, the photographs would have to have been taken from entirely different (in both height, angle, and point) locations. There are other shorter buildings in both photographs to the left of the buildings. However, the architecture of these buildings are radically different. In the Mexico City photo we have a v-roof building and a spectacular (at least compared to all the other depressing buildings in the photos) building with a triangle profile, its right edge perpendicular to the earth. In the Moscow photo, instead we have another flat roofed building. No v-roof, no triangle. The flat roof neighbor appears closer to the buildings, than the neighboring buildings do in the Mexico City building. Thus, if the pictures depict the same buildings, they are depicted from an entirely different vantage. The window details of the buildings in the two photographs are quite different in geometry. Please look again. Several of the Mexico City window details have a profile consisting of two adjacent rectangles, the right one being having approximately 30-40% the area of the larger rectangle to the left. The upper edge of both rectangles is shared, but the lower edge is disjunct. This pattern does not appear in the Moscow buildings. There are many other differences. The area of the buildings spanning the top to the top edge of the last window row is nearly twice as great on the Mexico City buildings as it is with the Moscow buildings. It is possible that the window details of the buildings shown in the Mexico City picture appear on the the buildings depicted in the Moscow picture, but on a different side of the building. This is unlikely, and irrelevant given the proof below. The most obvious difference that I found was that the Mexico City buildings increase in width from the bottom edge of the penultimate story (second to last window row) to the top of the building. This detail is not present in the Moscow buildings. Though it is possible, in theory, that this detail may only exist on the left side of the Mexico City buildings, but in practice, such subtly asymmetric buildings are incredibly rare. Given that it is unlikely that the Mexico City builings have this detail on only one side of the building, we can safely say that the lack of this detail in the Moscow buildings is strong evidence that the buildings are different. This detail would be apparent in any photograph that shows the top of the building and any of its vertical edges. If this protruding detail is facing us, (unlike the Mexico City photos) we should see a profiled shadow line after the penultimate story in the Moscow buildings. It is not present in the Moscow buildings. These buildings are not the same. Modern buildings, particularly the modern and unaesthetically sculpted buildings depicted here, tend to have symmetry. Let's say each of these buildings has four exposed rectangular faces (discounting the roof and the unaccessible foundation). If a window detail is found on the left edge of face number 1 of a building, it is quite probable that the detail will appear on the left edge of all the faces (2, 3, 4 also). Furthermore, the inverse of the detail will probably be present on the right side of all the faces also. Buildings do not have to be built this way, and the buildings in both photographs could possibly, but improbably, be built differently. However, I am simply giving evidence that further supports the DIFFERENCES I have found between the buildings in the two photographs. Since I have found major structural differences in the buildings represented in the photographs, someone who claims the buildings are identical needs to convincingly account for these differences. Given the tendencies of symmetry in modern buildings you will need much much more evidence than you have presented to make such coincidental claims. I contend that such claims have been made carelessly. Also, please realize that there are many homogenous forms in modern architecture. I have seen literally hundreds of buildings in Greece, Mexico, Turkey, and even Japan that have the basic profile of these buildings. In this way modern architecture is bland and criminally aesthetic free. Building design is no longer an artform. Buildings are built as cheaply and uniformly as possible. But all buildings in some way, are unique. These two photographs, upon examination, have revealed the uniqueness of the buildings. The Moscow buildings may not be in Moscow and the Mexico City buildings may not be in Mexico City, though it is said that the Mexico City buildings have indeed been located, BUT REGARDLESS, these buildings are, in my opinion quite different. DISCUSSION OF THE "UFO" OBJECTS The NOTW photo appears to be an obvious hoax: despite the noise in the photo the object lacks lighting cues which are present on the building. Though the object appears to be in the foreground of the building, haze and focus wash are curiously absent on the object. The object looks like a button, frisbee or even a hubcap as has been suggested. The object was not in the initial picture, I contend that it was later superimposed. This is a pathetic hoax. Regardless of its fakeness, the object is frisbee shaped: having the appearance of a half oval, it's greatest width found at its bottom. The Mexico City object is closer to a complete oval with its greatest width occuring in its center. Though the objects' orientation are indeed different, we should see a profile gradation that reveals the full oval shape in the Moscow object in order that the objects be the same (or even remotely similar). No such profiling exists on the Moscow object. These objects are not identical. The color gradation of the objects are radically different also. The Mexico City still I have seen is quite remarkable. The object given the haze of the city has a subtle haze wash with respect to the building. There are lighting cues present which look amazingly convincing given their imprint on the building. If a hoax, it is a subtle one. And if both of these pictures are a hoax, it is a supreme insult to the hypothetical hoaxer of the Mexico City photograph to suggest that this same person also created the Moscow picture. Please apologize at once! :) I agree that more information about the locale of the Mexico City picture should be determined. However, I am very suspicious of this comparison that has been made. Why does one make such a comparison when the differences between the photographs, after actually bothering to look carefully are quite vast? Is Jerry Andeson responsible for this bogus comparison? This is very sloppy. I have to interpret this comparison as a careless debunking. I really think that people should be careful before they make ill-formed claims, particularly because it is tiresome for me to have to spend a good two hours or so proving that someone's gee-whiz comparison is bogus in text. Does anyone else have an opinion of Jerry Andeson? Has he made such completely unsupportable assertions before? Christopher Penrose Digital Signal Processing Researcher Faculty of Environment Information Keio University Shonan-Fujisawa penrose@sfc.keio.ac.jp
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 14 Re: Solved Abduction cases? From: Don Ledger <dledger@istar.ca> Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 14:12:39 +0100 Fwd Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 18:54:29 -0400 Subject: Re: Solved Abduction cases? > Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 15:29:51 -0500 (CDT) > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net> [Dennis Stacy] > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Solved Abduction cases? > >From: clark@canby.mn.frontiercomm.net [Jerome Clark] > >Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 21:01:19 PDT > >To: updates@globalserve.net > >Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Solved Abduction cases? Apologetic snip..... > It's the application of agnosticism that troubles me. Is there > really anyone out there who seriously thinks the medical > profession wouldn't be intrigued by obvious cases of missing > fetuses? And that cases of same would routinely surface _without > regard to the UFO abduction literature at all_? Sonograms are as > routine nowadays as tongue depressors. If nothing else, a missing > fetus from one sonogram to another would prompt those involved to > contact social or law enforcement officials if not other medical > personnel at the very least. Hi Dennis, Jerry and List, I am sticking my head above the skyline to make a small point. What if the female has not had the 'sonogram" or as we call them up here "ultrasounds". I've had three daughters who have produced 6 grand children over the last six years and they tell me that these tests aren't normally required until 18 weeks into the term. I have a recollection, perhaps wrong, that in those cases where women have claimed to have had their fetus taken it was at about the third month of pregnancy, or 12 weeks. Perhaps some of those women on the list that have been through this "sonogram' in the U.S. or other countries, could elaborate. Also is my 3 month fetus extraction accurate. > Even alleged female abductees making > this claim should have unambiguous medical documentation of their > status. Yet we routinely accept such stories -- "Oh, those > aliens! You haven't seen the half of it, doc." Or maybe the > doctor lost her records or moved away and couldn't be located by > the dedicated investigator intent on gathering evidence that > would document alien intervention. Or maybe ET stole 'em. But be > agnostic about such cases -- hey, it coulda happened -- and > pretty soon you can be agnostic about anything, including claims > made by leading UFO lights that something like 4 million > Americans alone have been abducted. That's a LOT of potential > missing fetuses (and/or implants) in my book. (And even a very > small percentage would still be a very large lot.) Could we see > some documentation for just one? > > Dennis If you are going to go that route Dennis you had better start doing up some kind of questionnaire for affected females, and it is going to have to be all emcompassing. This is not going to be solved by one or two cases, it would require thousands to do a definitive study. I don't have time right now but if this thread continues I'll give you an idea what I am getting at based on some recent work done in our area by a university student of psychology doing his thesis. Regards, Don Ledger
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 14 Re: Witness Anonymity From: clark@canby.mn.frontiercomm.net[Jerome Clark] Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 10:24:17 PDT Fwd Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 18:48:24 -0400 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity > From: clark@canby.mn.frontiercomm.net [Jerome Clark] > Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 15:01:34 PDT > To: updates@globalserve.net > Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity > > Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 23:39:30 -0400 > > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > > From: Don Allen <dona@totcon.com> > > Subject: Witness Anonymity - open challenge > > At 10:13 AM 10/11/97 -0400, John Velez wrote: > > >Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 04:27:08 -0500 > > >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > > >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> > > >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity > > >>From: "C Hathaway & J. Presson" <earthwrk@doitnow.com> > > >>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net> > > >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity > > >>Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 23:04:01 -0700 > For those who can stand to face the > profound uncertainties and ambiguities that characterize this case > in humble reality ... > read Greg Sandow's marvelously balanced treatment > in the Spring and Summer 1996 issues of IUR. I meant to say the Spring and Summer 1997 issues. Sorry, folks. Jerry Clark Search for other documents from or mentioning: clark | dona | jvif |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 14 Re: From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 18:57:19 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 18:57:19 -0400 Subject: Re: Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 14:41:48 +0100 To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> Subject: Mexican photo and Moscow photo --compare... ------- Forwarded message follows ------- Sean, Take a look at this....I stitched the Mexico image over the Russian image using FTOUCH on a 60% transparency. I still say they're the same backgrounds. The building on the left of the
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 14 Researching Abduction Cases From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 14:31:00 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 19:13:42 -0400 Subject: Researching Abduction Cases Hello All, There has been a thread running about an abduction case that is being investigated by someone on the list. I didn't want to respond directly in the thread because I don't want to get into a situation where my comments are taken personally. Ergo, this new thread. Abduction research -must be- taken out of the hands of amateurs and para-professionals. Not so much for the sake of the research itself, there are many 'amateurs' that can do as competent if not better job than some pros, but for the sake of the well being of those individuals reporting. The assumptions and beliefs of the person investigating a report of abduction should NEVER (under any circumstances) become a part of the picture. Yet in recent posts all I hear is assumption and personal beliefs wild interpretations and pure new age philosophy. Not a shred of anything objective/methodical/empirical or even a well thought out course of action for that matter. A dangerous game to play with someone elses mind and life. You can't "practice" on -live ones- in this business. People can end up hurt or at best come away more confused than when they started their investigation. If you're not sure, or confident that you know what you're doing, or simply lack the proper experience you have -no business- doing it. Refer them to someone who is. An MHP at the very least. I do it automatically with anyone that contacts me. I'm working hard to try to steer abductees away from amateurs. It is my firmly held oppinion that unless and until abductees begin reporting their experiences to mainstream professionals such as family physicians, trusted counsellors, etc, we will never get the attention and the serious investigation that we need. Abductees will never recieve proper treatment or even objective handling at the hands of the amateurs. They can only get sold whatever 'explanation' the paraprofessional believes in him/herself, or they will get sold whatever bill of goods he or she is selling that week. This is serious business, peoples lives are quite literally at stake. It's not the "walk in the woods" adventure some percieve it to be, or worse yet as evidenced here on UpDates, an excersize in superimposing personal belief by those working with abduction experiencers. You wouldn't presume to do brain surgery, or treat someone who has a mental disorder unless you have the expertise and experience to do so. Working with someone who suspects that they are being abducted requires the same level of experience and expertise. What I see happening here is children playing doctor with real scalpels and live patients! I'm working hard to get AIC (Abduction Information Center) open so that people will have a safe and sane place they can come to for the best information and advice that's available. People desperately need an alternative to all of the tripe and misinformation that's out there. THIS IS NOT A GAME! Peoples lives are at stake. At AIC I'm going to encourage as many people as I can to turn to their local health care and counselling professionals. Shit, I'll go first! (I have already had ny self psychologically evaluated, and reported to my family physician.) If I have to, in order to set an example, I'll report my kidnapping to the goddam FBI. Old man Klass is right about that one, if ALL of us reported the abductions to the FBI they might perk up and pay some attention. There is power in numbers. I hope to gather as many abductees as possible under one roof. As a group, we can push in directions that will help us to get the answers we so desperately need. (WE) will make things happen. John Velez, Abductee Union Rep. John Velez jvif@spacelab.net
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 14 Re: Solved Abduction cases? From: clark@canby.mn.frontiercomm.net [Jerome Clark] Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 11:06:18 PDT Fwd Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 18:52:25 -0400 Subject: Re: Solved Abduction cases? > Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 15:29:51 -0500 (CDT) > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net> [Dennis Stacy] > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Solved Abduction cases? > >From: clark@canby.mn.frontiercomm.net [Jerome Clark] > >Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 21:01:19 PDT > >To: updates@globalserve.net > >Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Solved Abduction cases? > >Dennis, > >Appelle writes, entirely reasonably, that the alternative explanation > >-- that abductions are event-level interactions with ETs -- requires > >far more and better evidence than we have seen to date. It > >logically follows, I should think, that objective inquiry is a more > >logical next step than inflated rhetoric -- on either side -- and so is > >a modest acknowledgement that the abduction question is still wide > >open, not closed shut in a cell guarded day and night by psycho- > >socially inclined ufologists and debunkers. Only one thing seems > >obvious at this moment: abductions are a phenomenon in search > >of an explanation. In the meantime, agnosticism, anyone? > >Jerry Clark > Agnosticism is fine with me, as long as it leads to the > investigation of all possibilities. If hoax, however, to cite but > one example, isn't in a particular investigator's lexicon, then > how agnostic (as opposed, say, to forgiving) is that > investigator? > Appelle also lists ten research areas that need to be pursued in > depth, with which I wholly agree. The question here is how long > do we keep referring to abductionology as nascent, and using that > as a rationale to argue in ET's favor? As I said before in an > earlier post, implants and missing fetuses should be the "easy > parts" to document (compared, say, to passing through solid > matter and emerging unscathed on the other side), but it's been > 32 years since the Hill case was made public and 16 going on 17 > since "Missing Time" was published, and there is no compelling > documentation for either. You make half-sense here, Dennis. In every pronouncement with which I'm familiar, private or public, you have used the tentativeness of our knowledge of the abduction phenomenon as an argument against the ET possibility. You've gone on to diss everybody who refuses to close that door, arguing in the meantime for one of the most implausible explanations I've heard yet -- "abortion guilt" -- as one solution to the problem. One doesn't even have to believe ETs are here to accept as a general hypothetical proposition that an advanced alien race, capable of constructing interstellar spacecraft, could also be adept at hiding its tracks, especially when dealing with a society in which all elite opinion is hostile to the very idea of visitation and in which what may be evidence is swiftly rationalized away (as in elite opinion's handling of the UFO phenomenon generally). At this stage it is wise to be modest. Few professional resources have been brought into the investigation so far. Until they are and we have a firmer grasp of what evidence exists potentially (or does not exist), let's rein in the sweeping pronouncements and/ or dismissals. The evidence that does exist already is intriguing enough to keep the question open, and a few cases (e.g., Hill, Allagash, Walton) are puzzling by any standard. > As someone once said of nocturnal lights, how many more abduction > cases do we need to collect (and publish)? It's not enough to > applaud Appelle as an example of the good UFO literature while at > the same time some of the leading lights in the field appear not > to have read (let alone heeded) him, and continue turning out > abduction potboilers. Simultaneously criticizing science for not > getting involved. When was the last time, incidentally, you criticized scientists (who really ought to be all over the question) for not getting involved? My impression is that you save your criticisms solely for those poor souls who do get involved. For all their faults, at least they've had the courage to ask the questions, to investigate the cases, and to confront the unsettling possibilities. My guess is that history will be kinder to them than to the scientists who scoffed, in ignorance, from the sidelines. > It's the application of agnosticism that troubles me. Is there > really anyone out there who seriously thinks the medical > profession wouldn't be intrigued by obvious cases of missing > fetuses? And that cases of same would routinely surface _without > regard to the UFO abduction literature at all_? Sonograms are as > routine nowadays as tongue depressors. If nothing else, a missing > fetus from one sonogram to another would prompt those involved to > contact social or law enforcement officials if not other medical > personnel at the very least. Even alleged female abductees making > this claim should have unambiguous medical documentation of their > status. Yet we routinely accept such stories -- "Oh, those > aliens! You haven't seen the half of it, doc." Or maybe the > doctor lost her records or moved away and couldn't be located by > the dedicated investigator intent on gathering evidence that > would document alien intervention. Or maybe ET stole 'em. But be > agnostic about such cases -- hey, it coulda happened -- and > pretty soon you can be agnostic about anything, including claims > made by leading UFO lights that something like 4 million > Americans alone have been abducted. That's a LOT of potential > missing fetuses (and/or implants) in my book. (And even a very > small percentage would still be a very large lot.) Could we see > some documentation for just one? What you mean "we"? What you mean "routinely"? You act as if ufologists spoke in one voice on this subject, when in fact -- unlike, say, debunkers -- they speak in many voices on the abduction question, and just about any UFO- related question. As they should. No reasonable person disputes the problems with the evidence, or the existence of exaggerated claims for which no -- or at best only uncertain -- evidence can be demonstrated. Even so -- however much you seem to wish it, Dennis -- that is not the end of the discussion. Far, in fact, from it. Jerry Clark
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 14 Global Surveyor's Orbit Raised While Solar Panel From: NASANews@hq.nasa.gov Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 16:18:30 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 19:48:18 -0400 Subject: Global Surveyor's Orbit Raised While Solar Panel Douglas Isbell Headquarters, Washington, DC October 14, 1997 (Phone: 202/358-1753) Diane Ainsworth Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, CA (Phone: 818/354-5011) RELEASE: 97-232 GLOBAL SURVEYOR'S ORBIT RAISED WHILE SOLAR PANEL IS ANALYZED The lowest point of Mars Global Surveyor's aerobraking orbit has been raised temporarily, and aerobraking has been suspended while the flight team analyzes data to understand why one of the spacecraft's two solar panels, which had not fully deployed, exhibited unexpected motion during a recent dip through the upper Martian atmosphere. The spacecraft's current 35-hour orbit around Mars, which was taking it down to 75 miles (121 kilometers) above the Martian surface during each of its closest passes over the planet, has been raised to 105 miles (170 kilometers). The orbit was raised Oct. 12 by the operations team at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), Pasadena, CA, and Lockheed Martin Astronautics, Denver, CO, by performing a brief, 5.15-mile-per-hour (2.3-meter-per-second) propulsive burn at the farthest point of the spacecraft's orbit around Mars. The panel's performance has had no effect on spacecraft power. "We're taking a hiatus from aerobraking for the next few weeks while we study data to try to model and understand the apparent deflection of the solar panel that never fully deployed and latched in place after launch," said Glenn E. Cunningham, Mars Global Surveyor project manager at JPL. "This delay in the aerobraking process will probably change the spacecraft's final mapping orbit from the originally planned 2 p.m. local Mars time passage over the planet's equator to another time, and we are studying several other orbits that will give us nearly the same quality of science results." Preliminary data from the panel indicate that it has moved past what would have been its fully deployed and latched position, Cunningham said. In addition, the panel has shown some movement, rather than maintaining its rigid position during aerobraking. These changes occurred during the spacecraft's fifteenth close approach to Mars, on Oct. 6, when the density of the Martian atmosphere doubled unexpectedly. During the next few weeks, the Mars Global Surveyor flight team will leave the spacecraft's orbit in the current, 35-hour revolution around Mars, which will not take the spacecraft through the upper atmosphere of Mars, while they analyze data and simulate conditions in the Martian atmosphere to understand the behavior of the solar panel. This hiatus also means the spacecraft's solar panels will not be reconfigured for each close pass over Mars, but will remain in the normal cruise position. "We can't yet explain what has happened," Cunningham said. "We saw the unlatched panel move past the latched-up position, and it remains past that point now. By raising the spacecraft's orbit above the upper atmosphere, the panel should not shift further because it will not be exposed to the aerodynamic forces of the Martian atmosphere." Several other mapping orbits are available to Mars Global Surveyor to carry out its science objectives. The flight team will explore alternatives in the next few weeks to accomplish the lowest orbit possible and achieve a "sun-synchronous" orbit that will allow Global Surveyor to fly over the Martian equator at the same local solar time each orbit. These sun-synchronous orbits are designed so that the spacecraft's instruments always see Mars at the same lighting angle on every pass over the surface. "As we step back from aggressive aerobraking temporarily, we will have the opportunity to study the situation until we fully understand it. We will take advantage of this opportunity to return some spectacular data from the camera and laser altimeter," Cunningham said. "The thermal emission spectrometer and magnetometer/electron reflectometer also will continue to collect data while we remain in this holding pattern." The Mars Global Surveyor atmospheric advisory group reported that the Martian atmosphere has more than doubled in thickness in the last week. Global Surveyor is designed to withstand more than a 50 percent increase in atmospheric density, but began showing movement in the solar panel last week, during the fifteenth close approach on Oct. 6. Additional information about the Mars Global Surveyor mission is available on the World Wide Web by accessing JPL's Mars news site at URL: http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/marsnews or the Global Surveyor project home page at URL: http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov Mars Global Surveyor is part of a sustained program of Mars exploration, known as the Mars Surveyor Program. The mission is managed by JPL for NASA's Office of Space Science, Washington, DC. JPL's industrial partner is Lockheed Martin Astronautics, Denver, CO, which developed and operates the spacecraft. JPL is a division of the California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA. -end-
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 14 Poll finds that 3 million Canadians have seen UFOs From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 19:59:14 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 19:59:14 -0400 Subject: Poll finds that 3 million Canadians have seen UFOs Poll finds that 3 million Canadians have seen UFOs A national survey by an independent research consortium has found that 9.6 per cent of all Canadians believe they have seen UFOs. "This translates into nearly 3 million people who say they are UFO witnesses," notes Chris Rutkowski, project coordinator. The survey was conducted by independent researchers in five Canadian cities in British Columbia, Manitoba, Ontario and Quebec during August 1997. "Information was gathered by special interest groups across the country, working together for the first time in a coordinated research project," Rutkowski says. "Nearly 200 Canadians were randomly surveyed, and our results appear to be in line with similar studies in the United States." Other results of the survey: - 78 per cent of Canadians believe in the existence of life elsewhere in the universe. - More than 52 per cent believe that some UFOs are alien spacecraft. - Only 12 per cent of people who have seen UFOs actually report their sightings. - More than 57 per cent of Canadians believe there is a military or government cover-up regarding the existence of UFOs. - Older Canadians tend not to believe in UFOs or cover-ups. - Younger Canadian adults are more likely to believe in the existence of extraterrestrial life. For more information, contact the participating researchers in your area: UFO*BC (Vancouver) at 604-878-6511 Seekers (Brandon) at 204-728-7174 Ufology Research of Manitoba (Winnipeg) at 204-269-7553 MUFON Ontario (Toronto) at 416-249-0933 SOS OVNI Quebec (Montreal) at 514-536-0140 Or contact Chris Rutkowski, project coordinator, in Winnipeg at 204-269-7553
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 14 Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills From: Bob Shell <76750.2717@compuserve.com> Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 14:12:18 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 18:58:51 -0400 Subject: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills >Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 20:39:43 -0500 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Michael Christol <mchristo@mindspring.com> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills >Yes, I know exactly what you are describing. I have seen them. >I use to watch the ABC Wide World Of Sports, years ago, and they >had sport shooting on there a couple of times. >I also watched some people shoot clay targets from the rear of >the "Big Red Boat," on a three day cruise to the Bahammas and >back to Orlando, Florida, back in Jan. 95. >You are correct, I think the photo does look like one of those >clay pigeons. Thanks Bob. Anyone else into clay pigeons? >>As for the Mexico photos, I find it damned convenient that the video >>cameraman was in exactly the right place for this dramatic "Ed Wood" >>shot of the saucer cruising behind the building. Reminds me of the >>convenient placement of the camera in a certain crop circle video! >Yes, it is convenient, however, sometimes, the best things in >life seem to just happen that way. I will remain neutral at this >time, and wait and see what comes of this. >Oh, btw, did you pick up the message I posted in Sept. about the >earliest known Crash? July...., 1941...South Pacific? If you >know this place and time, I need not be any more specific... No, I must have missed that one. I was not getting UFO Updates for a while due to some sort of glitch, and I am guessing that you posted this during that time. Mind bringing me up to speed on this? >Yep, I know what you mean. But at some point, Bob, these things >must start coming closer and closer to us, rather than stay at >the limits of our focal range, if they are gradually conditioning >us for first contact. Sorry, we must disagree on this. I think first contact happened thousands of years ago, and continues today via a small group of humans. Bob
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 15 Re: Press Release SSE/UFOs From: Dan <geibdan@qtm.net> [Dan Geib] Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 18:41:50 -0700 Fwd Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 01:37:45 -0400 Subject: Re: Press Release SSE/UFOs >Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 08:35:06 -0400 >To: "Researcher List":; >From: Patricia Mason <pmason@ee.net> >Subject: Press Release SSE/UFOs >Sorry, I don't have a date for this. It was sent to me courtesy >of Robert Collins <fidelio@ix.netcom.com>. >----- >Press Release >There may be more to UFO evidence than just verbal reports of >what people see in the sky. >Some UFO evidence may be worthy of scientific investigation. >This is the tentative conclusion of a panel of scientists >convened by the Society for Scientific Exploration to examine >this matter. >The panel of nine scientists met at a conference center near New >York from September 29 to October 3. >The panel reviewed evidence presented by eight UFO investigators, >and will issue a report within a few months that summarizes the >workshop activities and makes recommendations for further >research. >The panelists were drawn from France, Germany and the United >States. >The investigators came from France, Germany, Norway and the >United States. <snipped> >SSE web site: > http://www.jse.com/index.html >[[[[[[[[[[[[ UNUSUAL RESEARCH ]]]]]]]]]]]]] > > http://users1.ee.net/pmason/index.html > >[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]] Does anyone know if this press release was ever released to any major press ? Thanxz Dan geibdan@qtm.net UFO Folklore at http://www.qtm.net/~geibdan/framemst.html Search for other documents from or mentioning: geibdan | pmason |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 15 Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills From: Michael Bessee <bessee@spiritone.com> Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 17:49:50 -0700 Fwd Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 01:36:51 -0400 Subject: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills >Hi all, >I have seen lots of ufo films where the ufo is always travelling in >parallel (moving across the screen, left or right, up or down) to the >eyewitness. Does film exist of UFOs travelling towards or away from >the eyewitness, getting visibly larger or smaller? >Regards, >JJ Mercieca >Malta UFO Research Interesting observation! I too have seen lot's of video and stills of alledged UFO's and have never seen a film capturing an object appearing to move away from or toward the camera apeture - always seem to be filmed laterally traversing the field of view. ALTHOUGH, if the object were coming toward you - OR - travelling away at a high rate of speed there would be little profile to see and therefore such a sighting might not actually catch your attention owing to it's narrow perspective. I do recall a statement attributed to Billy Meier recalling that the beamships he met did appear on the horizon as a small speck and then zoomed into close proximity in an instant. My question regarding these Mexico stills is this; "How many people in Mexico are walking around with a camcorder in hand?". Seems like an awfully large amount of video has been captured by chance. Perhaps this has become a common enough occurence that one would have the "where with all" to be toting a camcorder around at all times. I know both my cameras and one camcorder are stored away in their respective bags until I decide to take them with me somewhere - and then I usually take the bag, and I'd only have them out of the bag if I was planning to shoot something specific! If I did see an object close enough to recognize that it had a shape similiar to what I have seen as UFO's in photos I'm sure I would be standing there watching in amazement. The furthest thing from my mind would be to take my eye off of it and run for a camera. Maybe I'm naive to not be prepared but I tend to believe that there are many unreported sightings that go unmentioned because the episode was so fleeting and random that most people figure it must have been something else. Not to mention the fear of ridicule. MB
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 15 Re: Researching Abduction Cases From: Skye Turell <turel33@west.net> Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 18:31:33 -0700 Fwd Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 01:33:07 -0400 Subject: Re: Researching Abduction Cases >Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 14:31:00 -0500 >To: updates@globalserve.net >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >Subject: Researching abduction cases >THIS IS NOT A GAME! Peoples lives are at stake. At AIC I'm going >to encourage as many people as I can to turn to their local >health care and counselling professionals. Shit, I'll go first! Have fun, John. Once the "professionals" get ahold of you, with their assumption that you are delusional, you will spend your life in psychiatric hell. > If I have to, in order to set >an example, I'll report my kidnapping to the goddam FBI. Old man >Klass is right about that one, if ALL of us reported the >abductions to the FBI they might perk up and pay some attention. Actually I know someone who *did* report to the FBI and they were referred to their local MUFON chapter! >There is power in numbers. I hope to gather as many abductees as >possible under one roof. As a group, we can push in directions >that will help us to get the answers we so desperately need. From the FBI? From the so-called health care profession? I don't think so. I agree there's strength in numbers, but that also means that we are completely capable of getting those answers ourselves, and a lot more effectively than if we turn to established orders that have too much invested in the status quo. Skye Turell <turel33@west.net>
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 15 Re: Press Release SSE/UFOs From: jared@valuserve.com (Andromeda.net- Anderson, Jared) Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 18:50:52 -0700 Fwd Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 01:41:32 -0400 Subject: Re: Press Release SSE/UFOs > From: Patricia Mason <pmason@ee.net> > Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 08:35:06 -0400 > Fwd Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 10:27:31 -0400 > Subject: Press Release SSE/UFOs > Sorry, I don't have a date for this. It was sent to me courtesy > of Robert Collins <fidelio@ix.netcom.com>. > ----- > Press Release > There may be more to UFO evidence than just verbal reports of > what people see in the sky. > Some UFO evidence may be worthy of scientific investigation. > This is the tentative conclusion of a panel of scientists > convened by the Society for Scientific Exploration to examine > this matter. > The panel of nine scientists met at a conference center near New > York from September 29 to October 3. > The panel reviewed evidence presented by eight UFO investigators, > and will issue a report within a few months that summarizes the > workshop activities and makes recommendations for further > research. > The panelists were drawn from France, Germany and the United > States. > The investigators came from France, Germany, Norway and the > United States. > The strong representation from France is due to the fact that > France is the only country that has an unclassified on-going > official investigation into UFO reports. This program, at CNES > the French Space Agency in Toulouse, is headed by Jean-Jacques > Velasco who was a participant in the workshop. > Velasco described damage to soil and vegetation associated with a > strange object that was seen to land at a farm in > Trans-en-Provence in France, departing within about one minute. > This evidence has been analyzed by scientists in France on behalf > of CNES. > Other evidence presented and critically reviewed at the workshop > included photographs, video records, spectroscopic data, radar > records, reports of malfunctions of automobile and aircraft > equipment, material specimens, and radiation-type injuries to > witnesses. > "We made no effort to solve the UFO problem," said Von Eshleman > of Stanford University and Thomas Holzer of the High Altitude > Observatory, Co-Chairs of the Review Panel. "We had a far more > modest goal. We were here only to inform ourselves about claimed > evidence, and to try to decide if further scientific study of > such evidence is likely to significantly advance the resolution > of the UFO problem." > The "UFO problem" was defined by Peter Sturrock of Stanford > University, direct or of the workshop, as the problem of > understanding the cause or causes of UFO reports. > "Honest people report strange observations. Not all reports have > obvious explanations. So what are the not-so-obvious > explanations? I would like to see scientists play a more active > role in helping to unravel this 50-year old mystery. I see the > workshop as a small step in this direction." > Other members of the panel were Randy Jokipii of the University > of Arizona, Francois Louange from France, Jay Melosh of the > University of Arizona, James Papike of the University of New > Mexico, Guenther Reitz from Germany, Charles Tolbert from the > University of Virginia, and Bernard Veyret from France. Being unfamiliar with the Society for Scientific Exploration, I was intrigued by this press release. Any possibility for organized scientific investigation of the UFO phenomenon at the University level should leave the UFO community falling all over itself with delight. I don't live that far from Stanford University so I called Prof. Sturrock to collect some information about this group of scientists and their aspirations. According to Sturrock the jury is still out with the overall picture of UFO evidence and the conclusions of SSE regarding whether the sum of available evidence constitutes a neccessity for serious scientific study. however, the prospect looks very high. Although my conversation with Sturrock was brief, his descriptions of SSE's direction and the information in the litertaure he sent me about the organization revealed that they are indeed taking a serious look at not only the UFO issue but some other areas that sit at the edge of scientific understanding. It looks like Sturrock may be planning to re-analyze the Condon report which has already been done by several UFO organizations and independant researchers, but has never been done at the University level with the calibre of scientists in the SSE bios. Marsha Simms told me they are looking forward to "replacing" the Condon report with their own. Observe: http://www.jse.com/index.html Jared
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 15 Re: The sky over Roswell and estimates of speed From: Ted Viens <drtedv@smart1.net> Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 19:29:56 -0700 Fwd Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 01:43:35 -0400 Subject: Re: The sky over Roswell and estimates of speed > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com> > Subject: re: UFO UpDate: Re: The sky over Roswell and estimates of speed > Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 12:11:16 -0700 ---big snip--- > Since the size of a degree does not vary from horizon to zenith, > the speed should be the same at any point on the arc. > Since your observation was of an object travelling approx. 1.5 > degrees per second across the sky, I believe that my estimates > are correct, but I look forward to any further comments. Howdy Mark... The problem is in your choice of pivot point. Your calculations are for the sweep about the observer. This is where a degree at the zenith is equal to a degree at the horizon. The bogey is sweeping around the center of the earth. Now, back to our bogey passing at a constant 100 mile altitude. A ninety degree sweep for the observer centered at the zenith equals only 2.8 degrees of arc for the bogey. A ninety degree sweep for the observer from the zenith to the horizon equals some 12.7 degrees of arc for the bogey. This is about 4.5 times as far. A degree is not always a degree. Bye... Ted..
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 15 The 'Alien Embryo' Hoax - Disinformation Ploy? From: jared@valuserve.com (Andromeda.net- Anderson, Jared) Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 20:08:55 -0700 Fwd Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 01:56:49 -0400 Subject: The 'Alien Embryo' Hoax - Disinformation Ploy? By Jorge Mart=EDn - UFO Researcher - Puerto Rico Suspecting foul play in this incident, due to the many contradictions and strange angles in it, we continued investigating the matter further, arriving to the conclussion it was all a hoax designed to embarrass and discredit both the UFO / alien situation in Puerto Rico, as well as to discredit those involved in serious research on this phenomenon. Mrs. Alma Rivera, press officer of the Forensic Sciences Institute of Puerto Rico, explained to us, during an interview, that at the moment of the incident they could not say that the "embryo" was really a small plastic figurine inside a small crystal jar - keychain. She explained that they must stick to law 13, which describes the forensic investigations protocols, and as the small jar and its content was part of the evidence picked up at the crime scene, they could not say anything about it until it had been analyzed by a forensics chemist [the bottle itself, the liquid contained in it and the figurine itself. "We can not do otherwise - she said. For example, the liquid inside the jar could have been some type of poison, or some type of illegal drug, it could be related to the death of the victim, therefore we must check everything throughly. It was part of the evidence gathered, and it had to be treated as such." We understand this, but it sounds illogical if we take in account the overall situation that developed that day. A simple preliminary statement in the sense that it was a keychain, a plastic figurine, would have straightened everything out. But was everything the product of a mere misunderstanding? The results of further investigation imply a different scenario. We asked Mr. Banojian, from WAPA TV, Channel 4, for a copy of the original unedited hard copy video taped at the crime site by S=E1nchez. A through frame by frame examination of the video showed the dead man was not wearing a military uniform, as originally said. Also, according to several forensic sciences witnesses, as well as policemen at the site and others, there was no military suit and no manila envelope with the words 'Base Ceiba' written on top of it. The 4 x 4 black vehicle, allegedly observed by witnesses and policemen, according to cameraman S=E1nchez and channel 4 news department never existed. These were incorrect details that came out from the channel premises. The images of the crystal vial wich contained the alleged "embryo" always showed it from its sides, never showing the top of it, its cap. 'Someone' tried his best not to film the top of it, but inadvertingly did so for a couple of seconds. While checking it frame by frame, we found it showed a small hole on its top, a hole compatible with the one in the keychains mentioned in the TV report. This implied someone in channel 4 had to know about it being a figurine and not an "alien embryo" from the beginning, that it was all part of a misidentification... or a hoax. But strangely, they continued on with the story. If this was the case, why did the police officers at the crime scene reported a "fetus of non human appearance" in their official report? How could the forensic sciences representatives, detectives and a district attorney be confused about it being a biological organism, sending it to be analyzed? Also,after double checking with other sources we have inside the Forensic Sciences Institute, sources we trust, we concluded that everything the confidential source who allegedly worked in the institute [please refer to our previous preliminary report], who had contacted our common friend, told us the night after the incident, about a federal government covert operation going on in the institute pertaining to this case was not true. It was all disinformation, a lie. If this was the case and the institute's personnel knew that everything was a fraud, then the alleged physician who made a phone call [according to what channel 4 news department director Enrique Cruz and Mr. Banojian] from their premises, to the Forensic Sciences Institute, either lied or was lied to when he said the important inside source he called there told him that "...even though we haven't analyzed it completely, I can tell you that it is neither something human nor any type of animal we know of". Taking all of the above in account, it is obvious that 'someone' wanted to disinform the public and ridicule both the UFO / alien situation in Puerto Rico and abroad and those of us who seriously research and report on it, using the media, something that has been going on already for a couple of years now. The following are some examples on this. 1. About three years ago we were informed by some friends of a catholic priest that was organizing a UFO cult group with a mixture of beliefs such as aliens and UFOs mixed with angels, the Virgin Mary, and new age ideas, in the southwest of Puerto Rico. The man was a priest at the Church of Hormigueros, a town in the southwest region, but his actions became even more suspicious when he started saying to the group's members that "...many special children had to be born, that the extraterrestrials needed them [specially the women] to colaborate in bearing this children [of course sexually and with his active participation in the process]. Eventually we came to the knowledge that this 'priest' was really a spanish CIA operative that had been brought to Puerto Rico years ago from Nicaragua. As he said to some members of his group who talked to us on a confidential basis, he was a CIA operative in Nicaragua who was in charge, as well as others, in 'marking' for death some members of the Sandinista movement in that Central America nation. Being discovered by the Sandinistas and marked for execution by them, both the CIA and the Catholic Church, acting in accordance urgently created a false priest identity for him and got him out of Nicaragua, helping him escape and bringing him to Puerto Rico. According to ours sources within the group his job here was to organize a UFO cult group and create a major scandal which would include reports of degenerate group sex orgies with a blend of wild religious and metaphysical beliefs and rituals in which our name would come out, falsely, as one of the leaders, in an intent to discredit our reputation. The priest told the members of the group that I was dangerous because I was reporting on the UFO / alien situation in Puerto Rico and had a clear view of it, and was relaying this view to the public and this could not be. He even trained some of the group's members to physically 'neutralize' me, should there be need for this. Informed on this we denounced everything in our radio programn and the operative was ended. Eventually, he was taken out the country by the church as several husbands of some of the female members of the cult group complained about and denounced to the church archdiocese and bishop of Mayaguez, in charge of the Hormigueros Catholic church, that the 'priest' was sexually involved with their wives, and threatened to "...blow his head off if he wasn't removed." Several such UFO cult groups have flourished recently in Puerto Rico, and there's an interesting pattern in them, most of the leaders of these groups are men from central american countries who have strong background ties with either the U.S. military / intelligence community or NASA. Is this just coincidence? 2. In june1996 we were given an audio cassette tape with the alleged recording of an air combat between several U.S. Navy and several flying saucers which escorted a huge alien mother ship, allegedly nortwest of Puerto Rico. Allegedly, the recording was made by its owners when they were talking by phone and there was an apparent accidental technical malfunction wich allowed another communication to cross with theirs. The recording allow you to hear the owners comments on what they are hearing and apparent communications between a U.S. carrier, someone apparently in a military base and the pilots of some of the alleged U.S. interceptors. Even Air Force One is included in the communications mel=E9e. At one moment it is reported that several of the jets are downed by the alien crafts and that some of the UFOs have been destroyed. One of the UFOs was reported as crash landing in El Yunque rain forest, in Rio Grande, east of Puerto Rico, and being captured by U.S. Navy forces there. Examining the recording with several consultants who collaborate with us, U.S. military retired officers, we all came to the conclussion that it was a fraud, a forgery, as the techical lenguage used by the alleged military personnel and pilots in the recording was not the one officially used in such combat situations. Obviously, again, 'someone' was trying to disinform us with the apparent intention of getting us to make unsubstantiated comments on the recording, to later ridicule and discredit us, possibly after revealing everything as a hoax. 3. 'Coincidentally', at the same time the recording was sent to us, the leaders of a 'UFO investigations group' organized by those days in Puerto Rico, that dresses in black swat like uniforms and behaves in a very suspicious manner, began disseminating all over Puerto Rico several color photographs of an alleged alien laying on a hospital examination table. The story behind the pictures was that they showed an alien captured by U.S. forces during the crash of a UFO in El Yunque rain forest. The pictures were eventually shown in TV, where another alleged 'UFO researcher' presented them as bona fide photos of the aliens of the Roswell case. In reality, the photographs were those of the rubber prop dummies made for the Showtime movie "Roswell", produced by Paul Davids. This same group has participated in other hoaxes, as we will see below, and we must ask: Why is a UFO investigations group disseminating disinformation and hoaxes on this matter, instead of doing everything possible to do serious research and report on it with the upmost ethical behavior? I think the answer is obvious to all of us in this field. 4. On the night of may 5, 1997 a UFO crash was reported as having occurred in the town of Lajas, Puerto Rico, in the southwest. Having had people there that night and going there ourselves that same night, we became aware that nothing like that had happened at the site. A fire at the site was due to dry pasture fires in the area due to a very heavy drought season Puerto Rico was going thru at the moment. The false 'UFO crash' incident was fabricated by a self proclaimed 'UFO investigator' of unethical behavior, a self proclaimed contactee and cult leader in the area, and the leaders of the 'UFO investigations group' mentioned above. Several representatives of all the puertorican TV channels news department told us they knew everything was a fraud, a hoax, but nevertheless all of them presented the case afterwards in their broadscasts as a genuine. Eventually, it was obvious to all that no such thing had happened and it was all a lie, a fabrication perpetrated by those already mentioned. The southwest region of Puerto Rico has been, for decades, the site of a strong alien /UFO activity which seems to imply there's an alien underground base in the area. This unfortunate episode, created by individuals who are only looking for publicity [and maybe to discredit everything], has served the purpose of casting some doubts on the credibility of the many real and important UFO related incidents that occurr in that area. Simultanously with this, a female news reporter from one of the channels, asked us to give an opinion on a video image of an alleged brightly lit UFO taped by a woman in the town of Adjuntas that same day. As the image looked suspicious we asked her and her husband, her cameraman, if they had been to the actual site where the "UFO" was seen, because by the type of glare it could be a mere reflection of the sun over a residence window panel. They both assured to us they had been at the exact site in the mountain where the ufo had been and there was nothing there but grass and brush, dense vegetation. As in the "alien embryo" case, motive of this report, we expressed our concern on giving any cathegorical statements on the matter. We said that as we had not been at the site to examine it nor spoken with the alleged witness who videotaped the 'UFO', and as we were only looking at the image of something on a video, the only thing we could say was that "...there seem to be something there, but we can't say anything about it until more scientific analysis is made on it and more data is obtained." I was surprised later on that same day when a reporter of another channel presented the same video and explained that the 'UFO' in it was only the reflection of the sun on a glass window panel in a residence located in that mountain. The female reporter and her husband had lied to us...Maybe with the intention of ridiculing and discrediting us? Again, if that was their motive, it did nor work. 5. Lately, several local TV programs have interviewed charlatans, self proclaimed contactees and 'alien ambassadors' whose wild claims helped ridicule the phenomenon. Again, was the "alien embryo" episode a disinformation ploy? If so, why? The situation described below may give us the answer to this. The Caribbean National Rain Forest, located in the Sierra de Luquillo, east of Puerto Rico, has been another site of heavy alien / UFO activity in our contry for decades [and apparently for centuries, if we take in account many legends that go far back to the times of our extinct indian ancestors.] Among the several strange situations that occurr there, there have been numerous mysterious dissapearances of children, adults and U.S. military personnel. Recently, another such incident happened in august 1997, in which Dr. Darby Williams, Dean of Bowling Green University, in Ohio, U.S.A., dissapeared there. Fortunately, he reappeared after 12 days, but everyone was concerned and stranged that local and federal authorities would not let him speak freely with the media, and the few things he said were not logical. But his case opened a pandora box, because it made us puertoricans remember other such situations in the forest, as well as many incidents in which people claimed having had encounters with either alien humanoid type creatures and UFOs. These reports motivated reporter Carmen Jovet to do a special program of the matter, analyzing Williams's case as well as the many strange incidents in the forest. We helped her in the production of the special. Several very reliable witnesses related their accounts on their experiences in El Yunque. Some of them, while lost in the forest, encountered strange humanoid beings, others encountered Grey type aliens and enigmatic 'balls of light' that behave intelligently. Pictures of two grey type aliens taken up in the lane that goes up to Mount Britton, in the forest, were shown during the special. Also, two military helicopter pilots and officers from the national Guard talked about their frequent encounters with UFOs coming out from or going into El Yunque rain forest. Also, other things pertaining to the possibility of the existence of secret U.S. military facilities in El Yunque wich deal with the alien situation there, were discussed. Without a doubt, the program made an impact on the audience, as everything was discussed in a very serious fashion and all witnesses were reliable. Our people, the audience, realized something is really going on pertaining to the UFO /alien situation in Puerto Rico...and 'someone' seemed to be very concerned and very upset by this. After participating in Carmen Jovet's production we have felt a lot of pressure, apparently from government agents, and several threats to our life. Apparently we touched a sensitive nerve somewhere. To this 'someone' this was unacceptable, the panorama had to change. Therefore, what a better way to do this than creating a situation such as this "alien embryo" thing to ridicule everything and at the same time try to embarrass those of us who inform seriously on the alien subject? As both I and veterinarian Dr. Carlos Soto are very careful with the comments we make while investigating something, the intent on discrediting us through this did not work, as we expressed our concern on the fact that we were only viewing an image in a video, not analyzing the actual alleged organism, and therefore we could not say anything cathegorical about it. But this incident helped us become aware that the media in Puerto Rico is being used, specially the TV channels, to disinform about the UFO matter. Jorge Mart=EDn
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 15 UFO VIDEOTAPE, October 14: Clermont County, Ohio From: Kenny Young <task@fuse.net> Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 00:15:01 -0700 Fwd Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 02:06:07 -0400 Subject: UFO VIDEOTAPE, October 14: Clermont County, Ohio UFO VIDEO: 10-14-97 Clermont County, OH An alleged UFO videotape was recorded on Tuesday night, October 14, 1997 from the small community of Afton (between Williamsburg and Batavia) in Clermont County. The witnesses are among three of the eight witnesses to a separate event from Wednesday, September 24. After the previous reports, the witnesses had been asked to keep a videocamera handy in case of any future sightings. According to Chrissy, Susan and Mike (last names withheld), they had an occassion to grab the videocamera and roll tape after an object was seen from their vantage point on Alexander Lane after 8:00 p.m. The object was reported to have hovered in the southwest sky about 65 degrees above the horizon. The UFO, described as a 'huge, brilliant white light,' was said to have been above the East Fork Lake area. The three witnesses agreed that a total of eight airplanes converged on the object and 'hovered' around it. When questioned more specifically about this interesting detail, the witnesses agreed that the planes seemed to be trying to 'hem the object in,' yet maintaining a certain distance from it. One person described the planes as hovering, while another said they seemed to 'circle' around the huge light. They said there were 4-airplanes around the object, and two pairs of airplanes on each side of it. The object reportedly descended into an area near the lake, and disappeared from sight behind a treeline, at which point the planes circled a short time and then flew off into different directions. The effort to videotape the event was made by Chrissy, who later said the event was almost over by the time she ran to get the camera. She acknowledged having problems focusing the camera. The videotape is of a 5 minute and ten second duration, and the witnesses can be heard excitedly trying to operate the camera and record the object. The videotape does show fleeting glimpses of an object which appears only for a few seconds at a time as the camera is shaken due to its hand-held operation. The camera operator and bystander complain as the object descends behind a treeline and away from their view. "I can't get it, its going down too far into the trees," complains the camera operator. Most clearly on the video is the image of an overflying airplane. While attempting to provide a narrative of what is happening on the video, Chrissy, the camera operator, states: "The planes are trying to hover in on it. There is a plane coming around on it, blocking it in. The planes look like 'dots' compared to it." The engine sounds of the airplane suddenly recedes and the witness surprisingly proclaims: "The plane is now shutting off its engine and making a turn around to the thing! The plane has turned off its engine!" The audio portion of the recording affords the viewer with a clear perception of the engine sound, which does 'cut off' for a 22-second period of time, during which, dogs can be heard barking in the distance. The engine sound of the plane (propellor) then commences again as the narrative continues: "The plane just turned on its engine again and coming back." The bystander also comments on the plane shutting down its engine. The night-time video does include several wide shots showing the position from which the witness recorded the event from their residence. When the camera zooms in, focus is lost and the images are shaky. Due to its nebulous nature and lack of identifiable images (aside from the overflying airplane) or clear shot of the alleged UFO, it is the opinion of this researcher that the video is not outstanding evidence. It does, however, express the enthusiasm of the witnesses, who seem to have been greatly impressed with an object surrounded by many airplanes. The witnesses were interviewed and the videotape acquired around 10:30 p.m. the same evening. A phone call to the CLERMONT COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE (513-732-2231) was made at this time, and the dispatcher had no knowledge of UFO-related inquiries placed to the department beforehand. The incident was reported from an area near the Cincinnati Milacron plant and Ford Motor Company's production facility. Numerous other UFO sightings have also been reported from this locality by separate persons. Report filed: OCTOBER 15, 1997 KENNY YOUNG -- UFO Research http://home.fuse.net/task/
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 15 Re: Researching Abduction Cases From: XianneKei@aol.com Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 00:24:47 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 02:11:58 -0400 Subject: Re: Researching Abduction Cases > Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 14:31:00 -0500 > To: updates@globalserve.net > From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> > Subject: Researching abduction cases John, You make excellent points. I think there needs to be a distinction made between research and investigation. Those are two different things in my book and one person, IMO, can't objectively do both. Not easily anyway. Research, IMO, is best left to the professional, such as a medical professional. However, investigation could be done by a ufologist. These two factions would have to work together and the needs of the 'client' would come before any investigation. I think that what you are trying to accomplish is admirable. Someone commented about agnotisticism recently. I am agnostic on abductions. I don't know what is behind the phenomenon. However, I image, as in any field, there are abductees who are telling the truth, some who are lying for whatever reason, and some who might be ill. There could even be some abductees who have all of those facets in their character as well. Anyone who is not a medical professional or under the direct supervision of a medical professional should not be performing hypnosis on abductees. Hypnosis is, IMO, just like you said -- playing with someone's mind. I like the idea of going to one's family physician. Who better to assess the health, mentally and/or physically, of a patient? I would think that with the support that abductees tend to lend one another, the task of going to the family physician could be made easier. I think you have a fantastic idea John and one that is really needed. The phenomenon is never going to be understood, if it is left up to artists and carpenters to do the "research." Best of luck to you John. Rebecca
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 15 Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills From: Chris Penrose <penrose@sfc.keio.ac.jp> Date: Wed, 15 Oct 97 16:41:14 +0900 Fwd Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 04:14:58 -0400 Subject: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills >Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 10:21:43 +0100 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: JJ Mercieca <mufor@maltanet.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills >I have seen lots of ufo films where the ufo is always travelling in >parallel (moving across the screen, left or right, up or down) to the >eyewitness. Does film exist of UFOs travelling towards or away from >the eyewitness, getting visibly larger or smaller? The object in John Velez's video quite distinctly appears to both descend and move away from the viewer. >Since I'm not a video analyst I will not comment on the reality >or otherwise of the Mexican ufo footage. Has anyone noted that >on each still frame there is a bar (from top to bottom of the image) >of lighter film colouration where there is the ufo? What could be >causing this? First of all, the video stills that we have access to have been mediated by several processes: they have experienced an unknown number of generations, recorded from a television, etc., and to top it all off they have been JPEG compressed. I have increased the saturation in the still I have access to and I do notice a blue region somewhat centered around the object. It is not really a bar it is I don't have both stills at the moment, one is at home, and I was a little irked when I visited: http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Rampart/5430/ to find that they had been removed in less than a week. It would be interesting if the blue hue appears centered around the craft rather than be fixed in nearly the center of the image. It could be video distortion, or even a hoax artifact. However, the presence of the blue region is only relevant if it is present in the original footage. Chris Penrose penrose@sfc.keio.ac.jp
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 15 Non-Subscriber Posts to UpDates From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 10:28:51 -0400 Fwd Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 10:28:51 -0400 Subject: Non-Subscriber Posts to UpDates I seem to have caused some confusion regarding non-subscriber submissions to UFO UpDates. Let me try and clarify: Cross-posting (i.e. posts to other lists, news.groups, mass-mailings, Web Sites etc.) is perfectly acceptable, provided the originating attribution-header/URL is included or the originating poster is/was a subscriber to UpDates or the originating address is on file here also acceptable are posts from subscribers on behalf of the Net-impaired, whether single instances, on-going series or point/counterpoint discussion What is un-acceptable is where a non-subscriber, with Net access, who is mentioned in a post here, uses a subscriber to 'third-party' an on-going series of responses to the List I hope this clears the air a little,
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 15 Re: Mexican photo and Moscow photo --compare... From: Chris Penrose <penrose@sfc.keio.ac.jp> Date: Wed, 15 Oct 97 17:53:40 +0900 Fwd Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 10:23:20 -0400 Subject: Re: Mexican photo and Moscow photo --compare... >Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 14:41:48 +0100 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> >Subject: Mexican photo and Moscow photo --compare... > ------- Forwarded message follows ------- >Sean, > Take a look at this....I stitched the Mexico image over >the Russian image using FTOUCH on a 60% transparency. I still say >they're the same backgrounds. The building on the left of the >Ruskie pic has been removed and replaced with trees. Could it be >that the Mexican photo is the real one, and the Russian a fake? I am beginning to experience some extreme culture shock. What does this ludicrous transparency prove? It proves that the subject of each picture are entirely different! First of all, even if these buildings were the same, which I contend they are not, (see my earlier posting) the two pictures are of different sizes and taken at different angles. If you look carefully at the transparency, which the creator evidentally hasn't, you will notice that none of the windows in the buildings mesh. The two layers reveal all sorts of incongruities. It would be nice if the Bruce Maccabee policy of compulsory subscription be applied to John Anderson as well. Then we could ask him just what he is trying to communicate with this transparency. I think my UFO updates hobby may be coming to a close. Chris Penrose penrose@sfc.keio.ac.jp
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 15 Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills From: Jakes Louw <louwje@telkom.co.za> Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 11:15:51 +0200 Fwd Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 10:39:31 -0400 Subject: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills >From: Chris Penrose <penrose@sfc.keio.ac.jp> >Date: Wed, 15 Oct 97 16:41:14 +0900 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills >and I was a little irked when I visited: >http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Rampart/5430/ >to find that they had been removed in less than a week. Chris I think "a little irked" doesn't quite describe how I felt. I found the page to be exhibited in an arrogant manner. However, go and look at: http://www.geocities.com/~mcashman/ufomex.htm where Mark Cashman has put a panorama of the stills. If this vid is genuine, then it MUST be the best in the world. Jakes E. Louw louwje@telkom.co.za +27 12 311-2668 082 923 6144
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 15 Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 10:11:12 +0100 Fwd Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 10:42:02 -0400 Subject: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills >Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 17:49:50 -0700 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Michael Bessee <bessee@spiritone.com> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills >My question regarding these Mexico stills is this; "How many >people in Mexico are walking around with a camcorder in hand?". >Seems like an awfully large amount of video has been captured by >chance. Perhaps this has become a common enough occurence that >one would have the "where with all" to be toting a camcorder >around at all times. I know both my cameras and one camcorder are >stored away in their respective bags until I decide to take them >with me somewhere - and then I usually take the bag, and I'd only >have them out of the bag if I was planning to shoot something >specific! >If I did see an object close enough to recognize that it had a >shape similiar to what I have seen as UFO's in photos I'm sure I >would be standing there watching in amazement. The furthest thing >from my mind would be to take my eye off of it and run for a >camera. HI Michael I don't know if this has occured to you but it is entirely possible the person who filmed this ufo had his vid-cam out for the same reason that you would take your vid-cam out, ie he/she had something to film, a faimly party, a presentation etc etc. So imho making blaz=E9 statements about "who strolls round with a vid-cam in hand" is shot from the hip without prior fore-thought. As to watching in awe rather than "shooting the film". How many people have presence of mind to react to a situation rather than go "oh my gawd!", more than few I bet, I know I am one. If I saw a ufo with a camera in hand you can be bloody sure I would get a pic of it. Are you a man or a mouse, come on squeek up! Sean Jones reply to--sean@tedric.demon.co.uk Homepage--http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Zone/1745/index.html Reasearch page --http://www.tedric.demon.co.uk/ Search for other documents from or mentioning: tedric | bessee |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 15 Re: Abduction Sat 4 Oct 1997 From: wlmss@peg.apc.org [Lawrie Williams] Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 21:46:28 +1000 (GMT+1000) Fwd Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 10:49:01 -0400 Subject: Re: Abduction Sat 4 Oct 1997 > Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 20:50:05 -0700 > To: updates@globalserve.net > From: Skye Turell <turel33@west.net> > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Abduction Sat 4 Oct 1997 >>I told her that it could be possible that the purpose of all this >>was to make hybrids, half like us and half like them. > Lawrie, I'm not sure it's a good idea to tell the girls what they should > expect to experience. Let them have their own experiences and tell you. Hi, Skye! : ) I did just that. I listened to what was said. I was making a prediction with relation to the experience to come, if any. > If it seems like they have common sorts of occurances, then tell them > that others have done likewise, but don't plant ideas. I did exactly that. And I told them what many believe. That is not "planting ideas". That is "telling the truth". I did not say it was *the* truth though, I said that is what many believe. > That might lead them and it certainly will scare them. They were understandably intensely curious. Like anyone, they wanted full disclosure and informed opinion. That need came ahead of research needs. > They will allow the information through that they are capable of > integrating, and not more than that. That's a failsafe mechanism > and you shouldn't try to override it...IMO. No over-riding. These are bright, normal people and I treated them as such. I understand the point you are making Skye. I am aware of the hazards of generating witness bias. Knowing what might be, they would know to watch for those otherwise easily-missed early signs of embryonic development. > Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 06:14:49 -0500 (CDT) > From: Michael Wayne Malone <wayne@fly.HiWAAY.net> > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Abduction Sat 4 Oct 1997 > WHY DID YOU DO THIS????????????????????? Try not to get so excited Michael. > From this point on, any further data gained from these subjects is > tainted. In other words, I had to give them the run-aound, tell them lies or avoid telling them the full truth. > If they have any experiances that in any way match what you told > them, there is no way of knowing the real from the imaginary planted > by you. Absolutely untrue. If I knew what I know now based on the evidence of hundreds of other abductees, I would have gained far more information during my various and sundry encounter experiences. I was preparing them for whatever comes next. Hey, you ever seen a person with red glowing eyes? > This is a typical example of BAD fieldwork. It was not fieldwork. I was asked for advice and I gave it. The next best source of information is American-made drama full of terror and fear. Give me a break! Kids and adults all over the world are being fed mind-disrupting horror day and night. The U.S. Film and TV industry is a sewer of psychiatric disruption distorting all of the paranormal and everything else in the quest for profits. And I tell some kids how it may be - fully and frankly - and *I* am condemned? Anyway, where is all this fieldwork? I get out in the field and I ask questions and I tabulate the answers, then I give feedback. Then I write it up in short concise files and post the stuff on the internet. And I make myself accountable - willingly answering further questions. A few other lay people do the same, they share, share, share. I get the impression that most self-styled "ufologists" spend more time taking in each other's washing and rarely if ever share their fieldwork promptly and openly, as I have always done. How about it? Is this true? Where are the ufologists who do fieldwork and then subject their work to immediate peer review? You have the internet to do some real science on now. Forget the other rituals! > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Abduction Sat 4 Oct 1997 > Date: Mon, 13 Oct 97 16:41:54 -0000 > From: Orca <pwedel@neptune.on.ca> [Paul Wedel] > To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net> > .... I must agree with Skye. I think it's admirable that people wish > to help others and take on such unusual work. Perhaps if at a > time they ask you your thoughts in the future, you present them > as one of many theories. For we do not know _for_sure_ why any of > this is happening. It just happened to me. And I did discuss options, as I said, and I presented one as more likely, and emphasized how little is known. I did exactly that, and said so in my file. Clearly. > With respect to aliens farming us. This in itself could generate > undue fear in a "newbie" (please excuse the colloqualism). We live in a rural dairying area. Good breeders are well looked-after. > I have interviewed several Mohawk and Innuit Medicine people who do > not think these beings are evil at all. - Without going too far off Ufologists might be able to tell me more about Project Camelot conducted by the CIA in 1972, allegedly to find out about native beliefs so they can use them for guerilla warfare. But they got into big trouble in Chile, with all its UFO's, and so they bit back and had the popular government there overthrown and replaced by a brutal dictatorship. But what was Camelot *really* about? It seems it was a cover for secret operations in remote parts of the country. Maybe under FOI someone can now find out. > topic, I just wanted to suggest that we all have theories, and > perhaps it is best in a research situation to keep our theories > close to our hearts during the intial phase of the investigation. I have opposed this theory for years, but I cannot ignore the mounting evidence. And no, I will not obscure vital information. Nor would I make the same claim in a different type of contact situation, obviously. It depends on the type of abduction scenario that is taking place. But none are evil "attacks". Why do you think these entities are doing this? It seems they are striving to replace crew blown out of the sky by the United States of America. Maybe they believe that when it is our own children flying these craft then human mortals will stop their murderous attacks on them. I wish I shared their faith. UFO's are dealing with a culture that seems to want to shoot anything that moves. > This may just be the beginning for your witnesses. As Skye > states, it is important for them to remember only what they > are comfortable remembering. I agree. Nobody is playing hypnosis games around here. I have never been hypnotized (to my knowledge! :) ) and never but never secure information that way, nor do I believe it is necessary. Nor do I lead people. In this case, I informed them about a probable coming scenario, as in forewarned is forearmed. I think it would be rude to withold information on the pretext that it might shock or frighten the questioner. > There are internal mechanisms in place from a neurological point of > view (and goodness knows what else) to allow them to deal with the > shock. Leading them on (even unintentionally) will not yield > accurate data. Shock? No sign of that. I laid out some basic provisional data to provide a framework for the securing of more complex data. We do not have the luxury of abundant time. That was squandered by those who kept telling us this phenomena is not happening, and who now tell us we have to treat our witnesses like mushrooms, i.e. keep them in the dark and feed them bullshit. Thanks for your moderate comments, however. Lawrie Williams____________ Search for other documents from or mentioning: wlmss | turel33 | wayne
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 15 Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculouso From: Mike Smith <mickey@anix.co.uk> Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 14:15:57 +0100 Fwd Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 12:05:16 -0400 Subject: Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculouso Hi All, This is a response to many of the posts on this thread. The main thread seems to have been lost. The point was, is it possible for someone over there to get over here, when 'there' is a very long way away. The answer is yes. We as society are already technologically cabable of building interstellar craft. And in fact have already done so, both of the voyager probes and the one that came before them(can't remember the name) (??? Pioneer ???)are going interstellar within our lifetimes. We can build much faster propulsion systems than are already in use. Only logistics and the chance to experiment have prevented us from doing so already. Even if another society was only 100 years ahead of us they would be perfectly capable of getting from 'there' to 'here'. It's also a perfectly natural thing to want to do. We want to do it. Missions will be organised as soon as they are logistically possible. As to speed, well yes at present such missions would be slow. Project Daedalus, which was once a front runner, had projected speeds of up to 25% SPEOL, Stellar Ram Jets could possibly travel faster still. All without resorting to Warp Engines. Okay so you probably would not want to send people at first, but where machines lead people shortly follow. The speed of light in a vacuum is seen to be a universal speed limit. There are certain quantum events to which this limitation does not apply.The Quantum Tunneling effect is one of these. This is okay, its accepted. Nothing gets violated unless information can be transmitted from one point to another. As I understand it, Mozart (thats his music not the composer) has already been transmitted at 3.7 c i.e. 3.7 times faster than the supposed speed limit. This may however be down to experimental errors and work is going on at present to show that information can be coherently transmited at faster than c. If this continues to be the case, we may well have to ask a lot of new questions that science, at present, is ill equipped to answer. You should never rest on your proverbial scientific laurels as you can never tell when someone will come along and pull them from under you. So there we go, sermon over. It's possible we can do it so why can't they. Don't get me wrong I'm still a sceptic, but I won't dismiss an idea out of hand just because I'm Sceptical. Regards to the List, Mike
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 15 Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills From: William.Hamilton@pcsmail.pcshs.com Date: 15 Oct 1997 16:02:22 UT Fwd Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 16:28:35 -0400 Subject: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills >Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 11:15:51 +0200 >From: Jakes Louw <louwje@telkom.co.za> >To: updates@globalserve.net >Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills >>From: Chris Penrose <penrose@sfc.keio.ac.jp> >>Date: Wed, 15 Oct 97 16:41:14 +0900 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills >>and I was a little irked when I visited: >>http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Rampart/5430/ >>to find that they had been removed in less than a week. >Chris >I think "a little irked" doesn't quite describe how I felt. >I found the page to be exhibited in an arrogant manner. >However, go and look at: >http://www.geocities.com/~mcashman/ufomex.htm >where Mark Cashman has put a panorama of the stills. >If this vid is genuine, then it MUST be the best in the >world. I would like to comment on the video since I have seen it and replayed it as well as observed magnified images and negative images of same. In the video (2nd generation copy) I can see the same noise level across the screen. The domed saucer is hovering, apparently rotating on its axis, and wobbling. When it starts to move to the right to pass behind a multi-story building it tilts slightly back or away from its direction of motion. If this were a tethered object (and it would have to be large), one would expect it to tilt forward in the direction of motion as it was pulled forward. That does not seem to be the case. Under magnification and negative imaging no cable or tether can be seen. If this is a superimposed set of images, it is an excellent product using a digital videocam. Could the saucer itself be a large inflatable craft of some sort used to hoax the video? Then it is, indeed, an elaborate hoax. But, then, there were eyewitnesses (7 to 9 to date) who saw the saucer hovering from different ground positions around the area. Lastly, it could be an authentic Unidentified Flying Saucer wobbling about as its gravity control attempts to reach an equilibrium. If it is decidedly authentic, then we might want to do a time-motion study. I hope you all get to see the full video soon. Sincerely, Bill Hamilton Exec Dir Skywatch Int. Search for other documents from or mentioning: william.hamilton |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 15 Re: Abduction Sat 4 Oct 1997 From: Skye Turell <turel33@west.net> Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 09:33:41 -0700 Fwd Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 16:33:38 -0400 Subject: Re: Abduction Sat 4 Oct 1997 >From: wlmss@peg.apc.org [Lawrie Williams] >Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 21:46:28 +1000 (GMT+1000) >To: ufo-l@mb.protree.com, updates@globalserve.net >Subject: Re: Abduction Sat 4 Oct 1997 >> Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 20:50:05 -0700 >> To: updates@globalserve.net >> From: Skye Turell <turel33@west.net> >> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Abduction Sat 4 Oct 1997 >Knowing what might be, they would know to watch for those otherwise >easily-missed early signs of embryonic development. Lawrie, this is exactly what I was warning about. And besides, half of the beliefs you fed them may not in any way be true, or may not pertain to them, even if they do pertain to some. I would *not* have talked about embryos and hybrids. Skye Turell <turel33@west.net>
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 15 Re: Mexican photo and Moscow photo --compare... From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 12:18:39 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 16:30:56 -0400 Subject: Re: Mexican photo and Moscow photo --compare... >From: Chris Penrose <penrose@sfc.keio.ac.jp> >Date: Wed, 15 Oct 97 17:53:40 +0900 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: >>Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 14:41:48 +0100 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >>From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> >>Subject: Mexican photo and Moscow photo --compare... >> ------- Forwarded message follows ------- >>Sean, >> Take a look at this....I stitched the Mexico image over >>the Russian image using FTOUCH on a 60% transparency. I still say >>they're the same backgrounds. The building on the left of the >>Ruskie pic has been removed and replaced with trees. Could it be >>that the Mexican photo is the real one, and the Russian a fake? >I am beginning to experience some extreme culture shock. What >does this ludicrous transparency prove? It proves that the >subject of each picture are entirely different! (snoop) >I think my UFO updates hobby may be coming to a close. >Chris Penrose >penrose@sfc.keio.ac.jp Hi Chris, Not until you've posted the results of your study of my UFO video! <G> I've been waiting patiently and I'd also miss your voice on UpDates. Don't let "culture shock" or a few mis-fires discourage you from participating, your offerings are always most welcome. John Velez, still waiting John Velez jvif@spacelab.net
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 15 Re: Abduction Sat 4 Oct 1997 From: clark@canby.mn.frontiercomm.net [Jerome Clark] Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 12:29:10 PDT Fwd Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 16:41:52 -0400 Subject: Re: Abduction Sat 4 Oct 1997 > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com> > Subject: re: UFO UpDate: Abduction Sat 4 Oct 1997 > Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 12:51:06 -0700 > > From: wlmss@peg.apc.org [Lawrie Williams] > > Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 07:36:06 +1000 (GMT+1000) > > To: starfriends@esosoft.com, updates@globalserve.net > > Subject: Abduction Sat 4 Oct 1997. > I hope no one will take undeserved offense, but it seems to me as > a researcher and investigator that this account of an > "investigation" represents much of the problem I have with > abduction "research". Mark, I could not agree more. This is, sadly, a textbook case in how not to conduct an abduction "investigation." The mind boggles. Jerry Clark Search for other documents from or mentioning: clark | mcashman | wlmss
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 15 Re: UFO VIDEOTAPE, October 14: Clermont County, From: wlmss@peg.apc.org [Lawrie Williams] Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 05:55:09 +1000 (GMT+1000) Fwd Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 16:50:57 -0400 Subject: Re: UFO VIDEOTAPE, October 14: Clermont County, > Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 00:15:01 -0700 > From: Kenny Young <task@fuse.net> > To: updates@globalserve.net > Subject: UFO VIDEOTAPE, October 14: Clermont County, Ohio > UFO VIDEO: 10-14-97 Clermont County, OH > An alleged UFO videotape was recorded on Tuesday night, October > 14, 1997 from the small community of Afton (between Williamsburg > and Batavia) in Clermont County....... > ....an object was seen from their vantage point on Alexander Lane > after 8:00 p.m. The object was reported to have hovered in the > southwest sky about 65 degrees above the horizon. The UFO, > described as a 'huge, brilliant white light,' was said to have > been above the East Fork Lake area. The three witnesses agreed > that a total of eight airplanes converged on the object and > 'hovered' around it. > When questioned more specifically about this interesting detail, > the witnesses agreed that the planes seemed to be trying to 'hem > the object in,' yet maintaining a certain distance from it. One > person described the planes as hovering, while another said they > seemed to 'circle' around the huge light. They said there were > 4-airplanes around the object, and two pairs of airplanes on each > side of it. > The object reportedly descended into an area near the lake, and > disappeared from sight behind a treeline, at which point the > planes circled a short time and then flew off into different > directions........ > From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>, on 10/12/97 8:34PM > From: wlmss@peg.apc.org [Lawrie Williams] > Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 07:36:06 +1000 (GMT+1000) > To: starfriends@esosoft.com, updates@globalserve.net > Subject: Abduction Sat 4 Oct 1997. Regarding the October 4 1997 Abducting UFO here - I have also found another witness who, at about "7.30 to 8 pm" on the same night saw a yellow light in an unusual straight path crossing the sky silently at a distance. It was going in the direction of the place where the abduction was reported, and about 10-15 miles away as the proverbial or perhaps mythical crow flies. My informant knows nothing about the abduction and I can introduce him to anyone who wants to check the veracity of the story. He is late twenties, military background, working on a dairy farm. The sky that night was clear and he is an experienced observer. He said it was quite unlike anything he normally sees in the sky. > .... K had seen it in more detail. D sketched it for me as K had > described it to her. It had a central light and nine lesser > lights around it in a square. Sparks or lights were streaming > outwards from the inner light to the lesser lights. Silly me. If you arrange 9 dots around another in a square they do not fit. The way she drew it, there were EIGHT lights. I have two sketches here, both with 8 dots in a square around a bigger dot. I want to clarify how the outer lights "behaved" now, and what colour the object was. I shall arrange now for the witness to commit to paper her own drawing and her own words of what she saw. I hope this does not cause her undue trauma. :( Btw nobody has said anything to her about the UFO to give her misleading impressions. <sigh> So I have reported a UFO with 8 equidistant lights and 10 days later in the USA a UFO with 8 equidistant lights is independently reported seemingly going about the same business. Long odds for a coincidence? I guess someone can now generate a "paper" about how Lawrie Williams hoaxed it because he originally said 9 and there were only 8 lights, and an elaborate theory will be concocted about accomplices in Ohio. I guess it helps pass the time. :) And yesterday at the supermarket I ran into "S" who in 1989 had a visitation that involved telepathy - she said she was reassured they were protecting her and her child. At the same time a bunch of people on a hillside nearby saw an object variously described as UFO-shaped and "emitting streams of bright lights". They could not say it was over her house, only that it was in line-of-sight in that direction. Anyway "S" has two children and both are very human. The first child is without doubt bright as a button. As happened in the current case, I was the only person available to listen to "S". So folks, please judge not lest ye be judged. Thanks! Lawrie Williams_____________ Search for other documents from or mentioning: wlmss | task |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 15 Re: UFO VIDEOTAPE, October 14: Clermont County, From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 20:18:55 +0100 Fwd Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 16:56:36 -0400 Subject: Re: UFO VIDEOTAPE, October 14: Clermont County, >Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 00:15:01 -0700 >From: Kenny Young <task@fuse.net> >To: updates@globalserve.net >Subject: UFO VIDEOTAPE, October 14: Clermont County, Ohio >UFO VIDEO: 10-14-97 >Clermont County, OH >Report filed: >OCTOBER 15, 1997 >KENNY YOUNG Hiya Kenny, Errol and all I asked a friend of mine who lives in Cleveland about this and this was his reply: I have heard of no word of the incident or tape on any local news shows or news papers.... even the trashy ones. Cincinnati Int'l Airport is actually in a Kentucky suburb of Cincinnati. Williamsburg OH is 40 kilometers nearly due east from the airport, across the Ohio River. My sense is that this is a case of mistaken identity, i.e. normal airport traffic. -- Roger Scott Any opinion Are you a man or a mouse, come on squeek up! Sean Jones reply to--sean@tedric.demon.co.uk Homepage--http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Zone/1745/index.html Reasearch page --http://www.tedric.demon.co.uk/
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 15 Re: Alien Autopsy Film From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net> Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 13:10:19 -0700 Fwd Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 16:38:48 -0400 Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy Film Roger R. Prokic wrote: > Date: Tue, 14 Oct 97 05:46:39 > From: "Roger R. Prokic" <rprokic@ibm.net> > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Alien Autopsy Film > Give Theresa a hello from me. Ask her how she can prove that > these "aliens" aren't twins.... I'd hate to think she overlooked > it in her quest to be the one to prove it a hoax... > Roger Hi, Roger, You give up on CompuServe, too? <g> Theresa is on the list and will probably see this. She's very busy putting the article together; so, she might not answer. Her evidence will address the twin issue, specifically the clone issue, since "they" are said to be cloning experts. I understand Michael Hesemann said that the photos on the http://www.uforeport.com were modified images from the second autopsy video. This is untrue since these shots do not appear in either the video sold by Merlin nor the one derived from the Kivat/Green production. And it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see this. <BG> Terry
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 15 Re: Alien Autopsy Film From: Bob Shell <76750.2717@compuserve.com> Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 17:10:12 -0400 Fwd Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 17:42:09 -0400 Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy Film >Date: Tue, 14 Oct 97 05:46:39 >From: "Roger R. Prokic" <rprokic@ibm.net> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Alien Autopsy Film >>Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 09:03:11 -0700 >>From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net> >>To: updates@globalserve.net >>Subject: Alien Autopsy Film >>which is mis-labeled "butt shot" and compare this image >>with some of the beginning footage of the second >>autopsy film, you will see that there are some >>remarkable similarities of the two bodies. >Give Theresa a hello from me. Ask her how she can prove that >these "aliens" aren't twins.... I'd hate to think she overlooked >it in her quest to be the one to prove it a hoax... >Roger Roger, and all, I had hoped that this would not get posted here until some of us had a chance to really study what Theresa has proposed. Alas that is not to be. I received Theresa's material today, but have not had time to really study it. Her premise seems to be that the left leg contours of the two creatures are nearly identical. I'm not sure what this can prove. I'll have more to say when I have had time to study this in detail. Meanwhile, I have arranged for the still images which I have from the first autopsy to be published in the CD ROM edition of Beyond Roswell which will come out in January. This should allow better comparisons from images of higher quality. Bob Shell Search for other documents from or mentioning: 76750.2717 | rprokic |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 15 Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculouso From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 20:14:32 +0100 Fwd Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 18:35:48 -0400 Subject: Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculouso >Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 14:15:57 +0100 >From: Mike Smith <mickey@anix.co.uk> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculous >Hi All, >This is a response to many of the posts on this thread. The main >thread seems to have been lost. The point was, is it possible for >someone over there to get over here, when 'there' is a very long >way away. >The answer is yes. We as society are already technologically >cabable of building interstellar craft. And in fact have already >done so, both of the voyager probes and the one that came before >them(can't remember the name) (??? Pioneer ???)are going >interstellar within our lifetimes. We can build much faster >propulsion systems than are already in use. Only logistics and >the chance to experiment have prevented us from doing so >already. >Even if another society was only 100 years ahead of us they would >be perfectly capable of getting from 'there' to 'here'. It's also >a perfectly natural thing to want to do. We want to do it. >Missions will be organised as soon as they are logistically >possible. >As to speed, well yes at present such missions would be slow. >Project Daedalus, which was once a front runner, had projected >speeds of up to 25% SPEOL, Stellar Ram Jets could possibly travel >faster still. All without resorting to Warp Engines. Okay so you >probably would not want to send people at first, but where >machines lead people shortly follow. >The speed of light in a vacuum is seen to be a universal speed >limit. There are certain quantum events to which this limitation >does not apply.The Quantum Tunneling effect is one of these. This >is okay, its accepted. Nothing gets violated unless information >can be transmitted from one point to another. As I understand it, >Mozart (thats his music not the composer) has already been >transmitted at 3.7 c i.e. 3.7 times faster than the supposed >speed limit. This may however be down to experimental errors and >work is going on at present to show that information can be >coherently transmited at faster than c. >If this continues to be the case, we may well have to ask a lot >of new questions that science, at present, is ill equipped to >answer. You should never rest on your proverbial scientific >laurels as you can never tell when someone will come along and >pull them from under you. >So there we go, sermon over. It's possible we can do it so why >can't they. Don't get me wrong I'm still a sceptic, but I won't >dismiss an idea out of hand just because I'm Sceptical. >Regards to the List, >Mike Hi Mike, Hi Errol, Hi Stan, Hi All <phew> When Stan joined us on irc (#ufo, on the ultranet) I asked him... <Sean_J> Hi and Welcome to #ufo Stanton, what I would like to ask is, On Errols Global Updates we have been recently talking about traveling to other stars how many years away do you think this is for us earth people? -->(Re-Zeta not so Ridiculous) <Stanton> "Depends on vision will and money. Like going to the moon on the day 40 years ago today when Sputnick went up. Many thought then it would never happen. Probably the emphasis is on MONEY. The root of all evils etc etc, but cost is probably the most mitigating factor. "We" may well have the technology to visit other stars in our childrens lifetimes but the cost with present technology is exorbitant. As to the speed of light being the speed limit of the universe, "we" now have _proof_ that this is simply no longer so. The proof is in the form of Tachyons. Tahcyons have a minimum speed limit of c, so in my humble opinion ftl drives are possible." Are you a man or a mouse, come on squeek up! Sean Jones reply to--sean@tedric.demon.co.uk Homepage--http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Zone/1745/index.html Reasearch page --http://www.tedric.demon.co.uk/ Search for other documents from or mentioning: tedric | mickey |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 15 Crop Circle Connector #46 From: Mark Fussell <mjfussell@marque.demon.co.uk> Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 19:44:44 Fwd Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 18:38:15 -0400 Subject: Crop Circle Connector #46 Hi WHAT`S NEW on the Crop Circle Connector at:- http://alpha.mic.dundee.ac.uk/ft/crop_circles/anasazi/whatsnew.html Updated Monday 13th October 1997 (Members 2209 on 13-10-97) *************************************************************** DELUXE, GLOSSY 1998 CROP CIRCLE CALENDAR *****NOW AVAILABLE WHILE STOCKS LAST***** EMAIL TO RESERVE YOUR CALENDAR NOW Stunning 30x40 photographs of the 1997 formations with the Calender in four different languages for that International appeal! email for details:- calendar@marque.demon.co.uk ************************************************************** 1st Annual Crop Circle Conference This is your chance to chat On-Line, about your views, and questions to the researchers, and even the Editors of the Crop Circle Connector. Its an all day event, so please let us have your opinions and interest on this day. Please use the contact email at the bottom of the page. Thank you. We look forward to hearing from you all. Email address: chat98@marque.demon.co.uk ************************************************************ Brummen, Netherlands. Reported on the 5th of August, the Dutch circles are still coming into the Connector from the Summer. See International Crop Circles 1997 ************************************************************ New Crop Circle Book from the Czech Republic Written by Petr Novak, this book is only available in Czech for the moment, but traces the history of the Crop Circles in the Czech Republic, and abroad. ************************************************************ Ilyes Presents A lecture COSMIC CONNECTIONS Portland on Sunday 19th of October A talk on the latest shapes and information within the fields See ilyes Homepage, and What's New ************************************************************ Crop Circles Investigated by the Oxford Group in 1997 Compiled by Jeremy Kay A selection of reports on the formations in their area. ************************************************************ The Spiral, Issue 23 OUT NOW! Latest photographs of the formations *********************************************************** All the best Mark and Stuart * The Koch Fractal, Silbury Hill, 1997 :/\: .-- --. . :\ /: . *__/\__/ \__/\__* :\ /: ./__ __\. Mark Fussell: ':\ /:' mailto:mjfussell@marque.demon.co.uk .'__/ \__'. \ / Subscribe: :/_ __ __ _\: news:alt.paranormal.crop-circles * :\/: \ / :\/: * . :/ \: . The Crop Circle Connector Web Site at: .-- --. http://www.marque.demon.co.uk/connector/connector.html :\/: * Search for other documents from or mentioning: mjfussell | calendar |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 15 Alfred's Odd Ode #190 From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com> Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 16:22:38 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 17:48:08 -0400 Subject: Alfred's Odd Ode #190 Apology to MW #190 (For October 15, 1997) Grab yer fishin' gear, git over here, =85 sail in my ship! The ship? Imagination! =85Copped from Carl, nicked it quick! Saved from dusty hangers, in a daring daylight raid, A stellar craft with thought quick drives that moves in time and space! This ship is mine, and I can sail it to the bottom of your mind. I can show you things constructive you can treasure as a find. We can shrink down real tiny like the microbe in your gut. We can stretch, engage, improve your lot, or gouge you from your rut. Leave Imagination in the air a moment, and sit in my back yard. And look south southwest about half way up, and let down all your guard. See thought quick, a brilliant peek, a streaking white hot meteor That cracks the sky a twelve inch slash -- a millisecond theatre! Oh the meteor was impressive, but it was out just like a flash bulb. A single strobe of white hot light, and then light was gone, Bob <g>. It's what came after ruled my day, and makes me write these lines; It's what I saw when light was gone, and it wasn't in my mind. For a second or two in a light of it's own, was a reddish glowing tail! A churning urn of burning plasma=85lit by an object to scar heaven's pale. A slender storm of billowing cloud, colored violet and gold, It marked the eye with violence that can scarcely be retold=85 But, let's get aboard, and off to fish -- in a catch/keep kind of program. Some stuff caught you might let go, and become a part of the problem. You must keep it in your memory, and with a smile carry on, Or reality can drag you down, and you're blown away and gone. So now let's settle in, in comfy chairs, and pass some drinks around. The robots give you back rubs as a buzz "what now" abounds. Let's go see those "Hooter's" people, as they light up all my dials. You know=85the chain of bar and grills that fills the watcher's files. A corporate bunch that makes a girl a life support for tits=85 Hey -- I don't make the news, I just write the news you miss. So we zip to Hooter's HQ, such a fine appointed suite. These guys live 'right', I hope to snort, they're living real sweet. Behind closed doors consumption goes beyond the mere conspicuous. Mellifluous is their rhetoric, but their attitude? Contemptuous! What's this to do with UFO's you ask with strident spunk? Well -- UFO's are flat not seen, or believed not seen, while drunk. More on Hooter's later, but I had it on my mind. I own the ship we fly in, and we'll steer where I'm confined <g>. Conscience is a righteous bitch, and the best use of my metrics Is to throw the light in to the dark, eschew distracting hat tricks. Where to now? Have we got time -- to visit someplace neat? Some place of nifty secrets? Some place a real treat? How about a near earth asteroid, a place we would be living If William Gates got off his butt -- was a thoughtless bit more giving. We are THERE! =85 a monstrous lump of metal, rare and worth it's trillions. Shall I tow it back for high earth orbit and sell it short for billions? No, we'll leave it here, a threat so dear that humankind will move, And elevate its spirit to a sweet spot in the groove. Let's go now where _you_ want to, you have command control. Any where in space and time? Any place you might extol? Any time that is in real time, but be careful where you visit. Because you carry what you witness, and it may be painful, is it? Lehmberg@snowhill.com I was out in the morning an hour before dawn on a school day, watching the sky. I thought something had plopped into my highly prized Southern Pecan coffee, an insect or singularly accurate bit of bat guano. I looked up into the sky about 45 degrees thinking about bats, and insects, and dear wasted coffee beans -- and what I saw made me forget all about coffee of any stripe! Right IN my line of sight appeared a hot white streak, about a foot long held at arms length -- a thought-quick burning plunge of incandescent meteor, top left to bottom right, a thirty degree from horizontal slash of white hot strobe! Now the meteor in itself was astonishing -- but what made me forget my cup was what occurred immediately after. In the wake of that meteor, and on brilliant, glorious, and violet tinged FIRE was a momentary string of visibly churning, interior lighted thunderstorms laid end to end like the length of a squirming glowing serpent -- the upper atmosphere set to torrid FLAMES by the friction of the penetrating meteor. And then=85<and then!> -- so faint that it was almost lost in the soft sounds of a lower Alabama pre dawn, =85a small earth shaking thump of the meteor's passage=85 I exclaimed an out loud, very serious "wow", took a good slug from my coffee cup=85,and remembered the bat guano -- <A-heh> I kept it down, but got some fresh coffee, and thought about sounds from a coffee cup that stop movement, and compel a person to look, just so, into a starry, starry pre dawn sky. But for the sound in my coffee cup I would have missed the entire spectacle. That's the stuff I live for. -- Explore the Alien View? http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/arecibo/46/ "I cleave the heavens, and soar to the infinite. What others see from afar, I leave far behind me." - Giordano Bruno, while burning at the fundamentalist's stake for seeing beyond the glowing sky. =B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1= =B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1= =B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1 Government or Social Harassment REPORT - Presently, "ZERO" Personal HARASSMENT; however, the harassment index is infinite for each of us. Consider the hyper rich!
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 16 High School UFO Teaching From: brazel@webtv.net (Clint Stone) Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 18:34:52 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 08:09:52 -0400 Subject: High School UFO Teaching Hey Errol, Mr. Washington, and all-- I am out on a limb. I was asked today, by my Astronomy teacher, if I could bring in some videos, magazines, books, etc. to help us along on our studies in the unit of extraterestrial life. Since I am the "UFO guy" of the class, everyone knows that I'll pass with flying colors. The truth is, I am not an experienced "UFO guy". I am afraid that I won't expose them to enough (or the right) information to get them interested. Could someone please calm me down, or tell me what to do. Thanks, Clint Stone ASD Ky/MUFON
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 16 Analysis of Mexico City Stills and NOTW Photograph From: Michael Christol <mchristo@mindspring.com> Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 19:48:44 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 08:11:38 -0400 Subject: Analysis of Mexico City Stills and NOTW Photograph >From: Chris Penrose <penrose@sfc.keio.ac.jp> >Date: Tue, 14 Oct 97 19:30:12 +0900 >To: updates@globalserve.net >Subject: Analysis of Mexico City Stills and NOTW Photograph >ANALYSIS RESULTS OF MEXICO CITY STILLS AND NEWS OF THE WEIRD >PHOTOGRAPH >I have spent way too much time on this. But I believe strongly >that people on the list who suggest that the buildings in the >Mexico City footage bear a curious resemblence to this News of >the Weird photograph really need to look at the buildings much >much more carefully. Please don't make such coincidental >judgements without bothering to scrutinize your evidence. Such >ill-formed judgements only embarass you and the ufology >community. I have hyperopia (farsightedness), which indicates >that I must strain my eye muscles far more than the average >person to focus on objects nearby. Reading a book for an extended >period is very difficult. Despite this condition, I see glaring >differences in the buildings and I don't understand how an >average person can't notice them. My hypothesis is that PEOPLE >ARE NOT LOOKING CAREFULLY. >I did a side-by-side comparison of one of the Mexico City frames >with the extremely noisy News of the Weird photograph. >I can see how someone might initially confuse these buildings, >particularly after only a casual glance. However, the initial >similarities between the buildings disappear very quickly. Also, >even with a first impression, I can't see how someone could >perceive the two "ufo" objects as being remotely similar beyond >their classic disc-like proportion. >Being the son of an architect, I am embarassed by some of my >parlance deficiencies in the field. Please bear with them. >PLEASE READ THE NEXT PARAGRAPH CAREFULLY (it begins with "First >of all"). I will make a statement about each photograph. The >statement holds ONLY for the specific photograph I am talking >about in each sentence. >The Mexico City still I have seen is quite remarkable. The >object given the haze of the city has a subtle haze wash with >respect to the building. There are lighting cues present which >look amazingly convincing given their imprint on the building. >If a hoax, it is a subtle one. And if both of these pictures are >a hoax, it is a supreme insult to the hypothetical hoaxer of the >Mexico City photograph to suggest that this same person also >created the Moscow picture. Please apologize at once! :) >I agree that more information about the locale of the Mexico City >picture should be determined. However, I am very suspicious of >this comparison that has been made. Why does one make such a >comparison when the differences between the photographs, after >actually bothering to look carefully are quite vast? Is Jerry >Andeson responsible for this bogus comparison? This is very >sloppy. I have to interpret this comparison as a careless >debunking. I really think that people should be careful before >they make ill-formed claims, particularly because it is tiresome >for me to have to spend a good two hours or so proving that >someone's gee-whiz comparison is bogus in text. Does anyone else >have an opinion of Jerry Andeson? Has he made such completely >unsupportable assertions before? Nope...I have had my say about the two alleged incidents. I definitely think the Moscow UFO photos are a fake. I said that before. <G> Thanks for taking the time and making the effort to check this out, Chris. I for one appreciate it. >Christopher Penrose >Digital Signal Processing Researcher >Faculty of Environment Information >Keio University Shonan-Fujisawa >penrose@sfc.keio.ac.jp REgards, Mike http://www.mindspring.com/~mchristo/
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 16 Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Still From: Michael Christol <mchristo@mindspring.com> Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 19:53:47 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 08:12:52 -0400 Subject: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Still >Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 10:21:43 +0100 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: JJ Mercieca <mufor@maltanet.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills >Hi all, >Since I'm not a video analyst I will not comment on the reality >or otherwise of the Mexican ufo footage. Has anyone noted that >on each still frame there is a bar (from top to bottom of the image) >of lighter film colouration where there is the ufo? What could be >causing this? There is the possibility the bar could be caused by the duplication of the video image to a picture. I don't know for sure. But, I have seen vidoe bars on film before, myself, but not on the Mexico City images. >I have seen lots of ufo films where the ufo is always travelling in >parallel (moving across the screen, left or right, up or down) to the >eyewitness. Does film exist of UFOs travelling towards or away from >the eyewitness, getting visibly larger or smaller? >Regards, >JJ Mercieca >Malta UFO Research >http://www.mufor.org/ Yes there is, but most people have already been convinced it is a HOAX. It is the Billy Meier film of the Plieadean Beam Ship. Check it out for yourself. REgards, Mike
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 16 Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills From: Michael Christol <mchristo@mindspring.com> Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 20:03:22 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 08:14:34 -0400 Subject: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills >Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 14:12:18 -0400 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Bob Shell <76750.2717@compuserve.com> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills >>Oh, btw, did you pick up the message I posted in Sept. about the >>earliest known Crash? July...., 1941...South Pacific? If you >>know this place and time, I need not be any more specific... >No, I must have missed that one. I was not getting UFO Updates >for a while due to some sort of glitch, and I am guessing that >you posted this during that time. Mind bringing me up to speed >on this? If you remember I had previously said that I had received word that the first known crash of a UFO occurred in 1942, and ask if anyone knew anything about it. You said that was a little vague and asked for more info. I told you I had to talk to my contact person. I did so. I was informed that it did not occur in 1942, but in July, 1941, near a well known island in the South Pacific. I don't wish to tell all of the details. I want to see if someone else knows what I am talking about. Just think little boy and fat man....<G> >>Yep, I know what you mean. But at some point, Bob, these things >>must start coming closer and closer to us, rather than stay at >>the limits of our focal range, if they are gradually conditioning >>us for first contact. >Sorry, we must disagree on this. I think first contact happened >thousands of years ago, and continues today via a small group of >humans. >Bob Now Bob. You are talking about "belief." I am not disagreeing with you, but, I am talking about modern contact with humanity as a whole. I am not talking about a select few. Thus, my reasoning for the UFOs moving closer and closer to the camera focal point. REgards, Mike
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 16 Re: Mexican photo and Moscow photo From: Michael Christol <mchristo@mindspring.com> Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 20:18:52 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 08:16:37 -0400 Subject: Re: Mexican photo and Moscow photo >Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 14:41:48 +0100 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> >Subject: Mexican photo and Moscow photo --compare... > ------- Forwarded message follows ------- >Sean, > Take a look at this....I stitched the Mexico image over >the Russian image using FTOUCH on a 60% transparency. I still say >they're the same backgrounds. The building on the left of the >Ruskie pic has been removed and replaced with trees. Could it be >that the Mexican photo is the real one, and the Russian a fake? > Jerry Anderson > Co-ordinator UFOMEK They are not the same Jerry. You don't need to superimpose them over one another to see that. The windows are shaped differently.\ The top of the superimposted Russian pic is totally different in design than the Mexico City photo. There is nothing similar between these two pics. There are apartment buildings in virtually every large city in the world... Why not try to superimpose the Mexico City photos over virtually every apartment complex in the world? <g> ;-) Just Kidding. REgards, Mike
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 16 Re: Researching Abduction Cases From: Paul <pwedel@neptune.on.ca> [Paul Wedel] Date: Wed, 15 Oct 97 21:35:50 -0000 Fwd Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 08:20:38 -0400 Subject: Re: Researching Abduction Cases >Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 14:31:00 -0500 >To: updates@globalserve.net >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >Subject: Researching abduction cases >Hello All, <snip> >Abduction research -must be- taken out of the hands of amateurs >and para-professionals. Not so much for the sake of the research >itself, there are many 'amateurs' that can do as competent if not >better job than some pros, but for the sake of the well being of >those individuals reporting. <really huge, big, big, snip> > As a group, we can push in directions >that will help us to get the answers we so desperately need. (WE) >will make things happen. >John Velez, Abductee Union Rep. Hey Johnny, I can't say I disagree with a word you've said here. (Well, I guess there's always at least one thing in any conversation <G>.). I hope the AIC works. With respect to as many abuctee's as possible coming forward (a.m.a.a.p.c.f) I believe the initial phase of that will not occur unless some brave, brave people agree to move en masse (en englais, c'est "as a big forceful, credible group chewing hard gum and wearing stirrups). It would be very hard for all, and especially the intial group that stepped forward. To imagine a large enough people putting their jobs, reputations, friendships, and relations on the line either singularly in dribbles or as a group stresses ones concerns over the outcome for "those" people. I know of only one person in Canada (so far) who has had the guts to go forward to the medical profession with her experiences and received disability so that she could somehow get her head together and function. When I asked her if she felt the medical representatives she had dealt with believed her story, she said, "nah, they just think I'm crazy." This, inspite of multiple witness events, reports to police, and corroborative data. In principle, what you say is (from a human perspective) what may well be needed. Perhaps only as a group this will occur. And perhaps that beginning may occur with a group like the A.I.C. I hope so, as it would help further acknowledgement of a truth that surrounds and can affect all of us. Best regards always, Paul. "Must get moose and squirrel!" ..Boris Badenov
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 16 Re: Alien Autopsy Film From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net> Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 03:00:06 -0700 Fwd Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 08:26:40 -0400 Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy Film Bob Shell wrote: > Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 17:10:12 -0400 > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > From: Bob Shell <76750.2717@compuserve.com> > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Alien Autopsy Film [snip] > Her premise seems to be that the left leg > contours of the two creatures are nearly identical. I'm not > sure what this can prove. I'll have more to say when I have > had time to study this in detail. [snip] There's a bit more than that to it, Bob. Take a look at the "bruises" on the left thigh and below the right knee of both "creatures". AAMOF, take a look at all the "spots" on both "creatures". There's also some anomalies on the second autopsy vid that she found recently. I'm taking a look at those now. I can state one thing categorically, with which, I think you will agree: Noone has examined this piece of video as extensively as Carlson. Something has puzzled me. Ray gave T. a Beta copy of the vid. But, I hear that Santilli told you not to give her copies of the first autopsy stills. Is this latter item true? If so, any idea why? Terry
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 16 Re: UFO VIDEOTAPE, October 14: Clermont County, From: Kenny Young <task@fuse.net> Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 23:15:09 -0700 Fwd Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 08:28:28 -0400 Subject: Re: UFO VIDEOTAPE, October 14: Clermont County, Roger Scott, Mark Cashman, Lawrie Williams,: To answer some questions regarding the video recording, allow me to add the following: The October 14 happening in Clermont County received no local news media publicity. Seldom do UFO-related happenings in Cincinnati receive reportage (deserving or not). Even further, if local news media had expressed an interest in the recording, they wouldn't have much to select from the video aside from quick 1 to 5 second clips randomly showing 'a light' which is shakily out of focus. As stated, it is my opinion that this recording is not outstanding evidence. Cincinnati Int'l Airport is in Boone County (in Erlanger, Kentucky - 27 miles southwest of this area), and flights to and from there can be seen from Clermont County, but not by a dramatic stretch. What has caused problems in past Clermont County cases is the WILMINGTON AIRPORT, located 31.5 miles north of the East Fork Lake area. Airborne and Federal Express flights to this airport after midnight are frequently seen over the area, shining their big, odd-looking lights around. Please see more information on this in the report on the 1994 CLERMONT COUNTY RECORDING located at the following address: http://home.fuse.net/task/OWENSVILLE.htm A military refueling operation has not been considered, as the region in question is not within a MOA (Military Operating Area). The nearest MOA (Buckeye MOA) is around 30-miles east of Batavia, and also not in the direction the alleged object and planes were reported. A case of mistaken identity, i.e. normal airport traffic, is a plausible explanation. However, this doesn't account for the witness description of a huge object which 'hovered' for a period of time before slowly descending into the lake area. I would opt more for a star explanation (If I'm not mistaken, Venus or Saturn was visible in this portion of the sky...), however this, too, has descriptive characteristics (hovering and then sudden descent) which are incompatible with the explanation. The other aircraft flying overhead and expressing perceived interest in the object also adds sensation to the story. The witnesses told me with confidence that the airplanes were 'hovering.' This is, of course, somewhat conspiratorial. I do know that one of the three witnesses has been exposed to certain UFO literature, from TV and possibly books, so there may be that pre-disposition to have awareness of and express certain details which may appear odd and complicate the story. I do not think the other two witnesses would also share this 'witness contamination' with present-day UFO mythology that would motivate them to confabulate the account of 'hovering airplanes.' I have not made any inquiries with local military airbases (Springfield Ohio ANG, Wright Patterson AFB) regarding refueling or other exersizes in this area. If anyone is so inclined, please be so kind as to coordinate me in advance so I could be informed, as I am also curious. I have received an inquiry asking for copies of the tape. I haven't the resources or ability at this moment to furnish copies. I hope to be able to soon. Furthermore, I haven't talked with the owners of the tape about giving out copies, although I don't think they would mind. I'll be happy to assist with further questions. Sincerely, KENNY YOUNG task@fuse.net -- UFO Research http://home.fuse.net/task/
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 16 Aug '97 Mexico City Stills From: galevy@pipeline.com [Gary Alevy] Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 22:59:47 -0400 Fwd Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 08:34:43 -0400 Subject: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills > Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 17:49:50 -0700 > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > From: Michael Bessee <bessee@spiritone.com> > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills > My question regarding these Mexico stills is this; "How many > people in Mexico are walking around with a camcorder in hand?". > Seems like an awfully large amount of video has been captured by > chance. Perhaps this has become a common enough occurence that > one would have the "where with all" to be toting a camcorder > around at all times. I know both my cameras and one camcorder are > stored away in their respective bags until I decide to take them > with me somewhere - and then I usually take the bag, and I'd only > have them out of the bag if I was planning to shoot something > specific! > MB Regarding your question about the large amount of video that has been captured in Mexico. Your skepticism is probably unwarranted, you need to become informed on what has transpired in Mexico. This large volume is the result of organization, funding and the encouragement of people to carry camcorders. Moreover there has been organization of groups of people to provide organized camcorder coverage. To my knowledge this has been the result of the work of Jamie Mausen [?spelling] a television journalist on the Mexican equivalent of the American television program 60 minutes. It is also noteworthy that he has also organized in Mexican universities to review videos and perform image analysis in academic departments. Most of this information I am providing has been has been publicly but scarcely reported in the US. This would be akin to Morely Shaffer of CBS 60 minutes going nation wide with requests for videos and moreover personally involving himself in organizing people to be provided with camcorders, encouraging them to obtain the video and then arranging to have the tapes analyzed at several universities. Think about it. Gary
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 16 Re: Researching Abduction Cases From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 02:42:17 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 08:40:33 -0400 Subject: Re: Researching Abduction Cases >Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 18:31:33 -0700 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Skye Turell <turel33@west.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Researching Abduction Cases >>Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 14:31:00 -0500 >>To: updates@globalserve.net >>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >>Subject: Researching abduction cases Hi Errol, Skye, All, I wrote, >>THIS IS NOT A GAME! Peoples lives are at stake. At AIC I'm going >>to encourage as many people as I can to turn to their local >>health care and counselling professionals. Shit, I'll go first! Skye responds, >Have fun, John. Once the "professionals" get ahold of you, with >their assumption that you are delusional, you will spend your >life in psychiatric hell. See, now that's the problem! Before I went to Hopkins I arranged to have myself evaluated by a psychologist here in NY. She was open minded, listened, offered no judgements along the way and although my feeling was that she didn't take my account 'literally' she nonetheless maintained a very open attitude during our sessions. The myth that all MHP's are somehow "predjudiced" against those reporting abduction accounts is just that, an unsubstantiated myth. Because of my action (going to a MHP for evaluation) I was able to eliminate 'insanity' or 'psychological instability' as a cause for my experiences. That can be a very comforting thing, as well as disturbing, but that's another thread! <G> As far as 'judgemental counsellors' that would have you commited for reporting an abduction,...there is -always- a 'joker' in the deck, that much is true, but then you can always 'fire' them! There are also a lot of 'other' fish in the sea! Let me ask you this Skye, don't you think that an experienced psychologist or counsellor would do a much better job of serving an abductees needs than say the kind of thing that is happening on another current thread? (Which will remain unnamed) That kind of approach is something I find shameful and embarassing, not to mention the potential psychological harm to those poor unsuspecting souls that is being introduced by the "investigator" in the case. JV.>> If I have to, in order to set >>an example, I'll report my kidnapping to the goddam FBI. Old man >>Klass is right about that one, if ALL of us reported the >>abductions to the FBI they might perk up and pay some attention. >Actually I know someone who *did* report to the FBI and they were >referred to their local MUFON chapter! If it had been a hundred or five hundred or a thousand people reporting simultaneously, what do you suppose they would do then? It would be an interesting excersize (even if futile) to put it to the test. Even if they didn't investigate a single case it would have the effect of "empowering" those who participated, and if nothing else, it would tie up the FBI's phones for a day or two. (It would serve them right for ignoring us! <G>) JV.>> There is power in numbers. I hope to gather as many abductees as >>possible under one roof. As a group, we can push in directions >>that will help us to get the answers we so desperately need. > >From the FBI? From the so-called health care profession? I >don't think so. I agree there's strength in numbers, but that >also means that we are completely capable of getting those >answers ourselves, and a lot more effectively than if we turn to >established orders that have too much invested in the status >quo. We -have been- 'left to ourselves' and the result so far is; *A dangerous set of beliefs about abduction that are rapidly becoming codified, and spreading like an infection from one to the other, (abduction dogma!) *More interpretations of the phenomenon than Carter has liver pills, *New age Philosophies based on benevolent space brothers and alien chanelers, *A "mutual re-inforcement" fest among believers to beat the band, (very bad stuff as any counsellor will tell you) *Mis-trust of those in the professional community (to whom we should be turning) because they (Quote) "Won't believe us." -What completely unsubstantiated bullsh-t that one is!- *Very little progress in terms of having gotten some firm answers to our questions, *and, very little progress in raising the consciousness of the public at large. (Who also need answers as badly as we do, only -they- don't know that -they need to know-!) *Too many quacks, and amateurs! Assholes out to make a buck or a name for themselves that don't much care how many heads get screwed up along the way. That 'other thread' I mentioned being a 'classic' example! *Too many people have suffered in silence too long because they fear ridicule or 'excommunication' from society. If the support of enough mainstream pro's can be solicited it'll be easier for those folks to come forward and get the help they need. Given the current atmosphere surrounding the subject that would simply be impossible. The only way it is going to change is if WE change it. That's what I meant about the power of 'numbers.' When folks begin to realize that it is their friends, family members, and neighbors that are reporting this stuff conditions -will- change. -I have to believe that we can do it, because things as they are, are just unacceptable. My main concern is for the abductees themselves, and then for the raising of the publics conciousness. One thing cannot/should not be done without the other in mind. I don't think you serve any constructive purpose suggesting that 'abductees' should isolate themselves from professionals (or everyone else) because they will "have you commited to some psychiatric hell." Incestuous mutual reinforcement is -not the answer- nor will it produce any. Without the objectivity of others, all we have is what we already have, hundreds maybe thousands experiencing something that none can explain with any certainty or authority. Sorry Skye, that's just not good enough. People deserve to be taken seriously and efforts should be made to recruit as much help as we can get. Take my word for it buddy, not very many handle this as well as you have, or as quick to integrate it into their world view and then get back to the business of living a life. What is happening to us today, could be happening to them tomorrow. There's just too much at stake to play this any other way. It's together, all of us, abductees and the general public alike, or none of us at all. We are one race living on one rock together, what happens to my neighbor happens to me. I'm about involving as many people as I can, abductee or no. "Together we stand, -divided- we fall!" John Velez, Abductee Union Rep. John Velez jvif@spacelab.net
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 16 Re: UFO VIDEOTAPE, October 14: Clermont County From: XianneKei@aol.com Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 04:26:19 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 08:45:00 -0400 Subject: Re: UFO VIDEOTAPE, October 14: Clermont County From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 20:18:55 +0100 Fwd Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 16:56:36 -0400 Subject: Re: UFO VIDEOTAPE, October 14: Clermont County, > I have heard of no word of the incident or tape on any local news > shows or news papers.... even the trashy ones. Cincinnati Int'l > Airport is actually in a Kentucky suburb of Cincinnati. > Williamsburg OH is 40 kilometers nearly due east from the > airport, across the Ohio River. My sense is that this is a case > of mistaken identity, i.e. normal airport traffic. Sean, Since this event occurred on Tuesday October 14, around 8:00 pm, I would be surprised if the video would have made it to television that quickly. Also, if you read the report and previous reports from Kenny, I think you will find that he KNOWS and/or is related to these witnesses as they had a sighting on Sept 24, as well. I imagine that Kenny is in possession of the video and more than likely will do the reporting to the media, if necessary. There's a lot we don't know about this case yet, but I have found Kenny to be extremely forthcoming and timely in his reporting on the internet of investigations he is involved in. Let's give him a little while longer, before we write this off. I doubt that Kenny has made any conclusion so far, and he is the one in a position to make a conclusion. I appreciate the work that Kenny and TASK do and would like to continue seeing their reports. Rebecca
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 16 Re: Abduction Sat 4 Oct 1997 From: Michael Wayne Malone <MWayne@bigfoot.com> Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 03:40:20 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 08:51:12 -0400 Subject: Re: Abduction Sat 4 Oct 1997 >From: wlmss@peg.apc.org [Lawrie Williams] >Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 21:46:28 +1000 (GMT+1000) >To: ufo-l@mb.protree.com, updates@globalserve.net >Subject: Re: Abduction Sat 4 Oct 1997 >> Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 20:50:05 -0700 >> To: updates@globalserve.net >> From: Skye Turell <turel33@west.net> >> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Abduction Sat 4 Oct 1997 >> WHY DID YOU DO THIS????????????????????? >Try not to get so excited Michael. I'm sorry if playing with the mental health of your witnesses in a cavalier and dangerous manner gets me excited. >> From this point on, any further data gained from these subjects is >> tainted. >In other words, I had to give them the run-aound, tell them lies >or avoid telling them the full truth. What full truth? You didn't give them a "truth" you gave them your "belief" based on unsupported data. Right now, as far as the "data" can clearly suggest, the theory that these critters are demons from hell is a supported, and clearly has a longer historical database, than the idea of UFO abductions and phantom pregnancies. While you were at it, why did you hold back from giving the girl's parent's the "full truth" if you are so ethical and everything? >> If they have any experiances that in any way match what you told >> them, there is no way of knowing the real from the imaginary planted >> by you. >Absolutely untrue. If I knew what I know now based on the evidence of >hundreds of other abductees, I would have gained far more information >during my various and sundry encounter experiences. I was preparing >them for whatever comes next. Whatever. If you can't see the basic underlying problem and the pure taint you've placed on this case, then you are lost to the realm of scientific endeavour. And if you can't see the intense psychological harm you could have caused your "witnessess" then the only thing we have to hope for is they find strong and talented counslers later in life. >Hey, you ever seen a person with red glowing eyes? More than once, and more than you'll ever know. What does this have to do with your unethical, unscientific, and dangerous feildwork? >> This is a typical example of BAD fieldwork. > >It was not fieldwork. I was asked for advice and I gave it. The next >best source of information is American-made drama full of terror and >fear. Give me a break! Kids and adults all over the world are being >fed mind-disrupting horror day and night. The U.S. Film and TV >industry is a sewer of psychiatric disruption distorting all of the >paranormal and everything else in the quest for profits. And I tell >some kids how it may be - fully and frankly - and *I* am condemned? You want me to write a disertation on all the evils in the world? Sorry, I thought we were on a UFO discussion list, and were discussing ufology and abductions. Perhaps you and I can discuss the evils of modern media in an approprate mailing list. >Anyway, where is all this fieldwork? I get out in the field and I >ask questions and I tabulate the answers, then I give feedback. Then >I write it up in short concise files and post the stuff on the internet. >And I make myself accountable - willingly answering further questions. >A few other lay people do the same, they share, share, share. I've shared shared shared. And I took my lumps. This is the closes thing we have to peer review. And so far, your review stinks. As a counsler, your job wasn't to give advice, but to help the subject deal with the unexplainable emotional side-effects of her alleged abduction. As a ufologist, you were to investigate without taint, without bias, and without preconcieved ideas as to the end result of your research. And as a responsible human being, you were not to scare young women with the worst case senerio. What evidence did you have that this is how her abduction experience would turn out. So far, we are stuck with anecdotal evedince, not physical or medical. Even the previously lauded works of Sims and Leir are under heavy attack as meaningless. So your "Truth" had holes in it that could sink a battleship. >I get the impression that most self-styled "ufologists" spend more >time taking in each other's washing and rarely if ever share their >fieldwork promptly and openly, as I have always done. How about it? >Is this true? Where are the ufologists who do fieldwork and then >subject their work to immediate peer review? You have the internet >to do some real science on now. Forget the other rituals! I couldn't agree more. The peer review is lacking. Perhaps if you had recieved stronger peer review before, you wouldn't have made such an untrained rookie mistake. But that aside, how objective are you in your research? From the post, I found you to have closed your mind completely to everything but what you've already determined as TRUTH. -- Michael Malone Kilo Foxtrot Four Mike Yankee X-ray Search for other documents from or mentioning: mwayne | wlmss | ufo-l |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 16 Re: Alien Autopsy Film From: "Roger R. Prokic" <rprokic@ibm.net> Date: Thu, 16 Oct 97 05:38:15 Fwd Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 19:25:57 -0400 Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy Film >Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 13:10:19 -0700 >From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Alien Autopsy Film >Hi, Roger, >You give up on CompuServe, too? <g> Hi Terry! I did give up because it got too expensive to participate there... but I may re-join now since Compuserve came out with a flat 24.95 per month *unlimited*.... >Theresa is on the list and will probably see this. She's >very busy putting the article together; so, she might >not answer. Her evidence will address the twin issue, > specifically the clone issue, since "they" are said to be > cloning experts. I understand Michael Hesemann said > that the photos on the http://www.uforeport.com >were modified images from the second autopsy video. >This is untrue since these shots do not appear in >either the video sold by Merlin nor the one derived from >the Kivat/Green production. Thanks. I will look forward to seeing her work then... >And it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see this. <BG> Ahhh shucks. I guess I will then have to see it, since I'm the rocket scientist... <g> Oh, have you heard... I am the Telecom lead design engineer for the Mars 2001 space satellites? I am now finishing up on the Mars 1998 space satellites. We should get to see some nice Cydonia pix soon, if and when MGS fixes their solar array problem... We're unsure if the one panel is just hanging by power lines because telemetry indicates the panel is beyond the latch position... To circularize the orbit for mapping, we would have to continue to aerobrake through the Martian atmosphere which is now twice as dense as expected... the drag could worsen the condition of the array... not sure what the safest plan would be, but there is the chance to leave it elliptical... but pics would not be as easy and plentiful... Oh well, I'll keep everyone posted from Mission Control here... Roger R. Prokic Telecommunications Engineer Lockheed Martin Astronautics Denver, Colorado USA
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 16 Re: UFO VIDEOTAPE, October 14: Clermont County, From: Don Ledger <dledger@istar.ca> Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 11:49:12 +0100 Fwd Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 19:30:48 -0400 Subject: Re: UFO VIDEOTAPE, October 14: Clermont County, > Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 23:15:09 -0700 > From: Kenny Young <task@fuse.net> > To: updates@globalserve.net > Subject: Re: UFO VIDEOTAPE, October 14: Clermont County, Ohio > Roger Scott, Mark Cashman, Lawrie Williams,: > To answer some questions regarding the video recording, allow me to > add the following: > The October 14 happening in Clermont County received no local news > media publicity. Seldom do UFO-related happenings in Cincinnati > receive reportage (deserving or not). Even further, if local news > media had expressed an interest in the recording, they wouldn't have > much to select from the video aside from quick 1 to 5 second clips > randomly showing 'a light' which is shakily out of focus. As stated, > it is my opinion that this recording is not outstanding evidence. > Cincinnati Int'l Airport is in Boone County (in Erlanger, Kentucky - > 27 miles southwest of this area), and flights to and from there can > be seen from Clermont County, but not by a dramatic stretch. What > has caused problems in past Clermont County cases is the WILMINGTON > AIRPORT, located 31.5 miles north of the East Fork Lake area. > Airborne and Federal Express flights to this airport after midnight > are frequently seen over the area, shining their big, odd-looking > lights around. Please see more information on this in the report on > the 1994 CLERMONT COUNTY RECORDING located at the following address: > http://home.fuse.net/task/OWENSVILLE.htm > A military refueling operation has not been considered, as the region > in question is not within a MOA (Military Operating Area). The nearest > MOA (Buckeye MOA) is around 30-miles east of Batavia, and also not in > the direction the alleged object and planes were reported. Hello Lawrie, Mark and List, First a clarification. Military aircraft do not have to be in a Military Operational Area [MOA] to refuel. They refuel wherever they are needed and get permission from whatever control zone they are operating in to do so. Secondly, refueling is normally done at higher altitudes where the air is stable and less conjested. Third, and this is most important, the aircraft do NOT surround the refueling tanker. They trail out and behind. The pilot of the tanker has enough to worry about without being concerned that one of the others flying ahead of him/her might cross into the tanker's line of flight. The tanker pilot has to fly straight and level during the opreation and cannot be manouvering to avoid other aircraft. The toughest spot to see for the aircraft out in front is its six o'clock, or directly behind. Besides there is no need for any aircraft to be out in front of the tanker. Regards, Don Ledger
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 16 Re: Alien Autopsy Film From: Bob Shell <76750.2717@compuserve.com> Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 11:13:23 -0400 Fwd Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 19:32:12 -0400 Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy Film >Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 03:00:06 -0700 >From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Alien Autopsy Film >There's a bit more than that to it, Bob. Take a look at the >"bruises" on the left thigh and below the right knee of both >"creatures". AAMOF, take a look at all the "spots" on both >"creatures". Oh, I'm sure there is more to it than that. Theresa is nothing if not thorough! As soon as I can get near the stuff <VEG> I'll look more closely. >There's also some anomalies on the second autopsy vid that she >found recently. I'm taking a look at those now. More anomalies???? Let me know what they are when you can, or ask T. to fill me in on this. >I can state one thing categorically, with which, I think you will >agree: Noone has examined this piece of video as extensively as >Carlson. You won't get any disagreement from me on that. I don't always agree with her conclusions, but I give Theresa credit for sticking with this when most of the other researchers have either dismissed it out of hand, or turned it into a religion. >Something has puzzled me. Ray gave T. a Beta copy of the vid. >But, I hear that Santilli told you not to give her copies of the >first autopsy stills. Is this latter item true? If so, any idea >why? You're asking ME to explain Ray's actions?????????!!!!!!! Come on, Terry! Hey, I talk to the guy often, and even have developed a liking for him, but I have no idea why he does what he does. I asked if I could make copies for Theresa and a few others if they would sign statements that they would not make copies for anyone else, and he said no. That was a while back. Ray has offered to forward any questions about the similarities Theresa is seeing between the critters on to the cameraman for comment, so if you have any specific questions send them to me by e-mail and I'll forward them to Ray. Bob
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 16 Re: Alien Autopsy Film From: Michael Wayne Malone <MWayne@bigfoot.com> Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 03:47:23 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 19:23:09 -0400 Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy Film >Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 17:10:12 -0400 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Bob Shell <76750.2717@compuserve.com> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Alien Autopsy File >Meanwhile, I have arranged for the still images which I have >from the first autopsy to be published in the CD ROM edition >of Beyond Roswell which will come out in January. This should >allow better comparisons from images of higher quality. >Bob Shell Bob, If I can ask, where did these still pictures come from? Not in the "Santilli" kind of sense, but from what stock did the stills come from? Michael -- Michael Malone Kilo Foxtrot Four Mike Yankee X-ray
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 17 Re: Hillsboro, OH UFO Pursuit w/Clermont County From: Kenny Young <task@fuse.net> Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 12:38:10 -0700 Fwd Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 02:29:47 -0400 Subject: Re: Hillsboro, OH UFO Pursuit w/Clermont County The month of October has historically been a good one for UFO sightings, and this year seems to be no exception. From the Ohio/Kentucky/Indiana regions, we have had 9 reported sightings since September 24. Within the last two weeks, sky conditions in this region haven't been exceptionally crisp and clear for good viewing conditions. There was some haze present on the clear nights we have had. therefore, I would conclude that October atmospheric conditions have played no part in any reported UFO sightings thus far, as we have heard so often in the past (for example, a clear October sky makes airplane headlights from far away look much closer, same with stars, planets, etc). I initially thought the Greenwood, Indiana case which was reported by a Navy enlisted man to Wright-Patterson Air Force Base -- details at http://home.fuse.net/task/OCT97.htm#Greenwood_INDIANA_UFO was explainable as being the Space Shuttle/MIR duo traveling overhead. I was wrong, however, as the shuttle/station team was not listed as being visible over this area at the time. This case presently remains unexplained. In review of two cases (recent Clermont County with video and a UFO sighting in Middletown last Friday night) where the descriptive details of the sightings were similar, I theorized that the possible explanation for these cases would be SATURN. If interested in reviewing the data, go to: http://home.fuse.net/task/Oct14_video.htm#middletown I concluded SATURN because both events were viewed to the SOUTHWEST at around the 8:00 to 8:30 p.m. time frame, when Saturn is visible. I also considered if the air traffic as reported in the CLERMONT COUNTY action complicated the event, and thought this detail would strengthen the SATURN explanation (especially if the witnesses mistook the celestial object as being amongst the airplanes, thereby giving it a 'hovering' illusion). However, thanks to MIKE FRIZZELL, he advised the following: Saturn was visible, almost due east, at 8:00PM EDT on October 14, 1997 as its rise time was 6:54 PM EDT given an observing location of Cincinnati, OH. Also, the moon, which should have been nearly full, was in close proximity to Saturn as its rise time was 6:21 PM EDT. Both were located roughly 30 degrees off the horizon. Given this added data, the SATURN explanation is greatly weakened, as the witnesses described the object to the southwest of their vantage point, not due east, as where Saturn would have been situated. In addition, new information has been brought to our attention courtesy of Paul Althouse of MORA. He conveys of two corroborating reports he received, the details of which have similarities to the reported Clermont County Airplane/UFO incident. The report he received was from Hillsboro, Ohio (Highland County), which is 31.5 miles northeast of the October 14 incident in Clermont County. The first report was from a Hillsboro resident reporting a large number of airplanes flying over her house at 2:15 p.m. on Wednesday, October 8. There were 12 or 13 large jets, in no specific formation, flying around randomly. She did not know what kind of jets they were, but said they were larger in size then those normally seen in the area. The second report received by Paul Althouse advised of a second Hillsboro resident also complaining of the jet activity. This person, however, reported a large triangular shaped craft surrounded by approximately 13 jets. As the jets continued to fly around the object, it suddenly rose straight up and dissapeared from sight. It was assumed that this alleged craft held a level orientation as it rose straight up and out of site. Mr. Althouse is hopeful to acquire more information from the witnesses, and has been informed of the report from Clermont County on October 14. The Hillsboro event happened within a section of airspace over Southern Ohio that is reserved for military flights. The air corridor is called 'THE BUCKEYE MOA,' and the 2:15 p.m. time frame from the Hillsboro report does fall within the times allowed for maneuvers in the BUCKEYE MOA, as per details released through an AUG. 15th FOIA response from FAA Director of Air Traffic (details enclosed below), which reveals the boundaries of the corridor, operating times and controlling agencies. [Excerpt from FOIA response enclosed below] These cases are presently under investigation KENNY YOUNG task@fuse.net _____________________ Buckeye MOA, OH Boundaries: Beginning at lat. 38 deg. 54'40"N., long. 83 deg. 54'45"W/; to lat. 39 deg. 10'45"N., long. 83 deg. 53'00W.: to lat. 39 deg. 27'45"N., long. 83 deg. 23'00"W.; to lat. 39 deg. 24'20"N., long. 82 deg. 49'30"W.; to lat. 39 deg. 18'00"N., long. 82 deg. 44'15"W.; to lat. 38 deg. 58'45"N., long. 82 deg. 50'00"W.; to lat. 38 deg. 47'00"N., long. 82 deg. 58'45"W.; to lat. 38 deg. 46'20"N., long. 83 deg. 14'20"W.; to lat. 38 deg. 52'15"N., long. 83 deg. 34'00"W.; to point of beginning. Altitudes: 5,000 feet MSL to but not including FL 180. Time of use: 0900 - 1600 Tuesday, Friday and Saturday; 0900 - 2200 Wednesday and Thursday; other times by NOTAM. Airspace will not be scheduled between 2200 - 0700. Controlling agency: FAA, Indianapolis ARTCC Using agency: 178th Fighter Group, Springfield-Beckley ANGB, OH __________________________ -- UFO Research http://home.fuse.net/task/
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 17 Current Encounters: Train Case From: jan@cyberzone.net (Jan Aldrich) Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 12:28:34 -0700 Fwd Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 00:20:58 -0400 Subject: Current Encounters: Train Case Forwarded from the Current Encounters E-mail List: Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 12:17:10 -0500 From: slk <slk@EVANSVILLE.NET> Subject: train case To: CURRENT-ENCOUNTERS@LISTSERV.AOL.COM UFO FILTER CENTER MESSAGE I'm not getting out of the "UFO business", but I am directing my efforts more towards The Lunascan Project. But to preserve my 37 years "in" the business I wrote a book in 1994. This is one of the special evidence cases presented in the fully illustrated, 170-page book: "Regional Encounters: The FC Files". Francis Ridge slk@world.evansville.net UFO STOPS A TRAIN October 20th, 1973 Near Mt. Vernon, Indiana (small town near Evansville). This incident occurred during the massive sighting wave of 1973, and within a few days of one of our rare MADAR detections. My wife got a call early that morning. I was at work. She told me that the man was very serious about something that had happened that morning. The man calling was a conductor on a L&N train and had just had an encounter with a UFO at 6:50 AM, just a few miles east of my home. To be precise, it was at a point on the tracks near St. Phillips, which is about 8-miles east of my home in Mt. Vernon. I got in the car and headed home, called the man and taped the interview. Later I conducted a full investiagtion. The original train crew had experienced engine trouble near Upton, a little town 3-4 miles northwest of Mt. Veron. One of the rear diesal units had been overheating and the Burlington engine was pulling a 6,000-ton load, overloaded under these conditions. The maintenance man at Upton was a 30-year man and told the conductor that the rear unit was "dead" and that there was, in his words, "no use messin' with it". He'd already tried. In any case, the new crew lumbered in to Mt. Vernon, taking 20-25 minutes longer to get there than usual. The sky was clear, temperature was a cool 55-degrees, wind was calm. Again, it was about 6:50 AM. They had gone through Mt. Vernon and were nearing the Lamont crossing, 2-miles east of the city, heading east for Evansville. The sun was just barely peeking over the tree tops. The two men in the front engine saw a very bright, but distant, light in the sky coming out of the north. At first they thought it was an aircraft, then later decided that it couldn't be. The object was very bright and was tracking north to south, pulsating from real bright to dim to bright. The distant light appeared to travel a short distance, 50-60' between pulsations. The light finally turned more east towards Evansville and disappeared. When they neared Caborn (6-7 miles east of Mt. Vernon), the lead conductor told the rear conductors by intercom that they had seen a real bright light. When they got near St. Phillips, the rear conductor reported that there now was a train following them, on the same track. By then they had gotten up on Belknap hill (at Peerlsess Crossing), a pretty good pull on a train, and had gotten hung up. One of the rear men suggested that they should get the train behind them, which he said had been following them for a while, to push them. The lead conductor replied, "Well, I haven't heard him on the radio." After a short while the rear man suggested the same solution to the problem, again: "Well, he's been following us and I can see his light back there and the "board" is red!" The object following them had given them a "red signal" on their blocking system. The signal referred to here is a series of lights, similar in color to regular traffic lights, situated on a pole on the side of the tracks. This shows either red, green, or amber, indicating "danger", "all clear", or "caution", respectively. (This signal is a part of the Automatic Blocking System which tells of other traffic on the same track). The "red board" normally meant that something was on the track behind them. The rear conductor again suggested that the crew call the "tower" (Howell Round House at Evansville) and see if there was a train behind. A quick check with the yardmaster showed that there was no train behind them at all. Upon receiving the news, the rear conductor replied, "There is a headlight behinds us. I can see it. It's real bright." After the train had gotten hung up and had stopped on Belknap Hill, they got out and looked around. The conductor, after backing the train down the hill, got out, walked down to the rear unit and pressed the restart button. To his surprise the unit "kicked right off, ran real good". The light or the object was now moving off, back from where it had come from. According to the conductor, whatever had given them a "red board", now was giving them a "green board". As he, himself, stated, "The board went green. The light cleared up the board". The train, previously hampered with a bad rear unit and way over-tonnage, was now fully able to climb the steep, hill and made it in to Howell without further mishap! What makes this case interesting is in this detailed report (this is only a synopsis) something very bright was first seen, then a similar bright light follows a train, a diesal. Tractors and other diesals have been virtually unaffected by UFOs. The Blocking System reacts as the object approaches and recedes, just as if there was a train on that track. The train, originally disabled (an reportedly with a "dead" rear unit) now works fine even with over-tonnage when the UFO is out of the picture. All this during a massive sighting wave with some of the best close encounters we ever recorded! And that's not all. The crew was reprimanded for filing a report. Later we found that the engine had been pulled and taken down south to be studied and reportedly the U.S.Air Force was involved. (Source: "Regional Encounters: The FC Files", written by Francis Ridge, Director of the UFO Filter Center. Available in 8-1/2x11, 170 pages, fully illustrated cases. $20 U.S.; $30 Foreign). Francis Ridge slk@world.evansville.net ----------- Index: Francis Ridge Search for other documents from or mentioning: jan | slk |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 17 Re: Aug '97 Mexico City From: fergus@ukraine.corp.mot.com [George Fergus] Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 12:49:32 -0500 (CDT) Fwd Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 00:24:16 -0400 Subject: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City > From: William.Hamilton@pcsmail.pcshs.com > Date: 15 Oct 1997 16:02:22 UT > Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills > To: updates@globalserve.net > Could the saucer itself be a large inflatable craft of some > sort used to hoax the video? Then it is, indeed, an elaborate > hoax. > But, then, there were eyewitnesses (7 to 9 to date) who saw > the saucer hovering from different ground positions around > the area. Has anyone translated the eyewitness accounts into English yet? Or any of the investigations by local ufologists? It would be useful to know if there was anyone directly underneath the craft, so as to rule out the notion that it was an advertising balloon tethered to a vehicle. -George Fergus Search for other documents from or mentioning: fergus |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 17 Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculouso From: Loy Pressley <lpressle@webwide.net> Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 13:22:49 -0700 Fwd Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 00:29:18 -0400 Subject: Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculouso > This is a response to many of the posts on this thread. The main > thread seems to have been lost. The point was, is it possible for > someone over there to get over here, when 'there' is a very long > way away. > The answer is yes. Sure it is possible...you just have to take most the mass in the universe and use it to accelerate yourself to some reasonable percentage of the speed of light and then use the remaining mass to shield yourself from the atoms in space that become deadly missiles at that speed. You know one tenth of the speed of light in a vacuum is 18,600 miles per second. So far we've got up to about 10 or 15 miles per second. Looks like we have a long way to go to me... What's the time dilation effect of moving at 1/10th the speed of light anyway? Is it enough to make it practical for a race that lives, say, a thousand years. > We as society are already technologically > cabable of building interstellar craft. And in fact have already > done so, both of the voyager probes and the one that came before > them(can't remember the name) (??? Pioneer ???)are going > interstellar within our lifetimes. Yep, in seventy five thousand years or something they will reach the vicinity of the nearest star. > We can build much faster > propulsion systems than are already in use. Only logistics and > the chance to experiment have prevented us from doing so > already. I'll wager that what we say we can do and what we finally determine to be possible to do are entirely different things. And we aren't even proceeding in the directions it takes to make it possible for us to develop drives powerful enough to make any semblance of practical interstellar travel possible. We are so terrified of anything nuclear that we can't even launch a very slow probe to Saturn without worldwide protests. > As to speed, well yes at present such missions would be slow. So slow as to make it impractical, I'll wager. > Project Daedalus, which was once a front runner, had projected > speeds of up to 25% SPEOL, Stellar Ram Jets could possibly travel > faster still. Let's see; 25% of the speed of light in a vacuum is approximately 46,500 miles per second. That's moving on out... Since the nearest star is approximately 4 light years away (and a light year is approximately 6 trillion miles; a number I can't even imagine) it would take 16 years to get there assuming (not likely) instant acceleration and deceleration. And 16 years to get back to report. Or, 20 years to receive a report about what was found there. Doesn't sound very practical to me... > All without resorting to Warp Engines. Okay so you > probably would not want to send people at first, but where > machines lead people shortly follow. That doesn't seem to be the case at the moment. In fact, it looks like everyone wants to just stick to sending machines if anything is sent at all. > The speed of light in a vacuum is seen to be a universal speed > limit. There are certain quantum events to which this limitation > does not apply. I don't understand...which quantum events? I thought all these 'events' were thought to aberrations of observation. > The Quantum Tunneling effect is one of these. This > is okay, its accepted. Please explain. > Nothing gets violated unless information > can be transmitted from one point to another. As I understand it, > Mozart (thats his music not the composer) has already been > transmitted at 3.7 c i.e. 3.7 times faster than the supposed > speed limit. If Mozart's music has been transmitted then information has been transmitted from one point to another. Unless Mozart's music isn't considered to be information. > This may however be down to experimental errors and > work is going on at present to show that information can be > coherently transmited at faster than c. Could you expand on the above. > If this continues to be the case, we may well have to ask a lot > of new questions that science, at present, is ill equipped to > answer. You should never rest on your proverbial scientific > laurels as you can never tell when someone will come along and > pull them from under you. Agree 100%! > So there we go, sermon over. It's possible we can do it so why > can't they. Don't get me wrong I'm still a sceptic, but I won't > dismiss an idea out of hand just because I'm Sceptical. I'm not even skeptical. I think that they are doing it right now. If flying saucer's do, in fact, shield themselves and their occupants from the effects of gravity, then they have a practical means to exceed the speed of light by just about as much as they want too. It doesn't take much to accelerate zero mass. It may not sound like it from my comments above but I do think that interstellar travel at less than light speed is possible. I just don't think it will ever, under normal circumstances, be practical for a species like us with a life span of three score and ten. Americans couldn't even maintain focus for ten years for the Viet Nam war much less over the several decades it would take to complete an interstellar mission. And most countries are less favorable to space exploration than America. Even with the time dilation effect, the crew of an interstellar spacecraft is likely to return to earth and find that no one cares or everyone moved to Mars to protest that we're polluting interstellar space or something even more exotic. Loy
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 17 Re: Researching Abduction Cases From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@ucs.orst.edu> Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 11:26:24 -0700 (PDT) Fwd Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 00:31:28 -0400 Subject: Re: Researching Abduction Cases > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Researching Abduction Cases > Date: Wed, 15 Oct 97 21:35:50 -0000 > From: Paul <pwedel@neptune.on.ca> [Paul Wedel] > To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net> > >Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 14:31:00 -0500 > >To: updates@globalserve.net > >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> > >Subject: Researching abduction cases > >Abduction research -must be- taken out of the hands of amateurs > >and para-professionals. Not so much for the sake of the research > >itself, there are many 'amateurs' that can do as competent if not > >better job than some pros, but for the sake of the well being of > >those individuals reporting. [...] > >John Velez, Abductee Union Rep. > Hey Johnny, > [...] > With respect to as many abductee's as possible coming forward > (a.m.a.a.p.c.f) I believe the initial phase of that will not > occur unless some brave, brave people agree to move en masse (en > englais, c'est "as a big forceful, credible group chewing hard > gum and wearing stirrups). [...] One more opinion -- a compromise?: I think that UFO abductees should indeed be encouraged to go to mainstream psychologists/psychiatrists for treatment or uncovering of memories, but *only if* they have strong assurance that the practitioner under consideration is considerably more open minded and considerate than average. And that's the sort of information you can only get through word of mouth or if the abductee should just happen to know or be a friend of the practitioner in the first place. Usually it probably means going to one that a few other abductees have already gone to, in which case that psychologist might no longer be considered "mainstream." But the abductee will then at least have a fair chance of being believed, and of helping to awaken the psychologist to the reality of the UFO abduction phenomenon. Otherwise, there is just no point in seeing a "hard-nosed" mainstream psychologist who will think the abductee is hallucinating, fabricating, or whatever. There is no changing such a person's belief system, which has no room for existence of aliens, short of most of his trusted colleagues becoming enlightened first. Such a person will simply make life more miserable for the abductee. But I know of no definite way to learn about which psychologists/psychiatrists in which locations might be open-minded enough to be prepared to confront an abductee for the first time and ask himself/herself, "Maybe this really happened! I need to treat it seriously, and start reading up on any related literature about it that I can find." Regarding whether abductees should come forward en masse, and thereby perhaps gain more attention and credibility, I don't think this would work, as they would all be categorized into one group and characterized as "nutty" or some such by the press. However, if it were one of those million-person affairs, it would then likely gain the attention of a few brave, open-minded reporters and succeed partially. Jim Deardorff
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 17 Re: JSE article on Gov't. Remote Viewing Program From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com> Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 15:15:03 -0400 Fwd Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 00:40:57 -0400 Subject: Re: JSE article on Gov't. Remote Viewing Program I don't know if the following has been posted previously, but I thought it was interesting enough to forward: SOURCE: http://www.jse.com/PR_CIA_96.html SOCIETY FOR SCIENTIFIC EXPLORATION PRESS RELEASE Embargoed until March 22, 1996 CONTACT: Marsha Sims, Executive Editor, Journal of Scientific Exploration Former Directors Dispute Conclusions of Government ESP Program Review by CIA Stanford, CA, March 22, 1996 --- The current issue (Vol. 10, No.1) of the Journal of Scientific Exploration, an international peer-reviewed research journal, presents the most complete discussion to date of the 24-year long government-sponsored ESP programs at SRI and SAIC. In addition to the official reports on the program by Prof. Jessica Utts, (University of California, Davis) and Prof. Ray Hyman (Univ. of Oregon) the Journal is publishing the first in-depth discussions by former program directors Dr. H. E. Puthoff and Dr. Edwin May and by former SRI researcher Russell Targ. Both Puthoff and Targ discuss, among other things, declassified aspects of the code-named Scanate efforts at SRI to psychically view top secret facilities in the former USSR and elsewhere. They present the first released drawings of the Semipalatinsk, USSR facility comparing the psychically-obtained sketches with satellite reconnaissance observations. This is now possible because in July 1995, 270 pages of SRI reports were declassified and released by the CIA, the first, but not the only, sponsor of such programs as Grill Flame, Center Lane, Sunstreak and Star Gate. Although various unclassified aspects of the early work led by Puthoff and Targ have drawn media attention for some time, the bulk of the funded research was carried out between 1986 and 1995,directed by May. Building on the Puthoff-Targ findings, rigorous new tests were developed by May's team to try to identify the relevant variables and explore their dependence on space and time. Contrary to the implications of some media accounts, these efforts concentrated on developing proper scientific controls and were in fact guided by a Scientific Oversight Committee which included a Nobel Laureate, a former Major General, and internationally known professors of statistics, psychology, neuroscience and astronomy. It is estimated that more than 80000 pages of program documents remain highly classified. Much of the opposition of mainstream scientists to ESP phenomena of this sort traces to the perplexing lack of appropriate space and time behavior. Electromagnetic and gravitational forces diminish predictably with distance and, except in science fiction movies, never mysteriously propagate backwards in time. Taken at face value the ESP data suggest that information can be psychically accessed as easily across two continents as two doors down the hall. And apparent examples of bizarre time-shifting of perceptions abound. One of the most curious results, reported by Targ, concerns a remote viewing by former Burbank police commissioner, Pat Price, in 1975. In one of the experiments Price described a target site, a swimming pool complex at Rinconada Park in Palo Alto, with "great accuracy." But he then went on to describe some non-existent water storage tanks at the psychically-viewed location. Targ discusses how 20 years later, in 1995 long after Price had died, he came across an Annual Report of the City of Palo Alto from 1913 that touted the "new municipal waterworks" built that year on the Rinconada park site. A photograph from 1913 shows two water tanks "just where Price had drawn them" 60 years later... long after they were gone! Skeptics would criticize this as "post hoc" interpretation, but numerous less dramatic examples of asynchronous perception suggest further study. The retrospective reviews commissioned by the CIA in 1995 reached contrary conclusions. Jessica Utts, a professor of statistics at the University of California, Davis and a fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science states: "Using the standards applied to any other area of science, it is concluded that psychic functioning has been well established." This is disputed in the dissenting report by psychologist Ray Hyman, a professor at the University of Oregon. However Hyman does agree with Utts on what the next steps should be, which in the Utts report is a recommendation for further funded investigation. Whether this recommendation stands any chance of being implemented in today's budget climate is problematic. May's overall assessment of his program's results is that photographic reconnaissance quality data were psychically obtained in approximately 15 percent of the operational remote viewings. While this would be more than sufficient to interest scientists, such a success rate appears to be too unpredictable to make the grade for continued intelligence funding. Most of the operational data remain classified, and in his commentary on the reports May argues strongly that virtually all high quality data and testimony of key individuals were deliberately excluded from the unclassified review process. He makes the case that owing to political considerations the ground rules of the review were determined so as to produce an outcome that could be used to justify terminating the program. This would explain why the CIA chose to, in effect, disregard the conclusions drawn by Utts in its official briefing to Congress. SOURCE: http://www.jse.com/PR_CIA_96.html
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 17 Re: High School UFO Teaching From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net> Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 17:04:37 -0300 Fwd Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 00:44:45 -0400 Subject: Re: High School UFO Teaching > From: brazel@webtv.net (Clint Stone) > Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 18:34:52 -0500 > To: updates@globalserve.net > Subject: High School UFO Teaching > Hey Errol, Mr. Washington, and all-- > I am out on a limb. I was asked today, by my Astronomy > teacher, if I could bring in some videos, magazines, books, etc. > to help us along on our studies in the unit of extraterestrial > life. Since I am the "UFO guy" of the class, everyone knows that > I'll pass with flying colors. > The truth is, I am not an experienced "UFO guy". I am afraid > that I won't expose them to enough (or the right) information to > get them interested. Could someone please calm me down, or tell > me what to do. > Thanks, > Clint Stone > ASD Ky/MUFON Clint: Give me a fax number and I will send you via fax a listing of scientific materials on UFOs.. books, videos, CDROM, and many papers covering all aspects. If no fax, then give me a snail mail address. Stan Friedman (I have done lots of class visits in the course of lecturing at more than 600 colleges)
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 17 Re: Composite Satellite Photograph East NTS From: jared@valuserve.com (Andromeda.net- Anderson, Jared) Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 13:07:45 -0700 Fwd Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 00:46:09 -0400 Subject: Re: Composite Satellite Photograph East NTS I've never seen this photograph before. It shows the entire east NTS including Groom Lake and Papoose Lake. Interestingly it does show a road that seems to lead from the southern end of Groom Lake towards the Papoose Lake area paralleling the base of the Papoose Mt. Range. This caught my attention because I remember Mahood saying that he was unable to locate any such road. http://www.xmission.com/~legalize/area51/images/bs-area51.jpg Jared.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 17 Re: UFO VIDEOTAPE, October 14: Clermont County, From: wlmss@peg.apc.org [Lawrie Williams] Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 07:40:44 +1000 (GMT+1000) Fwd Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 00:52:48 -0400 Subject: Re: UFO VIDEOTAPE, October 14: Clermont County, > Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 00:15:01 -0700 > From: Kenny Young <task@fuse.net> > To: updates@globalserve.net > Subject: UFO VIDEOTAPE, October 14: Clermont County, Ohio > From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>, on 10/12/97 8:34PM > From: wlmss@peg.apc.org [Lawrie Williams] > Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 07:36:06 +1000 (GMT+1000) > To: starfriends@esosoft.com, updates@globalserve.net > Subject: Abduction Sat 4 Oct 1997. > I want to clarify how the outer lights "behaved" now, and what colour > the object was...... > So I have reported a UFO with 8 equidistant lights and 10 days later > in the USA a UFO with 8 equidistant lights is independently reported > seemingly going about the same business..... I got that description. She's no fool, that girl. And now for something completely different. In mid-winter last year a lot of people were watching the Olympics. It was cold weather and that was supposed to have been the reason for a sudden widespread blackout. But some people reported that electronic devices went haywire, and 2 days later I saw TV footage from Townsville (a few hundred miles down the coast) about some sophisticated U.S. aircraft returning home after an "exercise". Too bad for them Townsville is a public airport as well as a military base, or I'd never have gleamed that extra little datum. They may have downed one, but I have not much on that, so I can make no claims at all in this regard. I can say with absolute certitude that U.S. ATF's were hunting heraic class UFOs in central Oz in 1995. I saw them at it, on a course to intersect the regular flight path of the UFO and at the appropriate time - 4 am, and they were flying south, and the UFOs usually flew eastwards. I observed that this craft (YF-23A) flew at an amazing cant, viz: \ like the craft observed in southern Queensland a couple of 'UFO Roundup's ago. So there is no doubt the USA military is actively hunting UFOs and it seems likely they are at it in Oz right now. Now the UFOs have changed. I can only guess that it is a form of defence. This suggests several things, one is that they are awfully keen about their mission, another is that they have enormous reserves of technology to call upon. I wonder if any aircraft attacking them will now be downed. Be warned. I would like to stay neutral in this, but it is not possible. If the U.S. President - the buck stops somewhere - has to attack UFOs he has never offered a reason, nor would there be much support for it if the people were asked, I am sure. I definitely do not accept the cock-and-bull story that private enterprise is doing this, that is just plausible deniability, i.e. lies. There are programs going on in Oz to develop laser weapons for the U.S. I'm sure if a private group were doing military things in the USA the Pentagon would have them run over with bulldozers. (All due apologies to Dr Greer and astronaut E. Mitchell.) Therefore I cannot post information that might assist the military in assessing this defence and defeating it, as I am sure they will try to. Therefore I must not describe the UFO seen recently. It is a bind, a painful one. I should be helping my own kind. What a pity my own kind cannot be honest and explain why they have to shoot UFOs down. I suggest that nobody post details that might assist the military in attacking and downing any further UFO's. At least until they offer a plausible reason for this activity. Like it or not, many of us have our own seed in those vehicles now, consider that. I am considering writing to the Minister for Defence about this. However I realize if our Australian Government showed any sign of independent thought, we would be screwed economically, those involved would suffer, and in extremis our goverment would be covertly destabilized and brought down. It happened in 1975 and that is undeniably factual, the matter is no secret. Beware the iron fist, not the velvet glove. Curious how ufology has always been seen as sort of a diversion for eccentrics but in fact it is closer to the bone than anything else that is going down. I wish the President and the Pentagon would be a little bit more honest with us all. Kindest regards to all, Lawrie Williams___________a little troubled about all this Search for other documents from or mentioning: wlmss | task |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 17 Ray Stanford - Project Starlight International? From: galevy@pipeline.com [Gary Alevy] Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 18:26:18 -0400 Fwd Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 01:08:06 -0400 Subject: Ray Stanford - Project Starlight International? I am interested in locating Ray Stanford the author of the book "Socorro 'Saucer' In A Pentagon Pantry. He was also the director of Project Starlight International located in Austin, Texas. In the 1970s he mentioned in his book that he lived in Phoenix Arizona. Thanks Gary Alevy
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 17 Re: Alien Autopsy Film From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net> Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 02:25:53 -0700 Fwd Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 01:15:14 -0400 Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy Film Roger Prokic said: > From: "Roger R. Prokic" <rprokic@ibm.net> > Date: Thu, 16 Oct 97 05:38:15 > Fwd Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 19:25:57 -0400 > Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy Film [snip] > Oh well, I'll keep everyone posted > from Mission Control here... Thanks, Rog! I pulled this off the archives because, for some reason, I didn't get anything today from email. The "rocket scientist" comment was intentional. Yep, I knew about your new assignment. It's nice to have someone on the "inside"! <G> Sorry to hear about the problems with the Observer. In the elliptical orbit, any idea what the best resolution will be with the MOC? I guess it varies with elevation. Terry
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 17 Re: Alien Autopsy Film From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net> Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 02:38:33 -0700 Fwd Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 01:17:10 -0400 Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy Film Bob Shell wrote: > From: Bob Shell <76750.2717@compuserve.com> > Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 11:13:23 -0400 > Fwd Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 19:32:12 -0400 > Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy Film [snip] > Ray has offered to forward any questions about the similarities > Theresa is seeing between the critters on to the cameraman for > comment, so if you have any specific questions send them to me > by e-mail and I'll forward them to Ray. Thanks, Bob! I forwarded this to T. to make sure she sees it. One of us will let you know about the film anomalies soon! It has to do with disappearing and reappearing alien blood. Terry Note to ebk: Check to see if I'm still subscribed, please. TIA!
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 17 Re: High School UFO Teaching From: "Blair Cummins" <ufoblair@hotmail.com> Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 18:56:58 PDT Fwd Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 01:19:06 -0400 Subject: Re: High School UFO Teaching >From: brazel@webtv.net (Clint Stone) >Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 18:34:52 -0500 >To: updates@globalserve.net >Subject: High School UFO Teaching >Hey Errol, Mr. Washington, and all-- > I am out on a limb. I was asked today, by my Astronomy >teacher, if I could bring in some videos, magazines, books, etc. >to help us along on our studies in the unit of extraterrestrial >life. Since I am the "UFO guy" of the class, everyone knows that >I'll pass with flying colors. > The truth is, I am not an experienced "UFO guy". I am afraid >that I won't expose them to enough (or the right) information to >get them interested. Could someone please calm me down, or tell >me what to do. >Thanks, >Clint Stone >ASD Ky/MUFON Clint - My name is Blair Cummins. I am a 16 year-old "UFO guy". In response to your email, I have a few suggestions. If your Astronomy Club wants you to bring in actual stuff about UFOs, I would suggest books by Kevin D. Randle (ie The UFO Casebook, A History of UFO Crashes, etc.), Stanton Friedman, Allen Hynek, and other "reliable sources" (there's too many to list here!). In terms of magazines, I would recommend the International UFO Reporter, MUFON Journal, or UFO Magazine. The best way to get people interested is to tell them about well-documented cases (like the 1948 Captain Mantell incident or the 1976 Tehran, Iran incident), not high-strangeness cases. A lot of people are turned away by cases that seem "too strange". If your club just wants the so-called "scientific stuff", Carl Sagan's book Cosmos is a great place to start. Astronomy magazines also frequently carry articles about SETI and extraterrestrial life. Well, I hope that helps. Good luck! Blair Cummins ufoblair@hotmail.com
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 17 CNN On Australian Sightings From: y0001095@ws.rz.tu-bs.de, Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose) Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 05:41:20 +0100 Fwd Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 01:20:48 -0400 Subject: CNN On Australian Sightings Found on the German UFO newsgroup "de.alt.ufo": ************************ Date: 16 Oct 1997 16:11:24 GMT From: y0001095@ws.rz.tu-bs.de (Jan-H. Raabe) Subject: CNN reports UFO in Australia! Message-ID: <625ebc$3mh$1@rzcomm2.rz.tu-bs.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: rzbcosv0.rz.tu-bs.de [ Article crossposted from alt.ufo.reports ] [ Author was V=EDtor Ribeiro ] [ Posted on 14 Oct 1997 22:02:46 GMT ] Sparkling Celestial Affair Stirs Southern Australia. Itar-Tass 14-OCT-97 SYDNEY, October 14 (Itar-Tass) - The telephone of the Australian national bureau for monitoring unidentified flying objects was attacked throughout last Saturday, with avalanching reports of an UFO from hundreds of witnesses. The story of residents of the eastern coast of Australia was that a bright greenish-silvery object was seen floating in the sky for a few minutes before to fall apart in sparkles that rained on the earth. Australian military experts and scientists of the New South Wales observatory are in hypothesis-making, while news media have come up with an explanation that the enigmatic sparkling affair was space junk from the Russian orbiting space station Mir. Copyright =A9 1997 Cable News Network, Inc. A Time Warner Company -- Vitor Ribeiro
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 17 Re: 'The Gulf Breeze Paper' From: c549597@showme.missouri.edu [Barbara Becker] Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 22:48:32 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 01:30:27 -0400 Subject: Re: 'The Gulf Breeze Paper' > Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 00:56:20 -0400 > From: bruce maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com> > Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: 'The Gulf Breeze Paper' > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > MY COMMENTS ON BARBARA BECKER'S COMMENTS ON MY RESPONSE TO HER PAPER, > "ONE PICTURE IS WORTH A THOUSAND WORDS" > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > 1) Here is my comment on her paper: > It is important to know that many other witnesses reported UFOs > flying around Gulf Breeze in the same time frame and, hence, it > is possible that others could have photographed them. This > applies in particular to "Believer Bill" (discussed below) who > claimed to have photographed UFOs at a location that turned out > to be just behind Ed's (old) house. ("Jane", described below, > claimed her photos were taken long before the Gulf Breeze flap.) > HERE IS BARBARA'S COMMENT on what I said. > None came forward before Walters. Myself and others interested in > this case have serious doubts about some of the reports. In some > cases it was months after Walters' photos appeared in the newspaper > that the reports were taken. I personally spoke with Mrs. Art > Hufford, an interview which I have on audio tape, where she says that > the object she did not have windows, yet Mr. Hufford often says that > what he saw looked EXACTLY like Ed Walters UFO. There is always the > danger of contamination of witness testimony the longer time goes on. > HERE IS MY COMMENT ON HER PAPER: I am aware that the GB skeptics > have tried, unsuccessfully, to discredit all the other witnesses. > There are about a dozen Gulf Breeze witnesses who say explicitly that > they saw what was in Ed's photos. **** BB: There were NONE that came forward before Ed and only ONE, a man named Thompson, who described and drew a picture similar to Ed's. > In UFOS ARE REAL, HERE'S THE PROOF (Avon. 1997) there are photos from > people around the world who have seen the same thing. **** BB: I have that book. Maybe we are having a problem of semantics. SAME means being exactly alike, identical. There are only three reproduced in that book that I would call identical. Oddly enough, they are from around Costa Rica, where Walters said he and his wife and children lived for a while...oddly enough again, Tommy Smith said that Walters told he and another friend that Ed had hoaxed UFO photos while he lived in Costa Rica. Go figure! :) > In the case of Mary Hufford and the claim that they saw no windows, > here is evidence of a witness not being contaminated! Nevertheless, > the shape of the object the described and drew is very similar to the > shape of the Ed-type UFO. Perhaps the :"windows" (dark areas) were > simply not showing when the Huffords saw it. **** BGB: Gee, that's funny, Art says he saw EXACTLY (identical) the same UFO Ed saw. And Mary said Art saw windows but she didn't except that later she said she too saw windows. > 2) Here is another of my comments on her paper: > Strictly speaking it is "impossible" to know how many > pictures Ed took... because he was not being watched 24 hours a > day. The reader should not, however, be caught by the > implication that he may have taken many more UFO photos. There > is no evidence that he took any UFO photos other than what he > released in the 1990 book (TGBS) and in the 1997 book (UARHTP). > **Here is Barbara's comment on my comment:: > Very true. It looks like we agree here. Not only was Walters not > being watched 24 hours a day but no one knew he had even taken > any other photos until December 23, and photo number 18. > Bruce continues:) "There is no evidence that he took any UFO photos > other than what he released in the 1990 book." That's not true. > Have you forgotten he shot two pictures while allegedly huddling > under his truck on January 12, 1987 the night of the infamous road > shot? Only one of the two was used in the book. > Here is my reponse: right and wrong. Wrong because the photo which > appears in th book was taken while Ed was still in th cab of the > truck. While under the truck he took only one photo which, he says, > only showed the tire because he couln't aim the camera while under > the truck. It is true that no one other than Ed) has ever seen this > photos because he said he threw it away when he saw that it didn't > show the UFO. > Barbara continues > In addition... In July 1991 I wrote to Maccabee and asked about > the difference in serial numbers on Walters' photos 15 (J712051Z), > 16 (H712631Z), and 17 (J712051Z) reported by Bob Oeschler on his > on a "Gulf Breeze Serial ID Number Sheet". Maccabee replied that > according to Polaroid: "In one batch (of sheet film) there could be > very many packs of film. The film is made in one long roll and cut > into 'pack size' after each piece is stamped with a 'mark' as > follows: 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8- cut-1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8, -cut- etc. Each > series of 8...is placed into a separate box and packaged for shipment > automatically. There could,... be many (hundreds?) of boxes made from > one long roll, that have the same serial numbers." And that is > EXACTLY why we have no way of knowing how many photographs Walters > actually took. He could have had three (hundreds?) of boxes with > identical serial numbers, shot 24 photographs or however many he > needed, and patched together the photos, 1 through 8. Making them > look sequential. As an example: This is from Oeschler's serial number > sheet. > Comment Photo serial# Mark Date Comments > 20 G715481E xd out 1/16/88 > xd out > 21 G715481E 7 1/24/88 Slight Add'l P smr > Cook A " 8 > 22 G715481E 5 1/26/88 No P Smr > 23 G715481E 6 1/26/88 No P Smr > At the bottom of sheet and NOT included w/Walters photos: > 14-A G715481E 1 Same S# as Ph# > 20-23 above > 19-A G715481E 3 > ("Mark" refers to the number of the photos in the film pack. There > were 8 in a full pack.) > If photo 21 is the one Walters took in Cook's presence and used in GBS, > then what is 21 A that specifically names Cook? > IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO KNOW MANY PHOTOGRAPHS WALTERS TOOK. > My comment: Shortly after the first (UFO) photo with Cook Ed took a > second photo for comparison. **** BB: It is still impossible to know how many photgrpahs Ed Walters actually took. Look at Oeschler's serial numbers. 20, 21, 21A, 22, 23, 14A and 19A (and there were more) all have the same "serail numbers". There is no control here. > NOTE: The GB investigators have been accused of sloppy work, etc. > However, I would like to point out that to make her argument about > the photos Barbara has used the very diligent efforts of Bob Oechsler > to catalogue every photo related to the UFO sightings that Ed took > with that camera. None of the skeptics undertook this effort. **** BB: Anyone with the slimmest doubt was kept away from this case. No skeptics allowed...only believers. > 3) Here is another of my comments on her paper > MACCABEE : Tommy Smith did not "come forward" publicly until June, > 1990. His testimony about Ed faking photos is about as solid as a > Swiss Cheese. Ed told the UFO investigators in January 1988 that a > young man had shown Ed UFO photos. **** BB: AFTER Tommy spoke with his father and AFTER Tommy cutoff his relationship with Walters Ed Walters told the MUFON Investigators that he was Mr. Ed. It was then that he showed Ware et al. the remaining photos to 18. > The young man had told Ed that he was exploding firecrackers in Gulf > Breeze when a UFO had appeared and he had photographed it. snip. **** BB: This is Ed's version. This IS NOT Tommy Smith's wersion. > Ed's testimony was supported by another young friend of Tommy's who >told me and other investigators that Tommy had told him, in late 1987, > about exploding firecrackers and seeing and photographing a UFO. **** BB: I have a copy of a statement taken by a certain memebr of CUFOS from a girl named "Carol" who was this "other" friends girlfriend and who attended Columbia College in Chicago with this "other" friend who claimed that this "other" friend had been offered money to help Ed in the hoax. This "other" friend was promised money for film making (like video?) and school etc. I trust this person in CUFOS I have no reason to doubt the statement since the CUFOS person thought it was truthful and sincere. AS with evryhting in this case, this "carol" was afraid to come forward. > The person Tommy "came forward" to with his story was his > father. According to his father, lawyer Thomas Smith, at a press > conference in June, 1990, Tommy told him in late 1987 of a UFO > sighting with pictures. According to Thomas Smith, a few days or > weeks later Tommy told him the pictures had been faked by Ed. > Neither Smith said anything in public about these allegations > until June, 1990. At the press conference Mr. Smith was careful > to avoid criticizing any of the other Gulf Breeze witnesses, > including those who claimed to have seen exactly the same thing > that Ed photographed. Tommy's photos were analyzed. Tommy > had claimed that Ed had faked them by double exposure methods. > However, analysis revealed no evidence of double exposure and, > in fact, the photos appeared to be just single exposures, not double > exposures as Tommy had indicated. The shape and color of the > depicted UFO was consistent with what Ed had photographed. > ** BB COMMENT: This is strictly disinformation damage control. > In the first week of January 1988, Tommy Smith confessed his role in > Walters hoax to his father, who then discussed it with his law > partners, Mayor of Gulf Breeze, Ed Gray and Police Chief, Jerry Brown. > So there is no lack of credible witnesses to what Tommy said and when. > All of whom believed MUFON would discover the hoax and it would go > away. It didn't. At this time Tommy cut his ties to Walters. This > was when alters executed his own damage control. He told Ware et al., > that he was definitely, "Mr. Ed." and showed the remaining 12 or so > photographs he had taken. To my recollection it was Walters who came > out with the preposterous story about Tommy Smith. > My comment on her comment: > I have never heard of any testimony that in January 1988 Tommy Smith > told his father, who told his law partners, the Mayor of Gulf Breeze > and the Police Chief. If it is true, that the Police Chief had a > witness to a hoax as early as January 1988, then I guess he could be > guilty of nonfeasance of duty to inform the public, inasmuch as there > was a lot of interest in the sightings at the time. **** BB: I cant speak for any of these people but everyone makes a bad call once in while...even you Bruce. > 4) Here is my comment on her paper: > This discussion about the copyright does not prove Ed > created the Bill and Jane photos. Hence Barbara's claim that > "this demonstrates his ability...." is also not proven. In > contradiction to Barbara's conclusion, many other factors in this > case indicate that Ed told the truth because many of the photos > he took were beyond his capability to fake. > ** BB COMMENT: You can make up any story you want to believe, > whatever makes you feel better. But the FACT of law is: IF ED WALTERS > OWNS THE COPYRIGHT TO THE BELIEVER BILL AND JANE PHOTOS AS HE > DECLARES, THEN HE MUST EITHER HAVE A TRANSFER AGREEMENT, WHICH HE > DOESN'T OR BE THE PHOTOGRAPHER. > ____________ > My comment: Can you prove the "Bill" and "Jane" didn't intend to > abandon all rights to their photos? **** BB: Read my copyright paper. ASlo, copyright is inherited, Bill said: "I'll keep the negs for my grandkids." (GBS p107) > Barbara: > And that DOES validate Tommy Smiths claims whether you like it or not. > My comment: quite independent of this argument,,Tommy's Smith's > testimony is full of holes. > Barbara": > And that does demonstrate his ability to use other cameras. > My comment: No, it doesn't. **** BB: Yes, it does! > Barbara: > (As an additional remark regarding copyright. Ed Walters claims that > on January 12, 1988 after 5:30 PM, he was chased down, while driving > his truck, by light wand carrying aliens, (photo 19. The road > shot). He claims he was physically and mentally traumatized. He > managed to escape and return home. Commenting that the next day he was > still feeling the effects. The copyright for the photographs taken by > Edward Daniel Walters, titled UFOS:PROOF POSITIVE, which includes > photo19, has a completion date of January 12, 1988. This means that > IF we believe Walters actually took photo19 on January 12, as he > claims, (but probably didnt) then he xeroxed his photographs, > completed the paperwork and got it in the mail in time to be received > and registered in Washington DC at the LOC on January 15. I wish I > had mail service that was that fast! This seems like rather odd > behavior for a man who is claiming he is being stalked by aliens. But > it is not odd behavior for a man pulling a hoax and hoping to > capitalize on it.) > My comment: he had been advised to copyright the photos by the UFO > investigatotors so the photos wouldn't be circulating with no control > at all. **** BB: That's not the point. He had the crap (alegedly) scared out of him and the thing he thinks about doing is filling out his copyright application and getting it in the mail? It makes perfect sense for someone pulling a hoax. But it doesnt make sense for someone in fear for the life. > ENDING COMMENT: Barbara can argue legalities as long as she likes. > I'll stick to the technical aspects combined with the numerous other > sightings (which include witnesses to the blue beam). For example, > stereo photos and photos which can't be simple double exposure (like > #1), etc. And then there is January 8, 1990 when Ed got photos in the > presence of other witnesses, two of whom took their own photos (see > UFOs ARE REAL, HERE's THE PROOF). ENDING COMMENT: Hey Bruce....Is Ed dead????? If nothow about calling him on the phone (surely you have his number) and ask him why he doesnt have a transfer agreement and why he owns the copyright to the B&J photos? Thats simple. And please no BS about Duane giving him the photos. BB
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 17 Re: High School UFO Teaching From: cs147@glen-net.ca (Cory Cameron) Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 00:00:25 -0400 Fwd Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 01:33:54 -0400 Subject: Re: High School UFO Teaching >From: brazel@webtv.net (Clint Stone) >Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 18:34:52 -0500 >To: updates@globalserve.net >Subject: High School UFO Teaching >Hey Errol, Mr. Washington, and all-- > I am out on a limb. I was asked today, by my Astronomy >teacher, if I could bring in some videos, magazines, books, etc. >to help us along on our studies in the unit of extraterestrial >life. Since I am the "UFO guy" of the class, everyone knows that >I'll pass with flying colors. > The truth is, I am not an experienced "UFO guy". I am afraid >that I won't expose them to enough (or the right) information to >get them interested. Could someone please calm me down, or tell >me what to do. >Thanks, >Clint Stone >ASD Ky/MUFON Dear Mr. Clint Stone, my name is Cory Cameron. I am also a high school student and member of MUFON. I was once in a dilemma similiar to yours. I started off the seminar by asking the class various questions concerning their knowledge of UFO's. I was extremely surprised to find one young man who suddenly stood up and began to discuss Ed Walters and the Gulf Breeze sightings!!! However, there were others in the audience who knew absolutely nothing of the subject. For instance, I asked some of the people what they thought a "grey" was. I got every answer from the "grey" matter that exists between fine lines to what their vomit looked like after the party. So you see, it all depends upon the individual. After asking the audience these common questions, I took out my nifty UFO model "as described by Lazar", and told them about Area 51, and Lazar's story. After this, I mentioned the prominent UFO Investigators: Budd Hopkins, J. Allen Hynek, Kevin Randle, Whitley Strieber, etc.... And I even mentioned the main three investigative branches of UFO investigation - MUFON, CUFOS, and NICAP. After discussing all of this; and it included Crop Circles, Cattle Mutilations, Chupacabras, Abductions, I began to talk about the somewhat far-fetched ideas of underground bases, military cover-ups - namely Roswell. I ended my speech with mentioning the NORAD incident in the Cheyenne Mountain near Colorado Springs, Colorado. Your best bet to keep your audiences attention is to discuss the Abduction scenario. I noticed whenever I would talk about a lonely walk in the woods.....or the dark lonely highway....or what was the worse that made people almost piss their pants was the bedroom abduction. Try that, and I can assure you it will work. :) So, best luck in your seminar, Cory Cameron MUFON
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 17 Re: Questions for Abductees From: Peregrine Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 10:58:16 -0400 Fwd Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 02:46:02 -0400 Subject: Re: Questions for Abductees The Duke of Mendoza presents his compliments and apologizes for this belated response to, among other things... >From: clark@canby.mn.frontiercomm.net [Jerome Clark] >Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 11:32:01 PDT >To: updates@globalserve.net >Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Questions for abductees ...but His Grace's horse went lame recently and needed much attention (and he hopes Zeiler, Rudiak & Partners, Conspiracy Brokers & Commissioners for Oaths of Ufological Loyalty, will be thrown into a frenzy of significance-seeking on learning that the hack in question is big, black, and called "Secret"); a number of people "in trade" have rather vulgarly suggested he might need money in return for services urgently to be rendered, but swiftly rendered they were; Lady Amarintha has been unwell; and there has been a spot of bother among the field agents, who want bigger allowances for false moustaches and are too lazy to grow their own. It has been a packed and stimulating fortnight, but this is not the Mendoza Diocesean News - especially as His Grace had recently to hang the Cardinal, who was edging toward the ducal kosher kitchenware with a phial of Lourdes water in his left hand - so let's get on with it, shall we? 1: MYSTERY TRAIN In response to >From: Peregrine Mendoza, 101653,2205@compuserve.com >To: updates@globalserve.net >Date: Wed, 01 Oct, 1997, 02:59 >Re: Questions for abductees Jerome wrote: >Does anybody, including yourself, know the meaning of the >phrase "the folklore that calls itself "abduction research"? >All of us, including the undersigned (as you kindly reminded >me recently), are capable of writing (and thinking) in haste, >and I daresay you are doing so here. There is folklore about >abductions, but the experience of abduction is not "folklore," Yes, I did formulate that phrase in haste. It is a species of shorthand, and I will explain it here in due course. My friend, I'd be the last to say that the *experience* (what seems to happen on the spot at the time) of abduction is folklore. Nor do I see how it could be. In consequence this strange idea doesn't appear in my post. It would be wrong to presume that everyone knows it, but for years now I have been consistent in published writings and on this List in insisting that I have no argument with the apparent reality of the abduction experience. That doesn't mean I think abductions are real. Nor does it mean that folklore does not enter into, color, shape, or parallel that experience. But it does mean I won't reflexively call someone who honestly, and *without benefit of hypnosis*, reports "being abducted", a liar, or a hoaxer, or a dupe of investigators, or psychologically or emotionally damaged. (The supposed polarity between "it really happened" and "abductees are nuts" is entirely false - there are plenty of other alternatives - and is really an expression of the power/sexual politics that lurk, insufficiently examined, within the abductionists' unstated agendas. This thought also raises the question as to how much of the trauma said to be suffered by abductees has been instilled in them by the investigators' approach [see the appalling hash-up made by Lawrie Williams over in the nearby thread] and their naive & amateurish ideas about hypnosis, and how much is really based in distressing experience. Hypothesis or wager: 95% of "abduction trauma" is iatrogenic.) It also means I recognize that there are shades of abduction experience. Not everyone who has been hypnotized by a dedicated (predisposed, prejudiced, whatever) abductionist is duped by them, for example. Their experiences too may include something genuinely anomalous, or at any rate not amenable to pat explanation. For instance. Both John Velez and Clarke Hathaway, esteemed posters to this List, can relate both weird conscious experiences *and* hypnotic recall of weird experiences. I have spent hours (days) in their company, and on the phone and in e- mails, punting these experiences and possible interpretations of them back and forth. From my point of view, some of this is "real" experience - genuine to them, that is, as subjectively perceived. Some of it I believe is contrived, especially what emerged under hypnosis. None of it, for me, necessarily involves real physical aliens. John, Clarke and I respect each other's points of view and the integrity with which we present our different perspectives. So. I don't have a problem with the abduction experience. I do with its objective reality, even leaving out the risks entailed in using hypnosis. I don't even have a problem with people who *prefer* to think they've been abducted by actual live squirmy aliens than to consider that some psychological factor is at work, if they feel happy with that and it really does make them happy. Whatever blows yer dress up, as they say, my friend. Is this now quite clear? (This must be the 99th time I have stated this position, BTW, and one of those occasions was in the excellent "Fortean Times", which I know Jerome reads. Do you not, my friend?) I do have a problem with people, who ought to know better, who think I'm so dumb as to confuse abduction "research" with the "abduction" experience, and who then start to create a folklore of their own about me on the back of it. And not just because it distracts from the bullshit about myself I try so hard to put about, to keep the paranoids off the scent. It has its own special irkiness. Wait and see. My friend. Back at the ranch, Jerome continues: >as you yourself imply when you suggest that "abnormal >psychology" is the be-all and end-all of the question. >You are too intellectually sophisticated, I should think, to >use "folklore" and "nonsense" as if the two were >interchangeable, for another thing. In a post quoted and referenced below, Paul Devereux wrote in response to this of Jerome's: >Jerry is trying to fabricate friction. I beg leave to spy a literal here. The word should be "fiction". Bucking for the Nebula award, or what, Jerry? You lose, my friend. I don't imply any of what you suggest, my friend, and I don't know why or how you infer it. I merely said, my friend, that looking for manifestations of "abnormal psychology" is a good place to start. I said nothing about endings. Such an investigation could end almost anywhere. Here's one of those boring repititions at which, my friend, I am becoming so adept: >And one place to start is the annals of so-unhelpfully-called >"abnormal psychology"... At any rate try to eliminate every >other possible explanation before plumping for the least >probable. Do we really have to go through the Top 47 Reasons why the ETH and the Gray alien fall off the twig with a flick of Occam's razor, here? Bear in mind, my friend, we are not talking possibility, but probability, reductionism and simplicity: pretty basic tools for scientists, logicians and philosophers. Introduce extra-terrestrials into your hypothesis and you le-t` a whole regiment of additional hypotheses squeeze into it through the door behind them, and still more if they eschew use of the conventional entrances and float through the wall or window. Of course you are correct, Jerry, my friend, in suggesting I'm sophisticated. So much so I even comb my hair, on Saturday nights. But there again, my friend, I didn't suggest folklore is nonsense. Far from it: I've always believed it's a cultural mirror. The nonsense is of your own making, and it is coming out of your ears and running down your arms and getting into your keyboard, where it has no place to be. And this-- >All you are saying, I guess, is >that you don't like people to research abductions and come to >conclusions about them you don't like. -- is unsubstantiated claptrap, my friend, not supported by anything I've said, written or even thought, and suggests that what I like or don't like in the realm of ideas overrides my powers of logical thought and self-criticism. Okay: you have the let out: "I guess". You guessed wrong. I don't think you're going to take a coconut home from the fair tonight, my friend. Nanny would have said: Go and wash your mouth out. What I don't like: soi-disant "researchers" who hypnotize (abuse) small children, shoddy logic (false syllogisms, the excluded middle and the Roper Poll), wilful ignorance about everything and anything, people who claim to be "scientific" who couldn't tell a particle accelerator from a portrait of Lavoisier, unctuous moralizers who speculate publicly about the provenance of minors (and the minors' mothers who allow this crap to be published), "researchers" who lie about "alien- induced" pregnancies, pompous fiction disguised as informed criticism, the concept of "co-creativity", bullshit, self- righteous self-deluders, people with hair on the palms of their hands, people who call Occam's razor "silly", the extra- terrestrial hypothesis, intellectual abdication masquerading as agnosticism and, unlike God, "alcoholics, all-nite DJs, eight-track tapes, and thieves", as the old song has it. (Whooo wrote that one, then, Melanie?) And I'll give you a minimum of four logical reasons, besides their overriding intrinsic illogicality or immorality, why I don't like each one, including even the hairy-palm=E8d ones in case you are one of those clowns (clones?) who chronically mistake facetiousness for attempts to be witty. >It is foolish, in any event, to seek to medicalize all >anomalous experience, But there again I don't, my friend. Not that I can see, and nor do you explain, my friend, *why* it is "foolish" to *seek* to "medicalize" anomalous experiences (even "all" of them). Some of these experiences may possibly be amenable to medical explanations. Others won't, maybe. You gotta start somewhere, though the seeking may be in vain. Occam's razor still applies. Meanwhile, my friend, please don't put words in my mouth or pin silly notices to my back -- a particularly daft move when I can see you do it. What we have here, my friend, is some of that vacant rhetoric against which you are rightly wont to rail. Ooop-ah! >and I really don't see what "abnormal >psychology" has to tell us about the more puzzling abduction >cases. Some marginal ones, perhaps. Well, nor do I, unless you, my friend, specify what you think *are* the "more puzzling" cases and the "marginal" ones. And I may even agree with you, my friend, once I know what particular cases you have in mind. There again I may not. In one sense, after all, all abductions cases are equally puzzling. So in their way are all Marian visions. I wonder if you would object so emotionally as to misread and misrepresent what I said if I'd suggested there may be a psychological explanation for those? Do you think Marian visions are less likely to be real than alien abductions? Many of the same miraculous powers are alleged in such cases, after all. >For a splendid critique of >the limitations of the ab-psych approach, see Stuart Appelle's >"The Abduction Experience: A Critical Evaluation of Theory and >Evidence," JUFOS 6 (1995/1996), pp. 29-78, or David J. >Hufford's The Terror That Comes in the Night (University of >Pennsylvania Press, 1982). As noted by others, my friend, in other threads, Appelle very ably and impartially summarizes the pros and cons of virtually all approaches to interpreting abduction accounts (more than experiences). All, he makes clear, have their limitations. He says that and I agree. Gosh: collapse of stout party. He doesn't single out abnormal psychology as particularly lacking any more than I pretend it solves all-your-abductees'-problems. To deal with Appelle's own limitations - such as not addressing what may or may not constitute an "abduction experience" per se - would take a book, and I don't have the time to spare to tackle that for less than a decent advance on royalties. But Appelle's piece is certainly worth reading (intelligent enough to disagree with, as Dr Leavis used to say), not least because the standard abductionist account begins to look a good deal more shaky than those damned fakirs Hopkins, Jacobs and Mack (and a few others less notorious) would have you believe. Nonetheless, the paper has its biases and quirks. To that extent, it partakes of the human world. It is an infuriating historical fact that David Hufford's book has long been unobtainable through the trade in the UK (if indeed it ever was), and I haven't read it. I have read a related article by Hufford that you, Jerry, once kindly sent me, and very interesting it was too. All I can say for now is that "abnormal" and much more to the point *cognitive* psychology has come *rather a long way* in the last 15 years toward getting a handle on these experiences. From reading the late lamented "Bulletin of Anomalous Experience" I don't get the impression Hufford has kept up with this - but I stand gladly ready to be corrected on that. >Declaring "abnormal psychology" every time we hear something >we don't like is the functional equivalent of shouting "shut >up." Emotionally satisfying, no doubt, but not intellectually >productive. Y'know, Jerome, my friend, for an intelligent man, and one with impeccable taste in music, you doooo saaay some quite phenomenally stupid things every now and then. And, in its way, this one's obnoxious to boot. Now I could indulge in a little idle speculation of my own here. I might, for example, my friend, wonder aloud if this does not embody its own straw point of view: perhaps, I might mischievously muse, mmm, perhaps it gives vent to emotions struggling to lurk beneath a false and rather ill-attached wig of rational criticism, and is itself trying to shout "shut up". But, dear me, I wouldn't be so rude. Instead I'll politely enquire how the f--- you, my friend, dare to presume to know what I "no doubt" find emotionally satisfying. But I'll give you a little clue. Putting the mockers on ufology isn't a patch on troilism in a barrel full of oily herrings, on a drizzly Thursday afternoon. Better for the ventricles, too, according to my mum, who does the sandwiches and champagne, now that she's over 80. She doesn't believe in gun control, either. 2: FOLK SINGER, HUM DINGER Okay, I know you're all dying to hear this bit. Quick reprise, from the top, twoooo, three: Jerome writes: >Does anybody, including yourself, know the meaning of the >phrase "the folklore that calls itself "abduction research"? Apparently someone does: >From: DevereuxP@aol.com >Date: Sun, 5 Oct 1997 20:17:49 -0400 (EDT) >To: updates@globalserve.net >Subject: Solved abduction cases? >...The Duke was clearly >referring to how abduction research, especially in North >America, has attracted its own themes, sub-themes, beliefs >(many simply assumed), protagonists, etc. All the stuff of >folklore. To be sure, Paul can translate (interpret) my shorthand better than most because the poor bugger has had to listen to so much of the longhand, often at an hour when he would rather be pleasuring the wife than keep up with my drinking. And perhaps for that reason he's also using shorthand of a kind. Jerome he say: >Labeling "abduction research," whatever else can be said >against or for it, "folklore" is to mischaracterize the nature >of both, or to find meanings for these words not immediately >apparent to the rest of us. What does the shorthand phrase "the folklore that calls itself 'abduction research'" mean, then, in terms immediately apparent to the rest of us? It means that the folklore about abductions is inextricably intertwined with what passes for abduction research as practised by the most visible proponents of the view that abductions are physically real events. In practice, out there in the real world, this means that quasi-information, factoids, rumor, innuendo, shenanigans, facts, foaftales, channeled material, the entire corpus of work on abductions printed, broadcast, drunkenly blurted in taverns and cathouses and whispered at Tupperware parties and induction parades, solemnly propounded at UFO conferences, mocked by the military, recycled by the X-files and the like, is floating around like a gigantic nebulous tumbleweed festooned with fantastic juicy fruits that are being multiplied and being fed from every minute of the day. That is what folklore is. It is like depersonalized, unfaced, dramatized gossip. It has a life and logic of its own, although they are not inaccessible to intelligent enquiry and a bit of lateral thinking, and it doesn't pause in Canby, MN, to ask for Jerome K. Jerome Clark's approval. It is what it is. And it doesn't care. Folklore is here and now and living in Bombay and Manhattan and Scunthorpe. It isn't just old tales that nobody tells any more (and ergo has retired from the folklore circuit). No one in "the West" can escape this particular folkloric "theme" any more. It's been growing at cancerous rates since 1987, when "Communion" was published, but it was around long before then. The other day in Aberteifi I bought a tobacco tin with a Gray's face painted on the lid. A few weeks before that the 14-year-old daughter of one of my business partners solemnly told me over dinner how she'd been abducted, blow for blow the whole standard story, and nearly tipped her gravad lax on the carpet with giggling at the end. A wind-up, of course (plus she thinks I'm funny anyway. Someone has to). This is anecdotal, of course. Now go do some proper Roper omnibus research and see, after the X-Files and all, how widespread this knowledge is. (Why doesn't FUFOR do this kind of thing? I wonder.) What this in turn means is that someone who has a strange experience, perhaps the product of an altered state of consciousness, will *tend* to try to make sense of this - "order the flux of experience" - by comparing it with the template of the abduction foklore. Because that is the nearest handle they have on it. And they start to wonder... Those that get to an "abduction researcher" then encounter a mage, guru, priest or (in some cases) shaman-like individual who has his or her own special handle on the folklore, having been privy to the refined form of it that passes around among "researchers", aka the invisible theological college (see Jim Schnabel's "Dark White" for some instances of how one "rsearcher" will seed another with motifs). There then occurs an "interaction" between subject and "researcher", which modifies both their perceptions of the "scenario", i.e. the folklore. That - or those - then go out onto the grapevine (tumbleweed), and start their own stems, branches and tendrils of stories, half-stories, fragments of scenes, etc. This process is transparently at work in Lawrie Williams's "case" of 4 Oct 97. How much of the abduction "data" has been acquired with this kind of corrupt and corrupting technique? How will we ever know? That is what I mean by "abduction research" being folklore. It isn't folklore all of the time and not all abduction research is folklore. But the one partakes of the other, symbiotically. You don't agree? Look, I'm not trying to persuade you this is true, in this session. I'm just explaining the line of thinking here. None of it requires any overhaul of the commonly accepted senses of either "abduction research" or folklore, either. In replying to Paul (on Mon, 06 Oct 1997, in the "Solved Abduction cases?" thread), Jerome also wrote: >...you rephrase the >argument -- you'd have to, for the sake of coherence -- to >recycle the usual jumble of claims, long effectively refuted >by the one academically trained folklorist participating in >the discussion, Eddie Bullard... Given the density of my shorthand, anyone would have to rephrase it who could translate it. And a point of information, Mr President: whatever is meant by "the usual jumble of claims" (nice shorthand, Jerry), Dr Bullard isn't the "one academically trained folklorist participating in the discussion". You're reading something by another one right here (University of York, UK, 1969-75). Besides Dr Bullard, there is Prof Peter Rojcewicz, while given their erudition Bill Ellis might be counted an honorary ufologist while Hilary Evans and Peter Rogerson could be considered honorary folklorists. That there are so few "in" ufology is a pity, because others in ufology thus have little acquaintance with their discipline and criteria whereby to judge their abilities and wherewithal *as* folklorists. (The same goes for physicists, and probably photo analysts.) But there are plenty of folklorists, just as there are theologians, sociologists and anthropologists, who take an interest in ufology without entering the field as such (in the UK, Dr Jennifer Westwood, for instance, or Prof Steve Sayers), so you don't hear of them. (If you think I am hinting that ufologists as a class don't know much outside ufology, you'd be right.) It may also be of interest to those of you not up in the academic folklore literature to know that Doc Bullard tends to wobble into an inexplicable condition of skepticism when publishing there, and then to undergo strange spasms of credulity when publishing in the ufological journals. Perhaps he undergoes an altered state of consciousness in between. I shall have to ask my mum. Actually, cross my heart and hope to die, when it comes to folklore, I don't go for academically trained anything, really. Anyone intelligent can read up the literature in the course of a few years and understand the system and the jargon and learn to identify the fools and charlatans. True, it does help to have friends in the trade to swap ideas with. But I would as happily trust Jerome's knowledge, understanding and interpretation of traditional American music as any of the big cheeses in the field (whoever they are these days) - though he may be a bit weak when it comes to Phrygian versus Dorian modes, or bemused by pentatonics. There again, maybe he wouldn't. And so much the better for him. This *is* slightly more than a loose excuse to say I think Ed Bullard is wrong in almost everything he's said about the relationship between folklore and ufolore. In his reply to Paul, Jerome (both cited above) also said: >A few abduction cases strike me as impressive >and truly puzzling, and more plausibly (albeit tentatively and >undogmatically) interpreted as interactions with nonhuman >intelligences than as hallucinations generated by immersion in >obscure folklore texts. The key phrase in this context is "hallucinations generated by immersion in obscure folklore texts". I should like to know where *anyone* has *ever* claimed that an abduction experience is that, or where it's ever been claimed that an obscure folklore text could generate an hallucination. If it can, so can Mrs Beeton's cookbook or a copy of the Beano. Boiled up with eye of newt, wart of toad, etc, presumably. Someone seems to be mad here. Can it be Jerome? Folklore that hasn't retired is not texts anyway. It's bar, pillow, lunchbreak, CB and chatshow talk among many other things. It steals things from popular culture and gives things back in return. It certainly isn't just about gnomes and people who turn into geese when they die. Jerome seems not to understand this very basic point: that there is something called "folklore" flourishing today, and ufolore is no more immune to its influence than I am to Tyra Banks's perfume. Possibly Jerome's very strange idea arises as a result of not quite being able to follow what Jacques Vallee was on about once. (Join the club! Can *anyone* figure out what ufology's answer to Frederico Fellini was really trying to tell us?) Unfortunately, to pull this peculiar idea apart takes PAGES. It's also treating "folklore" in a special sense, not the one I intended in my original shorthand. I've addressed the relationship between traditional (i.e. dead) folklore and abduction lore in my book on abductions due out in spring '98, and I'm preparing a version of the argument for John Velez's AIC website. There is quite a lot on abductions as *myth* in Paul Devereux's and my "UFOs and Ufology" (pub UK November, US ?Feb), which is also quite illuminating. Mmm, I suppose I would say that, though, wouldn't I. But until they appear, I'm afraid, and beyond what I've already offered here, you're going to have to take it on trust that your average informed folklorist does not think that "abductions" are the simple cause-and-effect result of reading fairy stories or singing "Thomas the Rhymer" upstairs at the Ewe and Welly on a Friday night. You don't need to know any traditional folklore for your "abduction" to connect directly with folkloric themes. Nor can I explain why Jerome thinks it is (or seems to) - assuming he is saying what he means here, of course. ---------------------- 3: WHERE ALL THIS STARTED Back at the end of August, Rob Bull enquired: >From: "R.Bull" <RAB@cadcentre.co.uk> [Rob Bull] >To: "'UFO UpDates'" <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Questions for abductees >Date: Mon, 29 Sep 97 15:41:00 BST >I'm not sure I accept the literal reality of abduction >accounts, but are there 'standard questions' I should >be asking this lady to determine if her experience is >consistent with a classic abduction report? That attracted a lot of squawking from various quarters as well as some quite useful advice. What follows expands on something I wrote to Rob privately. By asking questions "appropriate to an abductee" - whatever those enquiries may be - you presume you have an "experiencer" in the first place and, furthermore, of an "abduction". If all you've got to start with are a bedroom apparition and some wounds, it's not impossible that those are all you may end up with. Neither necessarily implies an "abduction", which is to say, both have plenty of alternative, relatively prosaic explanations, and the two clues may not be related to one another. "When it rains, the pavement gets wet; but it does not follow that because the pavement is wet, it has been raining." The dread trinity of Hopkins, Jacobs & Mack are just the most visible practitioners the worst kinds of interrogation technique. Mack (as only he can) manages to make a virtue of this and calls his horrible stew of hyping witnesses, leading questions and New-Age irrationality a "co-creative" process. Edith Fiore was almost as bad. The interesting thing about her results is that they've been sidelined by the mainstream, I suspect because they don't fit the received mould. Which raises interesting questions for discussion elsewhere as to why one set of data should be more or less acceptable to the vulgar mind than another set despite their equivalence on a scale of weirdness and implausibility. Rank amateurism - just not knowing *how* to ask questions - helped generate some early classics. Leo Sprinkle's "pendulum" technique with Herb Schirmer was patently suggestive, and the buffs *never* cite the extremely negative conclusions of the psychological profiling that Condon's shrinks ran on Schirmer. Kevin Randle, who helped James Harder investigate Patty "Price" Roach in the early 70s, has now concluded that the "case" was the product of Harder's leading questions and priming the witness. Jerome Clark, Leo Sprinkle & Allen Hynek's investigation of Sandy Larson was a farce in terms of suggestive set, setting and technique: at one point all three of them were firing ill-considered (read: leading) questions at Larson; even before she had finished answering one, another would jump in, often with something unrelated. Sprinkle "taught" Clark hypnotic technique in an afternoon, and then left him to it. In the UK, Tony Dodd takes any old tall story at face value and refuses to reveal who his hypnotists are (it apparently never having occurred to him that the method has such risks that the precautionary principle should rule it out), but then he thinks that fieldmice have their eyes pecked out by aliens and not magpies and hawks. Perhaps aliens are closely related to the Bedouin & regard animal eyes as a delicacy. Now there's a double factoid to play with. It strikes me that Bullard's conclusion that (in Jerome's words) "investigators seem, by any measurable standard, not to affect the content of abduction narratives much. In other words, ...it's pretty hard to lead abductees" is meaningless unless one can establish what those "abductees" knew before they approached the investigator, *why* they sought those particular investigators out, and what interrogative techniques were used *in every case*. The Transcription Project now under way may throw some light on these matters (though I note that with his usual comprehension of the spirit of science Budd Hopkins has not released his files to the Project: enquiring minds enquire why not, and observe that any scientist who did such a thing with his/her data would soon find him/herself lucky to be employed as a crossing sweeper). The reason I suggested starting with "abnormal psychology" was to use that as the stepping-off point for a process of elimination, not because it necessarily contains the solution to every case. It's conceivable that you could end up with no other alternative than that an actual abduction did take place, but I suspect you would need to eliminate a huge list of alternatives before you landed up on that far distant shore. As to what questions actually to ask... I'd be inclined to take advice from a barrister, from a shrink, from a doctor, from someone trained in *medical* hypnosis, maybe even a police detective - to mention but a few kinds of expert in various kinds (and intentions) of questioning. Having dumped hypnosis as an acceptable investigative tool, BUFORA could spend its time, funds and energy in a lot worse ways than doing just that (and much more) - creating a truly objective investigative technique that any intelligent investigator - and the investigators had *better* be intelligent - could use after some rigorous basic training, and that didn't regard "proving" that an abduction had occurred as its be-all and end-all. However, if BUFORA's going to do that, it also needs a nationwide back-up team of counsellors, quacks, shrinks and the like to deal with the fall-out, and all of those people would need to be adequately briefed. Those "experts" should also be briefing the ufologists in return. When they discover there's a world outside ufology the brave ones may want to find themselves another title. One draws a curtain of modesty over American organizations' and individuals' approach to all this. Yours &c Plywood D. Mahogany Fascia Lifter Search for other documents from or mentioning: 101653.2205 | clark |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 17 Re: Solved abduction cases? From: DevereuxP@aol.com [Paul Devereux] Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 02:15:28 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 21:29:17 -0400 Subject: Re: Solved abduction cases? Dear Jerry, In response to my mild concerns about your 1 October attack on the Duke of Mendoza, you wrote on Monday 6 October: >From: clark@canby.mn.frontiercomm.net [Jerome Clark] >Date: Mon, 06 Oct 1997 10:38:50 PDT >To: updates@globalserve.net >Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Solved abduction cases? >Paul, >You're in your mind-reading mode, I'm afraid, my friend. You >don't know me well, so -- in defense of a not particularly >persuasive argument -- you feel free to attribute personality >and motivation to me. The phrase "the folklore that calls itself >'abduction research'" still makes no sense, and I am surprised >that you would try to defend it. In doing so, you rephrase the >argument -- you'd have to, for the sake of coherence -- to recycle >the usual jumble of claims, long effectively refuted by the one >academically trained folklorist participating in the discussion, >Eddie Bullard; see, for but one of many examples,his "Folkloric >Dimensions of the UFO Phenomenon," JUFOS 3(1991). I also see >the inevitable North America bashing, a >particular obsession of yours. Correct me if I'm wrong, but >don't you actually live here at least part of the time? <snip> >Though I think you are wrong about the UFO phenomenon >(though more interestingly so than most, except in the above- >expressed; I trust that the full treatment in your and Peter's >forthcoming book is more substantive), I respect the intellectual >processes that led you to the conclusions you espouse. Anybody >who knows me would find immensely hilarious the suggestion that >I hold views out of some craven need to conform with fashion. > I would appreciate your extending the courtesy to me of respecting >my own thinking even when you disagree with it. >My views (which you don't understand in any case) of the >abduction phenomenon are complex and evolving. I have grave >reservations about the excesses of both camps; see, for >one example, my piece on John Mack (IUR, March/April 1994). >Those who are interested in understanding why I have come to >the particular conclusions I have about the UFO phenomenon are >invited to read my UFO Encyclopedia, where the reasons, right >or wrong, are laid out in full and, if you disagree, you will not >be forced to bring my personality into the discussion. >I find the debunking literature (which is what we're discussing >here) mostly shallow and vacuous; it would never pass muster >in other areas of scholarly discourse, and it does not deserve to >be taken seriously until its standards improve. (Please don't >now insist that I'm therefore arguing that abductions are true >unless proven otherwise. Give me a break.) I see more evidence >here of traditions of disbelief (as David Hufford would call >them) than of traditions of scholarship. But one is allowed >free rein when the target is something presumed to be both absurd >and contemptible,such as the UFO experience. For a revealing >survey of the logical and evidential inadequacies of alternative >explanations to abduction phenomena, see Stuart Appelle's "The >Abduction Experience: A Critical Evaluation of Theory and Evidence," >JUFOS6 (1995/1996). >It seems to me that we needn't be frantic for conclusive answers >when such manifestly are unavailable. I simply don't understand >your need to bash all to whom Ultimate Truth is not so apparent >as it is to you. A few abduction cases strike me as impressive >and truly puzzling, and more plausibly (albeit tentatively and >undogmatically) interpreted as interactions with nonhuman >intelligences than as hallucinations generated by immersion in >obscure folklore texts. Most abduction stories are not evidential,for >all sorts of reasons, and I see no reason to believe that abductions >are happening to untold millions. But there is a phenomenon >here in search of an explanation. I feel perfectly comfortable >as an agnostic here. Anybody who seeks to persuade me that he >or she has that explanation would do well to use good arguments, >which I always am happy to hear. No effort >to bully -- or caricature -- me, or any of the rest of us who >remain open-minded about this most difficult and contentious >of subjects,into submission is going to do the job. >And finally, as to the Dylan quote/paraphrase at the end of >your posting: it seems to me, my friend, that you, too, ought >to take heed. >Jerry Clark Well, Jerry, I'm positively amazed that my gentle and brief comments should provoke such a screed from you! Forgive me for thinking that you are being a little over-defensive. But, well, if that's the way you want it .... I'll excerpt a few quotes from your stern stuff in order to try to clarify my corner. JC: "You're in your mind-reading mode, I'm afraid, my friend. You don't know me well, so...." PD: I don't need to be a mind-reader, just a reader, to see you getting narky. And I know you well enough to have seen you in one of your little paddies, so I know enough as far as this particular matter is concerned. JC: ".....the usual jumble of claims, long effectively refuted by the one academically trained folklorist participating in the discussion, Eddie Bullard...." PD: It's getting very "old", Jerry, the way you always wheel old Eddie out. Eddie's OK, but he isn't God, and he hasn't refuted anything worth mentioning.(Indeed, do please see the full boxing match in our forthcoming book.)In any case you are wrong, plain and simple. Bullard is NOT the only academically trained folklorist in this discussion. I won't embarrass the innocent party with "outing" him in this regard, unless he chooses to do so himself. Also, one of the key British earth lights researchers has a Ph.D in folklore. Further, I'm no folklore virgin myself - I'm a fully paid-up member of the British Folklore Society these past many years. You aren't dealing with rookies, my lad. I'll stick to what I said. We aren't talking Hansel and Gretel here, y'know. Folklore is a dynamic that is always being generated. The whole of ufology can genuinely be considered as folklore, and that goes double for the abduction scene.You seem to think the good Duke and I are somehow saying the UFO experience in general, and the UFO abduction experience in particular, is untrue, absurd, etc etc. This is not the case. I'll speak for myself: what I am saying is that the response to and treatment of such experiences is folklore. It's not the experients, its the goddam investigators and the milieu they operate in, Jerry. You've got what we are saying ass backwards. I DO think there is hoax, lying and crass self-delusion in ufology and abduction accounts, but I think there are also people who have experienced something unusual that demands explanation. My concern is that experients are all too often TOLD what it is they have experienced, and/or that the folkloric milieu they are introduced to will inculcate that explanation in them. JC: "I also see the inevitable North America bashing, a particular obsession of yours. Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't you actually live here at least part of the time?" PD: You aren't thinking clearly, Jerry. I am not North America bashing at all. (And how dare you lump Canada in with the USA? The fact that Chris RutKowski lives in Canada shouldn't malign a whole nation.) I love the USA, and I think it has many strong points, its people are generous, I love the energy the US has, I truly do love NYC, I have many dear US friends, and much, much else. No, I am not bashing the United States, I am being highly critical of the dominant, ET-literalist paradigm that infects nearly all of US ufology. Those two things are not the same. However, there is a literlaist tendency in US society as a whole, and that finds its microcosm in US ufology - a ufology that has been exported so that it is virtually international at the popular level. And yes, indeed, I spend at least half my time here in the States - we have a home on both sides of the Atlantic. You make my point for me. THAT IS PRECISELY WHY I AM IN A UNIQUE POSITION TO OFFER MY CRITICISMS. It is a fact, plain and simple yet again, that in British ufology, and I'm sure in the ufology of many other West European countries, the literalist view is balanced more effectively by alternative approaches than it is in the US. It is a healthier research climate in British ufology, notwithstanding that at the tabloid pop end of the business (and business it is) it is still literalism based on imported Americana. You simply cannot take the cultural influence out of this thing, Jerry. I stick absolutely to my claim that you have been affected by the cultural milieu in which you live, move, think and have your being. You can't see it, because you are in it. I can see it. You may play fancier footwork than most, but you are still in the ET-literalist ballpark of US ufology. Let me mix metaphors: the dominance of the ET-literalist paradigm within 'mainstream' ufology turns it into a conceptual ghetto. Mixing on, I'd say that the ET-literalist approach is a sort of rest home for the intellectually lazy. You may be the librarian at the rest home, Jerry, and look out of the windows more often than most, but you are still an inmate. Mainstream ufology as we know it is rooted in 1940s and 1950s Americana. It is American folklore. And you are coloured by it, and would find it exceptionally difficult to break free from it -- even though it is long past its shelf life. Ufology needs reinventing because there is, indeed, something to be understood within it, at the level of some experiences had by some people. If we are to understand it, we will have to break out of the ghetto, the ballpark, the rest home, the tatty conceptual museum of Americana. The fact that you and others get so defensive on the handful of occasions anyone suggests another approach, tells me that you haven't escaped yet. Nor have many ufologists on your side of the Atlantic (there are notable exceptions). You demand evidence for this or that. I just demand that you think a bit harder. The ET-literalist approach is treated as if it were somehow a proven fact. It is not. Yet when Dennis Stacy published my "Meeting with the Alien" in the MUFON journal, I understand he was told that he shouldn't be publishing such material. Shouldn't! There you have it. Alternative views cannot even be discussed rationally in US ufology. Anyone who promotes them is to be treated like a dolt, an imbecile, a criminal, a con-man,or whatever. Should be attacked or ignored. If I may invoke a bit more of Dylan - for pity's sake, will you please lay down your weary tune, if just for a while. See what else you might think off if you were not always leaning on your ET-literalist crutch. (I direct that at ETH US ufolologists in general.) JC: "...see, for one example, my piece on John Mack (IUR, March/April 1994)." PD: Well of course I read it, Jerry. That's why I perceive you becoming "softer" now. I do agree with you, however, in being cautious about both extremes. I have also had my differences with the over-zealous "new ufologists". You cannot treat all of us a monolithic whole. The extreme at the *other* end, however, the ET-literalist end, now reaches to the centre - nay, the core - of American ufology. That is the point of my criticism. JC: "...read my UFO Encyclopedia..." PD: Well of course I read it, Jerry.(Reprise.) May I ask you to read outside the UFO literature much more than you do? JC: "...hallucinations generated by immersion in obscure folklore texts." PD: No one I know has ever claimed that. You are missing a cognitive link here. The altered mind states involved (see below or appended file) are not generated by folkore, obscure or otherwise. But if you are trying to say that the course and content of dissociated states are not affected by set and setting, you need to see a psychiatrist (to confirm that your view is incorrect, I mean...) As to this little "obscure texts" chestnut you roll out frequently: the sources people like Hilary Evans and others point to are not all *that* obscure, but in any case even if a text is obscure, it only takes one person to make it less so. You never know where you pick up information. But I don't consider mass-media sources, even if old, all that obscure, to be honest. JC: "...I feel perfectly comfortable as an agnostic here...No effort to bully -- or caricature -- me, or any of the rest of us who remain open-minded about this most difficult and contentious of subjects,into submission is going to do the job." PD: Oh come on now, Jerry! That's your "reasonable face" you like to think you wear all the time. Your knee-jerk reaction to Mendoza, and your notable - shall we say - reticence regarding other views outside the ET-literalist paradigm, give the lie to your self-delusion. I'm not trying to bully anyone - just trying to get heard. And then listened to. That's the difficult bit. You didn't even refer to my statement that we are researching lucid dreaming, for instance. Did you think it didn't matter? Because I really do care what the UFO abduction thing is about, I'll add the following outline of what we are doing. ----------------------- THE ONTOLOGICAL STATUS OF "ALIEN ABDUCTION" REPORTS. I am involved with professional colleagues in studying the induction, brain-mapping and phenomenology of the "lucid dream" state. We are even funded (albeit modestly). Lucid dreaming is not some wishy-washy New Age nonsense, but an altered mental state (ANS), not at all like dreaming, that is signal-verifiable on dream laboratory polygraphs. The brain is awake and conscious when the body is physiologically asleep. To the experient, the state is indistinguishable from waking reality, except for possible bizarre content. The experient experiences full 3-D spatial reality; all senses can seemingly operate: ie. there is sight, hearing, touch, olfaction and taste. There is an image of the experient's body (just as we carry an image around with us in waking life). The ANS can occur spontaneously in a nap, at the onset of or awakening from sleep, from within the normal dreaming state, *and from the waking state*, especially while driving, even walking, and under stress and other circumstances. It can also be deliberately induced. It is not pathological. There are various contiguous states of AMS lumped together under the umbrella heading of "lucid dreaming" (a term first used in English in 1913). As part of this research, we are doing a deep and wide literature search. This spans not only lucid dream material, but ranges though various other categories, contemporary and historical, even including certain archaeological and ethnological material. It is clear without any shade of doubt that THE UFO ABDUCTION REPORT MATERIAL IS ONLY A SUB-GROUP OF A MUCH WIDER LITERATURE. Doubtless, the abduction experience is likewise only one form of a particular set of dissociated AMSs. This even goes down to factors such as body scars: I have seen anthropological photographs of tribal trance experients who have markings said to have been inflicted by spirits while the person was in trance. I have seen reports of whole batches of Linda Cortile-like floatings out of windows, but not under the heading of "UFO abductions". The various categories use differing terminology and conceptual images to frame the experiences.The experiences are essentially the same. ****For reasons currently unknown, all groups can meet entities that seem autonomous and so "real" that it is difficult to believe that they can be products of the mind. I myself have been within 20 feet of a non-human being (or "being") - full 3-D, full colour, astounding detail, totally solid and realistic - with all my conscious reasoning and senses intact. Some others have had tactile contact, including "scaley skins". We hope to be able to arrive at swift and effective induction methods that will allow investigators to experience this AMS. There are technical problems with mapping the effects within the brain while the subject is within this AMS, but we are hoping to overcome this with new approaches. It is hoped that we may be able to use a portable device. If this work proves successful, we would at last have a means of monitoring people subject to repeated "abduction" experiences. We might also be able to start to unravel the damage done by those who throw an ET-literalist strait-jacket over the experience. This work will take years, and is not being done as UFO abduction research, because that is actually quite a small sub-category of the phenomenon as a whole. I would like to publish a book preparing people for this area, but so far US publishers have declined, apparently fearing that it might adversely affect their literalist UFO titles (ie. it might interfere with the prevailing folklore, which is proving commercially gratifying.) But I will eventually get some introductory material out on all this. ----------------- Finaly Jerry, I do think you are high class as ufologists go, and I do like and respect you. But please get off your high horse. I am as keen as anyone to understand what is going on. I leave you with this observation... A few years ago Mark Rodiguer (sorry if I haven't spelled that correctly - it is late, I am tired, and I don't have a reference to hand) - gave a talk on the UFO abduction experience to the Society for Scientific Exploration in Santa Fe. It was an excellent talk, and, indeed, Mark is an excellent fellow. A fine researcher. However, nowhere in his presentation did he make an issue of the fact, if he mentioned it at all, that many if not most reported UFO abductions begin in the bedroom or when someone is in a quiescent condition, or when they have been driving at night. I had to bring it up as a question, and then he readily agreed and made the point to the audience. It wasn't that he was being biased or underhand. It was just that this incredibly significant fact about UFO abductions simply slipped past the cognitive threshold. It did not register as one of the most important things you could say about the experience. I claim that is a result of cultural conditioning. The milieu in which you all work. If you want to really be open minded, Jerry, I suggest you start with this fact about UFO abductions, without prejudice, and see where it takes you. Work on it, and come back and tell me in six months that it isn't one of the key facts about the matter. Best wishes, Paul
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 17 Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl> Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 08:21:21 +0200 (MET DST) Fwd Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 21:31:08 -0400 Subject: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills >Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 20:03:22 -0500 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Michael Christol <mchristo@mindspring.com> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills >>Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 14:12:18 -0400 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >>From: Bob Shell <76750.2717@compuserve.com> >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills >>>Oh, btw, did you pick up the message I posted in Sept. about the >>>earliest known Crash? July...., 1941...South Pacific? If you >>>know this place and time, I need not be any more specific... >>No, I must have missed that one. I was not getting UFO Updates >>for a while due to some sort of glitch, and I am guessing that >>you posted this during that time. Mind bringing me up to speed >>on this? >If you remember I had previously said that I had received word >that the first known crash of a UFO occurred in 1942, and ask >if anyone knew anything about it. You said that was a little >vague and asked for more info. I told you I had to talk to >my contact person. >I did so. I was informed that it did not occur in 1942, but >in July, 1941, near a well known island in the South Pacific. >I don't wish to tell all of the details. I want to see if >someone else knows what I am talking about. >Just think little boy and fat man....<G> I have never heard of this alleged crash, but if Little Boy and Fat Man are leads I take it you mean the well known island of Bikini, where one the first nuclear explosions occurred. If my memory is correct, this was also the first hydrogen bomb. __________________________________________ / Met vriendelijke groet/Best wishes \ Henny van der Pluijm hvdp@worldonline.nl Technology Pages http://www.worldonline.nl/~hvdp \______________________________________/
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 17 Re: Solved abduction cases? From: DevereuxP@aol.com [Paul Devereux] Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 05:26:52 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 21:54:36 -0400 Subject: Re: Solved abduction cases? Dear Chris, You wrote: >From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@cc.UManitoba.CA> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Solved abduction cases? >To: updates@globalserve.net (UFO UpDates - Toronto) >Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 09:23:42 -0500 (CDT) CR: "...that Rutowski guy who you keep referring to..." PD: Indeed. I must first and foremost apologize for habitually leaving out the first 'k' in your surname. A curious blindness. In order to eradicate the problem, I was told I should link the correct version of your surname with a distinctive mental image. I was nonplussed at first, but then came up with one. Now, every time I have to deal with your surname, I see a cow wearing skis, stuck in a rut... Seriously, though,as man whose surname ends in an 'x' that sounds like an 'o' (or, really, an 'eu'), I know how irritating it can be to have your name mispelled. Sorry. Onto the less important matters in your posting: CR: "Obviously, Paul, you've been smoking, but not inhaling. Much of what is being said by serious North American researchers has nothing to do with the ETH." PD: You must be joking. You really shouldn't inhale. Scratch even the most serious, and it is in there. A handful only do not subscribe in one form or another, more or less openly. CR: "...Gee, you mean just like Earth Lights?.." PD: We are not talking about earth lights here. Different issues are being dealt with. It is typical of you to jumble things up. CR: "...I know you think I'm a closet ETH believer. Of course, anyone who knows me and has actually read my work knows this is not the case..." PD: I'll take your word for it. It is possible that I just see the worst side of you as I am a proponent of earth lights and you have a very noisy bee in your bonnet about them. I assume, therefore, your papers critiquing the ETH are as voluminous as those attacking the TST and earth lights in general. I just haven't seen those, so it gives me a biased view of you. But I must stress that I have never thought you to be other than serious and honest, only misguided in certain respects, and I wouldn't (and wasn't) accuse you of being a gauche ETHer. CR: "In the context of my post, I was comparing abduction cases to "ordinary" UFO reports. Since I note that a small percentage of UFO reports do not have simple explanations, my suggestion is that a small percentage of abduction cases do not have simple explanations. In neither case does the small percentage of cases automatically mean that aliens are implicated." PD: Now you have said what you mean, it is a little clearer. Though I still think it is dangerous to assume the matters are equivalent. And I still don't understand what the factual basis is of your assumption. For further information on my views re UFO abductions, please see my response to Jerry Clark. Best wishes, Paul
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 17 Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculouso From: Mike Smith <mickey@anix.co.uk> Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 13:02:13 +0100 Fwd Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 22:03:41 -0400 Subject: Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculouso Hi all, Loy Pressley wrote: > Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 13:22:49 -0700 > From: Loy Pressley <lpressle@webwide.net> > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculouso [Snip] Just some general points about my post and interstellar travel. Given our present level of technology and the political will, it is possible for us to build craft cabable of between 10 and 25% SPEOL. We also have an understanding of other newer technologies that may in the future provide even faster speeds. All of this is well documented and understood. I was merely tring to point out that, 'Can aliens travel from there to here ?' is a stupid question to ask. If it is possible for us to do this at our present technological level, without resort to warp drive or anti-gravity, then another more technologically advanced society could get here no problem. > > We as society are already technologically > > cabable of building interstellar craft. And in fact have already > > done so, both of the voyager probes and the one that came before > > them(can't remember the name) (??? Pioneer ???)are going > > interstellar within our lifetimes. > Yep, in seventy five thousand years or something they will reach the > vicinity of the nearest star. That was not the point. The point is, without really trying to we've already sent objects interstellar. The fact that if they arrive at another star system they'll be dead and so will we is irrelevant, sending the objects is not difficult. > I'll wager that what we say we can do and what we finally > determine to be possible to do are entirely different things. > And we aren't even proceeding in the directions it takes to make > it possible for us to develop drives powerful enough to make any > semblance of practical interstellar travel possible. We are so > terrified of anything nuclear that we can't even launch a very > slow probe to Saturn without worldwide protests. NASA is at present studying exotic propulsion methods for deep space travel. Plus the methods suggested by Project Daedalus were hardly exotic, more brute force and ignorance. Just like todays chemical based rockets. Designs for Nuclear rockets have already been tested and modelled, ask Stanton. > > As to speed, well yes at present such missions would be slow. > So slow as to make it impractical, I'll wager. Not really. Cassini, that has just launched, is a long term mission as were the voyager probes and pioneer. Deadulus was envisiaged to take between 26 and 43 years to arrive at the nearest star. Depending on which set of speed estimates you take (either 10 - 25% SPEOL plus accelaration/decelaration) Automated long term missions are not a problem. Scientists would have all sorts of things to study, even in deep space. The stellar Bow-wave, The Oort cloud and Deep space itself to name but a few. Okay, now we get to quantum physics. > > The speed of light in a vacuum is seen to be a universal speed > > limit. There are certain quantum events to which this limitation > > does not apply. > I don't understand...which quantum events? I thought all these > 'events' were thought to aberrations of observation. > > The Quantum Tunneling effect is one of these. This > > is okay, its accepted. > Please explain. Here goes. [Simply, I Hope] A quantum particle reaching a barrier, through which it cannot pass. [Here's the tricky bit: calculations, equations, observations. Just have to take my word for it, me and the other ranks of trained monkeys] Has a finite chance of appearing on the other side. This appearing on the other side takes place without passing through the intervening media, or at least by passing through it very 'quickly'. It appears that particles on a quantum level can use this tunneling effect to exceed c. It was previously held that no coherent information could be passed via this method of travel as this would effect causality, and also that such effects could not occur on a macroscopic level. However, it now appears that this is not the case. As was stated in my previous post some physicists believe that they have transmitted Mozart at 3.7 c, using microwaves. They have not as yet 100% ruled out experimental error, but are working on doing so. As you can hopefully understand, this is quite a science-shattering event and is therefore subjected to even more scepticism than possibly even ufology. It does have UFO releated implications though. As it seems to suggest, scientifically, that the good old universal speed limit that we've all come to know and love, is not in fact an absolute limit. [Snip] Regards to List and Loy, Mike People looking QM for references via the web may like to try some of the following: Search altavista/yahoo for the quantum tunneling effect or could just try typing QM etc. http://av.yahoo.com/bin/query?p=quantum+tunneling+effect&hc=0&hs=0 A Good and simple explanation of the effect and it's possible implications for macro-physhics http://www.sccs.swarthmore.edu/~ndaniel1/qm_paper.html Atomic Tunneling (Macro Quantum Tunneling) http://www.lassp.cornell.edu/~ardlouis/dissipative/atomtunnel_research.html A Nice graphical example of wave functions and barriers http://www.sccs.swarthmore.edu/~ndaniel1/qm_paper.html A Humourous Brady based Explanation http://www.sfo.com/~costanos/QuantumBrady/marshat.htm Hope these help, don't have a web reference for the Mozart stuff. Got that from various publications/journals. But it's probably held somewhere electronically, if you're interested look around.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 17 Re: Alien Autopsy Film From: Bob Shell <76750.2717@compuserve.com> Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 08:24:20 -0400 Fwd Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 22:44:29 -0400 Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy Film >Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 03:47:23 -0500 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Michael Wayne Malone <MWayne@bigfoot.com> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Alien Autopsy Film >>Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 17:10:12 -0400 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >>From: Bob Shell <76750.2717@compuserve.com> >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Alien Autopsy File >>Meanwhile, I have arranged for the still images which I have >>from the first autopsy to be published in the CD ROM edition >>of Beyond Roswell which will come out in January. This should >>allow better comparisons from images of higher quality. >>Bob Shell >Bob, >If I can ask, where did these still pictures come from? Not in >the "Santilli" kind of sense, but from what stock did the stills >come from? >Michael >-- >Michael Malone >Kilo Foxtrot Four Mike Yankee X-ray Michael, The stills were sent to me by Ray in the form of still images on a Betacam SP video tape. Apparently they were made by putting a video of the first autopsy in a VCR, still framing it, and making a video from the monitor. The quality, needless to say, is not very good. The purpose of these images was simply to show that there were, in fact, two different bodies involved in two different dissections. I'm still looking at Theresa's material, but I am not convinced she has proved anything. I have talked extensively with two people who have seen the complete first autopsy video, Philip Mantle and Maurizio Baiata, and both have emphasized the differences in the bodies and the procedures performed on them. Just having one leg look very similar does not establish anything to me. Bob
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 17 Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculouso From: Bob Shell <76750.2717@compuserve.com> Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 08:28:39 -0400 Fwd Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 22:47:54 -0400 Subject: Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculouso >Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 13:22:49 -0700 >From: Loy Pressley <lpressle@webwide.net> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculouso Loy, I suggest you and others arguing against FTL should go back and read some history. Scientists PROVED that many things we take for granted today were impossible. Look at all of the scientific proofs that faster than sound travel was impossible. Bob
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 17 Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculouso From: Mike Smith <mickey@anix.co.uk> Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 13:33:17 +0100 Fwd Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 22:50:41 -0400 Subject: Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculouso Hi, Ooooopps, A Correction to my previous post. The URL for the graphical example of a Wave function and how it relates to Quantum Tunneling should have been http://www.phys.ksu.edu/perg/vqm/programs/shockwave/html/vq_qtun.html [requires shockwave from macromedia] and not http://www.sccs.swarthmore.edu/~ndaniel1/qm_paper.html as previously stated. What can I say it's just quantum, it was all going terribly well until I re-read my post, then poof simply by the act of re-reading my post [observation] I changed it's state and the state of the universe. If you subscribe to the many universes theory, then in at least one universe there was no need to write this addendum. Sadly not this one. Regards, Mike
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 17 Re: UFO VIDEOTAPE, October 14: Clermont County From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 17:06:03 +0100 Fwd Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 22:52:52 -0400 Subject: Re: UFO VIDEOTAPE, October 14: Clermont County >From: XianneKei@aol.com >Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 04:26:19 -0400 (EDT) >To: updates@globalserve.net >Subject: Re: UFO VIDEOTAPE, October 14: Clermont County, >From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> >Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 20:18:55 +0100 >Fwd Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 16:56:36 -0400 >Subject: Re: UFO VIDEOTAPE, October 14: Clermont County, >> I have heard of no word of the incident or tape on any local news >> shows or news papers.... even the trashy ones. Cincinnati Int'l >> Airport is actually in a Kentucky suburb of Cincinnati. >> Williamsburg OH is 40 kilometers nearly due east from the >> airport, across the Ohio River. My sense is that this is a case >> of mistaken identity, i.e. normal airport traffic. You missed a bit out --> Roger Scott >Sean, >Since this event occurred on Tuesday October 14, around 8:00 pm, >I would be surprised if the video would have made it to >television that quickly. >Also, if you read the report and previous reports from Kenny, I >think you will find that he KNOWS and/or is related to these >witnesses as they had a sighting on Sept 24, as well. I imagine >that Kenny is in possession of the video and more than likely >will do the reporting to the media, if necessary. >There's a lot we don't know about this case yet, but I have found >Kenny to be extremely forthcoming and timely in his reporting on >the internet of investigations he is involved in. Let's give him >a little while longer, before we write this off. >I doubt that Kenny has made any conclusion so far, and he is the >one in a position to make a conclusion. >I appreciate the work that Kenny and TASK do and would like to >continue seeing their reports. >Rebecca Hi Rebecca I personally made no observations about the sighting. I merely asked a friend of mine who lives in the vicinity of the sighting if he had heard anything about it, thats all. The opinion stated was his and not mine. Are you a man or a mouse, come on squeek up! Sean Jones reply to--sean@tedric.demon.co.uk Homepage--http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Zone/1745/index.html Reasearch page --http://www.tedric.demon.co.uk/ Search for other documents from or mentioning: tedric | xiannekei |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 17 Re: Alien Autopsy Film From: "Roger R. Prokic" <rprokic@ibm.net> Date: Fri, 17 Oct 97 07:44:57 Fwd Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 23:00:57 -0400 Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy Film >Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 02:25:53 -0700 >From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Alien Autopsy Film >Sorry to hear about the problems with the Observer. In >the elliptical orbit, any idea what the best resolution will >be with the MOC? I guess it varies with elevation. I haven't heard what the best resolution would be... but now indications are that the solar array is indeed intact and that they will eventually continue tthe aerobraking and circularize for mapping... We should hear more soon. Also, it's pretty evident that the general public wants the MOC to take pix of the Face On Mars and Cydonia... our mission control folks are interviewed all the time by local and national news crews... they all ask about the Face on Mars! <g> Roger R. Prokic Telecommunications Engineer Lockheed Martin Astronautics Denver, Colorado USA
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 17 Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 16:36:15 +0100 Fwd Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 22:59:53 -0400 Subject: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills >Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 20:03:22 -0500 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Michael Christol <mchristo@mindspring.com> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills >If you remember I had previously said that I had received word >that the first known crash of a UFO occurred in 1942, and ask >if anyone knew anything about it. You said that was a little >vague and asked for more info. I told you I had to talk to >my contact person. >I did so. I was informed that it did not occur in 1942, but >in July, 1941, near a well known island in the South Pacific. >I don't wish to tell all of the details. I want to see if >someone else knows what I am talking about. >Just think little boy and fat man....<G> Hi Mike I am currently researching a alledged UFO crashes at the moment with a view to writing a book on it, (I get a little wound up when people go on about Roswell as if it was the only crash) and the only one that I can find listed for 1941 is Cape Giradeau, Missouri. Is this the case that you are referring to? I currently have 126 cases listed although a few are now "known" to be false or hoaxes. Are you a man or a mouse, come on squeek up! Sean Jones reply to--sean@tedric.demon.co.uk Homepage--http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Zone/1745/index.html Reasearch page --http://www.tedric.demon.co.uk/ Search for other documents from or mentioning: tedric | mchristo |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 17 Re: Questions for Abductees From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 15:59:29 +0100 Fwd Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 23:22:14 -0400 Subject: Re: Questions for Abductees >Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 10:58:16 -0400 >From: Peregrine Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> >Subject: Questions for Abductees (RV) >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> To the Duke of Mendoze I present my compliments on your syllogistic speech on your abduction theories. >The Duke of Mendoza presents his compliments and apologizes for >this belated response to, among other things... >...but His Grace's horse went lame recently and needed much >attention (and he hopes Zeiler, Rudiak & Partners, Conspiracy >Brokers & Commissioners for Oaths of Ufological Loyalty, will >be thrown into a frenzy of significance-seeking on learning >that the hack in question is big, black, and called "Secret"); >a number of people "in trade" have rather vulgarly suggested he >might need money in return for services urgently to be >rendered, but swiftly rendered they were; Lady Amarintha has >been unwell; and there has been a spot of bother among the >field agents, who want bigger allowances for false moustaches >and are too lazy to grow their own. It has been a packed and >stimulating fortnight, but this is not the Mendoza Diocesean >News - especially as His Grace had recently to hang the >Cardinal, who was edging toward the ducal kosher kitchenware >with a phial of Lourdes water in his left hand - Are you ever lost for words? :o) >Do we really have to go through the Top 47 Reasons why the ETH >and the Gray alien fall off the twig with a flick of Occam's >razor, here? Er let me see. At a guess you would say something like there is no hard evidence. Yes? Well let me put it to you there is no PUBLIC hard evidence. > And I'll give you a >minimum of four logical reasons, Please do. > I shall have to ask my mum. You are obviously a very lucky man to have such a knowledgeable mother. >Yours &c >Plywood D. Mahogany >Fascia Lifter I won't answer this one :-) Are you a man or a mouse, come on squeek up! Sean Jones reply to--sean@tedric.demon.co.uk Homepage--http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Zone/1745/index.html Reasearch page --http://www.tedric.demon.co.uk/ Search for other documents from or mentioning: tedric | 101653.2205 |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 17 Re: Questions for Abductees From: "WHITE" <mjawhite@digitaldune.net> [John White] Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 07:38:24 -0700 Fwd Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 23:19:34 -0400 Subject: Re: Questions for Abductees Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 10:58:16 -0400 From: Peregrine Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> Subject: Questions for Abductees (RV) To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> Good morning all, and Duke, who wrote: The Duke of Mendoza presents his compliments and apologizes for this belated response to, among other things... >From: clark@canby.mn.frontiercomm.net [Jerome Clark] >Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 11:32:01 PDT >To: updates@globalserve.net >Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Questions for abductees <snip> Jerry wrote: >Does anybody, including yourself, know the meaning of the >phrase "the folklore that calls itself "abduction research"? >All of us, including the undersigned (as you kindly reminded >me recently), are capable of writing (and thinking) in haste, >and I daresay you are doing so here. There is folklore about >abductions, but the experience of abduction is not "folklore," <snip> >One draws a curtain of modesty over American organizations' and >individuals' approach to all this. >Yours &c >Plywood D. Mahogany >Fascia Lifter Duke, et al.: (I had not fully appreciated the "nom" peregine mendoza until today's posting on wariness in giving easy credence to false alien abduction stories.) I took the phrase "the folklore that calls itself 'abduction research'" to designate a body of written materials that a group of people consider as scripture in their belief and conduct involving alien abduction. I took Duke's thoughtful, explanatory response to Clark's posting on that phrase to mean that if one really wants to understand that "scripture" a deeper insight can be gained if one first goes about focusing on what can be objectively "known." That type of thinking got the gnostics branded as heretics in the early christian church which was struggling to come up with its own belief system: whatever the gnostikos' orthodoxy, the christian orthodoxy was not: "Off with their heads!" The responding post triggered that interesting parallel for me. So, I read several excerpts from The Foreigner, a gnostic text, and sure 'nuff, the Foreigner speaks of technique in comprehending reality, which didn't set right for the competition, so they made it heresy. (Great Post!) John White mjawhite@digitaldune.net Search for other documents from or mentioning: mjawhite | 101653.2205 |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 17 Re: US Unveils Intelligence Budget For First Time From: Ummo@concentric.net, Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose) Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 18:11:38 +0100 Fwd Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 23:26:44 -0400 Subject: Re: US Unveils Intelligence Budget For First Time Forwarded from "alt.alien.visitors". Date of message: October 17 09.36 local time: Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 22:16:48 -0700 From: STARGATE <Ummo@concentric.net> Subject: Black Budget Finally revealed? I found this on: http://www.infobeat.com/stories/cgi/story.cgi?id=5449030-27c 05:08 PM ET 10/15/97 U.S. unveils intelligence budget for first time By Jim Wolf WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. government Wednesday unveiled for the first time its annual spending on the CIA and sister intelligence agencies, a secret for 50 years. "The aggregate amount appropriated for intelligence and intelligence-related activities for fiscal year 1997 is $26.6 billion,'' CIA Director George Tenet disclosed in response to a Freedom of Information lawsuit that left scant choice but declassification of the figure. The disclosure of the so-called Black Budget capped a heated political debate involving Congress, the White House and directors of central intelligence for the past 20 years. In making public the overall intelligence budget figure for the fiscal year ended Sept. 30, Tenet said he had acted after consulting President Clinton and appropriate agencies. In April 1996, the White House said Clinton had determined that making the sum public would not harm U.S. intelligence activities, a stance shared by then-CIA director John Deutch. Clinton made clear at the time, however, that he wanted to declassify the total in concert with Congress, apparently to share any backlash from critics who might otherwise accuse him of undermining national security. The Republican-led House and Senate had refused to join Clinton in the maneuver on the ground that Congress did not rightly have the power to declassify and that this was a responsibility for the administration alone. In a statement, Tenet said the circumstances of the Freedom of Information Act lawsuit "do not allow for joint action'' with the Congress, as Clinton would have preferred. "We believe this action is appropriate because it does not jeopardize the ability of our intelligence agencies to carry out their missions and serves to inform the American people,'' he said. The lawsuit was brought by the Center for National Security Studies, a Washington group seeking greater intelligence agency accountability, on behalf of Steven Aftergood, director of the Federation of American Scientists Project on Government Secrecy. "This is a long-overdue reform,'' Aftergood said in a telephone interview. "Significantly, it took a lawsuit to accomplish this. Congressional oversight couldn't get it done.'' Kate Martin, counsel in the case and director of the Center for National Security Studies, said the CIA had been forced to unveil the budget figure Wednesday because it could no longer defend withholding it. "Only because the CIA was required to present its defense to the court today has it released the figure,'' she said. The annual spending total had been kept secret since the CIA was founded 50 years ago. Tenet runs the Central Intelligence Agency and serves as board chairman for the 12 other U.S. spy outfits whose aggregate funding level was at issue, including the Defense Intelligence Agency, National Security Agency and National Reconnaissance Office. In his statement, Tenet stopped short of promising to continue to release annual combined totals for intelligence spending, most of which is buried in secret Pentagon accounts. "Disclosure of future aggregate figures will be considered only after determining whether such disclosures could cause harm to the national security by showing trends over time,'' he said. Executive branch officials would continue to protect from disclosure "any and all subsidiary information concerning the intelligence budget, whether the information concerns particular intelligence agencies or particular intelligence programs,'' Tenet added. "In other words, the administration intends to draw a firm line at the top-line, aggregate figure.'' The overall level of U.S. intelligence spending has long been considered one of Washington's worst-kept secrets, widely estimated at $28 billion to $30 billion. A few years ago, a House panel published the figure inadvertantly. REUTERS@
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 18 CURRENT-ENCOUNTERS: Brazil's Colonel Uyrange is From: CURRENT-ENCOUNTERS@LISTSERV.AOL.COM, Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 22:34:00 +0100 Fwd Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 08:06:02 -0400 Subject: CURRENT-ENCOUNTERS: Brazil's Colonel Uyrange is Forwarded from the CURRENT ENCOUNTERS list: ******************** Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 15:58:05 -0300 From: Philippe Piet van Putten <abp1@UOL.COM.BR> To: CURRENT-ENCOUNTERS@LISTSERV.AOL.COM Subject: Colonel UYRANGE IS DEAD!! Message-ID: <199710171759.PAA28020@borges.uol.com.br> MIME-Version: 1.0 Dear colleagues and friends, Most of you probably heard about the important revelation made public by Brazilian Air Force (FAB) colonel (retired) Uyrange Bolivar Soares Nogueira de Hollanda Lima, 56, on July 20. He was interviewed during the national tv show Fantastico (Globo TV). For the first time, he confirmed his personal UFO-experiences while commanding the Operacao Prato (Operation Plate), activated by the FAB's 1st Regional Aerial Command (I COMAR) on September 1977. Uyrange and Operation Plate succeeded filming and photographing numerous UFOs which were causing panic in the Amazon region. He and agents of the extinct National Information Service (SNI) has a real close encounter with an enormous UFO. Operation Plate obtained HUNDREDS of photos of strange aerial phenomena which "seemed aware of the military presence" and moved in an intelligent fashion. Colonel Uyrange was apparently healthy and had made a public lecture about the Operation. He also gave an interview for a leading brazilian magazine on UFOs and seemed optimistic about his contribution to the revelation of the truth. We were informed today that the colonel commited SUICIDE on October 2, 1997 (??!!). We also heard rumours that his family vanished (?!!). We are trying to find out if such strange vanishing really happened. As soon as we have a conclusion we'll let all of you know about. In Syntony Philippe Piet van Putten Director - The Brazilian Academy of Parasciences (ABP) National Director - Picard UFO Research International (PUFORI) Editor - Fenomenos Aeroespaciais (Aerospatial Phenomena) E-mail: abp1@uol.com.br
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 18 Re: Abduction Sat 5 Oct From: wlmss@peg.apc.org [Lawrie Williams] Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 03:04:06 +1000 (GMT+1000) Fwd Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 08:33:30 -0400 Subject: Re: Abduction Sat 5 Oct > Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 03:40:20 -0500 > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > From: Michael Wayne Malone <MWayne@bigfoot.com> > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Abduction Sat 4 Oct 1997 >>> WHY DID YOU DO THIS????????????????????? lw>>Try not to get so excited Michael. mwm> I'm sorry if playing with the mental health of your witnesses in > a cavalier and dangerous manner gets me excited. mwm>>> From this point on, any further data gained from these subjects is >>> tainted. lw>> In other words, I had to give them the run-aound, tell them lies >> or avoid telling them the full truth. > What full truth? You didn't give them a "truth" you gave them > your "belief" based on unsupported data..... My truthful opinion. > While you were at it, why did you hold back from giving the girl's > parent's the "full truth" if you are so ethical and everything? So as not to involve confidential information. mwm>>> If they have any experiances that in any way match what you told >>> them, there is no way of knowing the real from the imaginary planted >>> by you. I have been abducted, it is not like that at all. It is very hard to lead abductees. lw>> Absolutely untrue. If I knew what I know now based on the evidence of >> hundreds of other abductees, I would have gained far more information >> during my various and sundry encounter experiences. I was preparing >> them for whatever comes next. mwm> Whatever. If you can't see the basic underlying problem and the > pure taint you've placed on this case, then you are lost to the > realm of scientific endeavour. I supplied the information needed to help them know what to watch for. Who is the most scientific? Who has the biggest one? Who is reacting in the most extreme way? > ...... And if you can't see the intense > psychological harm you could have caused your "witnessess" then > the only thing we have to hope for is they find strong and > talented counslers later in life......< deletia > Thank you for the free psychiatric diagnosis. Witness contamination has been discussed ad nauseum on many mailing lists and newsgroups for years and years. Abductees still call it as it is. They seem to be more emotionally labile in some cases, I grant. I know that high profile investigators and counsellors are informally ranked according to the use or misuse of hypnosis and the extend to which they lead witnesses. I don't know if that has evolved yet to a stage where you all shuffle sideways around a dining table until the correct hierarchy is reflected in the order of seating. Abductees are above all else just people who want honest opinions. True, if I was still trying to prove the humanoids in saucers axiom I could have withled that knowledge from her, but that has already been accepted on this list. I know because I put it up and there were no valid objections to that step forward. Remember? You were part of the decision. Is it going too fast for you? > ... I thought we were on a UFO discussion list, and were discussing > ufology and abductions. Perhaps you and I can discuss the evils of > modern media in an approprate mailing list. No. You were discussing how flawed information gets transmitted and you and several other guys wanted to make me a scapegoat. You cannot trick me that easily. I've already taken a large Hollywood industry mailing list to task over the dogs dinner they made of "Fire in the Sky", so I am proactive in that area, which deserves urgent attention from UFOlogy. There is no need to distort the appearance or behaviour of exotic entities so why is it done? People would prefer a little more accuracy. > As a counsler, your job wasn't to give advice, but to help the > subject deal with the unexplainable emotional side-effects of her > alleged abduction. The only drama comes from you and 2 or 3 others. > As a ufologist, you were to investigate without taint, without > bias, and without preconcieved ideas as to the end result of your > research. I know exactly what I am doing. > And as a responsible human being, you were not to scare young > women with the worst case senerio. There is a continuum? 1 share freely with old males, 2 With old women or young males you have to withold some data, 3 With young females you have to withold a lot more for their own good This is ufology? Is this to be part of some code of conduct? BTW I assure you I know of "worse cases"! > What evidence did you have that this is how her abduction > experience would turn out. Plenty. Had you the same experience, you would know. > .... Perhaps if you had recieved stronger peer review before, you > wouldn't have made such an untrained rookie mistake. You are my peer? > But that aside, how objective are you in your research? If I was dishonest with myself then I'd learn less. > From the post, I found you to have closed your mind completely to > everything but what you've already determined as TRUTH. I reported a simple conversation for the benefit of science. Lawrie Williams_______uncharacteristically reasonable
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 18 Re: Abduction Sat 4 Oct 1997 From: wlmss@peg.apc.org [Lawrie Williams] Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 03:05:26 +1000 (GMT+1000) Fwd Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 08:42:16 -0400 Subject: Re: Abduction Sat 4 Oct 1997 > Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 02:13:04 -0500 > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity > Got a beef with Hopkins? take it up with him! > Got a beef with Linda? Take it up with her! Got a beef with Lawrie Williams? Take it up with him! :) > Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 14:31:00 -0500 > To: updates@globalserve.net > From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> > Subject: Researching abduction cases > Hello All, Hi John Velez. : ) > There has been a thread running about an abduction case that is > being investigated by someone on the list. I didn't want to > respond directly in the thread because I don't want to get into a > situation where my comments are taken personally. Ergo, this new thread. I'm the asshole you refer to in the continuation of this thread. (Appended.) > Abduction research -must be- taken out of the hands of amateurs > and para-professionals. Not so much for the sake of the research > itself, there are many 'amateurs' that can do as competent if not > better job than some pros, but for the sake of the well being of > those individuals reporting. Thank the gods! I have triggered a Loudon phenomenon over here! Send help quick. No, come to think of it, take your time! > The assumptions and beliefs of the person investigating a report > of abduction should NEVER (under any circumstances) become a part > of the picture..... I agree. So I post a short file mentioning a conversation I had as one abductee with another, and your assumptions and beliefs have become a part of the picture. > Yet in recent posts all I hear is assumption and personal beliefs Assumptions departed from orthodox ufology or orthodox science? Personal beliefs different from your own? When you meet another person, especially an abductee, do you hide your personal beliefs from them? When does a conversation become counselling? 5 minutes? 10 minutes? An hour? When money changes hands? > wild interpretations and pure new age philosophy. Be specific and I can respond. I am accountable. I cannot walk in lock-step with orthodox science, nor can I append all my past work to every file, but I can and do answer specific objections. > Not a shred of anything objective/methodical/empirical or even a > well thought out course of action for that matter. Sweeping statements, again inadequately defined. Now there is an objective, methodical and empirical reply if ever there was one. How could you conclude that from such a small file? > A dangerous game to play with someone elses mind and life. You'll have them turning out with burning brands and pitchforks soon. This is all over a simple conversation! > You can't "practice" on -live ones- in this business. What, the counselling business? > People can end up hurt or at best come away more confused What about the situation that has you up in arms, where a FOAF (friend-of-a-friend) neither hurt nor confused got my advice and went away neither hurt nor confused but just less puzzled? You are in a tail spin because of two critical buzz-words. > than when they started their investigation. If you're not sure, or > confident that you know what you're doing, or simply lack the proper > experience you have -no business- doing it. Refer them to someone > who is. An MHP at the very least. I do it automatically with anyone > that contacts me. Medical people have a long history of carving out things they find without asking first. In the above situation there were no apparent complicatons in the procedure so no need for medical attention. > I'm working hard to try to steer abductees away from amateurs. It > is my firmly held oppinion that unless and until abductees begin > reporting their experiences to mainstream professionals such as > family physicians, trusted counsellors, etc, we will never get > the attention and the serious investigation that we need. You need to reach into the hearts and minds of the public if you want a paradigm shift like that. Set up for a medium budget film production about abductions and I'll script it for you in consultation with a variety of abductees. I know New York has the resources to do it properly. > Abductees will never recieve proper treatment or even objective > handling at the hands of the amateurs. They can only get sold > whatever 'explanation' the paraprofessional believes in > him/herself, or they will get sold whatever bill of goods he or > she is selling that week. I have never hypnotized and never allowed myself to be hypnotized and I warn people not to go to non-professionals to have their palms read, let alone hypnotized. The only commodity I seek is useful information. I have learnt to be thorough and balanced. > This is serious business, peoples lives are quite literally at > stake. It's not the "walk in the woods" adventure some percieve > it to be, or worse yet as evidenced here on UpDates, an excersize > in superimposing personal belief by those working with abduction > experiencers. I agree. The entities of the woods were known to have some similar technologies, however. I spoke to a woman today who seems to have once been subjected to a feeding session, but there was no craft involved and she was not worried about it, just baffled. &tc. > You wouldn't presume to do brain surgery, or treat someone who > has a mental disorder unless you have the expertise and > experience to do so. Working with someone who suspects that they > are being abducted requires the same level of experience and > expertise. What I see happening here is children playing doctor > with real scalpels and live patients! I think working with anyone who has flipped our or on the verge of flipping out takes expertise and experience, irrespective. John, most Abductees are not "sick". We are normal healthy people. You are confusing sick clients who also happen to be abductees which may or may not be related to their problem with ordinary people who also happen to be abductees. > Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 02:42:17 -0500 > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Researching Abduction Cases > Let me ask you this Skye, don't you think that an experienced > psychologist or counsellor would do a much better job of serving > an abductees needs than say the kind of thing that is happening > on another current thread? Point is, I was all there was. That or the X-Files/ID4 genre. > (Which will remain unnamed) Lawrie Williams, the abductee who dared give an informed opinion to another abductee. > That kind of approach is something I find shameful and > embarassing, not to mention the potential psychological harm to > those poor unsuspecting souls that is being introduced by the > "investigator" in the case. I sense a cross cultural problem here. If it had been a visitation by the god of ingrown toenails I wonder if such intense emotions would have been stirred in you and several other clearly very sincere and moral people. In my experience most abductees handle what goes on with total equanimity. Only troubled people come to light so you see a disproportionate number of anxious cases. There's a would-be-counsellor I know who graduates on this her fifth year with all them bells and whistles of academia. Only recently I spent a while talking to her suggesting she take up abduction counselling since she was considering specialties. She does not realize the extent of this phenomenon and has accepted only that a lot of people are seeking counselling in relation to it. If you have an explanatory package for such people then I'll be only too pleased to forward you her email address. No catches, only trying to help. > We -have been- 'left to ourselves' and the result so far is; > *A dangerous set of beliefs about abduction that are rapidly > becoming codified, and spreading like an infection from one to > the other, (abduction dogma!) Strange you should say that. When I framed my letter I had in mind a very interesting comment made ojnly the other day: >> From: clark@canby.mn.frontiercomm.net [Jerome Clark] >> Date: Thu, 09 Oct 1997 10:02:02 PDT >> To: updates@globalserve.net >> Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Solved Abduction cases? >> .....content of abduction narratives much. In other words, Bullard >> validates formally what investigators have always insisted: that popular >> debunking mythology aside, it's pretty hard to lead abductees. It is not "leading" to tell one abductee what you think. And it would take far more than that to mess with memories and expectations. > *More interpretations of the phenomenon than Carter has liver pills, I invite you to read: [ Nick Pope "The Uninvited" Simon & Schyuster London 1997 ] And then we can discuss things from a common perspective. You might learn something. That is if Nick Pope is Credible, I don't know, maybe there is a definitive Barbara Becker Paper out on him. If so, don't quote from it whatever you do! > *New age Philosophies based on benevolent space brothers and > alien chanelers.... I have an entirely deserved reputation as a scourge of those who express bizarre and derivative belief systems. I wish I had a dollar for ever file I have written debunking the kind of stuff you quite understandably abhor. *And* I fought the "alien hybrid" story until recently. But regarding the "New Age" material, its not my fault that most leading theorists have thrown out the baby with the bathwater. Even as I write this, radio 2JJJ which caters to young people is carrying one Al Beilik live from the Brisbane UFO Convention. He is telling us about the Montauk Experiment and how he took two trips to Mars via a secret matter transporter, where he explored a secret base made by long vanished humans. We heard about the 1954 secret pact with the aliens and how things went awry after that. The usual heady mix of fact and fiction. > *A "mutual re-inforcement" fest among believers to beat the band, > (very bad stuff as any counsellor will tell you) As Union Rep, maybe you could show a little more respect for your constituency. > *Mis-trust of those in the professional community (to whom we > should be turning) because they (Quote) "Won't believe us." -What > completely unsubstantiated bullsh-t that one is!- Easily said if you live in the Gross Apple. That is how it is elsewhere. Psychiatrists snigger and psychologists go "tsk tsk!". Not that it bothers the rural folk in these parts. We just get on with things and we sure do not need to hire someone to listen to us, we talk to one another in trust. Hmmm, its late at night now, and news has just come thorugh of the Harrier Jet on a "training exercise" that just came down in Ohio. I wonder if my warning in the last file came too late. We hope the pilot was not hurt. > *Very little progress in terms of having gotten some firm answers > to our questions..... <deletia about poor public awareness> No wonder if you bite off people's heads based on minimal information. > *Too many quacks, and amateurs! Assholes out to make a buck or a > name for themselves that don't much care how many heads get > screwed up along the way. That 'other thread' I mentioned being a > 'classic' example! John, I care very much. And this full moon, you care too much, and have the wrong picture entirely. > *Too many people have suffered in silence too long because they > fear ridicule or 'excommunication' from society. It seems to have moved into a new phase for me too. I'm even get it from those I thought were of my own kind. But it is full moon. > The only way it is going to change is if WE change it. Have you the insight and self-restraint to be such a spokesman? But enough of this bickering type rot, I see John is about to break into "The Abductees Anthem" sung to the tune of "The Marsellaise": > .... What is happening to us today, > Could be happening to them tomorrow. > There's just too much at stake > To play this any other way. (chorus) > It's together, > All of us, > Abductees and the general public alike, > Or none of us at all. > We are one race > Living on one rock together, > What happens to my neighbor > Happens to me. > I'm about involving as many people as I can, > Abductee or no. > John Velez, Abductee Union Rep. > "Together we stand, -divided- we fall!" Says John as he swings a large club. :)
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 18 Re: Questions for Abductees From: wlmss@peg.apc.org [Lawrie Williams] Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 04:57:14 +1000 (GMT+1000) Fwd Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 08:45:47 -0400 Subject: Re: Questions for Abductees > Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 10:58:16 -0400 > From: Peregrine Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> > Subject: Questions for Abductees (RV) > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> I extend my thanks to the Duke of Mendoza and thank him for so recently cleaning out his stables and forwarding the contents to this list. Note the lovely odour of spam. > This thought also raises the question as to how much of the trauma > said to be suffered by abductees has been instilled in them by the > investigators' approach [see the appalling hash-up made by Lawrie > Williams over in the nearby thread] and their naive & amateurish > ideas about hypnosis, and how much is really based in distressing > experience. Hypothesis or wager: 95% of "abduction trauma" is > iatrogenic.) Reluctant as I am to confuse such cerebro-avian reasoning with actual facts, you should know that the person in question K was not distressed before or after the experience. I have never even met her in fact! I did recount a conversation with her friend D, which file 4 - now 5 - people have clearly failed to read carefully enough despite its brevity. They have instead larded on their own preconceptions of where I am at. This says more about them than me. And perhaps even more about the perceived rights of free speech between abductees by believers and skeptics alike. I must some time slip in another couple of buzz words and watch if the same identities get in a flap. Nobody can say I am not even-handed in the people I upset. That is the benefit of being a moderate caught between extremists, one so foolish as to insist his very real experiences are very real, and the other insisting on mental theories more elaborate than the simple and factual explanation - humanoids in a hovering craft, based on axioms that were readily accepted by this list. The Duke implies I have naive and amateurish ideas about hypnosis but if you rake through the verbal muck carefully enough one can see it is only implied in such a way that others will infer it. Fact is I have never been hypnotized nor would I suggest it to anyone else. As for the person in question, I did not introduce any ideas other than the one I mentioned, which was intended to alert her to any possible reproductive system anomalies. Any memories of being on a spaceship on a table and surrounded by entities remain as pure as the driven snow, ready to be scooped up and placed in a sterile container, to no doubt be labelled "iatrogenic". At last report D and K are happily getting on with life and still there is no sign of the trauma so eagerly anticipated for their mythical counterparts by fantasizers elsewhere on this globe. How anyone can draw such extensive inferences both factual and moral from the minimal information I provided is quite beyond me. My file was brief and lucid before consumption, and related to a very real event. Now it has become a mini-myth and has taken on a life of its own. I am mightily entertained. Anyway thanks to the man from the aviary for his material, which I will most assuredly apply to my comfrey with great benefit. Lawrie Williams________________
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 18 Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Still From: Jean van Gemert <jeanvg@dds.nl> Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 21:13:47 +0200 (MET DST) Fwd Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 08:47:10 -0400 Subject: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Still >Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 19:53:47 -0500 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Michael Christol <mchristo@mindspring.com> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills [On UFOs on film moving towards or from an observer:] >Yes there is, but most people have already been convinced it is a HOAX. Can you blame them? >It is the Billy Meier film of the Plieadean Beam Ship. Which, to me, looks so fake I couldn't believe people would buy into it! I don't know how many of you are familiar with Adamski's "footage" of his saucers but Meier's films aren't much more "convincing." I mean, come on now, the "saucer" dangles around the screen as if it's attached to a string! Gee, I wonder how much more obvious this can get? Oh wait... I already hear excuses comming. The aliens "made" the saucer look like a pie plate with a string attached, so all those poor skeptical souls who haven't yet been able to accept the obvious reality of Meier's ET contacts <snicker> have an opportunity to deny it. Err... Right... <roll eyes> >Check it out for yourself. And have a good laugh too! :) __________________________________________________________________________ Science, Logic, and the UFO Debate: http://www.primenet.com/~bdzeiler/index.html -----------------------
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 18 Re: Questions for Abductees From: Jean van Gemert <jeanvg@dds.nl> Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 21:16:01 +0200 (MET DST) Fwd Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 08:48:56 -0400 Subject: Re: Questions for Abductees >Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 10:58:16 -0400 >From: Peregrine Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> >Subject: Questions for Abductees (RV) >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> [Snip...] >Do we really have to go through the Top 47 Reasons why the ETH >and the Gray alien fall off the twig with a flick of Occam's >razor, here? Bear in mind, my friend, we are not talking >possibility, but probability, reductionism and simplicity: Occam's Razor itself has nothing to do with "probability" or "improbability" but just warns against multiplication of "entities". Skeptics, enigmatically, seem to see this as some "special pass", permitting "rubber stamping" the first prosaic possibility someone throws up. However, any probability assessments require information, rather than simply applying a rule of thumb like Occam's Razor. As for reductionism and simplicity, I might note that if the things you already know to exist do not satisfactorily explain all the data, then additional complexity is simply required. __________________________________________________________________________ Science, Logic, and the UFO Debate: http://www.primenet.com/~bdzeiler/index.html -----------------------
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 18 Did Satellites Image Phoenix Lights? From: William.Hamilton@pcsmail.pcshs.com Date: 17 Oct 1997 20:08:35 UT Fwd Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 08:55:32 -0400 Subject: Did Satellites Image Phoenix Lights? DID SATELLITES IMAGE THE PHOENIX LIGHTS? I have reported previously that I had gotten word that NORAD had detected a "fast walker" on March 13th. Some satellite tracked an unknown intruder into US air space. Also previously reported was the interview with the president of American Computer Company, Jack Schulman, talked about an Air Force satellite that had been disabled on March 13th. This is a follow-up on those reports and I have Linda Howe checking into this further. One of our prime Phoenix witnesses, Mike Fortson, is responsible for tracking this story. The Army wants to shoot down an Air Force satellite with its MIRACL laser installed at a sprawling base in the New Mexico desert. The target is the Miniature Sensor Technology Integration satellite, MSTI-3. The Air Force craft is the third in a series of research satellites meant to improve the tracking of missiles from space. The satellite, about the size of a refrigerator and weighing 450 pounds, has telescopes and cameras for observing hot rockets as well as the cool Earth, its imaging systems working like those in spy satellites. The camera on the satellite can see objects on the ground as small as 30 feet across. The satellite maker -- SPECTRUM ASTRO -- right here in Gilbert, Arizona opposes having MIRACL fire its beam at the $60 million craft. Mike Fortson called Spectrum Astro to talk with one of the engineers. This engineer confirmed that on MARCH 13, the MSTI-3's batteries suddenly went "dead" but now are functioning properly and he cannot understand why the Army wants to destroy this satellite. We now know that the first sighting in Arizona on March 13th was at 5:30 pm mst in Crown King, AZ. Witnesses saw 3 solid V-shaped craft and also stated that 3 F-16 fighterss came from the south only to see the V's disappear and reappear minutes later when the fighters left the area! Admittedly, there are gaps in our knowledge of events on that day, but new information is beginning to paint a picture of something extraordinary. I hope to follow up this report with more later. Linda may be reporting on these developments on DREAMLAND with Art Bell this Sunday. Sincerely, Bill Hamilton Exec Director Skywatch International
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 18 Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculouso From: Dave Everett <deverett@vir.idx.com.au> Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 21:26:51 +1000 Fwd Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 09:11:35 -0400 Subject: Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculouso >Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 20:14:32 +0100 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculouso >>Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 14:15:57 +0100 >>From: Mike Smith <mickey@anix.co.uk> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculous ><Stanton> "Depends on vision will and money. Like going to the moon on >the day 40 years ago today when Sputnick went up. Many thought then it >would never happen. >Probably the emphasis is on MONEY. The root of all evils etc etc, but >cost is probably the most mitigating factor. "We" may well have the >technology to visit other stars in our childrens lifetimes but the cost >with present technology is exorbitant. >As to the speed of light being the speed limit of the universe, "we" now >have _proof_ that this is simply no longer so. The proof is in the form >of Tachyons. Tahcyons have a minimum speed limit of c, so in my humble >opinion ftl drives are possible." It's my understanding that 'Tachyons" are hypothetical particles, like 'negative energy'. Does anyone have a reference for real tachyons? Dave Everett.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 18 Re: 'The Gulf Breeze Paper' From: RGates8254@aol.com [Robert Gates] Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 19:18:54 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 09:13:22 -0400 Subject: Re: 'The Gulf Breeze Paper' > From: c549597@showme.missouri.edu [Barbara Becker] > Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 22:48:32 -0500 > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: 'The Gulf Breeze Paper' > > Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 00:56:20 -0400 > > From: bruce maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com> > > Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: 'The Gulf Breeze Paper' > > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > > MY COMMENTS ON BARBARA BECKER'S COMMENTS ON MY RESPONSE TO HER PAPER, > > "ONE PICTURE IS WORTH A THOUSAND WORDS" > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > 1) Here is my comment on her paper: > > It is important to know that many other witnesses reported UFOs > > flying around Gulf Breeze in the same time frame and, hence, it > > is possible that others could have photographed them. This > > applies in particular to "Believer Bill" (discussed below) who > > claimed to have photographed UFOs at a location that turned out > > to be just behind Ed's (old) house. ("Jane", described below, > > claimed her photos were taken long before the Gulf Breeze flap.) > > HERE IS BARBARA'S COMMENT on what I said. > > None came forward before Walters. Myself and others interested in > > this case have serious doubts about some of the reports. In some > > cases it was months after Walters' photos appeared in the newspaper > > that the reports were taken. I personally spoke with Mrs. Art > > Hufford, an interview which I have on audio tape, where she says that > > the object she did not have windows, yet Mr. Hufford often says that > > what he saw looked EXACTLY like Ed Walters UFO. There is always the > > danger of contamination of witness testimony the longer time goes on. > > HERE IS MY COMMENT ON HER PAPER: I am aware that the GB skeptics > > have tried, unsuccessfully, to discredit all the other witnesses. > > There are about a dozen Gulf Breeze witnesses who say explicitly that > > they saw what was in Ed's photos. > **** BB: There were NONE that came forward before Ed and only > ONE, a man named Thompson, who described and drew a picture > similar to Ed's. More of Barbara's "interpretations" of the Gulf Breeze case. Same Sour Grapes, different Message. Cheers, Robert
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 18 Re: Questions for Abductees From: clark@canby.mn.frontiercomm.net [Jerome Clark] Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 20:03:10 PDT Fwd Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 09:18:35 -0400 Subject: Re: Questions for Abductees Hi, Duke and everybody, For some damn reason I can't get into Duke's recent posting. When I tried to print it out just now so to have it at hand while responding, it wouldn't print out, either. So I'm going to proceed from memory of what I saw there, and let me expresses all due apologies beforehand. I respect Duke's intelligence and good humor (the latter not always apparent here) while thinking he's wrong about many things ufological. Which will not stop me, by the way, from recommending his books, which are well written, smart, and stimulating even when I disagree -- and we often agree. As I've told him, his treatment of Dark Side mythology in the recent UFO: The Government Files is the best I've seen anywhere. (A plug here: I deal at length with the same subject in my just published The UFO Book [Visible Ink Press], a 700-page trade paperback in your bookstores this week.) Some, even much, of what Duke says in his posting is sensible enough, and no thoughtful abduction proponent or agnostic would take issue. And if I misrepresented his views in any way, I apologize. Still and all, it's easy to read Duke as an all-or-nothing type. When you have a credible multi-witness abduction story, it's pretty hard to argue that you're dealing with a subjective phenomenon. The first two abduction cases I investigated, long before anybody in ufology had ever heard of Budd Hopkins, were incidents that involved more than one person. All who participated had conscious memories of UFO sightings; they were also aware of missing time. This fact impressed me at the time and still does. What impresses me even more, in retrospect, is how much what these people reported anticipated what was to come. The Sandy Larson case, which seems to have unleashed Duke's full fury, is one of these. See Eddie Bullard's discussion in UFOs: The Measure of a Mystery. Not long ago, moreover, I was surprised to come upon an obscure CE3 in which an entity identical to the one reported by Larson figured. Duke wants to believe, and wants us to believe, that ufologists lead abductees. No one would say that never happens, or that we shouldn't be concerned about it, but there is no empirical evidence -- for all critics like Duke would have us believe to the contrary -- that this is the usual course of action, or that it's even, so far, a measurable problem. Again, go to Bullard's The Sympathetic Ear (1995). Unlike his critics, Bullard frames falsifiable hypotheses and investigates them empirically. The empirical evidence so far indicates that whatever an investigator's predisposition, abduction accounts end up sounding pretty much the same. So (as Bullard showed in an earlier JUFOS paper) do hypnotically elicited and consciously recalled accounts. As a rule, as investigators have long insisted, abductees are not leadable. Here's a story about my other early abduction investigation: The couple who had the experience went separately to a psychiatrist who thought the idea of UFOs was nonsensical. He'd never heard of UFO abductions until the psychologist who referred the couple to him explained the concept (this was in 1974). On hearing it, he expressed incredulity and even contempt. Thus he was shocked out of his skull when, separately, the two reported an abduction, with -- yes -- little gray men. He was so visibly startled that he actually scared his subjects. He told them he did not want to see them again. I think it's safe to say he wasn't leading them. The couple, incidentally, had no interest in UFOs and no knowledge of the subject. Neither did Sandy Larson, her daughter, or her daughter's boyfriend. Duke can rant all he wants about what he sees as our failings. I don't claim to be perfect, and this was, after all, 1975-76. I do feel sanguine about this much: the story stands up, and we investigators did not shape it. In fact, had we done so, it would have been a different kind of story. From Budd Hopkins and others, we now know of the "switching- off" procedure. We hadn't a clue about it in 1975. Yet that's precisely what Jackie, Sandy's daughter, reported: a state of paralysis and diminished consciousness while the abduction was going on. Leo Sprinkle was certain that this was simply a block, that she was really a participant in the incident but was shutting it out. He did everything in his power, including the asking of blatantly leading questions (which I recall feeling most uncomfortable about at the time), to break through (as he conceived it). Jackie withstood all the pressure and stood by the story. Meanwhile, Sandy said she did not see Jackie while inside the UFO. She said she did see Terry, the boyfriend, who (as I mentioned in an earlier posting) refused to undergo hypnosis, though he did confirm the UFOs, the missing time, and the inexplicable change in seating in the car. Something happened. What was it? That's what abduction research is about: trying to answer that question, however hard it may be. The usual answers -- which, for all his protestation to the contrary, Duke keeps coming back to -- don't work, as Stuart Appelle and others have shown. In the most puzzling cases (e.g., Hill, Allagash, et al.) interaction with ETs is a reasonable hypothetical explanation. Right now, in fact, it's hard to imagine another one. Which doesn't mean another one couldn't come along at some point. All I know is that we haven't seen it yet. In the meantime, agnosticism is not, as Duke foolishly implies, craven cowardice but perhaps the only truly intellectually honest response. What it says is that we don't have the answers yet, that we're going to have to do a hell of a lot more work before we do. Why should that make Duke so mad? I was JOKING, Duke, when I cracked wise about abductees burying themselves in obscure folklore texts. Okay? I was poking fun at psychosocial theorists who act as if the mere existence of some obscure folklore parallel to a modern abduction report deflates the latter. Let me quote Bullard here: "In most other efforts to establish media or cultural influences, standards of evidence are most conspicuous by their absence. After fishing expeditions amid folklore, science-fiction literature, and movie imagery, psychosocial theorists satisfy themselves to draw isolated motifs out of context, select favorable examples but ignore the rest, and never worry about whether the obscurity of sources limits the likelihood that an abductee might have seen them. Movies are a plausible source because they enjoy mass exposure, but why abductees choose the same narrow selection of movie elements when Hollywood has offered so much variety remains an unanswered question." And then there's Martin Kottmeyer with his spurious claim about the "Bollero Shield" Outer Limits episode and its supposed effect on Barney Hill's testimony. The connection can be rejected on other grounds (see High Strangeness, p. 250), but what is particularly striking is that Kottmeyer was content simply to draw the connection without bothering to ask Betty Hill if she and Barney were in the habit of watching Outer Limits. (I did ask her; they weren't.) Kottmeyer's theory, on its face at least, is less goofy than many to which we are subjected in the psychosocial literature, but still, Kottmeyer proves to be as indifferent to empirical investigation as his colleagues. That's why Bullard is so uniquely valuable: a believer in empiricism in this field is to be treasured. No wonder he drives the critics nuts. He doesn't play by their rules and, in his own gentle, understated way, shows that their rules get us nowhere. Duke, I am going to do you the favor of assuming you are joking when you imply that you take New Age speculationist Peter Rojcewicz seriously. Or if you do, I'll do you the further favor of assuming you have not read his Ph.D. dissertation, a fairly amazing document. For the rest of you, see pp. 379-80 of High Strangeness. Suffice it to say Peter is an educated John Keel, except with rose-colored glasses and a pleasant personality. Keel even confided to me once that Peter was going to carry on his work. Cheers to all, most of all my friend and fellow Forrest City Joe fan, Jerry Clark
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 18 Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills From: Michael Christol <mchristo@mindspring.com> Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 22:33:48 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 09:21:10 -0400 Subject: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills >>I did so. I was informed that it did not occur in 1942, but >>in July, 1941, near a well known island in the South Pacific. >>I don't wish to tell all of the details. I want to see if >>someone else knows what I am talking about. >>Just think little boy and fat man....<G> >I have never heard of this alleged crash, but if Little Boy and >Fat Man are leads I take it you mean the well known island of >Bikini, where one the first nuclear explosions occurred. If my >memory is correct, this was also the first hydrogen bomb. The clue was intended to tune people in the know in to the Island where the Inola Gay took off from for it's bombing run on Heroshema <sp> on Aug.6, 1945. That's all for now. REgards, Mike
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 18 Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills From: Don Ledger <dledger@istar.ca> Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 01:49:06 +0100 Fwd Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 09:31:22 -0400 Subject: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills > Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 08:21:21 +0200 (MET DST) > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl> > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills > >Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 20:03:22 -0500 > >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > >From: Michael Christol <mchristo@mindspring.com> > >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills > >>Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 14:12:18 -0400 > >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > >>From: Bob Shell <76750.2717@compuserve.com> > >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills > >>>Oh, btw, did you pick up the message I posted in Sept. about the > >>>earliest known Crash? July...., 1941...South Pacific? If you > >>>know this place and time, I need not be any more specific... > >>No, I must have missed that one. I was not getting UFO Updates > >>for a while due to some sort of glitch, and I am guessing that > >>you posted this during that time. Mind bringing me up to speed > >>on this? > >If you remember I had previously said that I had received word > >that the first known crash of a UFO occurred in 1942, and ask > >if anyone knew anything about it. You said that was a little > >vague and asked for more info. I told you I had to talk to > >my contact person. > >I did so. I was informed that it did not occur in 1942, but > >in July, 1941, near a well known island in the South Pacific. > >I don't wish to tell all of the details. I want to see if > >someone else knows what I am talking about. > >Just think little boy and fat man....<G> > I have never heard of this alleged crash, but if Little Boy and > Fat Man are leads I take it you mean the well known island of > Bikini, where one the first nuclear explosions occurred. If my > memory is correct, this was also the first hydrogen bomb. Sorry Henny, I think you have the wrong island. If I had to make a guess I would think he is referring to the island of Tinian, where the bombers were loaded and from where they left to bomb Hiroshima and Nagasaki. That has to be the island with the "Fat Man and Little Boy" connection. So where, on or near this island, was the object supposed to have crashed Mike? Interested, Don Ledger
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 18 Nightwatch Online From: Peregrine Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith] Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 23:49:15 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 09:34:14 -0400 Subject: Nightwatch Online The Duke of Mendoza presents his compliments to the List. Here's another old one I found & should have responded to earlier. For that reason I'm quoting rather a lot of the original message. Bits have also been reformatted to hold the preferred line length. Some snips are indicated by ellipses, thus [...]. >From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net> >To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Nightwatch Online >Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 11:57:02 -0400 >My respects to my friend the Duke, but I believe he's missing the >point. >>From: Peregrine Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> >>Subject: Nightwatch Online - Discussion with Velez >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >>[...] I didn't say Javier PdeC MUST react to >>*anything*. I said that if he HAD had a change of heart >>[about his attitude to ecology, "the environment", etc] (however >>this may be established) then those inclined to believe he was >>abducted on the night in question would have a small piece of >>circumstantial evidence on their side. [...] >In an earlier post, wondering what de C's environmental beliefs >might be, our favorite nobleman noted: >>It would still be interesting to know what the answers really >>are, even if it would be somewhat unkind to ask why no one >>raised these questions before. >So the point is that the worthy Duke, from the vastness of his >Welsh fortress, does in fact believe that de Cuellar's >environmental record might just possibly provide evidence (even >if only a small piece) in the Linda case. The point, from my crumbling ancestral *f*astness, is contained in that immediately previous quote from me. There is a subtle difference between what I'd find interesting to know and what I believe. What *I* believe or not (most of which, as you well know, is unsuitable for family viewing) is neither here nor there. >[...] Peter's impish commentary depends >on an unstated assumption, namely that abductees change their >behavior in ways that correspond with what they believe the >aliens have told them. There is no evidence for this. No, Greg, old fruit. I'm sure there's not. But that is neither here nor there, either. My actual unstated assumption is that people presented with dramatic evidence - or dramatically presented with what they believe to be evidence - that such and such is so and so, may believe it, even to the extent of changing their previous position on that question. This has nothing to do with being an abductee or not. Heavens, I've even done it myself - ironically, for one example, on the very issue of "environmentalism" - without having to be abducted. >[...] Many of Hopkins' abductees believe they've had >environmental messages from the aliens. >Not many, to the best of my knowledge, have acted on them. On the >basis of this data, there is no way to predict how any abductee >will react to a believe that he or she has received these >messages. Therefore there's no way to predict how de Cuellar >would react. And because of that, there's no way that his >environmental record could possibly provide even circumstantial >evidence suggesting that he does or doesn't believe he's been >abducted. I agree entirely with this last sentence, but then I didn't propose that anything to do with de Ceullar's environmental record *would* indicate anything else about his *beliefs* about his alleged abduction. The logic is deadly (note that word) simple: 1. PdeC has a reactionary or conservative or neutral position on environmentalism up to and including 28 November 1989. 2. After 29 November 1989, PdeC is observed to alter his position - perhaps radically - to any point to the "left" in favor of environmentalism, green politics, conserving wildlife, etc 3. Some people say PdeC was abducted early on 29 November 1989 and handbagged by one of them with a dead fish and a "green" message. 4. That PdeC had a change of heart about environmentalism late in 1989 supports the story that the aforementioned some people are telling. What I'd like to know (and "Witnessed" doesn't tell us) is whether (1) and (2) are true. If they are, (4) follows. It may not be the greatest logic on the face of the Earth, and there may be totally different reasons for this alteration. If (1) and (2) *are* true, but let's say it occurred because of what PdeC's mistress told him, it may be that the hoaxers in Linda's case knew about this alteration and were inspired to slide the dead fish into the story so that they could one day use the logic laid out above to support their merry fabrication. I'm not suggesting that *no* alteration in PdeC's views proves anything. That corollary doesn't follow. *I* am not saying *some* alteration *proves* anything. I'd just like to know what is actually the case. [huge snip] >And if [Linda] wasn't influenced, why should de Cuellar be? Why should he not be? Individuals have different reactions to experience. Turn this question around and you see how it makes no sense. In other words, if Linda *had been* influenced, why should de Cuellar be too? He might be being paid millions to lobby for the chemical industry, and think: "Sod the aliens. I vote for Mammon." Or he might just not be convinced by an hysterical demonstration that was a bit thin on science. >This whole discussion makes me sad. If we began from accurate >information, we wouldn't have to have it. Oh, Greg, cheer up, do, have a dram or listen to the Schubert octet or something. It is the accurate information that I am after so that we can begin at all. And although you observed a certain impishness here you seem to have overlooked what it was up to. best wishes (big grin) Pressando D. Melopoeia Metro Gnome
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 18 Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculouso From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl> Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 07:04:13 +0200 (MET DST) Fwd Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 09:36:16 -0400 Subject: Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculouso >Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 13:02:13 +0100 >From: Mike Smith <mickey@anix.co.uk> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculouso >Hi all, >Loy Pressley wrote: >> Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 13:22:49 -0700 >> From: Loy Pressley <lpressle@webwide.net> >> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculouso <Big snip> >Here goes. [Simply, I Hope] >A quantum particle reaching a barrier, through which it cannot >pass. [Here's the tricky bit: calculations, equations, >observations. Just have to take my word for it, me and the other >ranks of trained monkeys] Has a finite chance of appearing on the >other side. This appearing on the other side takes place without >passing through the intervening media, or at least by passing >through it very 'quickly'. It appears that particles on a quantum >level can use this tunneling effect to exceed c. >It was previously held that no coherent information could be >passed via this method of travel as this would effect causality, >and also that such effects could not occur on a macroscopic >level. >However, it now appears that this is not the case. As was stated >in my previous post some physicists believe that they have >transmitted Mozart at 3.7 c, using microwaves. They have not as >yet 100% ruled out experimental error, but are working on doing >so. <Another big snip> >Hope these help, don't have a web reference for the Mozart stuff. >Got that from various publications/journals. But it's probably >held somewhere electronically, if you're interested look around. From New Scientist April 1, 1995, paraphrased: 'In March 1995 Gunther Nimtz of the University of Cologne announced at a colloquium in Snowbird, Utah, that his team at Cologne had not only measured superluminal speeds for their microwaves, but had actually sent a signal faster than light. The signal was Mozart's 40th Symphony. What they did was frequency modulate their microwave source with the music and then measure how quickly the music arrived after traversing the forbidden zone in a waveguide. According to Nimtz the 40th hopped 12 cm of space at 4.7 times the speed of light. Nimtz had a recording to prove it.' The New Scienitst adds that skeptics are not sure that Mozart's 40th is a real signal. __________________________________________ / Met vriendelijke groet/Best wishes \ Henny van der Pluijm hvdp@worldonline.nl Technology Pages http://www.worldonline.nl/~hvdp \______________________________________/
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 18 Re: UFO crash video From: Dave Everett <deverett@vir.idx.com.au> Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 15:48:22 +1000 Fwd Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 09:46:01 -0400 Subject: Re: UFO crash video Last night on Channel 10 news (here in Australia) they showed a short video clip that I believe is being shown at the Brisbane UFO Symposium. The video camera tracks a glowing object (looks cigar shaped or disc seen from the side) as it travels from right to left. The object follows an arc toward the ground, strikes the surface and bounces back into the air, following a parabolic trajectory before hitting the ground again and exploding into many glowing pieces. The whole trajectory is reminiscent of a stone skipping on water. The object is travelling at a high speed and appears to be quite large (forgive me for those precise technical phrases). Does anyone have more information on this video or have the faintest idea what I'm talking about? Dave Everett.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 18 BWW Media Alert 971017 From: BufoCalvin@aol.com Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 02:04:03 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 09:52:03 -0400 Subject: BWW Media Alert 971017 Bufo Calvin, P O Box 5231, Walnut Creek, CA 94596 E-mail: BufoCalvin@aol.com Website: http://members.aol.com/bufocalvin ( BufoCalvin's Home Page ) TAP (The Address Project) Bufo's WEIRD WORLD e-zine Bufo's WEIRD WORLD Media Alert Bufo's WEIRD WORLD Books ( Bufo's WEIRD WORLD Books ) ALL RIGHTS RESERVED (permission is granted to reproduce or redistribute this edition of Bufo's WEIRD WORLD Media Alert provided that attribution is made to http://members.aol.com/bufocalvin. It is good etiquette to check with strangers before you e-mail them something. If you forward this, please make sure it is clear that you are forwarding it). October 17, 1997 Well, busy week. I'm starting a great new job, but that may make these a bit more abbreviated than usual, at least for the 90 day "ramp up" period. On the other hand, I may actually get more time to work on it...not all worked out yet. You've probably noticed the two test messages recently. My mailing list benefactor is enabling this to go to a different mailing system, and I'm getting up to speed on it. This may look a bit odd, but we'll see. I'd better get to it while I can squeeze some time in...Oh, and this Sunday at 5:30 PM Pacific (times here are generally Pacific) I will make my debut as an every other week feature on Eddie Middleton's NIGHT SEARCH on WREC 600 AM in Memphis, TN. It's a big station, and if you are in the area, you may be able to hear it. ON-LINE OMNI MAGAZINE (http://www.omnimag.com Omni Magazine ) is back to do real time conferences. The regular night for our kind of stuff is Tuesday 7:00 PM to 8:00 PM Pacific. No details available. UK.UFO.NW (tons of irc addresses, the channel is #UFO...you can get there through http://www.holodeck.demon.co.uk/ultrachat.html), 3:00 PM (Pacific), Saturday. No details available. RADIO AND TELEVISION SYNDICATED RADIO: END OF THE LINE is now SIGHTINGS ON THE RADIO. This has resulted, among other things, in a new website: http://www.sightings.com. SIGHTINGS ON THE RADIO Next week's guests not known (except for Michael Lindemann ...he'll be on at 6:00 PM Wednesday as I write this, but you can check their website on Monday. It can also be heard on your computer. Airtimes: M-F 7-10 PM Pacific (times given here are generally Pacific),. Sunday 8-11 PM Pacific. Archives of earlier shows are also available, so you can hear my previous broadcasts through this site. SYNDICATED TV: LOOKING BEYOND --No details available PSI-FACTOR (see http://www.psifactor.com for stations and airdates and other info). This series is supposedly based on real cases. --COMMUNION: After a UFO encounter, an experiencer gains the ability to affect living cells Saturday, October 18 RADIO: THE EDGE OF REALITY, 5:00 PM -8:00 PM Pacific. Also available on Satcom C5, Transponder 23, SEDAT Channel 24. The specific spots have to be considered tentative, and the station in your area may run it tape-delayed. I've found out recently that the one in my area even runs it out of order, running the third hour first! No details available. 2:30 PM, THE DISCOVERY CHANNEL, ARTHUR C. CLARKE'S MYSTERIOUS WORLD: NEAR-DEATH EXPERIENCES 6:00 PM, THE DISCOVERY CHANNEL, SCI-TREK: THE LOST MAMMOTHS (This says it deals with living mammoths...) Sunday, October 19 LOCAL RADIO, WREC 600 AM, Memphis, TN, NIGHT SEARCH WITH EDDIE MIDDLETON (I'll be on this...) SYNDICATED RADIO, 7:00 PM, ART BELL'S DREAMLAND: Art interviews William Buhlman, author of ADVENTURES BEYOND THE BODY(see website at http://www.artbell.com) LOCAL TELEVISION, 1:00 PM, KRCB in the San Francisco area, THINKING ALLOWED, ACTIVATING YOUR INTUITION: YOUR SIXTH SENSE, with Belleruth Naparstek, author of Your Sixth Sense: Activating Your Psychic Potential ( <A HREF="http://www. amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0062514938/bufosweirdworldA/">Your Sixth Sense: Ac tivating Your Psychic Potential</A> ) (part 2 of 2) LOCAL TELEVISION, 6-7pm, Portland public access, CAN Channel 11 (live): COSMIC CONNECTION: Crop circle researcher Ilyes. Call-ins (503/ 667-7434). LOCAL TELEVISION, KING COUNTY WASHINGTON, CHANNEL 29, 10:30 PM: JOURNEY: Brenda Roberts produces. 11:00 AM, THE SCI-FI CHANNEL, SIGHTINGS (#5065): ENCOUNTER OVER ENGLAND (UFO in 1993); THE WAY OF THE EXPLORER (astronaut Edgar Mitchell); SCHOOL SPIRITS (haunted Amerind school in Nevada); MONSTER OF THE ANDES (Abuelita, a lake monster) 4:00 PM, THE SCI-FI CHANNEL, SIGHTINGS (#5065): ENCOUNTER OVER ENGLAND (UFO in 1993); THE WAY OF THE EXPLORER (astronaut Edgar Mitchell); SCHOOL SPIRITS (haunted Amerind school in Nevada); MONSTER OF THE ANDES (Abuelita, a lake monster) 6:00 PM, THE DISCOVERY CHANNEL, ARTHUR C. CLARKE'S MYSTERIOUS WORLD: THE RIDDLE OF THE STONES (Stonehenge, etc.) 6:30 PM, THE DISCOVERY CHANNEL, INTO THE UNKNOWN: Giant lizards...Aussie cryptozoologist Rex Gilroy goes in search of giant goannas 10:00 PM, THE SCI-FI CHANNEL, SIGHTINGS (#5065): ENCOUNTER OVER ENGLAND (UFO in 1993); THE WAY OF THE EXPLORER (astronaut Edgar Mitchell); SCHOOL SPIRITS (haunted Amerind school in Nevada); MONSTER OF THE ANDES (Abuelita, a lake monster) Monday, October 20 SYNDICATED TV, MONDAY, STRANGE UNIVERSE: (see website at http://www.strangeuniverse.com (( Strange Universe )) for stations and playtimes in your area.) LOCAL TELEVISION, SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON, 3:00 PM: JOURNEY: Brenda Roberts produces. 10:01 AM, THE SCI-FI CHANNEL, MYSTERIES, MAGIC & MIRACLES (#34): Holiday Compilation" of past shows: Beating The Odds (superior performances by challenged kids); Our Lady of the Rock (Marian vision); Guardian Angels 10:00 PM, THE DISCOVERY CHANNEL, STRICTLY SUPERNATURAL: Seance Tuesday, October 21 SYNDICATED TV, TUESDAY, STRANGE UNIVERSE: (see website at http://www.strangeuniverse.com for stations and playtimes in your area) 2:00 AM, THE DISCOVERY CHANNEL, STRICTLY SUPERNATURAL: Seance 10:01 AM, THE SCI-FI CHANNEL, MYSTERIES, MAGIC AND MIRACLES (#35): Labyrinth; Graphology; Hotel Hell 10:00 PM, THE DISCOVERY CHANNEL, STRICTLY SUPERNATURAL: Tarot
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 18 PUFORI UFO News Apologises From: "Anthony Chippendale" <ufos@chipp.clara.net> Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 07:46:09 +0000 Fwd Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 19:55:05 -0400 Subject: PUFORI UFO News Apologises Hi, I must apologise over last weeks publication problems with PUFORI UFO news Issue 2. I had some problems with me web site and so I gave you the wrong URL to see it. the correct URL for Issue 2 is http://www.chipp.clara.bnet/news2.txt Anthony Chippendale, Editor.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 18 Re: From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl> Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 08:23:58 +0200 (MET DST) Fwd Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 19:54:05 -0400 Subject: Re: >From: DevereuxP@aol.com [Paul Devereux] >Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 02:15:28 -0400 (EDT) >To: updates@globalserve.net >Subject: Solved abduction cases? >Dear Jerry, >In response to my mild concerns about your 1 October attack on >the Duke of Mendoza, you wrote on Monday 6 October: >>From: clark@canby.mn.frontiercomm.net [Jerome Clark] >>Date: Mon, 06 Oct 1997 10:38:50 PDT >>To: updates@globalserve.net >>Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Solved abduction cases? >>Paul, >>You're in your mind-reading mode, I'm afraid, my friend. You >>don't know me well, so -- in defense of a not particularly <Big Snip> >Well, Jerry, I'm positively amazed that my gentle and brief >comments should provoke such a screed from you! Forgive me for >thinking that you are being a little over-defensive. But, well, >if that's the way you want it .... >JC: "I also see the inevitable North America bashing, a >particular obsession of yours. Correct me if I'm wrong, but >don't you actually live here at least part of the time?" >PD: You aren't thinking clearly, Jerry. I am not North America >bashing at all. (And how dare you lump Canada in with the USA? >The fact that Chris RutKowski lives in Canada shouldn't malign a >whole nation.) I love the USA, and I think it has many strong >points, its people are generous, I love the energy the US has, I >truly do love NYC, I have many dear US friends, and much, much >else. No, I am not bashing the United States, I am being highly >critical of the dominant, ET-literalist paradigm that infects >nearly all of US ufology. Those two things are not the same. >However, there is a literlaist tendency in US society as a whole, >and that finds its microcosm in US ufology - a ufology that has >been exported so that it is virtually international at the >popular level. >And yes, indeed, I spend at least half my time here in the States >- we have a home on both sides of the Atlantic. You make my point >for me. THAT IS PRECISELY WHY I AM IN A UNIQUE POSITION TO OFFER >MY CRITICISMS. It is a fact, plain and simple yet again, that in >British ufology, and I'm sure in the ufology of many other West >European countries, the literalist view is balanced more >effectively by alternative approaches than it is in the US. It is >a healthier research climate in British ufology, notwithstanding >that at the tabloid pop end of the business (and business it is) >it is still literalism based on imported Americana. >You simply cannot take the cultural influence out of this thing, >Jerry. I stick absolutely to my claim that you have been affected >by the cultural milieu in which you live, move, think and have >your being. You can't see it, because you are in it. I can see >it. You may play fancier footwork than most, but you are still in >the ET-literalist ballpark of US ufology. Paul, This is nonsense. I am a European and I have never seen any indication that the ET view is taken less seriously in Europe or elsewhere than in the USA. If you could read French and German you would see that on French and German web sites the ET hypotheses is taken just as seriously as in the USA or Canada or the UK for that matter. Especially the French are not known for following the USA wherever it goes. The UFOs that were observed over Arizona in March are just as literal as the UFOs that were detected on radar in March 1990 in Belgium. The crash of an alien spaceship in Roswell in 1947 is just as real as the crash of an alien spaceship in Dalnegorsk, Siberia, in 1986. Not only is the ET hypothesis taken seriously outside the USA, government officials of several countries, such as Chile, Belgium, Mexico and Russia, have openly stated that their air space has been violated by craft that do not originate on this earth. Yes, there is a lot of US material known in other countries, more than is known about the rest of the world in the US. This is due to: . the English language that is almost universally understood . the might of the American media . the fact that ETs have apparently taken a bigger interest in the US than in other countries, because of the level of technology present, especially nuclear and radar technology. See the case books. Nonetheless, sensitive installations in other countries have also been visited by alien craft, the Bentwaters/Woodbridge case in 1980 in the UK (then NATO's largest nuclear stockpile) being a textbook example. __________________________________________ / Met vriendelijke groet/Best wishes \ Henny van der Pluijm hvdp@worldonline.nl Technology Pages http://www.worldonline.nl/~hvdp \______________________________________/
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 18 ACC: Remarkable Update By Bob Wolf From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose) Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 12:45:50 +0100 Fwd Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 20:17:45 -0400 Subject: ACC: Remarkable Update By Bob Wolf Found at: http://www.sightings.com/ufo/accandloseufo.htm ************************** SIGHTINGS =BF ACC/Transistor Origin Update and Did the Air Force LOSE a UFO?! by Bob Wolf 10-17-97 (Note: The following key points were edited from Bob Wolf's lengthy ACC update by Stig Agermose) =BF Scientists at S.G. Thompson, RCA Research, Lawrence Livermore, NASA, ACSA, Sarnoff Research and the Department of Defense all agree that the Transistor was "brand spanking new" in December of 1947, had no precedent and appeared to be inadequately and hastily researched, and was unconnected to any prior technology. =BF Also: Nasa Astronaut Edgar Mitchell agrees with the basic idea of the technology transfer at that time and later, "from a UFO captured by the Defense Department". (See http://www.sightings.com/ufo/mitchell.htm and http://american-computer.com/mitchell.htm - editor's note) =BF And: if you really knew anything about the Transistor's phenomenological physics, you would know that there is NO WAY that William Shockley could have stumbled onto it by studying "High Back Voltage" Germanium Diodes. =BF Or, hundreds of others who studied such Germanium diodes would have noticed the phenomena. I feel, from reviewing the patent with an ex-Patent Office examiner, that Bell/Shockley (and Bardeen and Brattain) was "painting a rainbow to convince the RUBES" back in 1947 that was pretty common as people were not as thorough as they are today in analyzing incoming patents for "flawed history" - and if you know the patent process, all he has to do is CLAIM "original authorship" of an idea (it doesn't have to be accurate, just unique, original and not previously patented) and nothing more, if it can't be DISPROVEN by the patent officer at the time, one gets the patent. =BF The US Department of Commerce, Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) is running "a great game" - or so it appears. And if you know the ups and downs, you can turn a sows ear into a silk purse, even if it doesn't belong to you, as AT&T did in 1948. =BF No matter how great a Scientist Shockley (and his partners were) -- His Transistor story is nonsense and the entire story must have been made up by Bell to hide the origins of the Transistor at the Defense Department's Army Research Institute or Air Force Labs, at least, and possibly, from the Roswell or other UFO captured by them. His story and every related author who wrote one BASED ON SHOCKLEY's ACCOUNT - incidentally - since 1948, have become nothing more than the recasting of false lines of assumption that research on Diode Rectifiers (which are unipolar current conductors AND NOTHING MORE) led to the remarkable Transistor (which is a bipolar, configurable, variable switch and amplifier that has properties that we discover anew every year - note the new "multilevel switches" INTEL and IBM are claiming will revolutionize memory - announced in the last few weeks). =BF As Bell unravelled the mysteries of the "unknown object" newly given them (as now verified by Don McNally and the US Department of Defense) in August of 1947, Bell proceeded to patent and patent more and more electronic concepts -- all derived from the "unknown object". =BF American Computer has received VERIFICATION from the Defense Department that the "object" in the possession of Bell from which Bell created "doctored up patent applications, as if they were there own patent ideas" (and that's a direct quote) derived from a "Special Contract" between the "Defense Communication Development - Extreme Wavelengths" Lab at Bell Labs Holmdel, and the US Department of Defense, who provided AT&T the "object" which was unsuccessfully analyzed by scientists at the Air Force Laboratories, then forwarded to Bell. The DoD has indicated it is not fully aware of why it did not retrieve the "object" given Bell back, nor why it did not enforce the US Laws prohibiting it from giving Taxpayer Property to Bell Labs for its own profit in 1947. =BF They do, however, indicate that Bell scientists at AT&T's sole "science and technology research" in the Transistor, by December of 1947, consisted of "examing the device under microscopes, testing it with electronic probes, conjecturing on how it might work, then trying to duplicate some of its function" -- all of which was research work paid by the DoD and all of which was supposed to be turned back over to the Air Force Labs, in Massachusetts by January of 1949, without Bell Labs retaining any copies - by law. It wasn't turned back over and Bell kept the originals, or so the DoD feels. Due to the reorganization of the Army Air Force into the United States Air Force, in 1947/48, and movement of laboratories around the US, through what the DoD has indicated was a "trick of fate", it (the "unknown object" - from an extraterrestrially developed technology) was never retrieved from Bell, AND after some years, the "forgetful" Department of the Army forgot, and successor staff never even NEW that the technology became Bell Labs defacto property "by default", that is, until a subsequent investigation some 25 years later, when, in fact, Bell was forced to return the original device "to the National Storage Archives", but DoD was unable to do anything about the Trillion dollars in windfall profits that Bell had derived from the transfer. =BF So, people, I guess that's why they are keeping it all a secret: the Army mucked it all up and the Air Force lost it. And guess what, people: WE PAID FOR IT, AND THEN WE PAID AT&T THROUGH THE NOSE TO USE OUR OWN PROPERTY!!! Typical. And over the years, AT&T has bought and paid for Governmental personnel and officials to "look the other way", so the Public would never suspect a thing! =BF I understand a very wealthy billionaire has offered American Computer a ton of money to help the Air Force OSI find the "now missing UFO", which apparently, has also been "misplaced" due to secrecy compounded upon secrecy compounded upon misdirection compounded upon counterintelligence method compounded upon secrecy, or so the rumors are flying. =BF Jack Shulman, whom I called today to try to confirm the story, indicated he had promised the Air Force not to reveal its statements until it had sufficient time to verify "certain facts", yet said to me by phone this afternoon that he might have "heard a rumor that the USAF misplaced it's UFO" as a result of the depths of paranoia and its own covert operations, and then he commented: =BF "How do you lose a UFO?" =BF We both laughed for a full 5 minutes. Then we ended the short telephone conversation. =BF (snipped) =BF IT (the transistor ed.) CAME FROM AN ALIEN SPACECRAFT CAPTURED BY THE 1ST INVESTIGATION RECONNAISANCE CORP (an elite unit of the Army Air Force in 1947 that reported to General Dwight David Eisenhower) which then was secreted first in Roswell, where electronics were "lifted" to Massachusets (to an Army AF lab there) then to Holmdel (to Bell Labs), then two months later the UFO was transported by night to Wright Patterson, then much later it was transfered and stored at a supersecret weapons laboratory in, of all places, ROME, NY (all roads lead to Rome) at Griffiths AF Base, later repaired and test flown, and pieces of which were transported to the Pentagon, examined, and later disseminated, exactly as suggested by Ed Mitchell, and described by Col. Phillip Corso, to various companies for duplication and commercialization. =BF It was Eisenhower who hid the technology, after Truman tried to interfere, and it was Ike who caused AT&T and other companies to be able to use pieces of it, by direct Executive order, it was Eisenhower's way: he was a fan of "doing it quietly, in the back door, out the front", it was one of his basic political tactics - quiet, behind the scenes "manipulation". =BF Oh, yes, and some information from the UFO went to NASA... =BF And now, because of all the mighty efforts to hide its existence, the Air Force has "misplaced it" and can't seem to find it's whereabouts. =BF Or so they say. =BF (snipped) =BF I'm guessing: =BF For their next trick, ACC will cause the US Air Force to go back on General Shalikashvili's "sneering disclaimer", agree with various Nasa officials, including Dr. Edgar Mitchell, and with Col. Corso, and then publically admit they have Alien Technology in their possession, and admit that BELL LABS did receive "pieces of the UFO" that they subsequently turned into the Transistor, and other inventions that gave them a technological advantage that has never been surmounted. =BF -- Bob Wolf Email =BFeotl@west.net Homepage UFOs
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 18 Re: Solved abduction cases? From: Chris Penrose <penrose@cmlab.sfc.keio.ac.jp> Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 18:59:23 +0900 (GMT+0900) Fwd Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 20:28:18 -0400 Subject: Re: Solved abduction cases? >From: DevereuxP@aol.com [Paul Devereux] >Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 02:15:28 -0400 (EDT) >To: updates@globalserve.net >Subject: Solved abduction cases? >As part of this research, we are doing a deep and wide literature >search. This spans not only lucid dream material, but ranges >though various other categories, contemporary and historical, >even including certain archaeological and ethnological material. >It is clear without any shade of doubt that THE UFO ABDUCTION >REPORT MATERIAL IS ONLY A SUB-GROUP OF A MUCH WIDER LITERATURE. I have had assorted lucid dreaming experiences throughout my life, often during daytime napping, and when I was younger at the end of sleep. I am convinced this phenomenae exists. Furthermore, it is possible that it is a literal explanation for some reputed abduction experiences; however, there are documented abduction cases involving witnesses, where the experience is shared to some degree by groups of people. Lucid dreaming is a very tenuous explanation for mass or group hallucination. In my understanding, mass hallucination as an explanation is folklore on to itself. Perhaps Paul has some insight into some experimentally demonstratable mechanisms that could account for groups of people enter lucid dreaming states simultaneously, while still telepathically interacting together and sharing, in essence, the same experience. Perhaps Paul's explanation will be "any group abduction experience is a hoax". This isn't a "straw man" Paul, I just want to save you the trouble of saying this if you intend to. I am not being facetious, I am interested in any mechanisms that could potentially explain group experiences. Christopher Penrose penrose@sfc.keio.ac.jp
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 18 Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculouso From: Loy Pressley <lpressle@webwide.net> Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 07:16:01 -0700 Fwd Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 20:34:39 -0400 Subject: Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculouso > Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 13:02:13 +0100 > From: Mike Smith <mickey@anix.co.uk> > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculouso > Hi all, > Loy Pressley wrote: > > Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 13:22:49 -0700 > > From: Loy Pressley <lpressle@webwide.net> > > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculouso > [Snip] > Just some general points about my post and interstellar travel. > Given our present level of technology and the political will, > it is possible for us to build craft cabable of between 10 and 25% > SPEOL. > We also have an understanding of other newer technologies that may > in the future provide even faster speeds. All of this is well > documented and understood. > I was merely tring to point out that, 'Can aliens travel from there > to here ?' is a stupid question to ask. If it is possible for us to > do this at our present technological level, without resort to warp > drive or anti-gravity, then another more technologically advanced > society could get here no problem. I agree with what you're saying. If you, as I do, believe that they are here, then an argument that they can't get here is purely rhetorical. I did not mean to imply that we could not have visitors from another star system because physical laws prohibit travel over such great distances. What I did mean to say was that travel between the stars at less than light speed is impractical even with the time dilation effect unless you are an extremely long lived race. Therefore; visitors from other star systems must either be very long lived or be using some type of propulsion system that allows faster than light speeds. My personal opinion (unsupported by any facts or observation, i.e., a guess) is that they use some kind of field generated around the ship that causes the ship and occupants to have zero mass. For all intents and purposes, something with zero mass will not interact with anything in this universe; therefore it could be propelled with almost no fuel and could accelerate forever if need be. No shielding would be required because the craft and occupants could not be affected by anything that had mass. Use of such a field might account for the blurred appearance of most UFO images and, if the field could be projected, account for abductees descriptions of floating through walls, etc. Likewise, we can never shoot down a UFO who is operating with this field energized because an object fired at it could not interact with it. Having the ability to generate a field that renders things massless explains a lot of the observed characteristics of UFOs. <BIG SNIP> > Okay, now we get to quantum physics. > > > The Quantum Tunneling effect is one of these. This > > > is okay, its accepted. > > Please explain. <SNIP> > As you can hopefully understand, this is quite a science-shattering > event and is therefore subjected to even more scepticism than possibly > even ufology. Thanks for the great explanation. I can understand...the speed of light is deemed to be pretty sacred by most physicists. Thanks, Mike, for the discussion and the URLs. Even though thinking about light speed, quantum effects, etc., usually gives me a big headache (I usually get caught in an infinite IF/THEN/ELSE loop), I'll check out the URLs. Loy
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 18 Skywatch: House Of Lords Question Time From: skywatch@wic.net (SKYWATCH) Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 06:10:40 -0700 Fwd Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 20:58:11 -0400 Subject: Skywatch: House Of Lords Question Time ------- Forwarded Message Follows ------- Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 12:39:23 +0100 To: skywatch@wic.net From: georgina@easynet.co.uk Subject: Re: HOUSE OF LORDS QUESTION TIME (UFO) Nick Pope sent this over The House of Lords (UK) Questions in the House - 14 October 1997 Written Answers Lieutenant Colonel Charles Halt: Memorandum LORD HILL-NORTON asked her Majesty's Government: Whether the Ministry of Defence replied to the 1981 memorandum from Lieutenant Colonel Charles Halt, which reported the presence of an unidentified craft that had landed in close proximity to RAF Bentwaters and RAF Woodbridge, witnessed by United States Air Force personnel; and if not, why not and How the radiation readings reported to the Ministry of Defence by Lieutenant Colonel Charles Halt in his memorandum dated 13 January 1981 compare to the normal levels of background radiation in Rendelsham Forest. LORD GILBERT: The memorandum, which reported observations of unusual lights in the sky, was assessed by staff in the MoD responsible for air defence matters. Since the judgment was that it contained nothing of defence significance, no further action was taken. There is no record of any official assessment of the radiation readings reported by Lieutenant Colonel Halt. From a Defence perspective some sixteen and a half years after the alleged events, there is no requirements to carry out such an assessment now. Mid-Air Explosion, Isle of Lewis LORD HILL NORTON asked Her Majesty's Government: What was the military involvement in the search for the unidentified object that witnesses believe exploded in mid air, before crashing into the sea off the Isle of Lewis on 26 October 1996, and what liaison took place with the US authorities with regard to this incident. LORD GILBERT: Following media reports of an explosion, initially attributed to a mid-air collision north of the Butt of Lewis, an extensive search of the area was carried out by RAF and Coastguard Search and Rescue assets, but was later abandoned after it became clear that no aircraft had been reported overdue. HQ US 3rd Air Force were also approached at the time. They confirmed that there had been no US military activity in the area. =========================================================== Lord Gilbert's reply stating that there is no requirement to carry out an assessment sixteen and a half years after the alleged event is ridiculous considering that researchers have been trying to get answers from the MoD since the event first took place. Also the reference to "lights in the sky" was a put down considering witnesses reported an actual "landing". One wonders how long the MoD will continue to insist "It is of no Defence significance". The Rt Hon. The Lord Gilbert is the Minister for Defence Procurement. I am to understand that his answers would have been prepared for him by MoD employees and passed (probably altered) by higher bodies. Thanks to Nick Pope for bringing this to our attention Georgina Bruni georgina@easynet.co.uk Georgina Bruni georgina@easynet.co.uk =========================================================== ---------------------------------------------- Skywatch International and this list service are not responsible for authenticity of posts. ---------------------------------------------- Skywatch International, Inc. skywatch@wic.net "Strange is sometimes stranger when it's true" For latest UFO and Paranormal information Site: http://www.wic.net/colonel/ufopage.htm ----------------------------------------------
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 18 Re: Researching Abduction Cases From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 01:33:26 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 20:41:34 -0400 Subject: Re: Researching Abduction Cases >Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 11:26:24 -0700 (PDT) >From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@ucs.orst.edu> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Researching Abduction Cases >> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Researching Abduction Cases >> Date: Wed, 15 Oct 97 21:35:50 -0000 >> From: Paul <pwedel@neptune.on.ca> [Paul Wedel] >> To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net> >> >Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 14:31:00 -0500 >> >To: updates@globalserve.net >> >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >> >Subject: Researching abduction cases >> >Abduction research -must be- taken out of the hands of amateurs >> >and para-professionals. Not so much for the sake of the research >> >itself, there are many 'amateurs' that can do as competent if not >> >better job than some pros, but for the sake of the well being of >> >those individuals reporting. [...] >> >John Velez, Abductee Union Rep. >> Hey Johnny, >> [...] >> With respect to as many abductee's as possible coming forward >> (a.m.a.a.p.c.f) I believe the initial phase of that will not >> occur unless some brave, brave people agree to move en masse (en >> englais, c'est "as a big forceful, credible group chewing hard >> gum and wearing stirrups). [...] >One more opinion -- a compromise?: >I think that UFO abductees should indeed be encouraged to go to >mainstream psychologists/psychiatrists for treatment or >uncovering of memories, but *only if* they have strong assurance >that the practitioner under consideration is considerably more >open minded and considerate than average. At IF we have a large list of resource people (MHP's) that are scattered across the country. I wish we had more. I made it a point to call and speak with each and every one. I wasn't about to refer people to MHP's I hadn't met or spoken with myself. I always followed up each referal to make sure that the individual was satisfied with the guy/gal he had been sent to. I have maintained an ongoing dialog with most of them so it's easy for me to monitor them and how they were doing. But I agree with you 100% MHP's must be selected carefully. As long as no-one is imposing any belief systems on anyone everything is cool. >Otherwise, there is just no point in seeing a "hard-nosed" >mainstream psychologist who will think the abductee is >hallucinating, fabricating, or whatever. There is no changing >such a person's belief system, which has no room for existence of >aliens, short of most of his trusted colleagues becoming >enlightened first. Such a person will simply make life more >miserable for the abductee. Ja mon! Again, I agree. >But I know of no definite way to learn about which >psychologists/psychiatrists in which locations might be >open-minded enough to be prepared to confront an abductee for the >first time and ask himself/herself, "Maybe this really happened! >I need to treat it seriously, and start reading up on any related >literature about it that I can find." When I refer someone nowadays I e-mail them a copy of the MIT Code of Ethics for abduction researchers and tell them to present a copy to the therapist at their first visit. You can read/download a copy at the AIC (Abduction Information Center) website. -Which is only partially up BTW- http://www.crossfields.com/~aic/code.html >Regarding whether abductees should come forward en masse, and >thereby perhaps gain more attention and credibility, I don't >think this would work, as they would all be categorized into one >group and characterized as "nutty" or some such by the press. >However, if it were one of those million-person affairs, it would >then likely gain the attention of a few brave, open-minded >reporters and succeed partially. Jim, I pray that I can never muster one million abductees! -That- would be truly frightening. If there -are- a million of us, then God help us all. John Velez John Velez jvif@spacelab.net
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 18 Mars Observer [was: Alien Autopsy Film] From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net> Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 16:13:52 -0700 Fwd Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 21:23:11 -0400 Subject: Mars Observer [was: Alien Autopsy Film] Roger R. Prokic wrote: > Date: Fri, 17 Oct 97 07:44:57 > From: "Roger R. Prokic" <rprokic@ibm.net> > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > Subject: Alien Autopsy Film > I haven't heard what the best resolution would be... but > now indications are that the solar array is indeed intact > and that they will eventually continue tthe aerobraking > and circularize for mapping... We should hear more soon. > Also, it's pretty evident that the general public wants > the MOC to take pix of the Face On Mars and Cydonia... > our mission control folks are interviewed all the time by > local and national news crews... they all ask about the > Face on Mars! <g> Thanks for the good news, Roger. You're quite right about the people's desire to image Cydonia. And, IMO, NASA is obligated to do so. Their charter calls them a public space agency, not a defense agency; so, I would think that, not only is the information obtained by NASA public information, but, the information sought should be that desired by the public. The people wanted to land on the moon thanks to the great public relations job by President Kennedy. During the 60's we heard very little squawking about money "wasted in space" which could be used in other public programs. Such criticism is often heard today. If I were Goldin, I'd hire a PR agency and follow their advice on how to promote NASA. If the public supports a program, congress will follow suit with the required funds. Besides, if there is a program underway to acquaint the public with the existance of life on other planets, including life which has visited Earth, what safer way to confirm it than discover a long dead civilization on our own neighbor? Hell, if Cydonia didn't exist, and I were the director of NASA, I'd fake it!!! New NASA Motto: "The Face is our Friend!" <G> Terry
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 18 Mexican UFO Video - Scam? From: James Easton <pulsar@compuserve.com> Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 16:10:50 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 21:46:26 -0400 Subject: Mexican UFO Video - Scam? The current issue of Fortean Times, FT 104, November 1997, notes that "Coming in next month's issue", is: UFO SCAM We blow the lid off the much-hyped Mexican UFO video footage. I've asked Bob Rickard if he could confirm whether this relates to the latest video and if he might drop a hint about the article's contents. James. E-mail: pulsar@compuserve.com
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 18 Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills From: Michael Christol <mchristo@mindspring.com> Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 20:27:42 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 22:29:44 -0400 Subject: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills >>I did so. I was informed that it did not occur in 1942, but >>in July, 1941, near a well known island in the South Pacific. >>I don't wish to tell all of the details. I want to see if >>someone else knows what I am talking about. >>Just think little boy and fat man....<G> >Hi Mike >I am currently researching a alledged UFO crashes at the moment >with a view to writing a book on it, (I get a little wound up >when people go on about Roswell as if it was the only crash) and >the only one that I can find listed for 1941 is Cape Giradeau, >Missouri. >Is this the case that you are referring to? Hi Sean... No, this has nothing to do with that case. I was given some information by a friend who is supposedly, "in the know." He stated that there was a crash in 1941, in the South Pacific, around July 4, from which the "transistor" was derived. So, they did not have from July 1947 to Dec. 1947 to back engineer the "transistor." According to my friend, they had "six years." That makes a difference, doesn't it? >I currently have 126 cases listed although a few are now "known" >to be false or hoaxes. > Are you a man or a mouse, come on squeek up! > Sean Jones Psychology will get you everywhere, Sean, except when dealing with me. <G> squeek, squeek...scurry, scurry....
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 18 Re: Did Satellites Image Phoenix Lights? From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose) Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 03:22:18 +0100 Fwd Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 22:27:26 -0400 Subject: Re: Did Satellites Image Phoenix Lights? Bill Hamilton writes: >From: William.Hamilton@pcsmail.pcshs.com >Date: 17 Oct 1997 20:08:35 UT >Subject: DID SATELLITES IMAGE THE PHOENIX >To: updates@globalserve.net >DID SATELLITES IMAGE THE PHOENIX LIGHTS? >I have reported previously that I had gotten word that NORAD >had detected a "fast walker" on March 13th. Some satellite >tracked an unknown intruder into US air space. >Also previously reported was the interview with the president >of American Computer Company, Jack Schulman, talked about >an Air Force satellite that had been disabled on March 13th. >This is a follow-up on those reports and I have Linda Howe >checking into this further. >One of our prime Phoenix witnesses, Mike Fortson, is responsible >for tracking this story. >The Army wants to shoot down an Air Force satellite with its >MIRACL laser installed at a sprawling base in the New Mexico >desert. The target is the Miniature Sensor Technology Integration >satellite, MSTI-3. The Air Force craft is the third in a series >of research satellites meant to improve the tracking of missiles >from space. The satellite, about the size of a refrigerator >and weighing 450 pounds, has telescopes and cameras for observing >hot rockets as well as the cool Earth, its imaging systems working >like those in spy satellites. >The camera on the satellite can see objects on the ground as small >as 30 feet across. >The satellite maker -- SPECTRUM ASTRO -- right here in Gilbert, >Arizona opposes having MIRACL fire its beam at the $60 million craft. >Mike Fortson called Spectrum Astro to talk with one of the engineers. >This engineer confirmed that on MARCH 13, the MSTI-3's batteries >suddenly went "dead" but now are functioning properly and he >cannot understand why the Army wants to destroy this satellite. >We now know that the first sighting in Arizona on March 13th was >at 5:30 pm mst in Crown King, AZ. Witnesses saw 3 solid V-shaped >craft and also stated that 3 F-16 fighterss came from the south >only to see the V's disappear and reappear minutes later when >the fighters left the area! >Admittedly, there are gaps in our knowledge of events on that day, >but new information is beginning to paint a picture of something >extraordinary. I hope to follow up this report with more later. >Linda may be reporting on these developments on DREAMLAND with >Art Bell this Sunday. >Sincerely, >Bill Hamilton >Exec Director >Skywatch International =09 (snipped) >Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 08:55:32 -0400 >From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >To: updates@globalserve.net >Subject: UFO UpDate: Did Satellites Image Phoenix Lights? >Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19971018085532.008486e0@205.206.120.7> >Mime-Version: 1.0 This is a transcript of Linda Howe's Dreamland interview, in which Shulman goes into the particulars of the story. It can be found at: http://bbs.artbell.com/cgi-bin/WebX?14@@.ee7039a/0 ***************************************** Art Bell Message Boards (snipped) Jack Shulman on Sept 14, 1997 Transcribed by Chris Terraneau (terranea@nicimg.com) sysop - 02:03am Sep 17, 1997 PDT (#1 of 1) Keith Rowland >From Art Bell's Dreamland radio program, 14 September 1997: LH =3D Linda Howe AB =3D Art Bell JS =3D Jack Shulman LH: Well, last Sunday on Dreamland and Monday night's Coast to Coast, I reported about the American Computer Company's website containing information from a consultant, who works for both the military and ACC concerning satellite communications systems. The consultant alleges that the Department of the Army retrieved debris and advanced technology in July, 1947 from two delta- shaped extraterrestrial craft at a crash site in the vicinity of Roswell, New Mexico. Some of that extraterrestrial technology was then hand delivered in September, 1947 to Bell Labs in Murray Hill, New Jersey according to this consultant. There he said, scientists back-engineered and filed for a patent on what became the transistor made of nearly pure silicon with traces of arsenic and other elements. More technology, such as integrated circuits, digital processors and modems followed from further analyis of the extraterrestrial technology, according to the consultant. Since my reports last week, many people have contacted me, some engineers, to argue both for and against the consultant's claims. In an upcoming Dreamland I hope to provide more information about the differences between the germanium diode that existed prior to September 1947 and the silicon transistor that emerged at Bell Labs in 1948, a few months later. But tonight my focus is on my trip to Cranford, New Jersey yesterday, September 13th to meet Jack Shulman, chairman of the American Computer Company, and to see his offices. American Computer Company is located on the second floor of a suite of offices in a business park. To get to ACC's floor you have to pass a security guard, and at night there are laser monitors at the outside doors. If they are interrupted signals go directly to security and to the local police department - all of which were demonstrated for me while I was there. However, Schulman showed me the pulverized glass left in the tracks of what had been the original ten foot high glass door to ACC's office before the middle of August. It was smashed by something to pieces no bigger than B-Bs, a week after he posted the consultant's information on ACC's webpage at the consultant's request, and, only two days after ACC's fax machine received what appeared to be a classified military communication that the consultant said was connected to the strange lights seen by hundreds of people over Arizona on March 13th, 1997, and reported here on Dreamland, Coast to Coast, and in the national media. ACC's security and local police did not know how intruders got past the laser alarm system, nor why pulverized pieces of this huge ten foot glass door were scattered for fifty feet down the hall toward the elevators. Before the breakin, Shulman had reported the unusual military fax and its content to the Central Inteligence Agency out of concern that he had a classified document that might be urgently needed by someone in the government. The CIA duty officer he reached listened to Shulman read the fax, and said, quote, "Oh, that's an asset of the United States Air Force", and suggested Shulman contact the Pentagon. He did, and then two days later the ACC office was broken into, before anyone from the government had come for the fax. Now here is Jack Shulman from ACC... JS: We started to get these pecular faxes, and they were about the very asset that the consultant had told me had been shut down by this alien fly-by on March 13th. LH: ...That ended up... JS: That ended up over Arizona, apparently, and being reportedly seen by thousands and tens of thousands of people in Arizona. LH: Can you elaborate about what the consultant saw and knew in terms of actual fact concerning a flyover by a non-human inteligence? JS: I beleive that this was not just over Arizona, but was detected in outer space. He stated that there was something that flew over, that it had lights, and was quite obviously some form of craft. And that there was in fact a piece of equipment that the Air Force uses for surveillance that sits over the United States, and that this vehicle flew over and deactivated it. It didn't destroy it, but it shut it down. Interestingly, those odd faxes that we received here, to the tech support fax machine that you saw as you walked in - we use that as a tech support fax - that caused us after we put the article on our website, to become alarmed that we were receiving classified military faxes at our fax machine from a computer that we had developed at American Computer that is in use, it turns out, by this particular surveillance system. And that somehow it was trying to contact us which seemed a little strange - why would this computer be trying to send messages to its original manufacturer? We discovered that the Air Force equipment had originated the materials in question that ended up at our fax machine, and we subsequently contacted the nearest possible source of that information and told them that we had received these classified faxes or fax. And that these things we felt was information that belonged to them and they asked us to secure the fax. LH: How many faxes did you receive? JS: Just one, and it was cryptic, and I received two copies of it. Cryptic in the sense that it was obviously a military communications message, and it was not addressed to us. But it had a heading that said "no origin, destination: American Computer Company". LH: No origin? JS: No origin... Now the message format was a telex message format, and I recognized the format as having been something that we would commonly use with the computer in question, and that's of course why I thought the computer in question was having a nervous breakdown, and had gone through its database, found our fax machine number and called it and faxed the message to us that it was crashing, or going down. I couldn't imagine how something in space could communicate to me at a fax machine. It was bizzare, strange, and so I assumed that somehow the message had gotten routed to us, because it was a damaged message, someone had seen American Computer on it, found our contractor's fax-back telephone number for support, and sent it to us. So I was basically trying to trace back to whoever had sent it to me. It was a very strange fax to receive. LH: Can you tell me what the content was? JS: It referred to something which I have since been advised by our counsel I should not not identify the name of the asset for reasons of liability. So I can't name the device but I can say it just said this device is going down and had a series of codes on it. It was in telex transmission format, and it had an origin, time and date, a subject indicating that the device was going down, and then all the error codes associated with the device's failure. Whoever sent this to us, or whatever sent this to us, wanted us to know that this device was down. But that it had gone down, and the message looked like it had been coded to represent that it had gone down the night before. Or that day. Which was intersting because to the consultant, later when I discussed this with him, he said no, that was in fact the object that was disabled by that fly over in the middle of March that ended up being seen by all those people in Arizona. So he provided the missing piece that traced it back to the disablement of this satellite, or whatever it is. LH: Has the consultant though, ever said to you directly that he has had himself conversations either with people in Bell Labs or the Defense Department that he consults for, who has specific knowledge about any actions or intent of these extraterrestrial inteligences that gives them concern? JS: I think the disablement of this particular asset upset them, and there may have even been forms of observation of our planet, and I think you know some people have been involved with examining cattle mutillations and so forth, that have raised grave concern in their mind that probably where in fact, I, and the consultant would differ with their military thinking because in fact I beleive the public has a right to know. Even if it represents a threat, because we need to have a hand in the decision. We don't elect our public officials and have our public officials create the rules, like the Constitution, the rules of military conduct and so forth for no reason. We don't put it into the hands of an inner sanctum, and we don't put it into the hands of senior military leaders per se, without them first having to consider the fact that they are our employees, not our masters. This matter is something which perhaps is of such epoch-making or Earth-shaking importance to humanity that I think that the general concensus of all parties is required. Unfortunately I don't think that that particular opinion is mirrored throughout all parts of our government. LH: What if this extraterrestrial inteligence in fact wants the Earth and Earth life to survive and that it's intent is to make sure that humans, who seem to be on a self-destructive path in their own environment, do not destroy the planet? What if this is a positive-oriented extraterrestrial inteligence? JS: Then I think I'd have to give them tremendous points for logistical understanding of humanity's pyschology because if in fact the military holds the viewpoint that I don't agree with, that the (garbled) doesn't agree with, that is that they are potentially a threat to our existance, that would be one very good way: park a few ships off our bow and fly them by every once in a while to scare us into proceeding with caution. That in fact would scare the military to such an extent that they would, since they would beleive that they had no way of defending against these aliens, that they would not provoke them. And that would be one of the first things that would lead to a lessening of agressiveness on the part of our own military. (end of interview of Mr. Shulman) LH: Now I know that your communication from the Area 51 person was alleging concern about something not benign. And so that's a big question mark out there, Art. After receiving the fax, and the mysterious break-in, Shulman had to call the Pentagon again, because no one had responded. And finally two Air Force Office of Special Investigations agents from McGuire Air Force Base visited Shulman at ACC and grilled him about the fax. Then they took the fax and it's copy and Shulman has not heard back from anyone in the government since August. Curiously, he told me that he has heard from current Bell Labs employees, anonymously and by untraceable e-mail. He said that several have asked questions or made statements referencing secret underground installations at various Bell Labs facilities, but that he (Shulman) does not know why. AB: Wow! LH: And if this March 13th date and that flyover had some connection to this mysterious fax, and is an inside to military concern about what was in the sky over Arizona, again that policy of silence that always seems to be there might be explained. End of transcript.. (snipped) You must be a registered user to post a message. Please login first.=BF The opinions posted here are those of the users who posted them and are not necessarily those of the hosts, operators and providers of this service. Please report system abuse to the sysop. Copyright 1997 Keith Rowland, All Rights Reserved
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 18 Don Berliner discusses Government Secrecy and UFOs From: "Yvonne Hedenland" <VONNI_H@classic.msn.com> Date: Sat, 18 Oct 97 23:47:46 UT Fwd Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 22:39:49 -0400 Subject: Don Berliner discusses Government Secrecy and UFOs On Tuesday, October 21st, 6pm, PT Don Berliner, best known for his book "Crash at Corona" as well as his work with the Fund for UFO Research organization, will join us for a discussion on government secrecy and UFOs. This chat is available at http://forums.msn.com/UFO The Briefing Room chat can also be accessed by any IRC client. The chat server name is publicchat.msn.com and the room or channel name is #briefing.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 18 Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Still From: Michael Christol <mchristo@mindspring.com> Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 21:18:38 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 22:43:17 -0400 Subject: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Still >Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 21:13:47 +0200 (MET DST) >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Jean van Gemert <jeanvg@dds.nl> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Still >>Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 19:53:47 -0500 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >>From: Michael Christol <mchristo@mindspring.com> >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills >[On UFOs on film moving towards or from an observer:] >>Yes there is, but most people have already been convinced >>it is a HOAX. > Can you blame them? >>It is the Billy Meier film of the Plieadean Beam Ship. > Which, to me, looks so fake I couldn't believe people would > buy into it! I don't know how many of you are familiar with > Adamski's "footage" of his saucers but Meier's films aren't > much more "convincing." I mean, come on now, the "saucer" > dangles around the screen as if it's attached to a string! > Gee, I wonder how much more obvious this can get? > Oh wait... I already hear excuses comming. The aliens "made" > the saucer look like a pie plate with a string attached, so > all those poor skeptical souls who haven't yet been able to > accept the obvious reality of Meier's ET contacts <snicker> > have an opportunity to deny it. Err... Right... <roll eyes> >>Check it out for yourself. > And have a good laugh too! :) I have checked it out. I started checking the Meier case out back in 1989. I have talked to Wendelle Stevens on numerous occasions, as well as Marcel Vogle, the scientist who examined the metal samples which Meier gave to Stevens. Vogle is more remembered for creating the "floppy disk," for IBM. He did all types of experiments back in the 70's with plants and their reactions, when wired to a machine which measures stress. I know how the footage looks, I have over thirty hours of it in my historical library. I know how hokey some of it looks. Yet, there are other things which are not so hokey, and have yet to be explained. Sure, it's easy to discredit. I think it was intended that way. But to those who have taken the time, and not just a casual approach to the Meier case, there is something more to it than it appears on the surface. We live in an age of "indecision." We can't decide if we "believe" or "disbelieve," in the UFO phenomena as a reality. If we do, then are those behind the phenomena actually making contact with individuals scattered around this world? If they are, will they make it so obvious that no one will have trouble accepting it? Hmmmm...something to think about. REgards, Mike
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 18 Skywatch: Chile-UFO Video from Iquique Sighting From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 22:57:06 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 22:57:06 -0400 Subject: Skywatch: Chile-UFO Video from Iquique Sighting From: skywatch@wic.net (SKYWATCH) Organization: SKYWATCH INTERNATIONAL To: Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 20:35:07 -0700 Subject: Skywatch: Chile-UFO Video from Iquique Sighting ------- Forwarded Message Follows ------- Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 20:45:10 -0400 From: "Luis C. Sanchez Perry" <lsanchez@chilesat.net> Reply-to: lsanchez@chilesat.net To: "Skywatch International, Inc." <skywatch@wic.net> Subject: Chile-UFO Video from Iquique Sighting Following are some images I captured from a video filmed near Iquique by members of AION between Sept. 13 and 14 of 1997. The first image (iquique1.jpg) corresponds to a sighting on Sept. 13 and lasted only a few seconds but the quality is pretty good. The second and third image corresponds to a flotilla sighting on Sept. 14. The first one (iquique5.jpg) is when the UFO's where aproaching the group and then lost all electrical power. The second image (iquique6.jpg) is when the energy came back and cought when the UFO's where leaving in a straight line. Saludos, Luis Sanchez Chilean Director
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 18 Skywatch: Giant Meteor May Have Hit Ontario From: skywatch@wic.net (SKYWATCH) Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 04:21:46 -0700 Fwd Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 23:16:02 -0400 Subject: Skywatch: Giant Meteor May Have Hit Ontario ------- Forwarded Message Follows ------- From: Ndunlks@aol.com Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 03:59:09 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Giant Meteor May Have Hit Ontario Talk about a big bang: Giant meteor may have hit Ontario October 17, 1996 Web posted at: 5:45 p.m. EDT SUDBURY, Ontario (CNN) -- Meteors can and do hit planets. Shoemaker Levy 9 slammed into Jupiter in 1994 with the energy of about 50 million Hiroshima bombs, and in its early history, the Earth was seeded with continuous meteor hits. A meteor hit in the Yucatan Peninsula 65 million years ago is believed to have led to the extinction of the dinosaurs. And scientists suspect that a massive meteor, the size of a small mountain, hit northern Ontario eons ago, leaving behind a bunch of strange-looking rocks, and dredging up enough copper and nickel to support a thriving mining industry. However, scientists are still trying to prove the Ontario meteor theory. Geologist Wilfried Meyer, who works for the Ontario Provincial Government, says reading rocks is helping scientists piece together whether or not such a meteor did hit Sudbury 1.8 billion years ago. Scientists have developed computer models to analyze the power of meteor impacts. They believe the Sudbury meteor, six to 12 miles in diameter, exploded on impact with the blast of 10 billion Hiroshima bombs. "We ... believe that the meteor impact fractured the crust of the Earth to great depths and then rocks or magma, molten rocks from deep down in the Earth, came up and spread along between these younger rocks and the old crater wall," Meyer said. The impact shattered and scattered rocks, which rolled so much that they became smooth and round, Meyer said. Then, the rocks melded together, creating a 5,000-foot deep layer of rock that now is considered the Sudbury Meteor Basin. Meyer offered a geological formation called "shatter cones" as evidence that a meteor hit Sudbury. Scientists long maintained that a volcano could have created the mineral deposits and conglomerate rocks of Sudbury, but when the shatter cones were discovered 30 years ago in Sudbury, they all but shattered the volcano theory. "You can do this with dynamite explosions on a very local scale. You can do it in a nuclear explosions. But to the best of my knowledge, they've never been found associated with any volcanic explosion. So this is very strong piece of evidence of a meteor impact," Meyer said. Modern-day collision could wipe out human race If a large meteor hit the Earth today, the results could be devastating. For that reason, the U.S. Department of Defense is considering whether to monitor comet and meteor activity near Earth. As Los Alamos National Laboratories senior scientist Greg Canavan explained, "If you knew where those objects were, then you would know whether any of them were potentially threatening." In other words, to be forewarned is to be, hopefully, forearmed, so that we can do something to prevent a large meteor from hitting Earth. Scientists figure the odds of a meteor with the explosive energy of 300 Hiroshima bombs hitting the Earth is one percent every year. So, according to Canavan, "It's not a matter of if they'll hit Earth, it's when." CNN ---------------------------------------------- Skywatch International and this list service are not responsible for authenticity of posts. ---------------------------------------------- Skywatch International, Inc. skywatch@wic.net "Strange is sometimes stranger when it's true" For latest UFO and Paranormal information Site: http://www.wic.net/colonel/ufopage.htm ----------------------------------------------
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 18 Skywatch: CSETI's Dr. Greer on Sightings Radio From: skywatch@wic.net (SKYWATCH) Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 00:16:35 -0700 Fwd Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 23:23:47 -0400 Subject: Skywatch: CSETI's Dr. Greer on Sightings Radio [NOTE: Sunday is the 19th, Monday the 20th - the Sightings Radio site doesn't list upcoming guests that I can see - ebk] ------- Forwarded Message Follows ------- Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 13:11:53 -0700 To: webmaster@cseti.org From: "A.J. Craddock" <webmaster@cseti.org> Subject: CSETI's Dr. Greer on Sightings radio, Monday 19th CSETI's International Director, Dr. Steven Greer, will be interviewed about the ET presence and Congressional Hearings by Host Jeff Rense on "Sightings on the Radio" on Monday 19th October 7-9pm PDT. The show can be heard via affiliates or live on the Internet via Real Audio. For those of you that miss it, it will be archived for listening to later. Further details are on CSETI's Website. Note also that transcripts of Dr. Greer's two previous interviews this year on the Art Bell radio show are also now available for download from CSETI's Website. Regards Tony Craddock Web Administrator CSETI <bold> </bold>http://www.cseti.org ---------------------------------------------- Skywatch International and this list service are not responsible for authenticity of posts. ---------------------------------------------- Skywatch International, Inc. skywatch@wic.net "Strange is sometimes stranger when it's true" For latest UFO and Paranormal information Site: http://www.wic.net/colonel/ufopage.htm ----------------------------------------------
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 18 Skywatch: HMS Shetland in encounter with massive From: skywatch@wic.net (SKYWATCH) Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 16:01:21 -0700 Fwd Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 23:18:17 -0400 Subject: Skywatch: HMS Shetland in encounter with massive ------- Forwarded Message Follows ------- From: "Tim Matthews" <stealthchaser@hotmail.com> To: skywatch@wic.net Subject: HMS Shetland in encounter with massive UFO!! Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 03:02:02 PDT URGENT STATEMENT - TO ALL SERIOUS RESEARCHERS. HMS Shetland in Close Encounter last Thursday night???? Lancashire UFO Society was contacted by the Red Rose Radio chat-show host Tony Newman on Friday 10th October regarding 35 phone calls received from listeners relating to UFO sightings over the Lancashire Coast the previous night. Tony is known for his interest in UFOs and LUFOS has built up a good relationship with him as a result of detailed investigations, our reputation as sensible researchers and our grass roots activism. Two of the calls received on the Thursday phone-in programme were from HMS Shetland. The young man dealing with all the calls for Newman could only remember that it was "HMS Sh" - it was his first night on the job by all accounts! Baptism by fire no doubt! The caller insisted that a large UFO with a bright light was approaching the ship which was operating off the Lancashire Coast at the time, possibly in relation to the Conservative Party Conference at Blackpool. Eric Morris of the British UFO Studies Centre (in the Navy from 1970-1985), who has just formed the Northern Federation of Indepedent Ufologists with Lancashire UFO Society and the Pendle, Hyndburn UFO Group and other indepedent researchers, immediately contacted "Navy News" to see whether the they or the MOD could confirm any of these details. "Navy News" phoned the MOD. A woman from the MOD phoned 15 minuted later to confirm to Eric that HMS Shetland, a new 60 metre ship with sloped funnels, pennant number (P) 298 was indeed off the Lancashire Coast at the time. (Tim Matthews and Rory Lushman were witnesses to the conversation.) Has an incident involving HMS Shetland and a UFO taken place? The implication are enormous if it has...... Calls to Blackpool Airport, Coastguard, operators of Laser light shows etc etc have not borne fruit. The last week has seen unprecedented UFO activity with "unbelieveable" video footage being filmed in East Anglia, sightings in Southern England reported to us as well our phone calls relating to anomalous lights and "spinning discs" in the Blackpool, Bamber Bridge, Burnley, Southport and Crosby areas of the North West. Once again our groups have been at the forefront of investigations. Our focus has as usual been upon details and upon correct reporting procedures. This is an example to everyone. We recently formed the National Campaign Against UFO Secrecy, a moderate though active campaign calling for the release of all government-held UFO documents. The Campaign has already been joined by 9 groups and received the support of top researcher Nick Redfern, whose new book on the subject of government UFO investigations entitled "A Covert Agenda" is on sale now. In addition, we have received coverage in many local newspapers, on the radio and on TV. Let us hope that the whole movement can pull together on the question of secrecy at least. And let us hope that witness confidentiality will be respected. At a time when it was hoped that the problem of UFO researchers giving names of witnesses to journalists had been sorted out, we learn to our horror that a "respected" welsh ufologist has given personal details of "Close Encounter" witness to a reporter. This kind of thing must be stamped out. Unless we get a grip, start to follow a basic code of practice (as laid down by BUFORA for instance) and follow a strict methodology we will forever be written off as alien cultists more concerned with belief not fact. If our groups can work together then so can others. Not only have we agreed to standardize our reporting procedures but also to abandon our separate group magazines in order to produce a joint effort entitled "UFO NEWS". For further details on our investigations into the Lancashire Coast sightings please call us on (01704) 549322. It should be remembered that another one of our cases from November 1996 related to a cargo aircraft flying from Belfast Aldergrove Airport (callsign "Gemstone 904") to Coventry which encountered a UFO over the Lancashire Coast. This meant that the plane had to change course. The conversation between the aircraft and Manchester ATC was recorded by a amateur radio ham. (One thing we know for sure - advanced prototypes are being tested off the Lancashire Coast. Covert military activity is undoubtedly responsible for many reports - but not all.) WE hope to hear from you soon. Sensible suggestions/reports/news welcome! Details of the National Campaign Against UFO Secrecy and newsletter from: The Secretary, P.O.Box 73, Lancaster LA1 1GZ. SAE please! Tim Matthews - Lancashire UFO Society Eric Morris - British UFO Studies Centre Rory Lushman - Pendle, Hyndburn UFO Network Northern Federation of Independent Ufologists. Tel (01704) 549322 ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ---------------------------------------------- Skywatch International and this list service are not responsible for authenticity of posts. ---------------------------------------------- Skywatch International, Inc. skywatch@wic.net "Strange is sometimes stranger when it's true" For latest UFO and Paranormal information Site: http://www.wic.net/colonel/ufopage.htm ----------------------------------------------
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 19 Re: ACC: Remarkable Update By Bob Wolf From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net> [Dennis Stacy] Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 22:14:48 -0500 (CDT) Fwd Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 01:57:30 -0400 Subject: Re: ACC: Remarkable Update By Bob Wolf >From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose) >To: updates@globalserve.net >Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 12:45:50 +0100 >Subject: ACC: Remarkable Update By Bob Wolf >Found at: >http://www.sightings.com/ufo/accandloseufo.htm >************************** >SIGHTINGS >=BF >ACC/Transistor Origin Update >and Did the Air Force >LOSE a UFO?! >by Bob Wolf >10-17-97 >(Note: The following key points were edited from >Bob Wolf's lengthy ACC update by Stig Agermose) <snip, snip, snip and more snip> As far as I'm concerned, Bob Wolf might as well go bark up some other tree. If he wants to attribute everything from the transistor and the Rolling Stones to extraterrestrial technology recovered at Roswell, then more power to him, may he sleep well at night, etc., etc. (And as if it made any difference.) Some of us prefer to get on with our terribly mundane (and terrestrial) lives. And why are we arguing about a 1947-48 issue, anyway, when Corso the Conqueror didn't even claim to have appeared on the scene until 1961? On the one hand, Wolf and others have US scientists cracking the transistor code in a matter of days or months, whereas Corso tells us most secrets weren't cracked until two decades later -- after he miraculously arrived on the scene and took up the arduous task of enlightening mankind. Don't you people realize when you're being had? When will you stand up and resist rampant rumor and innuendo and *demand* incontrovertible proof of every and anything? Never mind. Dennis
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 19 Re: Solved abduction cases? From: clark@canby.mn.frontiercomm.net [Jerome Clark] Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 22:22:53 PDT Fwd Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 02:12:59 -0400 Subject: Re: Solved abduction cases? > From: DevereuxP@aol.com [Paul Devereux] > Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 02:15:28 -0400 (EDT) > To: updates@globalserve.net > Subject: Solved abduction cases? > Dear Jerry, > In response to my mild concerns about your 1 October attack on > the Duke of Mendoza, you wrote on Monday 6 October: > >From: clark@canby.mn.frontiercomm.net [Jerome Clark] > >Date: Mon, 06 Oct 1997 10:38:50 PDT > >To: updates@globalserve.net > >Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Solved abduction cases? > >Paul, > >You're in your mind-reading mode, I'm afraid, my friend. You > >don't know me well, so -- in defense of a not particularly > >persuasive argument -- you feel free to attribute personality > >and motivation to me. The phrase "the folklore that calls itself > >'abduction research'" still makes no sense, and I am surprised > >that you would try to defend it. In doing so, you rephrase the > >argument -- you'd have to, for the sake of coherence -- to recycle > >the usual jumble of claims, long effectively refuted by the one > >academically trained folklorist participating in the discussion, > >Eddie Bullard; see, for but one of many examples,his "Folkloric > >Dimensions of the UFO Phenomenon," JUFOS 3(1991). I also see > >the inevitable North America bashing, a > >particular obsession of yours. Correct me if I'm wrong, but > >don't you actually live here at least part of the time? > <snip> > >Though I think you are wrong about the UFO phenomenon > >(though more interestingly so than most, except in the above- > >expressed; I trust that the full treatment in your and Peter's > >forthcoming book is more substantive), I respect the intellectual > >processes that led you to the conclusions you espouse. Anybody > >who knows me would find immensely hilarious the suggestion that > >I hold views out of some craven need to conform with fashion. > > I would appreciate your extending the courtesy to me of respecting > >my own thinking even when you disagree with it. > >I find the debunking literature (which is what we're discussing > >here) mostly shallow and vacuous; it would never pass muster > >in other areas of scholarly discourse, and it does not deserve to > >be taken seriously until its standards improve. (Please don't > >now insist that I'm therefore arguing that abductions are true > >unless proven otherwise. Give me a break.) I see more evidence > >here of traditions of disbelief (as David Hufford would call > >them) than of traditions of scholarship. But one is allowed > >free rein when the target is something presumed to be both absurd > >and contemptible,such as the UFO experience. For a revealing > >survey of the logical and evidential inadequacies of alternative > >explanations to abduction phenomena, see Stuart Appelle's "The > >Abduction Experience: A Critical Evaluation of Theory and Evidence," > >JUFOS6 (1995/1996). > >It seems to me that we needn't be frantic for conclusive answers > >when such manifestly are unavailable. I simply don't understand > >your need to bash all to whom Ultimate Truth is not so apparent > >as it is to you. A few abduction cases strike me as impressive > >and truly puzzling, and more plausibly (albeit tentatively and > >undogmatically) interpreted as interactions with nonhuman > >intelligences than as hallucinations generated by immersion in > >obscure folklore texts. Most abduction stories are not evidential,for > >all sorts of reasons, and I see no reason to believe that abductions > >are happening to untold millions. But there is a phenomenon > >here in search of an explanation. I feel perfectly comfortable > >as an agnostic here. Anybody who seeks to persuade me that he > >or she has that explanation would do well to use good arguments, > >which I always am happy to hear. No effort > >to bully -- or caricature -- me, or any of the rest of us who > >remain open-minded about this most difficult and contentious > >of subjects,into submission is going to do the job. > >And finally, as to the Dylan quote/paraphrase at the end of > >your posting: it seems to me, my friend, that you, too, ought > >to take heed. > >Jerry Clark > Well, Jerry, I'm positively amazed that my gentle and brief > comments should provoke such a screed from you! Forgive me for > thinking that you are being a little over-defensive. But, well, > if that's the way you want it .... Paul, I am "positively amazed" at your positive amazement. Why wouldn't someone be "a little over-defensive" if somebody else were to speculate in his presence, as you did in mine (cyberspacially speaking), about his inability to think for himself owing to a deep need to follow fashion? I can imagine you going ballistic under the circumstances, and I wouldn't blame you. Who the hell needs that? Try to be a tad more sensitive in the future, please. > PD: I don't need to be a mind-reader, just a reader, to see you > getting narky. And I know you well enough to have seen you in one > of your little paddies, so I know enough as far as this > particular matter is concerned. You're pretty hot-tempered yourself, Paul, and have a reputation for same. It's just part of your charm. So is mine. > PD: It's getting very "old", Jerry, the way you always wheel old > Eddie out. Eddie's OK, but he isn't God, and he hasn't refuted > anything worth mentioning.(Indeed, do please see the full boxing > match in our forthcoming book.)In any case you are wrong, plain > and simple. Bullard is NOT the only academically trained > folklorist in this discussion. I won't embarrass the innocent > party with "outing" him in this regard, unless he chooses to do > so himself. Also, one of the key British earth lights researchers > has a Ph.D in folklore. Further, I'm no folklore virgin myself - > I'm a fully paid-up member of the British Folklore Society these > past many years. You aren't dealing with rookies, my lad. I'll > stick to what I said. It's a tad strange for you to charge somebody else with using an "old" argument (why the scare quotes, by the way?), since you've been beating the same drum for years and years, in book after book, lecture after lecture. And why the hell not? You think you've found something important, and you want to be heard, and ultimately to prevail, in the debate. Personally, I think you're interesting, dead wrong, and (dare I say it?) a trifle arrogant from time to time. So you're human. And keep speaking up. Bullard's work is, in my judgment, the most important yet done on the abduction phenomenon, and it is fundamental to any understanding and discussion of same. I know it pains you to hear that. Sorry. For the rest of you who haven't already done so, go out and read Bullard and find out why he so pains the abduction/abductionist-bashers. Reason one: he is an empiricist, not content with making broad, sweeping pronouncements but formulating and testing hypotheses -- few of which validate critics' favorite beliefs. At the end of it, Bullard ends up an agnostic, and so do I. > We aren't talking Hansel and Gretel here, y'know. Folklore is a > dynamic that is always being generated. The whole of ufology can > genuinely be considered as folklore, and that goes double for the > abduction scene. The "whole of ufology"? Such wild hyperbole will get you nowhere, my friend, though I'm sure it will make you feel better. If you want to be taken seriously, or even listened to, can that sort of rhetorical excess. > You seem to think the good Duke and I are somehow > saying the UFO experience in general, and the UFO abduction > experience in particular, is untrue, absurd, etc etc. This is not > the case. I'll speak for myself: what I am saying is that the > response to and treatment of such experiences is folklore. It's > not the experients, its the goddam investigators and the milieu > they operate in, Jerry. You've got what we are saying ass > backwards. I DO think there is hoax, lying and crass > self-delusion in ufology and abduction accounts, but I think > there are also people who have experienced something unusual that > demands explanation. My concern is that experients are all too > often TOLD what it is they have experienced, and/or that the > folkloric milieu they are introduced to will inculcate that > explanation in them. Let's see the evidence. Bullard, in The Sympathetic Ear (1995) and his paper on hypnosis and abduction reports (JUFOS 1, 1989), found that whatever the investigator's predisposition, abduction reports end up sounding pretty much the same. If you have empirical evidence to the contrary, let's see it. > PD: You aren't thinking clearly, Jerry. I am not North America > bashing at all. (And how dare you lump Canada in with the USA? > The fact that Chris RutKowski lives in Canada shouldn't malign a > whole nation.) Say what? Are you joking, Paul? Living in a state that borders Canada -- and in a town where to get to Chris Rutkowski's Winnipeg all I have to do is to take the highway straight north -- I have never once, in my entire life, not even for an instant, not even after staying too long at the bar, not even after having been struck by a meteorite, not even while enduring Republican administrations, mistaken Canada for a part of the United States. It was you who used the phrase "North America," and I was simply using your phrase. Actually, more properly I should be chastising you for daring to confuse Canada and the USA. > I am being highly > critical of the dominant, ET-literalist paradigm that infects > nearly all of US ufology. Absolutely false. By this time I do not mean there is anything wrong with the ETH, a perfectly sensible reading (whether ultimately validated or not) of the most evidential UFO cases. In reality, however, American ufology exists in a pluralistic universe in which all sorts of views are held and debated, from the neoskeptical to the paranormalist; there has even been something of a revival of secret-weaponism in recent years. There is a demonologist school. There are New Agers and other dimensionalists. Stop arguing in caricature. The ETH lost its dominance in American ufology in the late 1960s, with the appearance of Keel and Vallee. I think what you object to is that it continues to exist at all. In all due respect, Paul, I simply know a hell of a lot more about the intellectual history of American ufology than you do. > And yes, indeed, I spend at least half my time here in the States > - we have a home on both sides of the Atlantic. You make my point > for me. THAT IS PRECISELY WHY I AM IN A UNIQUE POSITION TO OFFER > MY CRITICISMS. It is a fact, plain and simple yet again, that in > British ufology, and I'm sure in the ufology of many other West > European countries, the literalist view is balanced more > effectively by alternative approaches than it is in the US. It is > a healthier research climate in British ufology, notwithstanding > that at the tabloid pop end of the business (and business it is) > it is still literalism based on imported Americana. Healthier, of course, because more people there agree with you. I find the same: the healthier the person, the more he or she is likely to agree with me. Strange how that works. > You simply cannot take the cultural influence out of this thing, > Jerry. I stick absolutely to my claim that you have been affected > by the cultural milieu in which you live, move, think and have > your being. And you haven't? Get off the high horse, Paul. This sort of argument doesn't get any of us anywhere. > You can't see it, because you are in it. I can see > it. You may play fancier footwork than most, but you are still in > the ET-literalist ballpark of US ufology. Let me mix metaphors: > the dominance of the ET-literalist paradigm within 'mainstream' > ufology turns it into a conceptual ghetto. Mixing on, I'd say > that the ET-literalist approach is a sort of rest home for the > intellectually lazy. You may be the librarian at the rest home, > Jerry, and look out of the windows more often than most, but you > are still an inmate. Thanks, Paul. > Mainstream ufology as we know it is rooted in 1940s and 1950s > Americana. It is American folklore. And you are coloured by it, > and would find it exceptionally difficult to break free from it > -- even though it is long past its shelf life. Ufology needs > reinventing because there is, indeed, something to be understood > within it, at the level of some experiences had by some people. > If we are to understand it, we will have to break out of the > ghetto, the ballpark, the rest home, the tatty conceptual museum > of Americana. The fact that you and others get so defensive on > the handful of occasions anyone suggests another approach, tells > me that you haven't escaped yet. Coming from one of the most emotional critics of the ETH I have ever encountered, I find these remarks ... well ... remarkable. And a lazy excuse not to deal with substantive issues. > Nor have many ufologists on your > side of the Atlantic (there are notable exceptions). You demand > evidence for this or that. I just demand that you think a bit > harder. The ET-literalist approach is treated as if it were > somehow a proven fact. It is not. Yet when Dennis Stacy published > my "Meeting with the Alien" in the MUFON journal, I understand he > was told that he shouldn't be publishing such material. There's no accounting for idiots. The inclination to squelch what one does not want to hear, however, is not a uniquely American phenomenon. Dennis stood up to the morons, and God bless him. All viewpoints, including yours, should be heard and debated -- everywhere in the world. > Shouldn't! There you have it. Alternative views cannot even be > discussed rationally in US ufology. Anyone who promotes them is > to be treated like a dolt, an imbecile, a criminal, a con-man,or > whatever. Should be attacked or ignored. Stop acting the martyr, Paul. > If I may invoke a bit more of Dylan - for pity's sake, will you > please lay down your weary tune, if just for a while. See what > else you might think off if you were not always leaning on your > ET-literalist crutch. (I direct that at ETH US ufolologists in > general.) As a player of weary tunes yourself, you really ought not to pointing and shouting at other musicians. Of course what you're really saying is: shut up. Ironic indeed after the complaints you expressed just above. > I do agree with you, however, in being cautious about both > extremes. I have also had my differences with the over-zealous > "new ufologists". You cannot treat all of us a monolithic whole. > The extreme at the *other* end, however, the ET-literalist end, > now reaches to the centre - nay, the core - of American ufology. > That is the point of my criticism. Paul, I have no doubt you're a good guy. You just need to refine your debating style -- and maybe, though I know it's asking much of anybody, consider, if even for a second, that you could be wrong. I freely acknowledge my capacity to be wrong. That's what keeps me intellectually cautious. You might try a little humility from time to time. I've earned mine the hard way: honestly. > PD: Well of course I read it, Jerry.(Reprise.) May I ask you to > read outside the UFO literature much more than you do? I read outside the UFO literature all the time, Paul, possibly even more than you do, and I have many other intellectual interests, as anybody who knows me knows well. I'll show you my library sometime. In some circles in which I move, people know little or nothing of my interest in the UFO phenomenon. My closest friends, who share many of my intellectual passions, are not ufologists. One of my interests, as Duke will tell you, is a very serious one in folklore and folk music -- actually more profound than my interest in UFOs. What's annoying about your remark, though, is its bombastic presumption that only an ignoramus, or a cowed conformist, or an inmate in an insane asylum, could possibly hold views different from yours. A kind of staggering arrogance lurks behind your words. You seem not to understand why -- or even that -- you're offending people by condescending to them in this rude and blatant manner. > JC: "...hallucinations generated by immersion in obscure folklore > texts." That was a JOKE. See what I told Duke about it in my recent posting responding to him. > As to this little "obscure texts" chestnut you roll out > frequently: the sources people like Hilary Evans and others point > to are not all *that* obscure, but in any case even if a text is > obscure, it only takes one person to make it less so. You never > know where you pick up information. But I don't consider > mass-media sources, even if old, all that obscure, to be honest. Read my critique of the psychosocial hypothesis in my just- published (shameless plug here) The UFO Book, pp. 492-504. Hilary Evans, whom I like very much and always enjoy reading, is discussed in detail. I mean to say, of course, that his work is. Hilary and I disagree fundamentally but have never had an uncordial moment. > JC: "...I feel perfectly comfortable as an agnostic here...No > effort to bully -- or caricature -- me, or any of the rest of > us who remain open-minded about this most difficult and contentious > of subjects,into submission is going to do the job." I have the feeling that any disagreement with you, Paul, is seen by you as "knee-jerk," when it is not driven by comformity, ignorance, or madness. You would do well to understand that where UFOs (and, for that matter, a whole lot of other things) are concerned, reasonable people can reasonably disagree. I have seldom if ever seen that simple reality acknowledged by you. If I'm wrong, please correct me. There's certainly no evidence of it in this posting. > PD: Oh come on now, Jerry! That's your "reasonable face" you like > to think you wear all the time. Your knee-jerk reaction to > Mendoza, and your notable - shall we say - reticence regarding > other views outside the ET-literalist paradigm, give the lie to > your self-delusion. As I've said, you need a more productive rhetorical style. And I'M supposed to be the hot-tempered one? Has it ever occurred to you that I simply find your views unconvincing? Or am I just another self-deluded dissenter from the Higher Wisdom of Paul Devereux? > I'm not trying to bully anyone - just trying to get heard. And > then listened to. That's the difficult bit. You didn't even refer > to my statement that we are researching lucid dreaming, for > instance. Did you think it didn't matter? Because I really do > care what the UFO abduction thing is about, I'll add the > following outline of what we are doing. > I would like to publish a book preparing people for this area, > but so far US publishers have declined, apparently fearing that > it might adversely affect their literalist UFO titles (ie. it > might interfere with the prevailing folklore, which is proving > commercially gratifying.) But I will eventually get some > introductory material out on all this. I look forward to reading the results of your work. I'm sure you'll find a publisher. UFO books, pro or con, are moving slowly these days, I'm told. I've had a slow year, too. Anyway, you acknowledge that when you wrote the above, you were tired. Like you, I can be tired and cranky. So let's end on a positive note and agree to disagree while maintaining respect and mutual good feeling. Meanwhile, I promise not to speculate about the psychosocial reasons you reject the ETH if you'll promise to refrain from comparable guesswork about me and my views. Let us assume each other's intelligence, sanity, sincerity, and integrity and go from there. Okay? Cheers, Jerry Clark
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 19 Re: Alien Autopsy Film From: Michael Wayne Malone <wayne@fly.HiWAAY.net> Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 23:32:16 -0500 (CDT) Fwd Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 02:16:31 -0400 Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy Film On Fri, 17 Oct 1997, UFO UpDates - Toronto wrote: > Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 08:24:20 -0400 > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > From: Bob Shell <76750.2717@compuserve.com> > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Alien Autopsy Film > >Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 03:47:23 -0500 > >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > >From: Michael Wayne Malone <MWayne@bigfoot.com> > >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Alien Autopsy Film > >>Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 17:10:12 -0400 > >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > >>From: Bob Shell <76750.2717@compuserve.com> > >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Alien Autopsy File > >>Meanwhile, I have arranged for the still images which I have > >>from the first autopsy to be published in the CD ROM edition > >>of Beyond Roswell which will come out in January. This should > >>allow better comparisons from images of higher quality. > >>Bob Shell > >Bob, > >If I can ask, where did these still pictures come from? Not in > >the "Santilli" kind of sense, but from what stock did the stills > >come from? > >Michael > >-- > >Michael Malone > >Kilo Foxtrot Four Mike Yankee X-ray > Michael, > The stills were sent to me by Ray in the form of still images > on a Betacam SP video tape. THANKS! > Apparently they were made by putting a video of the first autopsy > in a VCR, still framing it, and making a video from the monitor. > The quality, needless to say, is not very good. The purpose of > these images was simply to show that there were, in fact, two > different bodies involved in two different dissections. So when you say theses are "higher quality" images, your a refering to the quality your images as compared to the quality of the images used in Theresa's comparison? > I'm still looking at Theresa's material, but I am not > convinced she has proved anything. I have talked extensively > with two people who have seen the complete first autopsy > video, Philip Mantle and Maurizio Baiata, and both have > emphasized the differences in the bodies and the procedures > performed on them. Just having one leg look very similar > does not establish anything to me. Since I have neither looked at Theresa's material or anyone's rebuttal material, I can't draw a conclusion about anything either. In fact, the only reason I asked about the stills at all was in the hope that your stills actually came from the original film instead of video. Misguided hope that it was.... Needless to say, I'm much more disappointed with the fact that no one seems to have any of the original autopsy film than with any discussion of identical legs. Not that I'm not interested in Theresa's discussion. Despite the recent decline in intrest in the Alien Autopsy film, I maintain it is potentially the most important peice of information in ufology today as either the most successful hoax or the most important peice of proof ever in ufology. Michael. Search for other documents from or mentioning: wayne | 76750.2717 |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 19 Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl> Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 06:52:54 +0200 (MET DST) Fwd Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 02:18:36 -0400 Subject: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills >Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 20:27:42 -0500 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Michael Christol <mchristo@mindspring.com> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills >>>I did so. I was informed that it did not occur in 1942, but >>>in July, 1941, near a well known island in the South Pacific. >>>I don't wish to tell all of the details. I want to see if >>>someone else knows what I am talking about. >>>Just think little boy and fat man....<G> >>Hi Mike >>I am currently researching a alledged UFO crashes at the moment >>with a view to writing a book on it, (I get a little wound up >>when people go on about Roswell as if it was the only crash) and >>the only one that I can find listed for 1941 is Cape Giradeau, >>Missouri. >>Is this the case that you are referring to? >Hi Sean... >No, this has nothing to do with that case. >I was given some information by a friend who is supposedly, >"in the know." He stated that there was a crash in 1941, >in the South Pacific, around July 4, from which the "transistor" >was derived. So, they did not have from July 1947 to Dec. 1947 >to back engineer the "transistor." According to my friend, they >had "six years." That makes a difference, doesn't it? Say Mike, Instead of playing games, if I were you I would spend some time improving my geography. Tinian is in the North Pacific, not the South. >Psychology will get you everywhere, Sean, except when dealing >with me. <G> squeek, squeek...scurry, scurry.... Is this the kindergarten section? __________________________________________ / Met vriendelijke groet/Best wishes \ Henny van der Pluijm hvdp@worldonline.nl Technology Pages http://www.worldonline.nl/~hvdp \______________________________________/
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 19 Re: Questions for Abductees From: Peregrine Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith] Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 00:56:51 -0400 Fwd Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 02:23:22 -0400 Subject: Re: Questions for Abductees The Duke of Mendoza presents his compliments. >From: "WHITE" <mjawhite@digitaldune.net> [John White] >To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Questions for Abductees >Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 07:38:24 -0700 >I took the phrase "the folklore that calls itself 'abduction >research'" to designate a body of written materials that a group >of people consider as scripture in their belief and conduct >involving alien abduction. That was certainly part of what I meant (as the longer-winded exegesis makes clear, I hope). >The responding post triggered that interesting parallel for me. (John is referring to the Gnostic vs Christian Fathers debates in the Church of the 1st-3rd century CE, which ended in pain and sadness for the former) >So, I read several excerpts from The Foreigner, a gnostic text, >and sure 'nuff, the Foreigner speaks of technique in >comprehending reality, which didn't set right for the >competition, so they made it heresy. Errol, please take warning, if this develops into any substantial discussion, it calls for a whole new thread. John: your parallel is right up to a point, but IMO ufology is a lateral inversion of the Fathers vs Gnostics battles. By which I mean the ETH-centered ufological mythos is Gnostic (or Manichean) at heart, and it is that which is crying "heresy", not the skeptics - who after all have no would-be orthodoxy to defend or promote. The black-or-white choice to which Gnosticism limits itself is also paralleled by one of several unstated assumptions within ufology: "The debate must go on". The cosmic battle is reflected in the incurable yea-and-nay saying over specific cases. No consensus is achievable when the system of thought is (probably unconsciously) predicated on such foundations. Witness recent posts on Gulf Breeze. ETH-centered ufology is Gnostic religion cast in techno-scientific terms. Gnosticism is intrinsic, too, to the American religious consciousness - which is where ufology translated and transmuted it from. For a longer discussion that makes sense of these Olympian- sounding statements, slip over to http://www.magonia.demon.co.uk and look for articles under my (other) name. Failing that (tee hee) read anything on religion by Harold Bloom that you can lay your hands on, but especially his ""The American Religion". >(Great Post!) Gosh, thanks! Whyn't you say that louder to that nice Mr Williams over there. He's the one watching the UFOs shoot down Harrier AV-8Bs and GR-7s. Yours &c Predella D. Mandora Jobbing Builder
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 19 Re: Questions for Abductees From: Peregrine Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith] Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 00:57:07 -0400 Fwd Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 02:31:13 -0400 Subject: Re: Questions for Abductees The Duke of Mendoza presents his compliments. >From: wlmss@peg.apc.org [Lawrie Williams] >Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 04:57:14 +1000 (GMT+1000) >To: updates@globalserve.net >Subject: Questions for Abductees >The Duke implies I have naive and amateurish ideas about hypnosis >but if you rake through the verbal muck carefully enough one can >see it is only implied in such a way that others will infer it. >Fact is I have never been hypnotized nor would I suggest it to >anyone else. The Duke infers nothing of the kind. The Duke observed with a micture sorry (but look it up!) mixture of despair and disgust that you blithely predicted to a 16-year-old girl that she would be impregnated by aliens. Others have been measured in their criticism of this astounding revelation, and deserve congratulation, not to say medals and ticker-tape parades, for their self-control. With extreme difficulty I shall attempt just this once to emulate their example. Your status as a non-hypnotized abductee is totally irrelevant to the case of "the person K". Your status as a non-hypnotized "abductee" has its own fascinations, but they give you no special authority as a diviner of others' conditions or as an advisor to anyone. Because "the person K" has reported something like a abduction experience *does not* mean that is what they had. Nobody knows (except, it seems, you) what happened to them. Instead of trying to find out what did occur, you make one monstrous assumption and then tell this kid that she can expect to be rogered and made pregnant by an alien. Terrific. Now here is this little gem: >you should know that the person in question K was >not distressed before or after the experience. I have never even >met her in fact! So, never having met her, on what basis can you *possibly* judge her reaction to the alleged events or to your thoroughly stupid, unjustified and (let's think the best here) irresponsible prediction? How did you communicate? By phone? Fax? E-mail? Tell, please do. Why am I so bloody annoyed? Gather round children let me tell you a tale: Sir Cedric, a handsome but somewhat self-absorbed youth, had a fine stallion named Laughter, whom he let to run with several of his sleekest mares in a sweet meadow. Sir Cedric was also much besotted with the fair Lady Elfride, the niece of his godfather. She was sixteen and ravishing. One fine summer evening Sir Cedric was talking and chuckling to his stallion Laughter, and tickling his ears, for Laughter was an passing fine horse. Also passing at this time came one of Sir Cedric's sleek mares, one named Sparkle, and she spooked Laughter by standing behind him, and sniffing at his naughty parts. Laughter legged it. As he shot by Sir Cedric, just as a precaution in the circumstances, he flicked his powerful left hind leg in the general direction of the startled youth. Sir Cedric felt a terrible pain, then a numbness, then a ghastly sickness, then a kind of all-embracing stupidity overtook him. Laughter's iron-shod hoof had whacked him in the goolies. Sir Cedric sat down, speechless. Never had he known such agony. He sat and learned how to breathe all over again, how to cope with pain beyond endurance, for an hour at least. Sometimes he groaned. Sometimes for pain, sometimes in disbelief. As he sat there the birds fell silent. Larks and snipes went to their nests in the grass, just feet from where he sat, his arms clasped round his shins. Occasionally he forced his head to the ground. The sun had sunk behind the distant hills before Sir Cedric could bring himself to stand, and make his way delicately across the meadows to his father's manor, and to his bed. For he took no supper that night, and spoke to no one. The next day at about sundown Sir Cedric went walking - with some care - in the fields near where Laughter was running with his mares. Sir Cedric bore no grudge against his horse, but felt that he would prefer a decent hedge to stand between the creature and himself as they exchanged their habitual interspecies pleasantries. But, horror on horror! Whom should he see in the twilight but fair Elfride! Sitting on a tump in Laughter's field, her legs drawn up, her arms clasped about her shins, and little cries escaping her pretty pouting lips as she gazed, glazed, in seeming stupefaction, into the glorious but heartless sunset. With one bound (it was a low hedge) he was by her side. "Ah, my dearest Elfride," cried Sir Cedric. "That fiendish horse! He has kicked you I can see! I shall have him shot in the morning at first light, and his foals sent all to the knacker's the moment they are born. Such is my passion for you I can do no less for your tender care." "Do not be a prat," replied the lovely damsel. "If that wimpish creature so much as sniffed at me I should rip his lips off and tear his lungs out. I am merely admiring this charming sunset, and suffering a trifle from cramp in my thigh. Perhaps," - and her cornflower-blue eyes twinkled as she exposed the suffering limb to the youth's swooning gaze - "you would care to caress it for me and assuage my pain?" (Curtain, seditious jeers from peasants and groundlings, &c) The only connexion between you and Sir Cedric in this parable is your prattishness and your incapacity to judge a situation from anything but your own point of view. Do you get the point? >Nobody can say I am not even-handed in the people I upset. True. Some might pause at the significance of this. After all Messrs Velez and Turrel (on one side, and also abductees) and Mendoza and Malone (on the other) are not exactly famed for their luvvie-duvvie agreement on what abductions really are. But they are agreed that the welfare of the experient is paramount. You've just royally screwed this up, potentially (assuming the lady K is not having you on - ever think of that?). When a mob of such generally opposed persons jump on you with both feet, does it not cross your mind - never a long journey, it would seem - that you might be just a teensy, eensy, weeny bit mistaken? Apparently not. Somewhere or the other Plato has Socrates say to an acolyte: "Go, tell no one, and drown thyself." Not a bad idea, but more kindly I think you might at least restrict yourself to counting aircraft conked out by UFOs, or the number of times the Oz government has been overthrown by the forces of evil, or whatever other rubbish you like to imagine, because that gives some of us a good laugh and we can mock you with good humor. What you are up to now is potentially dangerous, deeply stupid, and without an iota of concern for the consequences to the subject in question. You show how truly half-witted your ideas are by the way you *defend* them and dozy actions. How old are you, by the way? Yours &c Palfreyman D. Mountingblock Stable Hand
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 19 Re: Questions for Abductees From: Peregrine Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith] Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 00:56:59 -0400 Fwd Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 02:30:57 -0400 Subject: Re: Questions for Abductees >Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 15:59:29 +0100 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Questions for Abductees >Are you ever lost for words? :o) Aaaah... Um... Er, now, aah... A-ha-ha. Ah. Hrmmpph. Course not. >>And I'll give you a minimum of four logical reasons, >Please do. Sean is referring to my resistance to the ETH, I hope. But also dread. For I have also been thrumming the fingers (11/8 time, like hell) every now and then this last fortnight at the immense labors demanded by >From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net> >To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Questions for abductees >Date: Wed, 1 Oct 1997 20:09:12 -0400 who asserts, with his usual (and whatever you call a 6ft+ imp-ish) smile, >Any belief that alien visits here are improbable is simply a >prejudice. (As would be the belief that they're likely or >inevitable.) >Allow me to predict, in closing, that any rebuttal you make will >prove to be based on circular reasoning. I find myself in a slight difficulty here, made slightly more embarrassing because it is all my own fault. I've just been asked (commissioned) to write at length on this very subject for a respected but nonetheless commercial international magazine (oh, hype hype). If I spill my best beans here, both the client and I are somewhat compromised. Whatever some people think about the notion of intellectual property being everyone's to grab and repro- duce, I have to fulfil that contract first, I think. But when that job is done, a version of it may well appear here - perhaps with additional jokes, perhaps with fewer. I will then of course gladly engage Greg (or anyone) in debate as to whether my arguments are circular. Meanwhile, I suggest you bend an eye to: Stephen Jay Gould "Wonderful Life" ISBN 0-14-013380-1 Michio Kaku "Hyperspace" ISBN 0-19-508514-0 Robert Baker 'Alien Dreamtime' in "The Anomalist" #2 Mike Davis 'Cosmic Dancers...' in "The Anomalist" #5 Ordering details for "The Anomalist" may be had from http://www/cloud9.net/~patrick/anomalist/ In a very oblique way, Teilhard de Chardin's "The Emergence of Man" is relevant too, as it shows how a powerful belief system - which did not exclude elements of National Socialism - can sophisticate itself out of the bleak implications of neo-Darwinism. I know this must be frustrating, and it's my fault for not anticipating this commission. Meanwhile, for you two and everyone else, a small consolation prize. This is what you get for mentioning naughty wossnames like "troilism" in posts that land up on the Web, where people surf for the most banal things: >Hi. from Kim & Ray >We are Kim & Ray and we live in the Dallas area. We are looking >for singles and couples for adult fun that includes still photography >and videos, and possible meetings. The kind of stuff adults like. We have formed a little group that exchanges photos, videos, has 'get togethers' and other types of shared adult fun all around the country. We even have females that will send photos.(Some will pose just the way you request). There is a wide variety of friends here and more joining everyday. We have friends from the West, East, National, everywhere. To contact our group of 'liberal minded' adults, check out http://www.[snipped: details available on request with proof of Texan residence] Which brings me to Sean quoting/saying >> I shall have to ask my mum. >You are obviously a very lucky man to have such a knowledgeable >mother. This is true. The Dowager Duchess of Mendoza is entirely formidable and has offered a catering contract to Kim and Ray at very reasonable rates (well, reasonable in her view). I am at a loss to know what will become of the older generation. Yours &c Mysotis D. Polemonium Green Man Search for other documents from or mentioning: 101653.2205 | tedric |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 19 Re: Solved abduction cases? From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 01:22:34 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 02:45:35 -0400 Subject: Re: Solved abduction cases? >Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 08:23:58 +0200 (MET DST) >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Solved abduction cases? >>From: DevereuxP@aol.com [Paul Devereux] >>Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 02:15:28 -0400 (EDT) >>To: updates@globalserve.net >>Subject: Solved abduction cases? >>Dear Jerry, Hiya Henny, <Tremendous Snip to get to the piece of meat that I want.> Henny writes, >Not only is the ET hypothesis taken seriously outside the USA, >government officials of several countries, such as Chile, >Belgium, Mexico and Russia, have openly stated that their air >space has been violated by craft that do not originate on this >earth. Now this is one piece of reality that you'll never see debated! About a year ago I put this same piece of information on the table in another thread Henny, the silence was deafening. It must be a hard set of facts to rationalize/debunk I guess! Just don't hold your breath waiting for someone to address it, I'm still a little blue. <EG> Here we have "official" government releases of information, some of it formidable as in the case of the Belgium government, (military, radar data, reports from credible sources on the ground -Gendarme- etc.) and yet it is still not taken as an "official announcement" that something 'out of the ordinary,'...'possibly not of this earth' is -hoopty doin it- in our skies. (And in our homes too, with our friends and relatives I hasten to add!) It must be some kind of militant/mutant 'snobbery' that allows these reports to go unacknowledged. I guess unless "He of the proferred bent rod" the "Grand Poobah" and "Painted Maddam" whoreself of the Biggest Little Whorehouse on the planet (Bubba Clinton) doesn't go on prime time TV and say it is so,... no-one is going to believe it. I assume that means no matter -who else- is reporting it! Why yew cain't believe anythang that them dang third world govamints like Belgium say, they just cain't be trusted! <G> Boggles the mind don't it! <VBG> Regards, John Velez John Velez jvif@spacelab.net
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 19 Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculoso From: Peregrine Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 01:58:14 -0400 Fwd Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 02:48:45 -0400 Subject: Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculoso The Duke of Mendoza presents his compliments. >Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 07:04:13 +0200 (MET DST) >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculouso >From New Scientist April 1, 1995, paraphrased: >'In March 1995 Gunther Nimtz of the University of Cologne >announced at a colloquium in Snowbird, Utah, that his team at >Cologne had not only measured superluminal speeds for their >microwaves, but had actually sent a signal faster than light. The >signal was Mozart's 40th Symphony. What they did was frequency >modulate their microwave source with the music and then measure >how quickly the music arrived after traversing the forbidden zone >in a waveguide. >According to Nimtz the 40th hopped 12 cm of space at 4.7 times >the speed of light. Nimtz had a recording to prove it.' >The New Scientist adds that skeptics are not sure that >Mozart's 40th is a real signal. Before you boys get too excited about this, eyeball the date again. And again. If you don't think this is sufficient reason to give you pause for thought, look at the last sentence again. Generations of orchestral players and conductors, perhaps not excluding even Mr Tim Good, might snigger at this. If this doesn't make you wonder, consider the possibility of checking to see if a Snowbird, Utah actually exists. (Answers of no more than two letters of the Roman alphabet should be sent to the Chief of Police, 11234 Pedicure Blvd, Verouka, Oregon 666, USA.) Or ponder that while the word "Nimtz" isn't in my German dixionary, the word "Nimmer" means "never". My colloquial/argot German doesn't stretch to knowing if "Nimtz" is slang for something related. Real scientists *like* a bit of wit occasionally. Yours &c Pestiferous D. Monorail Retort Stand
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 19 Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculoso From: Loy Pressley <lpressle@webwide.net> Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 04:38:30 -0700 Fwd Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 08:07:03 -0400 Subject: Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculoso > Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 01:58:14 -0400 > From: Peregrine Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> > Subject: Zeta Notso Ridiculoso > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > The Duke of Mendoza presents his compliments. > >Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 07:04:13 +0200 (MET DST) > >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > >From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl> > >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculouso > >From New Scientist April 1, 1995, paraphrased: <SNIP> Thanks, Duke, for subtly and courteously pointing out the, now that you've identified it, obvious humor of this item. Maybe Snowbird, Utah, should have read "Snowjob, Utah". I have a sheepish grin on my face... Loy
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 19 Re: Mexican UFO Video - Scam? From: Bob Rickard <rickard@forteantimes.com> Date: Sun, 19 Oct 97 16:40:09 -0000 Fwd Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 15:14:41 -0400 Subject: Re: Mexican UFO Video - Scam? James Easton wrote ... >Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 16:10:50 -0400 >From: James Easton <pulsar@compuserve.com> >Subject: Mexican UFO Video - Scam? >To: UFO UpDates <updates@globalserve.net> >The current issue of Fortean Times, FT 104, November 1997, notes that >"Coming in next month's issue", is: UFO SCAM >We blow the lid off the much-hyped Mexican UFO video footage." >I've asked Bob Rickard if he could confirm whether this relates to the >latest video and if he might drop a hint about the article's contents. I'm replying to UFO UpDates. We were planning to simply reprint John Shirley's critique of 'Masters of the Stars' from the Ecker's 'UFO Magazine' (July 97), having the required permission. However, at the last minute we wondered if this was not premature, especially as we could think of several additional lines of enquiry that would make it a much more interesting feature and decided to hold off until we could do more homework ... at the very least, we want to give the Elders a chance to respond. Bob Rickard - editor - rickard@forteantimes.com FORTEAN TIMES: http://www.forteantimes.com CHARLES FORT INSTITUTE: http://www.forteana.org "You work and work at it and all the public remembers is the night the chimp grabbed Larry's balls." Artie in Larry Saunders Show.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 19 Re: Abduction Sat 4 Oct 1997 From: "Roger R. Prokic" <rprokic@ibm.net> Date: Sun, 19 Oct 97 07:24:41 Fwd Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 15:48:51 -0400 Subject: Re: Abduction Sat 4 Oct 1997 >From: wlmss@peg.apc.org [Lawrie Williams] >Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 03:05:26 +1000 (GMT+1000) >To: ufo-l@mb.protree.com, updates@globalserve.net >Subject: Re: Abduction Sat 4 Oct 1997 >Lawrie Williams, the abductee who dared give an >informed opinion to another abductee. Hi Lawrie! This is my first post to you... I just wanted to say that you play mockery with everone that spoke their opinions of how bad you were to these two girls. You need to realize that you are not an investigator or counseler from what you have told them... you are more like a rapist or killer. You should under no means tell these girls that they were impregnated by an alien and their babies were stolen by them... This really is dangerous. It is much like if you had an infant child and everytime it cried when it went to bed from dreams, Daddy Lawrie would come in and comfort the young child be saying, "Son its ok, its only the little grey aliens that are trying to abduct you"... as the child gets older you have by then convinced the child they have been abducted/abused by aleins and have possible caused trauma, and psychological damage to your own child. This is just my opinion standing on the sidelines of this game... thinking you were very wrong to feed this dangerous misinformation to someone. Roger
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 19 Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculouso From: "Roger R. Prokic" <rprokic@ibm.net> Date: Sun, 19 Oct 97 06:50:19 Fwd Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 15:48:02 -0400 Subject: Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculouso >Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 13:02:13 +0100 >From: Mike Smith <mickey@anix.co.uk> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculouso >However, it now appears that this is not the case. As >was stated in my previous post some physicists >believe that they have transmitted Mozart at 3.7 c, >using microwaves. They have not as yet 100% ruled out >experimental error, but are working on doing so. Since when did electromagnetic waves travel faster than the speed of light... (It still takes me about 20 minutes to send a command signal to Mars). Roger R. Prokic Telecommunications Engineer Lockheed Martin Astronautics Denver, Colorado USA
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 19 Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills From: Chris Penrose <penrose@sfc.keio.ac.jp> Date: Sun, 19 Oct 97 20:24:06 +0900 Fwd Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 15:47:08 -0400 Subject: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills >Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 06:52:54 +0200 (MET DST) >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills >>Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 20:27:42 -0500 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >>From: Michael Christol <mchristo@mindspring.com> >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills >Say Mike, >Instead of playing games, if I were you I would spend some time >improving my geography. Tinian is in the North Pacific, not the >South. >>Psychology will get you everywhere, Sean, except when dealing >>with me. <G> squeek, squeek...scurry, scurry.... Mike's behavior reminds me of the phonies (in my perception) that call in to the Art Bell show and speak in silly riddles. It is a childish power trip usually employed as a sort of hypnotic fishing hook to gain personal attention and affection. Mike seems to have a need to squander his information as if it were some egolifting treasure that has given him affiliation with some imagined 'elite' community. Chris penrose@sfc.keio.ac.jp
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 19 Re: 'The Gulf Breeze Paper' From: bruce maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com> Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 23:09:02 -0400 Fwd Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 15:42:56 -0400 Subject: Re: 'The Gulf Breeze Paper' To the 1 or 2 people following this discussion: Here is my latest respose to Barbara's criticism of the Ed Walters case. > MY COMMENTS ON BARBARA BECKER'S COMMENTS ON MY RESPONSE TO HER PAPER, > "ONE PICTURE IS WORTH A THOUSAND WORDS" > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > 1) Here is my comment on her paper: <snip> > claimed her photos were taken long before the Gulf Breeze flap.) > HERE IS BARBARA'S COMMENT on what I said. > None came forward before Walters. Myself and others interested in <snip> > danger of contamination of witness testimony the longer time goes on. > HERE IS MY COMMENT ON HER PAPER: I am aware that the GB skeptics > have tried, unsuccessfully, to discredit all the other witnesses. > There are about a dozen Gulf Breeze witnesses who say explicitly that > they saw what was in Ed's photos. **** BB: There were NONE that came forward before Ed and only ONE, a man named Thompson, who described and drew a picture similar to Ed's. >>>>>BSM, 10/17/97: The following people stated they saw a UFO like or the same as what appeared in Ed's photos (list taken from GULF BREEZE WITHOUT ED, a paper presented at the 1991 MUON Symposium): Billie Zammit (Ed-type UFO, bright bottom ring, blue beam coming out; 2:30 AM, Nov 11, 1987; made sketch), Jeff Thompson (ED-type UFO, 8:15 AM, Nov 11, 1987, hovering and then departed rapidly as two jets came after it; made detailed sketch), Charlie and Dori Somerby (Ed-type UFO, moving slowly through sky, about 5 PM Nov 11, 1987; made sketch), Arthur and Mary Hufford (Ed-type UFO, hovering, seen in Pensacola, probably Nov 11, evening, but exact date not known for certain; made sketch), Lisette F. (name withheld at request of witness, similar to Ed-type, first half of November, 1987, exact date not known), Voncile H. (name withheld at request of witness; similar to Ed-type,Nov 21, 1987; in Alabama; made sketch); Hank Boland (Dec. 27, 1987;Ed-type, seen behind Ed's house, made sketch), Truman Holcomb (April 28, 1988, hovering, ed-type with blue beam coming out), Ray Pollack and two others (May 27, 1988, Ed-type), Fenner and Shirley McConnell (July 8, 1988, Ed-type over water, hovered and moved away; McConnell was doctor and county coronor), The "Two Jeff Sighting" (names withheld. Nov. 1990, Ed-type). There were numerous witnesses who claimed to see only a bright ring, like the "power ring" of the Ed-type craft. > In UFOS ARE REAL, HERE'S THE PROOF (Avon. 1997) there are photos from > people around the world who have seen the same thing. >**** BB: I have that book. Maybe we are having a problem of >semantics. SAME means being exactly alike, identical. There are >only three reproduced in that book that I would call identical. >Oddly enough, they are from around Costa Rica, where Walters said >he and his wife and children lived for a while...oddly enough >again, Tommy Smith said that Walters told he and another friend >that Ed had hoaxed UFO photos while he lived in Costa Rica. Go >figure! :) >>>>BSM 10/17/97: everyone should have a copy of "that book" which contains both verbal and pictorial descriptions. Persons who wrote to Ed in response to the publication of his first book, THE GULF BREEZE SIGHTINGS to say they saw the same or a similar thing: Clarence Barrons( "they are almost identical to the one I saw on Nov. 14, 1971....in Mississippi), Cliff Baer ("I saw that same object appear from behind some trees years ago...in the ack woods of Pennsylvania), Helen Brown (Crestview...30 miles from gulf Breeze....in summer of 1954....there were three objects ust like the one in your photo 19...) , John Duquette (I saw the Gulf Breeze UFO back in 1976...felt I must have been hallucinating), Randy Duke (...Nov. 1991....saw the UFO in photo 23...), Carol Parks (..I've seen this thing too....craft seemed almost as wide as the road and hovered two or three feet above it...), Robert Fuller (I have seen te Gulf BReeze UFO...in 1980 ...near Ogden, Utah...), Michael Storm (I was incredibly shocked when I saw the cover of your book because that is almost exactly what I saw while in Zimbabwe), Daniel Leshibis (Germany; ....The UFO looked exactly like the one you have photographed...), Alex Stutzamen (Germany; ......I realized that the object you photographed is exactly what I saw [in 1986]), Revis Vannistish(Switzerland;...I saw the pictures about the UFO [in Ed's book] and I know that's it...). There are dozen or so other sightings reported in the book by people who DID NOT say they saw the same thing, but they clearly saw SOMETHING wierd. As for the photos we have: Baker Watson (June, 1976, "I know the detail I saw is exactly what's in your book"; photo is very much like Ed-type); Harry Bordersfield (Jan 1980, coming out of Carlsbad Caverns; photo looks like what Ed got July 10, 1991), Susan Keiley (Jan 1980,UFO over the Grande Canyon, somewhat resembles Ed-type), Gary Tomlinson( April 1986, Monterrey, Mexico), James Warnerfred (March, 1989,El Progresso, Guatemala, two photos, some resemblence to Ed-type), Ray Harcourt (Canaima, Venezuela, January, 1990, looks like Ed-type UFO hovering and sending down a beam), Bryan Hampton (July, 1990, Las Vegas, somewhat like Ed-type), Carlos Medoso (Campo Grande, Brazil, December, 1991, similar to ed-type), James Parker (Fiji Islands, March, 1992, similar to Ed-type). Your comment that only three photos are similar is debatable (it could be more, depending upon the degree of similarity). Your comment, "Oddly enough, they are from around Costa Rica, where Walters said he and his wife and children lived for a while." is really a useless statement. On two photos taken by one man during one sighting are from the vicinity of Costa Rica, and that sighting was in Guatemala. Furthermore, Ed and family lived in Costa Rica in the 1970's and the Guatemala photos were taken in 1989. Perhaps you are suggesing that Ed created a hoax UFO in Costa Rica in the middle 1970's and then it somehow got ino Guatemala and fooled people ten or more years later? Your reference to a Tommy Smith claim that Ed hoaxed UFO's while in Costa Rica is another useless statement. Tommy is hardly an unbiased witness in this regard. > In the case of Mary Hufford and the claim that they saw no windows, > here is evidence of a witness not being contaminated! Nevertheless, > the shape of the object the described and drew is very similar to the > shape of the Ed-type UFO. Perhaps the :"windows" (dark areas) were > simply not showing when the Huffords saw it. >**** BGB: Gee, that's funny, Art says he saw EXACTLY (identical) >the same UFO Ed saw. And Mary said Art saw windows but she >didn't except that later she said she too saw windows. >>>>>I have copies of Arthur and Mary Hufford's reports and sketchs. Neither one shows windows. However, they both show the overall shape with a bright bottom and a top light. True, not identical to what is in Ed's photos, but close enough. > 2) Here is another of my comments on her paper: > Strictly speaking it is "impossible" to know how many <snip> > released in the 1990 book (TGBS) and in the 1997 book (UARHTP). > **Here is Barbara's comment on my comment:: > Very true. It looks like we agree here. Not only was Walters not <snip> > shot? Only one of the two was used in the book. > Here is my reponse: right and wrong. Wrong because the photo which <snip> > show the UFO. > Barbara continues > In addition... In July 1991 I wrote to Maccabee and asked about <big snip> > If photo 21 is the one Walters took in Cook's presence and used in GBS, > then what is 21 A that specifically names Cook? > IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO KNOW MANY PHOTOGRAPHS WALTERS TOOK. > My (Bruce's) comment: Shortly after the first (UFO) photo with Cook Ed > took a second photo for comparison. >**** BB: It is still impossible to know how many photgrpahs Ed >Walters actually took. Look at Oeschler's serial numbers. 20, >21, 21A, 22, 23, 14A and 19A (and there were more) all have the >same "serial numbers". There is no control here. >>>>>>BSM: 10/17/97 Ed also used his camera to take photos of other things, such as construction sites. In retrospect it probably would have been "better" if he had used it only to take UFO photos so that all pictures could be placed in a continuous series. However, he did have other things to do with the camera besides tajing UFO photos. SO, you are right, there was "no control," which is not surprising. > NOTE: The GB investigators have been accused of sloppy work, etc. > However, I would like to point out that to make her argument about > the photos Barbara has used the very diligent efforts of Bob Oechsler > to catalogue every photo related to the UFO sightings that Ed took > with that camera. None of the skeptics undertook this effort. >**** BB: Anyone with the slimmest doubt was kept away from this case. >No skeptics allowed...only believers. >>>>>BSM: 10/17/97 Skeptics including Willy SMith, Bob Boyd, Ray Stanford had access to data and their reports prove that the did. However, it is true that after they went public with their positive claims of hoax before the investigation was completed, and even before the sightings were over, they began to lose contact with the main investigation. HOwever, that did not stop them from gathering their own data and loudly proclaiing their conclusions. > 3) Here is another of my comments on her paper > MACCABEE : Tommy Smith did not "come forward" publicly until June, > 1990. His testimony about Ed faking photos is about as solid as a > Swiss Cheese. Ed told the UFO investigators in January 1988 that a > young man had shown Ed UFO photos. **** BB: AFTER Tommy spoke with his father and AFTER Tommy cutoff his relationship with Walters Ed Walters told the MUFON Investigators that he was Mr. Ed. It was then that he showed Ware et al. the remaining photos to 18. > The young man had told Ed that he was exploding firecrackers in Gulf > Breeze when a UFO had appeared and he had photographed it. <snip> >**** BB: This is Ed's version. This IS NOT Tommy Smith's >wersion. >>>>BSM: 10/17/97 I am not surprised that it is not Tommy Smith's version, since his version is whatever he wants it to be. > Ed's testimony was supported by another young friend of Tommy's who >told me and other investigators that Tommy had told him, in late 1987, > about exploding firecrackers and seeing and photographing a UFO. >**** BB: I have a copy of a statement taken by a certain memebr >of CUFOS from a girl named "Carol" who was this "other" friends >girlfriend and who attended Columbia College in Chicago with this >"other" friend who claimed that this "other" friend had been >offered money to help Ed in the hoax. This "other" friend was >promised money for film making (like video?) and school etc. I >trust this person in CUFOS I have no reason to doubt the >statement since the CUFOS person thought it was truthful and >sincere. AS with evryhting in this case, this "carol" was afraid >to come forward. >>>>BSM: 10/17/97 Tsk, tsk. People who are accusing Ed areafraid to step forward....excetp Tommy Smith, of course, So, we are to believe an anonymous ("Carol") teenage girlfriend of Rob M. , the "other friend" of Tommy Smith (not a friend of Ed), when she ostensibly (though an anonymous CUFOS investigator) says Rob M. was also "bought off" by Ed? I begin to wonder just how many people ed has supposedly "bought off" in this "Grand Conspiracy." All the other witneses, too? > The person Tommy "came forward" to with his story was his > father. According to his father, lawyer Thomas Smith, at a press > conference in June, 1990, Tommy told him in late 1987 of a UFO > sighting with pictures. According to Thomas Smith, a few days or > weeks later Tommy told him the pictures had been faked by Ed. > Neither Smith said anything in public about these allegations > until June, 1990. At the press conference Mr. Smith was careful > to avoid criticizing any of the other Gulf Breeze witnesses, > including those who claimed to have seen exactly the same thing > that Ed photographed. Tommy's photos were analyzed. Tommy > had claimed that Ed had faked them by double exposure methods. BSM: 10/17/97 Readers: note well the following paragraph: > However, analysis revealed no evidence of double exposure and, > in fact, the photos appeared to be just single exposures, not double > exposures as Tommy had indicated. The shape and color of the > depicted UFO was consistent with what Ed had photographed. ------------------------- > ** BB COMMENT: This is strictly disinformation damage control. > In the first week of January 1988, Tommy Smith confessed his role in > Walters hoax to his father, who then discussed it with his law > partners, Mayor of Gulf Breeze, Ed Gray and Police Chief, Jerry Brown. > So there is no lack of credible witnesses to what Tommy said and when. > All of whom believed MUFON would discover the hoax and it would go > away. It didn't. At this time Tommy cut his ties to Walters. This > was when alters executed his own damage control. He told Ware et al., > that he was definitely, "Mr. Ed." and showed the remaining 12 or so > photographs he had taken. To my recollection it was Walters who came > out with the preposterous story about Tommy Smith. > My comment on her comment: > I have never heard of any testimony that in January 1988 Tommy Smith > told his father, who told his law partners, the Mayor of Gulf Breeze > and the Police Chief. If it is true, that the Police Chief had a > witness to a hoax as early as January 1988, then I guess he could be > guilty of nonfeasance of duty to inform the public, inasmuch as there > was a lot of interest in the sightings at the time. >**** BB: I cant speak for any of these people but everyone makes >a bad call once in while...even you Bruce. >>>>>Yeah me.....and even You, Barbara. > 4) Here is my comment on her paper: > This discussion about the copyright does not prove Ed > created the Bill and Jane photos. Hence Barbara's claim that > "this demonstrates his ability...." is also not proven. In > contradiction to Barbara's conclusion, many other factors in this > case indicate that Ed told the truth because many of the photos > he took were beyond his capability to fake. > ** BB COMMENT: You can make up any story you want to believe, > whatever makes you feel better. But the FACT of law is: IF ED WALTERS > OWNS THE COPYRIGHT TO THE BELIEVER BILL AND JANE PHOTOS AS HE > DECLARES, THEN HE MUST EITHER HAVE A TRANSFER AGREEMENT, WHICH HE > DOESN'T OR BE THE PHOTOGRAPHER. > ____________ > My comment: Can you prove the "Bill" and "Jane" didn't intend to > abandon all rights to their photos? >**** BB: Read my copyright paper. ASlo, copyright is inherited, >Bill said: "I'll keep the negs for my grandkids." (GBS p107) >>>>>BSM: 10/17/97 When it comes to deciding who's right, you grasp for legalities is you wish; I'll stick to the physical analysis. > Barbara: > And that DOES validate Tommy Smiths claims whether you like it or not. > (Bruce) My comment: quite independent of this argument,,Tommy's Smith's > testimony is full of holes. > Barbara": > And that does demonstrate his ability to use other cameras. >(Bruce) My comment: No, it doesn't. >**** BB: Yes, it does! >>>>>BSM 10/17/97)No it doesn't!!! (Readers take note: this could go on for ages!) > Barbara: > (As an additional remark regarding copyright. Ed Walters claims that <snip> > behavior for a man who is claiming he is being stalked by aliens. But > it is not odd behavior for a man pulling a hoax and hoping to > capitalize on it.) >(Bruce) My comment: he had been advised to copyright the > photos by the UFO investigatotors so the photos wouldn't be > circulating with no control at all. >**** BB: That's not the point. He had the crap (alegedly) scared >out of him and the thing he thinks about doing is filling out his >copyright application and getting it in the mail? It makes >perfect sense for someone pulling a hoax. But it doesnt make >sense for someone in fear for the life. >>>>>Sometimes people do thinkgs that "don't make sense." > ENDING COMMENT: Barbara can argue legalities as long as she likes. > I'll stick to the technical aspects combined with the numerous other > sightings (which include witnesses to the blue beam). For example, > stereo photos and photos which can't be simple double exposure (like > #1), etc. And then there is January 8, 1990 when Ed got photos in the > presence of other witnesses, two of whom took their own photos (see > UFOs ARE REAL, HERE's THE PROOF). >BB: ENDING COMMENT: Hey Bruce....Is Ed dead????? If nothow about >calling him on the phone (surely you have his number) and ask him >why he doesnt have a transfer agreement and why he owns the >copyright to the B&J photos? Thats simple. And please no BS >about Duane giving him the photos. BSM: (10.17/97) (Ending Comment)^2: no transfer agreement because Bill and Jane can't be contacted. Had either one left a return address or a phone number Ed would have called. Bill and Jane have had nearly 10 years to make contact and assert their copyrights. Presumably they are aware of the publication of Ed's book in 1990. Look's like a hung jury as far as Bill and Jane are concerned. Meanwhile back at the photo analysis, other witnesses, etc.........(Now, how did Ed manage to fake the May 1 stereo photos showing two UFOs that appear more than a hundred feet from the shore over the Santa Rosa Sound;? And, let's not forget the more recent photos and videos........)
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 19 Off-Line From Sunday Night 10-19 'til Saturday From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 17:30:29 -0400 Fwd Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 17:30:29 -0400 Subject: Off-Line From Sunday Night 10-19 'til Saturday Gentle Subscribers, Unfortunately, UFO UpDates will be off-line as of 8pm EST tonight until 12 noon Saturday, October 25. I'll try and clear any back-log before. An out-of-town job, with little or no time to administer the List for the next few days is the reason. My apologies to the addicted,
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 19 Re: ACC: Remarkable Update By Bob Wolf From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com> Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 10:23:29 -0400 Fwd Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 17:48:26 -0400 Subject: Re: ACC: Remarkable Update By Bob Wolf >Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 22:14:48 -0500 (CDT) >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net> [Dennis Stacy] >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: ACC: Remarkable Update By Bob Wolf [text deleted] >As far as I'm concerned, Bob Wolf might as well go bark up some >other tree. >If he wants to attribute everything from the transistor and the >Rolling Stones to extraterrestrial technology recovered at >Roswell, then more power to him, may he sleep well at night, >etc., etc. (And as if it made any difference.) >Some of us prefer to get on with our terribly mundane (and >terrestrial) lives. >And why are we arguing about a 1947-48 issue, anyway, when Corso >the Conqueror didn't even claim to have appeared on the scene >until 1961? On the one hand, Wolf and others have US scientists >cracking the transistor code in a matter of days or months, >whereas Corso tells us most secrets weren't cracked until two >decades later -- after he miraculously arrived on the scene and >took up the arduous task of enlightening mankind. >Don't you people realize when you're being had? When will you >stand up and resist rampant rumor and innuendo and *demand* >incontrovertible proof of every and anything? >Never mind. >Dennis Dennis- Are you saying that the ACC/Transistor allegations have no credence because Corso's story indicates otherwise? This must, of course, mean that you have had a change of heart regarding some of Corso's story and that "Corso the Conquerer" comment was merely a holdover from previous beliefs. . . .<g> I don't know much about Bob Wolf, and still find the ACC story of interest. You seem to want to link Corso with the ACC story, which makes no sense (as you point out). ACC hasn't indicated any linkage, and Corso certainly didn't, and the continuing discussion of such a relationship (even in passing) merely serves to muddy the waters and doesn't lead to a rational discussion of the situation. Of course, I can gather from your tone that you believe this entire discussion is nonsense and not worth wasting time on. Several prominent researchers would probably disagree, including one who believed there was a lack of continuity in the development of the transistor long before Corso or ACC hit the scene (but I'll let him speak for himself). Your skepticism is healthy, but let's keep the discussion on a level playing field and not add to the confusion. It does little more than provide your critics with ammunition. Of course the "transistor code" (or transistor technolgy) wasn't developed in a matter of weeks or months. There is a paper trail that shows semi-conductor research had been ongoing for years. However, that would not preclude the incorporation of concepts or technology that was based upon the examination of foreign material. The military did this with captured weopens of war, and it would be no different for a capture alien craft. I have contended in other posts that our scientists and engineers would not have been able to understand any technolgy unless we already had the technological foundation to understand it. If we were already very close to developing an effecient transistor, and several viable "hints" dropped out of the sky, then they could be quickly adopted in the manner described. If the source of those "hints" was protected by national security, then a paper trail would have to be developed to prevent (or defend against) any patent challanges. Shulman has indicated that the original transisotr patent was only given tentative approval at first because the application failed to show a clear development history. I would like to see if there are any Patent Office files in the archives to show how that application was handled, but there's so much to do and so little time. I would add that Corso didn't spend much time in his "seeding" efforts. He (allegedly) had control of the material for about two years, and in that time helped with the development of a number of breakthroughs. On another note, I was sorry to hear that you have stepped down as Editor of the MUFON Journal. You're efforts have been appreciated. Steve
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 19 Re: Questions for Abductees From: "WHITE" <mjawhite@digitaldune.net> [John White] Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 07:38:46 -0700 Fwd Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 17:41:14 -0400 Subject: Re: Questions for Abductees Estimado Sr. Mendoza: Thank you for posting....... >Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 00:56:51 -0400 >From: Peregrine Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith] >Subject: Questions for Abductees >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> <snip> >Errol, please take warning, if this develops into any substantial >discussion, it calls for a whole new thread. > ..............<snip>................................................ IMO ufology is a >lateral inversion of the Fathers vs Gnostics battles. By which I >mean the ETH-centered ufological mythos is Gnostic (or Manichean) >at heart, and it is that which is crying "heresy", not the >skeptics - who after all have no would-be orthodoxy to defend or >promote. <snip with apology to context> >ETH-centered ufology is Gnostic religion cast in techno-scientific >terms. Gnosticism is intrinsic, too, to the American religious >consciousness - which is where ufology translated and transmuted >it from. For a longer discussion that makes sense of these Olympian- >sounding statements, slip over to > >http://www.magonia.demon.co.uk <snip> >Yours &c >Predella D. Mandora >Jobbing Builder I went to the site. I see that I stepped my post in hollowed ground, and was pleasantly surprised. (I was stretching the "nom" thing just a little too far when I reached for the "Foreigner" to cap a bit of wry humor. My apology for that, and my gratitude for extending the foregoing in reply.....) I believe there to be little argument with the foundational elements in the thought that "ETH-centered ufology is Gnostic religion cast in techno-scientific terms." This was brought home most forcefully to me when, by virtue of a suggestion from a List member, I read several Sitchin books, and recalled that there were gnostic "scripts" which proceeded on somewhat the same plane. To the extent, however, that the concept of orthodoxy would embrace belief in generally accepted ideas, then those skeptics whose point of view is that of routine questioning of generally accepted ideas engage in a belief system which I would coin as "sceptology" in the context of "ufology." It would seem to the untutored eye, that some (by no means all) sceptics do have an "orthodoxy" to promote, e.g., routine questioning. Whether we cast that questioning as advocacy or simple seeking of answers is all in the mode, tenor, and words we use. When it comes to UFOS, I have seen both forms of questions on the List, and I have seen something else: irrespective of the form, a general "truth" seems to emerge from either: there ain't no hard evidence out there. It is this fact, and this fact alone, which drives the dialogue between ufologist and sceptologist. One could argue that it is meaningless to even engage in the dialogue, or to take sides. This, however, is too close to the thought that we are at the end of the search for the beginning of things which is sometimes thrown out in science. Thank you again, John White mjawhite@digitaldune.net but I don't think one could argue very convincinly that it makes
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 19 Re: Alien Autopsy Film From: Bob Shell <76750.2717@compuserve.com> Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 10:41:24 -0400 Fwd Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 17:51:26 -0400 Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy Film >Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 23:32:16 -0500 (CDT) >From: Michael Wayne Malone <wayne@fly.HiWAAY.net> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Alien Autopsy Film >Since I have neither looked at Theresa's material or anyone's >rebuttal material, I can't draw a conclusion about anything >either. In fact, the only reason I asked about the stills at all >was in the hope that your stills actually came from the original >film instead of video. Misguided hope that it was.... >Needless to say, I'm much more disappointed with the fact that no >one seems to have any of the original autopsy film than with any >discussion of identical legs. Not that I'm not interested in >Theresa's discussion. Despite the recent decline in intrest in >the Alien Autopsy film, I maintain it is potentially the most >important peice of information in ufology today as either the >most successful hoax or the most important peice of proof ever in >ufology. Michael, I spent some time this weekend looking at Theresa's work more carefully. Basically she has shown that the contours of the left legs line up pretty accurately from just about the knee to the groin area, and that the shadows are similar. However, when the left leg is adjusted in size and angle so that it lines up like this, nothing else does. I had originally assumed that the bulging form of the muscles on the front of the thigh was swelling due to injury. But if the legs of both creatures are this similar, then I must assume that this is the normal shape of the legs of these things. I still lean toward these creatures being real, based more than any one thing on the weight of medical testimony that I have gathered. In fact I have some more medical experts looking at the video right now. So far the bulk of medical opinion is that this is a real body in autopsy two. As for the bodies coming from the same mold, if they did I'd expect the right leg to line up as well, and the arm also. Actually when you adjust the leg from autopsy one so that the thigh lines up with that in autopsy two, you end up with the left hand lining up with a position considerably lower on the left thigh in autopsy one, indicating a longer arm. If you adjust it so that the hands line up, then the legs don't. It doesn't bother me that shadows do roughly line up when you make the legs the same size, since the bodies were placed on the same table, in the same room, under the same lights. Under these conditions, I'd be very surprised if the shadows did not roughly line up. Yes, the stills I have are not very good. But they are much better than the material Theresa had to work with, which was scanned from images printed in an Italian magazine. I think Theresa has done us all a service by attracting attention back to the AA controversy. And, I absolutely agree with you. This is potentially the most important piece of information in UFOlogy today, or ever. It is either the "smoking gun" proving absolutely that we are not alone, or it is the best conceived and executed hoax in history. Bob
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 19 Re: Ray Stanford - Project Starlight International? From: c549597@showme.missouri.edu [Barbara Becker] Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 11:24:30 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 18:01:06 -0400 Subject: Re: Ray Stanford - Project Starlight International? > From: galevy@pipeline.com [Gary Alevy] > Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 18:26:18 -0400 > To: UFO UpDate <updates@globalserve.net> > Subject: Interested in locating Ray Stanford - Project Starlight International > I am interested in locating Ray Stanford the author of the book > "Socorro 'Saucer' In A Pentagon Pantry. > He was also the director of Project Starlight International located in > Austin, Texas. In the 1970s he mentioned in his book that he lived in > Phoenix Arizona. > Thanks > Gary Alevy > The last address (9/28/92) I have for Stanford is: POB 529 / College Park , MD 20740. This might at least give you a lead. BB
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 19 Re: More on the Gulf Breeze copyright issue From: c549597@showme.missouri.edu [Barbara Becker] Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 11:21:12 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 17:59:57 -0400 Subject: Re: More on the Gulf Breeze copyright issue > To: updates@globalserve.net > From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com> > Subject: More on the Gulf Breeze copyright issue > Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 02:27:05 -0700 > On p 134 of the MUFON Symposium proceedings, 1988... > "In early December, the National Enquirer contacted Duane Cook > about buying rights for a one-time publication of the photos he > had published. The Enquirer offered Duane several thousand > dollars for these rights. Since Mr. X had indicated that Duane > could have the photos, Duane accepted the offer." The only thing this confirms is that Duane Cook KNEW, when no one else did, that Ed Walters was "Mr. X." For your information, regardless of how you decide you want the law to be, ED WALTERS owns the copyright, (registered at the LOC) for photos 1 through 19 on his first copyright registration. So if Duane Cook "gave" the photos to the ENQUIRER and if they used them "ONE TIME", then it was with ED WALTERS NOT DUANE COOKS permission. > I think there are two things clear from this about journalistic > attitude toward copyright with regard to anonymous photos. 1) > Cook believes that the Sentinel owns such photos and can legally > sell rights pertaining to them, and 2) the Enquirer agrees, since > they contacted Cook to make the deal. The ENQUIRER contacted Cook because he knew how to contact Walters. > Note that these are not the Believer Bill or Jane photos - Cook > actually has a contact with regard to these photos, unlike the > situation with Bill or Jane where total anonymity is the case. > Yet Cook still accepts the offer. This would tend to substantiate > that he would believe he would have the right to assign copyright > to Ed. Cook cant "assign" anything to anybody. He doesnt own any of the photos nor does he own the copyright. No matter how hard you wish Dorothy, it aint gonna happen. BB
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 19 UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 2, Number 40 From: Masinaigan@aol.com Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 12:31:28 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 18:05:15 -0400 Subject: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 2, Number 40 UFO ROUNDUP Volume 2, Number 40 October 19, 1997 Editor: Joseph Trainor MYSTERIOUS EXPLOSION ROCKS AUSTRALIA A mysterious explosion took place in the skies above eastern Australia on Saturday, October 11, 1997. Nearly three million Australians living in a 400-mile (640-kilometer) zone stretching from Tamworth to Batemans Bay in New South Wales (N.S.W.) heard the explosion. According to the ITAR-TASS report, "residents of the eastern coast of Australia" saw "a bright, greenish-silvery object" floating in the sky for a few minutes before it "fell apart in sparkles that rained on the earth." "Australian military experts and scientists at the New South Wales observatory are in hypothesis-making while news media have come up with the explanation that the enigmatic sparkling affair was space junk from the Russian orbiting space station Mir." However, Australia's National 24-Hour UFO Hotline received "hundreds of calls" from witnesses ranging from Cooma, N.S. W., 200 miles (320 kilometers) southwest of Sydney, to Bribie Island in Queensland. According to Hotline director Ross Dowe, the blast was estimated to have taken place "within a 15-kilometer radius of Boggabi" in New South Wales, adding, "Local farmers state that they never had a blast like it before, the reverberating blasting sound remained in the area for a good five minutes." (Many thanks to Vitor Ribeiro for forwarding this report.) SPHERICAL RED UFO SEEN NEAR CARACAS, VENEZUELA On Wednesday, October 8, 1997, two men, Alejandro Alvarez and Rafael Urbino, spotted a spherical red UFO "with one small white star" flying over Urbana Terrazas del Avila, a suburb just north of Caracas, the capital of Venezuela. The UFO first appeared in the east, over the suburb of Barrio de Petare, and, after making a northward turn, "skimmed over Urb. Terrazas del Avila and flew behind Cerro del Avila (mountain), disappearing into the clouds," Alvarez said. "We sighted the object crossing overhead and flying (north) toward the Caribbean Sea," he added, (Muchas gracias a Alberto Guerrero de UFO Argentina y tambien a Pedro Cunha para esas noticias.) UFO APPROACHES BRITISH WARSHIP OFF LANCASHIRE SHORE On Friday, October 10, 1997, talk show host Tony Newman of Red Rose Radio at 999MW received over 30 calls from listeners, who claimed to have seen UFOs flying over Lancashire the previous night. Two calls came from men identifying themselves as sailors aboard the HMS Shetland (P298), which was on a cruise in the Irish Sea west of Lancashire. The men reported that "a bright light was approaching the ship." The UFO paced the 60-meter (198-foot) vessel for a few minutes before flying away. Tim Matthews of the Lancashire UFO Society (LUFOS) stated that his group had contacted the UK Ministry of Defence, and a spokeswoman confirmed that HMS Shetland had been offshore at that time. Other callers to the Newman show reported "anomalous lights and spinning discs" over Burnley, Blackpool, Crosby, Southport and Bamber Bridge. Currently investigating the incident are Tim Matthews, Gloria Dixon of BUFORA, Eric Morris and Rory Lushman. (Many thanks to John Hayes for forwarding this report.) TWO UFOs PHOTOGRAPHED NEAR GUNDAGAI, AUSTRALIA Two anomalous lights were spotted by motorists on the Hume Highway in Australia's Victoria state, about a 20-to-30 minute drive south of Gundagai. According to Ross Dowe of Australia's National 24-Hour UFO Hotline, "two bright white illuminations were sighted one to two miles (1.6 to 3.2 kilometers) away in the eastern sky near Gundagai. The illuminations were about 30 degrees up (above the horizon) in angle," and were first seen in late daylight at 6:20 p.m. (Note: Right now it's spring in Australia and the other countries of the southern hemisphere--J.T.) Witnesses "took a few photos" of the lights, which retained the same brightness after dusk fell. At 7 p.m., "a large flame" shot out of the stern of one UFO. "The larger of the two turned out to be a dark brown or black triangular object while the other was a small ball with a halo around it. The triangular object suddenly shot off to the north" at a speed "much faster" than any jet interceptor. The spherical UFO hovered "for a few minutes" and then "sped off and dropped to the south, all without any sound." (Credit goes to Ross Dowe of Australia's National 24-Hour UFO Hotline for this report. Many thanks to Errol Bruce-Knapp for forwarding it.) UFO SEEN HOVERING IN CLOUDS OVER MONTREAL On Sunday, October 12, 1997, at 1 a.m., two residents of Montreal in Quebec, Canada spotted some unusual lights at 10,000 feet (3,030 meters) in the overcast clouds. "We noticed an unusual light in the cloud cover," Francois W. reported. "At first, it seemed to be a reflection of lights that were crossing the clouds. The lights were white. We counted five of them--a central light and four smaller lights surrounding it. The lights on the outside rim were rotating." Francois and his companion kept the UFO in view for several minutes. "I am truly certain that this was an OVNI (French acronym for UFO)." (Email Interview) ANOTHER UFO SIGHTING AT OHIO'S EAST FORK LAKE East Fork Lake, about 15 miles east of Cincinnati, the site of a UFO incident last month, reported another sighting this week. On Tuesday, October 14, 1997, at 8 p.m., three people on Alexander Lane in Afton, Ohio, located on Highway 133 about 10 miles east of Cincinnati, spotted a UFO that "hovered in the southwest sky about 65 degrees above the horizon." The witnesses--Susan, age 36; her daughter, Chrissy, age 19; and Mike--described the UFO as "a large, brilliant white light" that descended towards East Fork Lake. This was the trio's second encounter this year with a UFO. They saw a similar object in the woods near the lake on September 24. According to Kenneth Young of Tri-States Advocates of Scientific Knowledge, one of the trio grabbed a videocamera and attempted to shoot an image of the UFO. "The videotape shows fleeting glimpses of an object which appears for a few seconds at a time, as the camera is shaking due to its handheld operation." The witnesses also reported seeing four to eight jet planes circling the UFO, which "dropped from sight behind a treeline." This was the third UFO incident in Ohio since the beginning of October, Young reported. On October 8, 1997, in Hillsboro (population 6,356), a city on Highway 50 north of Cincinnati, a resident "spotted a large triangular-shaped craft surrounded by approximately 13 jets. As the jets continued to fly around the object, it suddenly rose straight up and disappeared from sight." On October 10, 1997, in Middletown, Ohio (population 43,719), a city on Interstate Highway 75 approximately 35 miles north of Cincinnati, residents spied "a large, bright white illumination" similar to the East Fork Lake UFO, which flew away to the southwest. (Many thanks to Kenneth Young, public relations director of T.A.S.K. for these reports.) MULTIPLE UFOs SIGHTED IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA On Sunday, October 12, 1997, at 1:45 p.m., Ross M. was at work in his hometown of Santa Maria, California (population 68,000), located on Highway 101 approximately 187 miles northwest of Los Angeles. "I looked up and saw the jets," Ross reported. "Then I watched something higher than the jets. At first the objects looked like two stars. I thought it strange to be able to see them during the day. Then I noticed they were going west. They were moving rather slow. They traveled together for a short time. Then one of the objects turned south, and the other continued west." "As I watched the one (that) traveled south, it joined with yet another object. The new object seemed to be flashing brilliantly. They both contined south until I lost sight of them. This happened at 1:45 p.m." (Many thanks to Tim Hagemeister of NACOMM for this report.) UFO SQUADRON SPOTTED OVER THE GREAT SALT LAKE On Wednesday, October 15, 1997, at 9 p.m., Ryan R. spotted a formation of strange lights flying over Utah's Great Salt Lake. "I spotted 14 lights in the sky above the Great Salt Lake around the Clearfield-Sunset area," he reported. "At first I thought they were airplanes. The more I looked at them, I could tell they were not airplanes. I'm just wondering if anyone else saw these strange lights." (Email Interview) Clearfield (population 17,982) and its northern neighbor Sunset (population 5,733) are just off Interstate Highway 15, about 27 miles north of Salt Lake City. NASA CHANGES SURVEYOR'S LOW-ALTITUDE ORBIT On Sunday, October 12, 1997, NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California raised the lowest point of the Mars Global Surveyor's orbit, effectively putting a temporary end to low-altitude photography of the Red Planet. Surveyor's 35-hour orbit around Mars was slated to fly at an altitude of 75 miles (121 kilometers). The spacecraft will now be "doing most of its closest passes over the planet" at 105 miles (170 kilometers). According to NASA press release 97-232, NASA decided to raise the orbit after "only one of the space- craft's two solar panels, which had not fully deployed, exhibited unexpected motion during a recent dip into the upper Martian atmosphere." The release quoted Surveyor project manager Glenn E. Cunningham as saying, "We're taking a hiatus from aerobraking for the next few weeks while we study data to try to model and understand the deflection of the solar panel that never fully deployed and latched after launch." (USENET Item) STILL NO RADIO CONTACT WITH PATHFINDER On Wednesday, October 15, 1997, the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena attempted to send a series of commands to the Pathfinder spacecraft on Mars. The commands were uploaded via the Deep Space Network's 100-kilowatt transmitter in Madrid, Spain. The site has two 26-meter steerable antennae and a steerable dish antenna 64 meters in diameter. "In both cases, they had not received a 'transmitter on' signal on the ground, indicating that the commands had been received by the spacecraft." The last successful contact with Pathfinder took place on October 7. A JPL spokesman said, "We fear the signal is falling on deaf ears." (Many thanks to the gang at In Search Of for this report.) (Editor's Comment: Aren't twelve days of "lost contact" with Pathfinder newsworthy enough for a mention in your local newspaper? I haven't yet seen it in any of the half-dozen New England papers I read daily.) CASSINI DEPARTS FOR SATURN On Wednesday, October 15, 1997, at 4:13 a.m., the Atlas-Centaur rocket carrying the two-story Cassini spacecraft lifted off from Cape Canaveral, Florida. The "flawless" launch sent Cassini and its onboard probe, Huygens, on the first leg of a 2.2-billion-mile (3.5-billion-kilometer) trip to Saturn. "Once there, Cassini will spend four years exploring Saturn, its rings and its icy moons, especially the biggest--Titan... Cassini is the biggest, most complex interplanetary probe and the most expensive, too--$3.4 billion for the whole mission." (See the Boston, Mass. Herald for October 16, 1997, page 4.) Cassini is now on its way to Venus for the first stretch of its marathon four-year voyage. from the UFO Files... 1957: THE VILLAS BOAS CASE October 15 was the fortieth anniversary of the abduction of Antonio Villas Boas, then aged 23, from his farm on the outskirts of Sao Francisco de Sales, Minas Gerais state, Brazil. It began in early October 1957 when Antonio and his brother were awakened at 3 a.m. by an intense white light streaming through their bedroom window. Then, the night of October 14, while they were plowing their field, they "saw a ball of red light hovering 300 feet (92 meters) above the field." As Antonio approached the UFO, "it evaded him at high speed. Villas Boas chased it across the field. He gave up after 20 attempts" to reach the object. The same UFO appeared again the following night, October 15, 1957. "Villas Boas lost his enthusiasm of the previous night to catch up with the object and considered making a getaway in his tractor. He was not successful." "The object landed some 40 feet (12 meters) in front of him on three metallic legs; it was an egg-shaped craft with a rotating dome." Fleeing the tractor, Antonio was chased and caught "by five entities" who "carried him aboard. The entities wore grey tight-fitting suits and helmets which revealed only their small blue eyes. From the helmets, tubes ran into their clothes at the back and neck." Confined in a small compartment on the UFO, Antonio was forcibly stripped of his clothes, and a blood sample was taken from him. For an hour, he sat in the room, as pipes wafted a sour-smelling "smoke" which "made him feel sick." Suddenly, the door zipped open, and there stood an alien humanoid female with "blonde hair, pale skin, large blue slanted eyes, reduced lips, nose, ears and high flat cheekbones that gave the impression of a sharply pointed chin." He reported, "She was looking at me all the while as if she wanted something from me." Which turned out to be the mother of all understatements. Following two sexual events, the alien female departed, and the other occupants took a sperm sample from Antonio. He was then dropped from the UFO in a deserted field not far from Sao Francisco de Sales. (Editor's Comment: They could have just as easily dropped him off in his birthday suit in the middle of the Praca Tiradentes in Ouro Preto!) "Later, medical examination revealed a scar where the blood sample had been taken and what may have been radioactive burning on parts of his skin." Antonio Villas Boas was the first abductee of modern times to report a sexual event as part of his experience. (See WORLD ATLAS OF UFOs, by John Spencer, Smithmark Publishers, Inc., New York City, 1992, pages 181-184.) That's it for this week. Join us next Sunday for more saucer news from all over the world. Till then, here's wishing you all a safe and happy week from "the paper that goes home--UFO ROUNDUP." UFO ROUNDUP: Copyright 1997 by Masinaigan Productions, all rights reserved. Readers may post news items from UFO ROUNDUP on their websites and in newsgroups provided that they credit the newsletter and its editor by name and list the date of issue in which the item first appeared.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 19 Important Conference! From: leahmarc@IX.NETCOM.COM (Leah Haley) (by way of Curious Curator <erik@cross fields.com>) Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 12:34:25 -0500 (CDT) Fwd Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 18:14:32 -0400 Subject: Important Conference! To museum lists: _____________________________________________________________________________ ---- Begin Forwarded Message Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 12:15:00 -0500 (CDT) From: leahmarc@ix.netcom.com (Leah Haley) Subject: Fwd: Important Conference! ---- Begin Forwarded Message Date: Tue, 07 Oct 1997 14:04:35 +0700 To: Leah Haley & Marc Davenport <leahmarc@ix.netcom.com>, From: leahmarc@ix.netcom.com (Leah Haley) (by way of Pat Welsh <pwelsh@nwu.edu>) Subject: Important Conference! Please pass this information along to everyone on your list. Thank you! See you at the conference! Cordially, Marc Davenport Announcing CONTACT 97 MEMPHIS Tennessee's First annual UFO Awareness Conference Friday, November 7--7:00 PM to 9:00 PM Saturday, November 8--9:00 AM to 9:00 PM Sunday, November 9--9:00 AM to 4:00 PM University of Memphis, Psychology Auditorium CONFIRMED SPEAKERS INCLUDE: Colin Andrews--Crop Circle Update Jeanne Marie Robinson--A Quest to Understand Contact Lyssa Royal--Preparing for Contact Vance Davis--The Future of America Leah A. Haley--Debunking the Debunkers Marc Davenport--What Your Government is Afraid to tell You Licia Davidson--UFOs, Black Helicopters, and Government Interventions Forest Crawford--Update on the Oscar Case Jim Dilletoso--Phoenix Lights Video Anita Albright--Reptilian Abductions Robert Buck--Awakening to the Omega Point Hundreds of books and tapes will be available for sale courtesy of Greenleaf Publications. Entire conference pre-registration--$35.00 (Must be postmarked by October 24, 1997) Entire conference at the door--$40.00 Students with current ID at the door--$25.00 One-day session at the door--$25.00 Please pay by check or money order payable to: Contact Quest P.O. Box 771716 Memphis, TN 38177-1716 For more information, telephone: Contact Quest 901-526-0190
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 19 Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculoso From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl> Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 20:17:08 +0200 (MET DST) Fwd Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 19:26:22 -0400 Subject: Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculoso >Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 01:58:14 -0400 >From: Peregrine Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> >Subject: Zeta Notso Ridiculoso >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >The Duke of Mendoza presents his compliments. >>Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 07:04:13 +0200 (MET DST) >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >>From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl> >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculouso >>From New Scientist April 1, 1995, paraphrased: >>'In March 1995 Gunther Nimtz of the University of Cologne >>announced at a colloquium in Snowbird, Utah, that his team at >>Cologne had not only measured superluminal speeds for their >>microwaves, but had actually sent a signal faster than light. The >>signal was Mozart's 40th Symphony. What they did was frequency >>modulate their microwave source with the music and then measure >>how quickly the music arrived after traversing the forbidden zone >>in a waveguide. >>According to Nimtz the 40th hopped 12 cm of space at 4.7 times >>the speed of light. Nimtz had a recording to prove it.' >>The New Scientist adds that skeptics are not sure that >>Mozart's 40th is a real signal. >Before you boys get too excited about this, eyeball the date again. >And again. Peter, I eyeballed the date months ago and I phoned the New Scientist editors in London. The article was not an April Fools' joke. Gunther Nimtz is a real person and has appeared in television documentaries. >Real scientists *like* a bit of wit occasionally. Real scientists also do research. Btw this experiment validates only one of a coterie of theories that indicate that speeds faster than light are possible. The argument that ET visitation is improbable because such speeds don't exist is obsolete even according to present day human science. You would have found that out had you read some real science magazines. __________________________________________ / Met vriendelijke groet/Best wishes \ Henny van der Pluijm hvdp@worldonline.nl Technology Pages http://www.worldonline.nl/~hvdp \______________________________________/
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 19 An interview with ACC's President From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com> Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 14:32:48 -0400 Fwd Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 19:31:40 -0400 Subject: An interview with ACC's President For what it's worth, I thought that some might find this of interest and may have missed it. -------------------------------------------------------------------- SIGHTINGS -------------------------------------------------------------------- EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW: Jeff Rense Talks With American Computer President Jack Shulman About The Roswell/Bell Labs Controversy Courtesy CNI News [Since mid-August, a controversy has raged on the internet concerning highly provocative information posted on the web site of American Computer Company (see CNI News of September 16, 1997; and visit ACC's web site: http://www.american-computer.com). In brief, ACC has suggested that the historic invention of the transistor at Bell Laboratories in December, 1947 might have been aided by covert transfer of technology from an alien spacecraft recovered near Roswell, New Mexico. This suggestion directly parallels similar claims made by Lt. Col. Philip Corso in his recent book, "The Day After Roswell." However, ACC personnel state they had no knowledge of Corso or his book, but relied instead on information provided by a "consultant" who remains nameless. American Computer's president and chief technical officer is Jack Shulman. In recent weeks, Shulman himself has come under scrutiny by UFO researchers, as have several other people who have presumed to speak in a seemingly authoritative way on behalf of American Computer. Chief among these "others" are one Ed Wang and one Bob Wolf. Pronouncements attributed to these two persons have raised suspicions that Shulman himself may have been writing under one or several pseudonyms. CNI News, working in cooperation with radio host Jeff Rense of the popular syndicated program "Sightings on the Radio," [see Jeff's web site at http://www.sightings.com], is seeking to verify or dispel the various rumors swirling around ACC and the person of Jack Shulman, so that public attention can be refocused to the significant issues raised on the American Computer web site. This special supplement to the October 1 edition of CNI News is directed to that goal. The following is an edited transcript of a telephone interview between Jeff Rense and Jack Shulman which took place on September 29. Jeff Rense and CNI News editor Michael Lindemann consulted together on the questions to be asked prior to the call. CNI News recognizes that the statements made by Shulman in this interview by no means satisfy all the questions we would like to have answered. However, we hope that this information represents a contribution to the ongoing investigation of this unusual case. Thanks to Jeff Rense for sharing the complete contents of this interview with CNI News.] JEFF RENSE: It's September 29, and we're talking with American Computer Company president Jack Shulman. To begin with, are you, Jack Shulman, writing under the pseudonym "Ed Wang"? JACK SHULMAN: No RENSE: Have you ever met Ed Wang? SHULMAN: No. RENSE: Have you ever talked to anyone calling himself Ed Wang? SHULMAN:: Yes, he's called here a couple of times. At one time he had asked us if he could use an account at one of the computer science associations nearby to access the internet for the purpose of investigative reporting. That predated this whole controversy. We did in fact give him an account to use, back about eleven months ago. I don't remember what he was investigating at that time. Then somebody raised his name, in about the early part of August, asking us if we could verify something that he had paraphrased from one of the stories on our web site. Since he had paraphrased, and it was all quoted and everything, it would have been just as easy for that party to just look at our web page. So we said, "If you'll look at our web page, you'll see that whatever he's paraphrased here does appear to resemble exactly the words that are on the web page." To my knowledge, the only other contact we've had with Ed Wang is an occasional call from him, much as you've called me today, and others such as Stig Agermose, who have contacted us to ask questions. RENSE: Who is Bob Wolf? Does he mean anything to American Computer? SHULMAN: Again, he's one of the people, like Jared Anderson, Ed Wang, Linda Moulton Howe, yourself and others, who've written us. There have been dozens of people who have either written us or called us for information. I have spoken to Bob Wolf at length by phone. I have not personally met the guy. He does appear to be a very nice fellow. He's given me some very interesting information. I don't know if I'd take all of it without the proverbial grain of salt, because he has told me some things that led me to believe there are parts of his background that he doesn't want to disclose to me. Apparently he worked for the U.S. Navy as a Seal, but I can't verify that. I can't call the Seals organization and ask if this guy was a Seal. They won't respond to that. RENSE: What is your purpose in exposing the Roswell/Bell Labs allegations on the ACC web site, thereby attaching your credibility, for better or worse, not only to Roswell, but to claims concerning Bell Labs' access to alien technology -- claims which either must be substantiated, or which could make you look like a nut, or a disinformer? SHULMAN: I don't think there was any purpose -- either to look like nut, a disinformer, a credible source or anything -- taken into consideration at first. We had a consultant come to me and tell me this story. At first, I was quite skeptical about it. I knew a lot of the facts, because they are pretty much matters of record, but had always thought that the reason there was a cloud of -- shall we say -- controversy about the exact origins of William Shockley's transistor was that it stemmed perhaps from a prehistory that AT&T didn't care to disclose. I didn't have any idea, up until the time that the consultant came to me and raised these issues, that it might in fact be related to the Roswell incident. I originally thought [the origin] was something like German rocket scientists.... RENSE: How did this consultant come to you? SHULMAN: I had known the consultant years ago. We had met each other in the hinterlands of AT&T. I've worked on and off in AT&T contracts over the course of a couple of decades. And about a year ago, in my capacity as the chairperson of the American Computer Science Foundation, I was asked to review materials that pertained to an ongoing investigation of telephone company practices that were pertinent to the success of the computer industry, during the course of which I happened to come across some fairly strong allegations that were made by the consultant in the dominion of that specific investigation. I was not at that time informed of the possibility of an alien technology transfer. It was not until he came to me personally and suggested it that I said to him, "Well, you're going to have to show me some bonafide evidence before I even consider this." About six months later he came back to me with what appeared to me to be... some evidence that might suggest in fact that the transistor came from some kind of a project involving investigation into an alien technology of some kind. RENSE: Can you elaborate on that evidence at all? SHULMAN: I can tell you that I have seen what appears to be some notes from someone. However, I cannot verify their authenticity, so I'd really not like to describe them in any detail. Frankly, Jeff, I grow concerned about leading people in the wrong direction. They did give me the appearance of a lab notebook, of a lab-keeper's notebook. In fact, they did appear to describe or have an actual memorandum referring to a disinformation campaign in late 1947 at AT&T. But again, they could have been a complete forgery. They could have been anything. They might have been legitimate too. At that particular juncture, I said to him, "OK, this now looks like it's fairly conceivable it might have happened, if in fact this is bonafide." So he suggested to me, Why don't we at the American Computer Science Foundation post some kind of white paper on the subject? I said we really can't do that. He asked me why, and I said to him that it was because American Computer Science Foundation carries the weight of its membership companies, etc., all of which might lend a greater weight, in essence underwriting the credibility of this story in a way that I would not intend it to. I would prefer that the information somehow stand on its own. Well, he pestered me for a couple of months. We were talking over coffee, reviewing the whole thing, and he suggested, "Why don't you put it on your American Computer Company web site?" I said I can't do that, because it might [reflect badly on ACC]. So he said -- and I'll be blunt with you here -- "Why don't you make it look humorous? That way, you have a plausibly deniable excuse." I said, "It IS humorous, in a way, because if you look at it, you have a company -- if in fact they did obtain technology from a technology transfer source -- that's been running around for fifty years trying to hide that fact." That's funny. Why would anybody do that? It struck me at that particular moment that AT&T would have been better off admitting it. So I said, "OK, why don't we make it appear in its proper light -- as outrageous and/or funny -- and put it on the ACC web site and see if we get any reaction at all from anybody who reads it. Perhaps if it strikes a chord, somebody will contact us and tell us whether this is ridiculous or not." Initially, we did not expect anyone from your investigative arena to even notice the story. At least I didn't. The consultant may have, but I did not. I initially thought that people would see it in passing and would say, hmm, how interesting, how humorous, or whatever. RENSE: You had no idea of the potential scope of this? SHULMAN: Well, interestingly, exactly what I thought might happen did happen -- that is, it struck a chord with somebody and they wrote us. Sure enough, the first week someone wrote us and said, "Yes, my father worked for AT&T/Bell Labs in 1947, and in the early '60s took me to see a UFO." I was flabbergasted, absolutely floored. You could have knocked me over with a feather at that moment. Not because I was skeptical, but in the context of how ridiculous it makes AT&T look, I found it to be humorous. What, are they crazy? Why didn't they come out with it in 1947? The world would have been in their debt. AT&T would have been the greatest company that ever lived. Why would they hide it? It was then that the full import of the suggestion of profiteering began to occur to me. If in fact this were true, the profiteering aspect was something that none of us considered. If people were ready to make billions and billions of dollars for 200 years on this kind of technology, and it came from an "alien source," they would keep it a secret -- because if it came from outside of AT&T, it wouldn't belong to AT&T. It hadn't even dawned on us, because we were looking at it from the perspective of how amazing the story is, how earthshaking, and how silly it would be to keep it a secret -- until we began to realize who was in the business of profiting from this kind of technology. RENSE: Do you have any relationship with Bell Labs now, Jack? SHULMAN: Not really. They call us every once in a while to look at buying equipment, but I am no longer personally doing any consulting for Bell Labs. RENSE: Does the consultant? SHULMAN: Occasionally. He or she does communications-related consulting in the defense industries, and very specifically his or her identity is being withheld for security reasons. RENSE: Has the consultant expressed to you any surprise at the amount of internet interest in this story? SHULMAN: He and several of our public relations consultant clients said that, frankly, it will do quite well as a story on the internet because it will serve to brighten up the interest of some very frustrated people. This information will give people in your investigative field some leverage in dealing with the whole subject. Even if the entire story might not be 100 percent accurate for whatever reason, the facts described in our story are materially largely true. For instance -- and it's been interesting to see how many people have reacted adversely to this suggestion -- if you take a look at the part about the Nike-Ajax missile bases, and the anti-aircraft guns that preceded them, in and around AT&T down in Red Bank, outside of Crawford's Corners, up in Murray Hill and over in Holmdel, it's almost shocking to discover that, while New York City and New Jersey sat undefended, AT&T had both anti-aircraft and then anti-missile batteries constructed around them in the 1940s and 1950s. This is painfully humorous. It actually hurts to consider that AT&T and Bell Labs are more important than the citizens of our country. So I'm thinking, wow, there must be more than just the labs there. Because I know something about the research community, and I don't know that there is anything at AT&T from 1947 to 1997 that was irreplaceable. Whereas, when I think of places like the Applied Physics Laboratory, Cold Springs Harbor, Lawrence Livermore -- there are projects going on there that are not reproducible, and I'm not sure they all have Nike-Ajax missile bases around them. RENSE: Concerning the allegations about Bell Labs, then, would you say that you are a conduit for someone else's information? SHULMAN: Yes, we are providing a forum. To date, only Motorola from the AT&T arena has tried to dispute it. AT&T appears to be remaining mute on the subject. And Lucent has remained mute, although I must tell you that our relationship with Lucent on the technical support side -- because we support some of Lucent's products on the AT&T phone systems -- has been less than warm since August 15. We've actually been hung up on a few times. RENSE: But have you had anyone call up and tell you, Jack, you've really stepped across the boundary here? SHULMAN: No, not thus far. We've gotten a couple of nasty letters from people who didn't provide a return email address. But we're just trying to provide a forum for people to hear these facts and either disprove them or prove them. There's nothing worse, in my view, than something like this that's left open to conjecture indefinitely, because it does nothing but hurt the people who try to consider it, and I think it hurts the country to some degree. I think it weakens our country. The fact that people will continuously arrive at the conclusion, for instance, that either the DoD, or the president, or someone like that is not disclosing facts to them that they ought to disclose, leads to the kind of thinking that undermines our democratic system. It tends to erode our confidence in government, and I think our confidence in government really needs to be reinforced. RENSE: Is American Computer consciously part of a larger coordinated campaign of public disclosure or education aimed at revealing things about the alleged alien presence on earth? SHULMAN: No. Not unless you call ACC's own campaign that broader one. Nobody came to us other than this consultant. RENSE: So would you say that Jack Shulman, as a matter of conscience and patriotism, independently decided to put this on his web site? SHULMAN: Conscience, yes, simply because I thought that the facts deserved disclosure and consideration. The public should know. Even if they're not true, the fact is they appear to have some degree of plausibility, so they should be considered on their own weight. By the way, I was caught completely off guard by Colonel Corso's book. I did not know the book existed until Jared Anderson called here and spoke to John Schwartz, one of my VPs, who got me on the phone immediately and said, "Did you know there's a book that describes transfers of technology from either Roswell or some other crash to AT&T?" That was the first I heard of it. As for what you call patriotism: We are our government, Jeff. The government is us. We have this perception of a dyspeptic, detached entity with X-Files guys running around in it, Men-in-Black running around in it, abusive IRS guys running around in it -- all those reasons are used by people who are insurrectional in their thinking. I don't happen to share those views. I happen to love this country and the people who live here, and I think that if they have a gripe or a beef, it deserves to be aired. And this is one of those that appears to deserve to be aired.... I raised that very issue in a letter to, dare I say, Secretary of Defense William Cohen. I stated my concern that -- what do they say, "Sooth the savage beast"? -- I'm concerned that a "savage beast" will emerge eventually from the disinformation, lack of information, strangely conflicting or compelling stories, and the lack of a basic kind of town-hall sit-down to discuss these matters. I mean, how expensive is it for the government to respond to a million FOIA requests a year, compared with one concerted effort to gather all the information, keep it pure, break down a few barriers that might be left over from some nameless classified project....? RENSE: It sounds like you don't subscribe to the idea of a fifty-year, coordinated cover-up of the UFO subject. SHULMAN: I think I would have to see actual evidence of a coordinated cover-up. It's not that I don't subscribe to it. It's that I don't as yet see evidence of anything other than bureaucracy, technical deficiencies in requests [for information], a disinclination on the part of the government to discuss the matter. I think, if anything, I'd call it a fifty-year disinclination, rather than cover-up. RENSE: But the reasons for that "disinclination" are the key... SHULMAN: That's correct. That's one of the things we raised in the Shadowlake Invitation page on our web site [an open letter to the Secretary of Defense, Joint Chiefs of Staff and other top officials to participate in an open forum on the subject of UFOs.] RENSE: That letter has caused a lot of reaction. Who wrote that? SHULMAN: It was written by American Computer Company. You have people working here, including myself, who are less than inclined to seek the public spotlight on this issue. We are not what you'd call publicity hounds. RENSE: I understand. What is your personal opinion about the ET issue, vis a vis our military and our government? SHULMAN: My personal opinion is a very troubled one. I have a degree of personal integrity that forbids my [drawing conclusions] until I've seen the absolute facts. I have not concluded one way or the other. But I am inclined to believe that it is more likely that there is some shred of truth to visitation than that there is no shred of truth. RENSE: Do you expect any more information from your consultant to come through ACC's web site? SHULMAN: I can't say at this moment. We have a plan in place, that we're considering, to raise the ante a little bit to try to generate some kind of reaction out of the Department of Defense that might lean toward the town-hall, public-forum type of meeting. But I really don't want to reveal any more about this now. RENSE: Is the consultant's agenda, in your opinion, personal, or is he or she being directed by any agency? SHULMAN: The consultant does not work, to my knowledge, on this particular story for any agency, because that would probably violate the consultant's security oath. The consultant has been advised, and has advised us, that the information that he or she has given us is "allowed" to be given to us by whatever agency he or she consults to, because the information was obtained other than through their employment by the U.S. government. Meaning, the guy worked at AT&T, came across this information, and was not working for the federal government at the time, so the federal government cannot prevent him or her from releasing it to us. But to be very distinct here... the federal government is not particularly happy that the information is being given out. RENSE: How do you know that? SHULMAN: That's a comment from the consultant. He said, "I don't think they're happy that I'm talking. I don't think they're upset, but I don't think they're happy." RENSE: To summarize: Would you say that you think the information given by the consultant is credible and believable? This seems to go without saying, or you wouldn't have put it on your web site. SHULMAN: "The information" is rather broad. There are a lot of different parts to this, and some feel more accurate to me than others. RENSE: On balance, would you say that ACC's web postings on this subject are important? SHULMAN: That's been said to me. Again, we did not do it to attract this kind of publicity. We did it because we thought we would attract some interest from someone, somewhere, who might know whether it's true or not -- meaning other than from sources that the consultant has, such as past contacts with John Morton [formerly of Bell Labs], William Shockley, others at AT&T and Defense who were involved with him at the time. The problem is, too many people are trying to read into it, Jeff. If it's true, it's true -- if it's not, it's not. I was not there in 1947. I cannot swear if it is or isn't. A complete charade could be presented to me, and I could be fooled if it were presented properly. It could be suggested that the consultant is a bold-faced liar, or that he has had information given to him that is untrue but looks very plausible and believable at the level of detail that we presently know. RENSE: Thanks very much for your time. [Jeff Rense has invited Jack Shulman to be a live guest on "Sightings on the Radio," where many of the foregoing issues might be explored in greater depth. No date for that interview has yet been announced. Meanwhile, CNI News will continue to pursue the ACC/Bell Labs/Roswell story.] NOTE- Shulman was a guest on Sightings on the Radio and that interview can be heard via RealAudio. Go to http://www.sightings.com for more information on this topic.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 19 Re: Skywatch: Giant Meteor May Have Hit Ontario From: Paul <pwedel@neptune.on.ca> [Paul Wedel] Date: Sun, 19 Oct 97 15:27:49 -0000 Fwd Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 19:44:57 -0400 Subject: Re: Skywatch: Giant Meteor May Have Hit Ontario Greetings Errol, list, et al, >Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 04:21:46 -0700 >------- Forwarded Message Follows ------- >From: Ndunlks@aol.com >Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 03:59:09 -0400 (EDT) >Subject: Giant Meteor May Have Hit Ontario >Talk about a big bang: Giant meteor may have hit Ontario >October 17, 1996 >Web posted at: 5:45 p.m. EDT >SUDBURY, Ontario (CNN) -- Meteors can and do hit planets. Shoemaker Levy >9 slammed into Jupiter in 1994 with the energy of about 50 million >Hiroshima bombs, and in its early history, the Earth was seeded with >continuous meteor hits. >A meteor hit in the Yucatan Peninsula 65 million years ago is believed >to have led to the extinction of the dinosaurs. >And scientists suspect that a massive meteor, the size of a small >mountain, hit northern Ontario eons ago, leaving behind a bunch of >strange-looking rocks, and dredging up enough copper and nickel to >support a thriving mining industry. <very large unkind snip> There is also a rather large but not well known crater called the "Brent Crater" which resides in the northern part of Algonquin Park located in Central Northern Ontario. I believe it is the largest crater of it's kind on the planet - or so I recall from what a Conservation Officer in the park once stated at the night time open theatre there. It is my understanding that the Canadian shield is a glacially plowed over mountain range. Whether the crater was formed before or after this I do not know. This is accurate to the best of my knowledge, if anyone has more accurate info, please correct my inaccuracy(s). Since a number of claimed abductee's/contactee's/experiencers claim they have been shown images of a large asteriod (or whatever) hitting the earth in the future, it's relevance for our own understanding should not be discounted. Best regards, Paul. "Must get moose and squirrel!" ..Boris Badenov
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 19 Pt. 2 - Matthew Williams - UK.UFO.NW From: United Kingdom UFO Network <ufo@holodeck.demon.co.uk> Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 20:39:05 +0000 Fwd Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 19:49:22 -0400 Subject: Pt. 2 - Matthew Williams - UK.UFO.NW ______ _______ ____ ------ / / // ____// |---------------------------------------------- U K / / // ___/ / / ' October 19th, 1997 / / // / / / / N E T W O R K part 2 --- (_____//__/ -- (_____/------------------------------------------------ This special issue comes in 2 parts. If any part is missing please mail: ufo@holodeck.demon.co.uk giving the special issue number. The issue will be reposted to you. Please put the details as below in the subject section e.g. Repost Matthew Williams - part 1 or part 2. <Mulder> What other countries could be involved in this? Is it possible that the United States and Britain are the only countries involved? Or is it on a more global scale? <truthseek> I would say Global <truthseek> A pseudo secret deal was done with France and the UK over sharing "all" intelligence info <truthseek> we have a similar agreement with the US. <truthseek> This means that france is in on the act <truthseek> Off the point here but it was because of this secret agreement with france and the UK that the UK Govt backed the French nuclear tests a few years ago. <truthseek> They did not want to break off deals etc by not backing the tests. <truthseek> The deals involve Nuclear arms secerts having been shared between UK France and US. So there was a real reason for UK and US to let those tests go ahead. Not many people know that!!!! <truthseek> I would imagine that Mossad and other high level intel orgs are involved. Even KGB probably has an angle on this. I am not sure about the truth behind the conspiracy theory that the Russians were helping the US with <truthseek> the UFO problem and this is why they relaxed and opened the borders... interesting thought though. <truthseek> I cant help but think of Reagan and his "UFO speech". I think he knew more and I think he was giving us all a very big hint! Thanks ?? <bambina> Matt, I've talked to "contactees" (don't like the term abductees) who have said that they have been in these underground facilities. They also mention seeing MEN in lab coats, and one mentioned MJ-12. This speculates that our govt's are taking contactees also. Any thoughts? <truthseek> Well if the abductee scenario is true in regards GOVT and abductions then contactees would be taken too sure. <truthseek> I think this goes without saying.... <truthseek> The only trouble I have is knowing what is the truth. We must tread carefully with the use of hypnosis. <truthseek> It is a useful tool but I did a session once where the abductee recalled events with GOVT people and it seemed like he was talking about a USA scenario <truthseek> when we heard all he had to say it sounded exactly like a scene from the movie Roswell. We discounted this info <truthseek> I think we must be even more careful in the western world because like it or not we are all saturated by UFO TV and media and it does sink in <truthseek> I do not discount what these people say totally it is just that so many times the fantasy that is created rings of TV or books. <truthseek> It does in the cases I have dealt with. <truthseek> What I need now is proof. I want to have the names off lab coats and the vehicle registrations <truthseek> which "should" be there if the abduction is not a fantasy. <truthseek> When you start to delve in those areas the abductee rebels. This is when *I* think they are trying to maintain the fantasy. <truthseek> We then try and get the person back on a sensible track and start again. <truthseek> Trained hypnotsist can tell when this is happening anyhow. It is an interesting facet of hypnosis. <truthseek> I just hope that everything that people say under hypnoisis is not taken as gospel by those listening. We must be careful. Thanks ?? <BonzaiBon> What exactly, in full description, is your belief that is going on in these underground bases? If you believe that there are vehicles being stored there of extraterrestrial origin, do you believe that we are enveloping that technology ourselves? For what reasons would we use that technology? <truthseek> for those who havent tried yet my cuseeme is running on IP 195.99.52.33 <truthseek> for those who havent tried yet!!! <truthseek> this is a webiste I maintain <truthseek> http://members.aol.com/alienep/index.htm <truthseek> also visit our ftp site at ftp://members.aol.com/alienep/irc/ <truthseek> where there are loads of piccys and text files from my hard drive <truthseek> Well at Rudloe Manor I only think that they investigate the UFO sightings. I don't have any info to speak of UFOs stored or alien bodies, <truthseek> unless you take on board a Remote Viewer who I asked to go there (he didn't know me) and he got the tunnels bit spot on... he did say there were aliens there. <truthseek> This is problematic as I have never spoken to anyone who has worked there who can back this up. <truthseek> I am not sure that there are underground alien bases. I hold final judgement. I find it an interesting and compelling idea but I just haven't been able to prove it. <truthseek> I cannot accept the anecdotal evidence which I am given - by unreliable sources and by abductees. <truthseek> I only go with information which can be backed up in other ways - which is why 99% of what I am told in regression sessions I cannot really use to PROVE to the world what is taking place. <truthseek> I bear these things in mind but they aren't part of my reality at the moment. <truthseek> If you want my speculation on what is going on based on the rumours I have heard they go something like this: <truthseek> Aliens engineering peoples souls via metaphysical and electronic equipment. <truthseek> Aliens and MOD studying cloning and soul transferance <truthseek> Aliens giving GOVT cloning technology so Govt can create hybrid race and drone workers. <truthseek> Govt doing secret experiments on some captured aliens.... <truthseek> the usual. <truthseek> I can't verify these things. <truthseek> Sorry I couldnt be more helpful on that one. ?? <hackit> ask him if hes been approached by "anyone" telling him to back off!!!!!! <truthseek> Only spammy researchers who are far too paranoid for their own good and by people not involved in the subject who think that the MOD work I do will get me into trouble (gentle warnings) <truthseek> No I have never had ANY trouble at all. Infact I welcome it. I want to meet trouble head on - face to face, hence why I go into secret MOD establishments and face off the people there. <truthseek> I think people are very paranoid and double guess what "will happen to you" when they have no direct experience of these threats themselves. <truthseek> I have spoken to such "terrifieds" and they try very hard to give you the frighteners. <truthseek> I think these people are far worse than those non-existent govt people they accuse. <truthseek> Infact they probably do the job for them... hehe ;-) <truthseek> I think there are people who do get hassled but the ways this happens are far more subtle. <truthseek> I think that a lot of the UFO researchers are the one we should be careful of. I am very suspicious of a number of researchers. <truthseek> If anyone is expecting a call from the MIBs it won't happen. What will happen is you will get a researcher turn up at your house, con you out of your master camcorder tapes and photos along with the negs and run <truthseek> this has the effect of hacking people up and making them upset. Then the fighting starts and this keeps people tied up. <truthseek> I swear this is the game plan, diversion from the goals and to make people despondent with UFO researchers because of bad behaviour. <truthseek> Some UFO groups and people cannot behave and I think they are far worse enemies of the subject than the GOVT - but then my question is <truthseek> are the govt behind those Groups and individuals antics.... <truthseek> Time and time again we see infiltratuion by GOVT of UFO orgs. NICAP was a good example <truthseek> a few of our beloved british groups behave in a manner which beggars belief. Case files go missing and never see the light of day and real research is supressed AT ALL COSTS. <truthseek> This is what I have been up against. <truthseek> Theres the conspiracy if you ask me - they are inside your groups.... ! ?? <John_z> Some people say that abductees could be suffering some kind of mental ilness, they also say that as it runs in families it is probably hereditory what do you think about this? <truthseek> I am asked all the time do I believe the abductees. I have to say yes. <truthseek> The consistency of what is said by them is sometimes uncanny. Only small points but those things that you as a dedicated researcher can pick up on. <truthseek> It takes a lot of absorbtion of cases to be able to look at all the info. <truthseek> Yes in my opinion they are telling "a" truth. <truthseek> I don't think it is the only truth. I think that their stories run deeper than they are aware of. You sometimes scratch the surface of these things. <truthseek> What I feel - from some personal experiences which would take longer than I have to talk about (perhaps - coax me), I believe that the alien scenario is a screen memory. <truthseek> I think the experience is far more profound than just medical experiments - but this is the only way it can be understood by people when in a physical state. <truthseek> My own belief of the parts of abductions which we understand is that the aliens are not exactly physical. <truthseek> I think that the aliens are metaphysical and come from what I can only term as spiritual realms. <truthseek> I think the realities they exist in cannot be fully undertood by us in normal concept and this is why the abductees are often confused at the deeper levels. <truthseek> The surface abduction stories remain the same but the deeper stuff just goes awol. <truthseek> I think we are looking at a spiritual interface and I do not believe that there is anything negative about it. <truthseek> I honestly believe that all"abductions" are positive no matter what the person feels. I have yet to come across a case wher there has not been some positive influence in peoples lives. <truthseek> I am troubled by the Budd Hopkins stuff and David Jacobs because I have never met any "abductees" with scare stories like that. <truthseek> Even the abductees who were scared *during* their experiences have come away with far greater understandings of their own situations <truthseek> and life in general. I think it gives them perspecives. <truthseek> Many I know have gone so far towards the aliens that they want to be with them and want to leave this life behind. This is another reason I feel the aliens leave those frightening memories with us <truthseek> I feel they are trying to persuade us to root ourselves here. We are not all quite ready for what they have to tell us. <truthseek> I have no personal experience of this myself - I am not an abductee. This is the feeling I get from hearing those people who are abductees. Profound eh.... <truthseek> And I must say that before 1990 Iwas a total skeptic. Since my first UFO sighting the subject has brought me to a faith in "something" or someone else out there which is above us. <truthseek> I am not saying I am worshipping aliens, simply that I now am open to much more and the experiences I have had have enabled me to enjoy my life to a much fuller degree than I think I would have had not seeing the things I have seen. <truthseek> So in that way I feel a little like the abductees - enriched by something. <truthseek> So you got your 1 pennys worth. hehe. I bet I was really ambigiuous on some of that.... ;-) thanks ?? <{ChuD}> " DO u think any country might blow the "cover" on ufo's, what would be the uk/USA reaction to a country that did?" <truthseek> I think some countries have tried - Mexico, Belgium, Japan <truthseek> The trouble with this subject is that unless it actually touches somebody in some way people cannot believe in it fully. <truthseek> Take me for a classic example - pre 1990 I didn't believe in anything <truthseek> I joked about peoples UFO sightings. I would have watched the TV progs and then scratched my head a little and thought ah well I will believe it when I see it. <truthseek> Now to a certain degree people WILL believe what they are told by others. It is when the groundswell is high enough <truthseek> that then BELIEF will change and everyone will believe. <truthseek> It takes people to be brought to belief slowly. It will not happen overnight unless the subject touches people in some way. <truthseek> So to answer your question <truthseek> Some countires have been touched and they are nearer than other countries but it doesn't help if your speaking to people who are not touched. <truthseek> Also there is without a shadow of a doubt heavy press censorship in the UK and US on these subjects <truthseek> take Arizona for instance - they could not stop people seeing the UFOs <truthseek> but they could affect the way it was reported and investigated. <truthseek> The mayor seemed to be either told to shut up or he wanted to close the story down himself. <truthseek> That was a coverup <truthseek> Take MEXICO as another example - that story made total mexico news coverage, and went all around the wire and news services of the world. It was not touched by ANY US or UK tabloids or TV. <truthseek> That was afterall WORLD news. Sightings commented on the lack of coverage. <truthseek> So in a way if Independence Day was taking place for real in some lonely part of the world or even in the next state, or county some GOVT people and Press people would still not be telling us. <truthseek> This is why UFOlogy needs to be grass roots, so we can bypass the normal channels of communication in order to feed the info <truthseek> and when we all have it then we just lobby TV and press to take these stories seriously <truthseek> Grass roots is the way forward. ?? <BonzaiBon> why did they not take his film away from him upon seeing him filming? <truthseek> Who are we talking about ? <Crow> that was a while back <Hideout> bonzaibon: you can now speak in the channel <Crow> shall we come back to BonzaiBon <truthseek> okies <truthseek> I think Bonzai may be referring to the cameraman from Sightings. Thats a complicated issue <truthseek> remember the base I told you about was covert. That is where their problems lie. <truthseek> In the UK if bases are covert they need special exemption rules in order to take your tape because a covert base is not a military base be definition. <truthseek> For this reason they do not tell you you cannot film and take photographs so if you do then they can not take them from you. <truthseek> I have gone into detail on this point with the MOD police here in the UK. We were totally covered for us not being arrested or having our tapes taken. <truthseek> What we did though was risky because you never can tell if they will just try to take the tape by brute force and lie about it. And they do have weapons down there, but not on show. <truthseek> So its a stale mate really. If they had tried to take the tape I would have started a fight and asked for the real police to be called in and got them to tape possesion of the tape. I can be devious you see. <JeroenW> Question: I can still hear Steven Greer (on Art Bell) talk about aliens. He told Art that US Prez. Truman won the election campagne because of his promise to reveal the UFO coverup. After he won presidentship no-one heard about it anymore until on a press conference a reporter asked him about his promise.... Greer told that the tears sprung into Truman's eyes.... What could scare a president so much? <truthseek> On the next question:Well I dont know about Greers story... <truthseek> It sounds a bit far fetched but not impossible. We heard the same rumours about Kennedy and others. <truthseek> Reagan was the most open and he wasn't respected for what he said. <truthseek> Carter said he saw a UFO sighting and he was quoted as wanting to find out more - it never happened. <truthseek> Churchill here in the UK asked for info on UFOs and was just told by the MOD that it was nothing of real concern when behind the scenes they were doing many investigations. <truthseek> This makes me wonder if the public office letters of the GOVT actually hide the fact that perhaps Churchill was told more. We can never find out now, unless somebody spills the beans. <truthseek> And then we will all try and run down the credibility of the source. Catch 22. <truthseek> There is a very good saying - who do you believe a lie from ,a king or a beggar. <truthseek> I think that lies when given by high ranking sources are listened to and this is why most public believe there is no cover up on UFOs. <truthseek> Leaders are not put into office to expand peoples minds - they are there to govern and just think if you get into office <truthseek> and you are told "Yeah we know about aliens and UFOs but if you tell anyone about it you won't make it past this term in office because we will smear you" <truthseek> What would you do? <truthseek> I think presidents are the puppets of bigger leaders. Those leaders are the unknowns - the secret societies leaders. <truthseek> America and the UK is run by them. Little is known about their activities. <truthseek> If we want answers about the aliens we should ask the 66th degree arch Satanist freemasons who probably have lunch with the aliens every day ;-)))))) <truthseek> perhaps....there may be some truth in this. ?? <SUFOIT\PA> Hi Barry here, I am the International Director for SUFOIT/PARA-4, I am a little uncertain of the "ethics" of certain UFO groups and investigators, yet we must work together to seek the truth, how do you handle these situations? <truthseek> Name dropping again ;-) hehe. Youll be on sighting show yet! ;-)))))) <truthseek> Its just a complex game of life. You have to duck and weave and try and keep people on your side. <truthseek> Always be open and give away evey piece of information you can (without breaking witness confidentiality) <truthseek> and by this you set an example. <truthseek> If you then try and show that behaving in an open manner gets you credit and recognition then people want to behave in the same manner. <truthseek> It is almost like training a dog to do something and then rewarding it. <truthseek> God I sound patronising don't I. <Crow> hehe <truthseek> I just reward excellence and then this allows people to expand. <truthseek> Those who hide and shy away or start to attack you I try to work with where I can. <truthseek> Some of these people who attack do not want to listen and if they cannot be dealt with then I earmark those people as troublemakers <truthseek> I dont cut them off but I deal with them very carefully. <truthseek> I think the key is to keep things positive where you can - chastise bad behaviour but reward excellence. <truthseek> It makes the bad boys feel left out in the cold. <truthseek> At the moment though I think we are surrounded by bad boys everywhere and they feel in good company <truthseek> and this is why it is important to set higher standards than theirs -and things will change slowly. <truthseek> Or they will look stupid... ;-) <truthseek> I would like ot thank you all for being so patient and listening to this. It is very kind of you. <truthseek> I realise that IRC is not the easiest medium to hear a speech on... ;-) <Crow> its been great Matthew we have really enjoyed it. <John_z> it's been most informative and enjoyable <Rainey> I would just like to say to Matt on behalf of all the channel thank you very much for sparing some of your valuable time to answer our questions, please feel free to join us anytime, as I'm sure we would all be pleased to see you again. <truthseek> I would like to thank also the people who asked me on here Vadir and Raine and Crow who have been helping me, <Hideout> whats matts email addy again? <truthseek> If anyone wants to CuseeMe I am still xmitting on IP 195.99.52.33 <truthseek> also my FTP page is ftp://members.aol.com/alienep/irc/ <Vadir> truthseek, 2night has been a blast :) <truthseek> to go and get those articles on some of the things we have been dealing with tonight <truthseek> along with photos. <truthseek> my email is truthseekers@celtic.co.uk <Dave_UFO> Thanks Matthew - a riviting evening. <hackit> thanks matthew its good to see someone not afraid to speak the truth for a change <truthseek> my pleasure. I suggest that insteading of me droning on we open it up and i will just jump in deep end styley and do an normal IRC fest.... what say ye? *** Rainey sets mode: -m Then follows a free for all as #ufo goes crazy.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 19 Pt. 1 - Matthew Williams - UK.UFO.NW From: United Kingdom UFO Network <ufo@holodeck.demon.co.uk> Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 20:39:05 +0000 Fwd Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 19:48:58 -0400 Subject: Pt. 1 - Matthew Williams - UK.UFO.NW ______ _______ ____ ------ / / // ____// |---------------------------------------------- U K / / // ___/ / / ' October 19th, 1997 / / // / / / / N E T W O R K part 1 --- (_____//__/ -- (_____/------------------------------------------------ This special issue comes in 2 parts. If any part is missing please mail: ufo@holodeck.demon.co.uk giving the special issue number. The issue will be reposted to you. Please put the details as below in the subject section e.g. Repost Matthew Williams - part 1 or part 2. Matthew Wiliams on the UK-UFO-NW IRC #UFO Channel This is a cleaned up log, of the United Kingdom UFO Network Saturday 27th Sptember 1997 IRC meeting on #UFO with guest Matthew Williams. Matthew kindly gave up almost three hours of his spare time to answer some questions for the regular members of the channel, below you will find a list of questions that was asked along with his replies. The name in between the < >'s e.g. is the nick name of the IRC user asking the question and where you see <truthseek> is of course the start of Matthew's reply. CREDITS: We would like to thank Vadir for arranging this meeting with Matthew Williams We would like to thank Matthew for attending this meeting and answering the questions put to him We would like to thank all the people involved in asking questions We would like to thank everyone who attended this meeting This meeting was moderated by Crow and Raine *** Raine changes topic to "Matthew Williams Moderated meet, plz msg your questions to Raine and NOT the guest speaker" <truthseek> I have got a cuseeme feed if anyone wants to log on <truthseek> the IP is 195.99.52.33 <Crow> ok all we will be going into moderated mode shortly channel #ufo2 will be open for unmoderated disscusion <Crow>http://alpha.mic.dundee.ac.uk/ft/crop_circles/truthseekers/trut hmain. h tml <truthseek> guess that means we start <truthseek>I suppose I will start then; hello everyone. Thanks for coming. My names Matthew Williams <truthseek> I think there is some sort of moderation on so you need to address your questions as a /msg to the moderator *** John_z sets mode: +m <Rainey> Hello everyone, I would just like to say thank you to Matthew (truthseek) for coming to the meet to give us some information and answer your questions, the meet will be moderated, could you please /msg me with your questions and not Matt, thank you. Matt could you please give evryone an introduction <truthseek> he will pass them to me I believe and I will then reply in public - am I right? Mr Crow? <Crow> yes we will pass them to the channel matthew <truthseek> I am based in the UK, Wales to be precise. I started in UFOs in 1990 after I had a sighting of a major unexplained paranormal event - 1 200ft yellow triangle sitting on the side of a mountain... <truthseek> I am very sympathetic to peoples cliams but not gullible. I now predominantly research UFO and government cover up stories. I have seen ghosts and had out of the body experiences and I used to "work for the government" - hoho. <truthseek> Ask me about that one if you dare! I have been looking into an underground base in Wilsthire called Rudloe Manor which used to investigate UFOs for the Ministry Of Defence. <truthseek> This was long denied but myself and a few other researchers got files which proved it, then the fun started when the Govt. nicked the files. We got them back after using an MP to raise a question about the affair in the Houses Of Parliament. We also showed that the same MP was lied to!!! <truthseek> Lied to by the MOD. He is not happy and the story goes on. <truthseek> Currently I am sitting here in my room with a camera pointed at me. If anyone wants to see me <truthseek> I am on CUSEEME under IP number r 195.99.52.33 <truthseek> also I have loads of files and pictures for you to download on ftp://members.aol.com/alienep/irc/ <truthseek> or you can ask me nicely if you can use my anon ftp server which is online now - try the FTP on AOL first though as it will be quicker for you. <truthseek> I have contributed to TV, Radio and video productions on both sides of the camera. I have a regular feature on LiveTvs "THE WHY FILES" <truthseek> I am totally commited to UFO truth and don't like charlatans and I expose facts about the subject which some dont want to hear - I have got a name for myself as a bit of a troublemaker, <truthseek> both in MOD circles and and in UFOLOGY. I don't lie down... <truthseek> I have researched the abduction phenomenon and worked with regressionists. <truthseek> Fire away....?? <Crow> ok you ready for the first question matthew, also when you have answered could you please signal us with ?? at the end of your reply. <Miki> If there is something sinister going on, will not his interest force it to go underground again? <truthseek> Perhaps but we have to try and root out all secrets. <truthseek> I dont believe that the GOVT have a right to withold these things from us. Yes I see your point and it is quite likely that all UFO functions at Rudloe Manor have ceased since our interest. We are not totally sure about this though so perhaps they are still there. I keep the best till last and there are some things I am researching RE secret bases that I haven't told people yet. <truthseek> This will shake the tree. Thanks for this. ?? <hackit> ask him if he knows anything about secret research bases in norfolk! <truthseek> Well the whole of the East Coast is riddled with underground facilities. I suppose you know this already, <truthseek> I did a feature on this will is available for doanload on the sites called bunkerbusters.txt <truthseek> this covers a few east coast bases - I know that they are very secret. Some of the facilities are used for RAF operations. I do not know which may have secret experiments. <truthseek> Going on but I do know that there are many which are connected to the NADGE radar system, which reaches <truthseek> into Europe and therefore gives a wide UFO scope for those who are watching... <truthseek> I hope this answers the question... Ask me a specific area if you wish. ?? <BonzaiBon> First question is what is the most well-known underground base that you are aware of and where specifically is it located at? What is this base's prime objective and how did you come across this information? <truthseek> RAF Rudloe Manor is the biggest and best I know of. It has 35 Miles of underground interconnecting tunnels <truthseek> it will be used as a bunker for the royal family. It has a nuclear generator. It has hospitals, pubs and recreation facilities based underground. <truthseek> It also was the centre for UFO invetsigations in the 1960s and collected ufo reports up until 1992. <truthseek> We suspect the may still be doing something with UFO reports there today but short of breaking in we are not totally sure. <truthseek> We have heard rumours of work continuing and this seems reasonable. I hope we find out more soon. ?? <Ufochaser> Do you know about the Deep Underground Military Bases in the US? <truthseek> Yes, I went to Area51 before they shut the border. This was in 1993, so I was kind of an early bird on that one ;-) <truthseek> Also I know about many facilities in California such as edwards and the <truthseek> Antelope Valley one with the retractable radar cross sction thing... <truthseek> The whole point is with underground stuff is it is essential for military to use bunkers because nuclear explosions kill troops - as you guessed ;-) <truthseek> So they have to build extensive facilities. They just don't like to admit to it. <truthseek> Some are in use, some are closed - some get transferred to other projects. These ones sometimes go under-cover and could be home to black projects. <truthseek> It is exactly the same here in the UK. The bases get sold from the MOD to public companies which are nothing more than fronts for the MOD. <truthseek> These bases have underground tunnels beneath them, and they are in use. <truthseek> We caught the MOD doing this at a place called Monks Park and we penetrated the base to see what was down there. It was immense! I do not use the word lightly. ?? <{ChuD}> "Do you feel that perhaps the government are covering up all ufo information for a good reason and its for our own benefit to now know?" <truthseek> No it can never be for a good reason. This is how I see secrecy. <truthseek> If you have a secret and you don't want people to know for a good reason... when people get close to the truth <truthseek> or stumble on the truth you have to shut them up. This means people get treated badly. I think that some people have been <truthseek> persecuted for their research efforts. This can never be acceptable. <truthseek> When it comes to the the security codes for nuclear missiles - yes keep it secret. <truthseek> When it comes to UFOs, we have a right to know so tell us the truth, no matter how much it may frighten us. <truthseek> I suspect the real reason they don't tell is because it is not us who will be frighetened but it is they who are frightened of us knowing the truth and empowering ourselves. <truthseek> So I can never agree with secrets of this type. <truthseek> Thanks for that ?? <bambina> Matt, I am the Assistant National Director for SUFOIT/PARA-4(scient ific UFO investigative team/Paranormal Activity Research Associtation. I and my members are looking into the underground facility at Raven Rock, PA, USA, and the Lake Ontario Bases. Do you have any infomation on these? <truthseek> PS IP 195.99.52.33 is my CUseeME camera ;-) <truthseek> Wow thats am impressive title ;-) <John_z> download cuseeme at http://www.cuseeme.com (9MB) <truthseek> No I have never heard of those - I am not a total USA bunker expert. I know a few of the main ones and a few speculated ones such as Dulce but I am not a great expert. I would love to see what you have to say on it though if you want to email me something. <truthseek> To anyone who wants to email me its: truthseekers@celtic.co.uk <truthseek> I publish a magazine and ezine called Truthseekers Review, I can put your articles in if you submit them ;-) <truthseek> ?? <Crow> Do you think Nick Pope really knows about Rudloe manor, and is for unknown reasons denying any knowlege of it and if so why do you think has says he has never heard of the place before? <truthseek> He used to say he didn't know about it. He was being coy. He was then forced by us to admit that he knew about it <truthseek> but he then said that he was SURE it didnt do anything important to do with UFOs. <truthseek> Well thats a big turn from "I dont know", to, "It does nothing", which makes me a little suspicious <truthseek> We cuaght him out on this and at the same time got Govt docs proving it was involved in UFO research <truthseek> in the 1960s thru 92 <truthseek> and we showed him this proof and he just scoffed and said that he never had any reports from them <truthseek> ... interesting considering they were dubbed by the MOD as the "central co-ordination point for UFO reports" <truthseek> their rank and title and job descriptions put them many levels above Pope so we put it to him that perhaps he was not the main arm of the MOD <truthseek> for UFO investigations and that they were the main people. He did not want to accept this. <truthseek> He said whilst he was at the MOD he knew of no other departments that dealt with UFOs other than those under him. <truthseek> Well these people at Rudloe and a few other places were above him and weren't telling him what they were doing. <truthseek> They even were supposed to send their fuinal reports to him for guess what - filing. <truthseek> He says that there was nobody looking at his case files whilst he went home from work - we contend that they never needed to because they had better ones than he did and he was only fed the dross reports to keep him happy. <truthseek> This is the way the cards seemed to have stacked against him. <truthseek> It does not put him in a good light. ?? <Crow> thanks matt <stu7> ...Matthew...everyone is talking about the "traingular" ufos...have you researched those at all ? <truthseek> Yes and no. I saw a triangular light myself which sparked my interest as you heard earlier <truthseek> but I have not had many reports of those myself. I know some people who specialise in that sort of area. I know that they are being seen all over the country. <truthseek> I would also offer that because of the triangle hype that exists today a lot of people are misidentifying aircraft as triangular UFOs <truthseek> I have infact seen, and digitally analyised some UFO footage which were cliamed triangle. ufos. They were aircraft. <truthseek> Omar Fowler is the UK expert on this subject email me and I will forward you his details. He even <truthseek> publishes a magazine on the triangles. <truthseek> Hang on a minute, guess what I nearly forgot I saw a completely unknown form of aircraft in Yeovilton coming out <truthseek> of the RNAD Yeovilton base. I didn't see this bit, but it aparently went nearly straight up. <truthseek> I saw the shape and drew it and gave it to aircraft enthusiasts and they could not identify it. This was in the early part of this year. ?? <hackit> ask him how he penetrated monks park and did he relise it was used for certain purposes. <truthseek> Well the report will appear in the next UK edition of Alien Encounters magazine in full. It reads like a boys own tale with <truthseek> me and Richard Conway sneaking in past guards and going down a tunnel entrance <truthseek> we set off alarms going in but ran, ran, ran along corridors and hid down the 1000th alleyway. I think because they get a few false alarms <truthseek> they thought we weren't in the tunnels so didn't search for us. We were lucky. <truthseek> When we tried to get out we neard automatic rifle fire as well as shotguns. This showed that the nearby MOD base had their guards come over to help out <truthseek> with security - so much for this civilians owned base eh? <truthseek> We had to get out via a back door and set off other alarms. They were firing at us as we ran. I don't know if those shots were in the air or at us. <truthseek> Thankfully we got away with good photos a good story and our lives. <truthseek> As for what was the base used for. Well I guessed it was used for something connected with Rudloe Manor because they interconnect via underground tunnels - this we know. <truthseek> There were storage bays with hi-tech gear in them. We saw satellite transmission stuff and weapons parts. <truthseek> We also saw a bay marked CIA - but this could mean something else to the MOD, I dont know. <truthseek> We only looked in a few boxes. <truthseek> Hope this answers the question. ?? <Crow> sure does matt <Hideout> Do you think that there could well be ordinary civilians working in these bases or are they so top secret that they wouldnt let this happen? <truthseek> Well this base is storage by the looks of it. That is why it was able to be sold off. I think the really secret stuff they still hold on to as RAF bases. <truthseek> I know that there is a secret base which is totally covert near Rudloe Manor called the CCC <truthseek> and this is completely UNMARKED. <truthseek> This is very high security and we penetrated that one too - I did this for a sighting TV show and we got quite far in. <truthseek> It is going to be on sightings soon. The guys filming it said they had never had so much excitement! <truthseek> I love taking TV crews into dangerous situations hehehe;-) <truthseek> We got taken out by the guards who foolishly opened one of the security doors by mistake. They must have thought we were service personnel when they saw us on the CCTV. When we got inside they realised their error and came and got us. <truthseek> One of the guards locked himself inside a security compartment in his rush to get us he typed in the wrong code on a keypad. We filmed all of this. <truthseek> Keep an eye out for it. Rudloe Manor featured for the first time in the US. I can't help but feel a bit proud ;-) <truthseek> Thanks ?? <Vad> truthseek: do you know how the radar tracking facilities at rudloe compare in comparisson to other large gov. bases in the world, and do you have any idea of just how much unusual ufo activity is logged day to day? <truthseek> Good question <truthseek> Well heres the good answer. Rudloe has what it terms as lodger units on its base facilities. <truthseek> These lodger units function seperately from RUDLOE itself but are housed there. <truthseek> One such lodger unit is the CDCN which stands for the Command Of the Defence Communications Network. <truthseek> Sound important.... well it should. Its the MAIN HUB of all British military data, voice and radar signals <truthseek> They have uplinks off the Rudloe Site at a place called Colerne Airbase (which is the best, most functional disused airbase I have ever seen!!! - check your ordanance survey maps to see it called a disused airbase!) <truthseek> The uplinks are to the SKYNET sattelite systems which allow vocie and data comms for the Mil. <truthseek> One othe rthigs they do at Rudloe is to monitor the Radar screens of all UK radar stations. This allows them to plot and plan wars because in another part of Rudloe there is a backup war command centre. <truthseek> These stations, if they send any data comms or voice comms about any matter CDCN can pick it up. <truthseek> If they see UFOs on Radar then CDCN and others are almost sitting in the background watching too. <truthseek> This means that they could be watching for UFOs full time. I know some stuff about that and will hint at this time that is exactly what is happening but I can't go into further details until some things are checked. <truthseek> Thanks ?? <JeroenW> Question: Have you heard of Alien delegations being located in Underground bases... either by themselves (As in alien civilizations created some Underground bases) or as ambassadorshoused in bases made by co-operation between aliens and humans. It is said that the centrum for this is located in Alberqurqe (spelled the name wrong). <truthseek> I know the place but I ant spell it either ;-) <truthseek> I didn't know about that but it is interesting. I hear it all the time but it is always from distant sources. Some of the closest sources I have got to on rumours such as this are unreliable to say the least. This is a shame. <truthseek> I have also got some people saying the same things to me about the UK having such bases. One rumour surrounded a base on Ilkley Moor in the UK <truthseek> which is supposedly connected to Menwith Hill NSA facility <truthseek> yes folks MENWITH HILL NSA listening station in the UK - so secret they won't talk about it in parliament! <truthseek> ho hum <truthseek> BTW everyone I am listening to the soundtrack of Stargate the movie - good mood music. ?? <Crow> heh <bambina> Matt, it is said that the triangle UFO's are a US and UK invention, with a little help from alien influence. What do you think? <truthseek> quite possible. I hear pro and con to that. <truthseek> I hear that we have the technology to do this and have done so at places such as RAF Wharton in the UK. <truthseek> It is a dvelopment base for British Aerospace. <truthseek> Then I hear the stories about the triangles and abductions - which doesn't neatly fit the pattern of MOD activity... <truthseek> and some of those possible alien triangles are much bigger than any fighters - and to be so big and silent.... <truthseek> if they have this technology then we are being lied to by our GOVTS big time. If it were true I would be fighting my way into those bases to expose it... <truthseek> in reality though I suspect we have small scale RPV triangles and thats about it.?? <SUFOIT\PA> How deep do you think is the USA's involvement in UFO sightings in the UK? Worldwide? <truthseek> Well one or two unreliable sources place involvement as very high. I can't see it myself. I think the US if they have secret technology would fly it out of the UK. <truthseek> Thats for sure. <truthseek> If they were to try and develop technology with us here in the UK then we would have access to those secrets too and could develop these things into our aircraft. <truthseek> If we are in on a much darker secret level with the US and involved in the abduction stuff - then I would be worried but I see little evidence of this coming from my abductee witnesses. <truthseek> I think we are probably looking at joint co-op on research and investigation and perhaps coverup on the subject. <truthseek> I nor nobody I know and respect can say if this is good or bad. <truthseek> I have got a case at the moment which implicates the US in flying crashed UFO techno with the UK <truthseek> This is my first case of this type. I have not got a clue which way it will go - will it get proven or will it not be able to be proven or will the witness turn out to be unreliable. I just dont know. I hope for the truth whatever. Thanks ?? <watch^dog> Indiana State Director for SUFOIT/PARA-4 here, How do you handle a situation when you catch someone in a lie, or deception, or when presented with undeniable information, brushes it off as hogwash? <truthseek> Well sometimes I walk away and let other people deal with it or sometimes I take the bull by the horns and sort it out myself. <truthseek> It depends on my mood. <truthseek> If you knew what has been happening to me lately with **** from certain UFO research orgnanisations and persons you would be shocked... <truthseek> things are not good at the top of British Ufology. There is much absue of witnesses and people <truthseek> not taking ethical points seriously in UFO research. I have just dealt with a serious matter in one organisation I belonged to. Because of my <truthseek> mistrust for their operating policies after I did what I had to do, I resigned. I could not associate with them after this. <truthseek> Thanfully the situation I came to them with was resolved and the guilty parties are out to. I just thought the whole way it was dealt with left a lot to be desired. <truthseek> I have had some bad ufologists threaten me with physical violence. In this instance I called the police because I feared not the person but that I was being set up. <truthseek> I had serious reason to believe this. <truthseek> So I suggest that however you deal with these problems you do it openly and honestly and with the full co-operation of others because when you take up the challenge to clean up some things that certain people <truthseek> dont want cleaned up, you face trouble and will need support. <truthseek> Hope that answers you? Just don't lie down, just choose your moments to take action. ?? -[continued in part 2]-
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 19 Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculoso From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl> Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 23:47:47 +0200 (MET DST) Fwd Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 19:58:28 -0400 Subject: Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculoso >Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 04:38:30 -0700 >From: Loy Pressley <lpressle@webwide.net> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculoso >> Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 01:58:14 -0400 >> From: Peregrine Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> >> Subject: Zeta Notso Ridiculoso >> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >> The Duke of Mendoza presents his compliments. >> >Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 07:04:13 +0200 (MET DST) >> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >> >From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl> >> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculouso >> >From New Scientist April 1, 1995, paraphrased: ><SNIP> >Thanks, Duke, for subtly and courteously pointing out the, now >that you've identified it, obvious humor of this item. Maybe >Snowbird, Utah, should have read "Snowjob, Utah". >I have a sheepish grin on my face... >Loy Loy, Duke, Are you people genetically unable to do even the slightest bit of research? Here, this cost me 2 minutes to find: Snowbird, Utah Famous for powder and views, Snowbird offers some of the most exhilarating skiing anywhere. With an average 500 inches of snow each season and a 3,100-foot vertical drop, Snowbird specializes in the dramatic: deep powder, steep chutes and wide open bowls. Yet there are plenty of runs for intermediates and beginners. Maybe the best way to say it is, "Snowbird has plenty of everything," including a terrain park for snowboarders and an aerial tramway which can transport 125 passengers to the mountain's 11,000 foot summit in under seven minutes. International-caliber snowboard competitions are regularly held here. Whatever your pleasure it will be enhanced by the spectacular backdrop of the Wasatch Mountains. Sit and enjoy the view at the Cliff Lodge's rooftop spa or indulge in a soothing mud bath or herbal wrap; swim, use the hot tub or try the work out equipment. It's all there to add to the excitement of your stay at Snowbird, with the added attractions of Salt Lake City only 24 miles away. 1--Cliff Lodge 2---Iron Blosam 3--Lodge at Snowbird 4--The Inn Call Aspen Ski Tours to book: or contact us via the net. __________________________________________ / Met vriendelijke groet/Best wishes \ Henny van der Pluijm hvdp@worldonline.nl Technology Pages http://www.worldonline.nl/~hvdp \______________________________________/ Search for other documents from or mentioning: hvdp | lpressle |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 19 Re: ACC: Remarkable Update By Bob Wol From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose) Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 00:15:19 +0100 Fwd Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 20:01:31 -0400 Subject: Re: ACC: Remarkable Update By Bob Wol Dennis Stacy writes: >Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 22:14:48 -0500 (CDT) >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net> [Dennis Stacy] >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: ACC: Remarkable Update By Bob Wolf >>From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose) >>To: updates@globalserve.net >>Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 12:45:50 +0100 >>Subject: ACC: Remarkable Update By Bob Wolf >>Found at: >>http://www.sightings.com/ufo/accandloseufo.htm >>************************** >>SIGHTINGS >>=BF >>ACC/Transistor Origin Update >>and Did the Air Force >>LOSE a UFO?! >>by Bob Wolf >>10-17-97 >>(Note: The following key points were edited from >>Bob Wolf's lengthy ACC update by Stig Agermose) ><snip, snip, snip and more snip> >As far as I'm concerned, Bob Wolf might as well go bark up some >other tree. >If he wants to attribute everything from the transistor and the >Rolling Stones to extraterrestrial technology recovered at >Roswell, then more power to him, may he sleep well at night, >etc., etc. (And as if it made any difference.) >Some of us prefer to get on with our terribly mundane (and >terrestrial) lives. >And why are we arguing about a 1947-48 issue, anyway, when Corso >the Conqueror didn't even claim to have appeared on the scene >until 1961? On the one hand, Wolf and others have US scientists >cracking the transistor code in a matter of days or months, >whereas Corso tells us most secrets weren't cracked until two >decades later -- after he miraculously arrived on the scene and >took up the arduous task of enlightening mankind. >Don't you people realize when you're being had? When will you >stand up and resist rampant rumor and innuendo and *demand* >incontrovertible proof of every and anything? >Never mind. >Dennis In relation to similar, though not identical, allegations on American Computer's Roswell webpage, this quote from Corso's book is particularly relevant (p.177f): "General Trudeau and I had quickly established our routine in early 1961, and our categorization of how we did our jobs seemed to be working. Night vision was under development at Fort Belvoir, and researchers who worked with us had made sure that the silicon wafer had gotten to their colleagues at Bell Labs and assured us that a new generation of transistorized circuitry was already finding its way into development. The silicon chips were a covert reintroduction to the people at Bell Labs because the initial introduction of the integrated-circuit chips from the Roswell crash had reached defense contractors as early as 1947 in the weeks after the material reached Wright Field. A similar history of introduction and reintroduction had occurred with stimulated-energy radiation, a weapon that early analysts believed they were looking at in the wreckage of the Roswell craft. Since directed-energy radiation was a technology we'd already deployed in World War II, seeing what they thought was a super-advanced version of that technology, so advanced as to be in a completely different realm, so excited the analysts at Wright Field that they wanted to get it out to their research scientists as quickly as possible, which they did. And by the early 1950's, a version of stimulated-energy radiation had found its way into the scientific community, which was developing new products around the process of microwave generation." Corso then goes on to explain in detail how the stimulated-enery radiation device of the craft tallied with the theories behind the microwave oven e.g. - the first commercial ones being produced by Raytheon in Massachusetts in 1947 "before any dissemination of either intelligence or material from the Roswell craft had occurred" - and the way the introduction and reintroduction of the Roswell technology ultimately resulted in the laser.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 19 Re: Did Satellites Image Phoenix Lights? From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose) Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 00:56:47 +0100 Fwd Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 20:11:59 -0400 Subject: Re: Did Satellites Image Phoenix Lights? Bill Hamilton writes: >From: William.Hamilton@pcsmail.pcshs.com >Date: 17 Oct 1997 20:08:35 UT >Subject: DID SATELLITES IMAGE THE PHOENIX >To: updates@globalserve.net >DID SATELLITES IMAGE THE PHOENIX LIGHTS? >I have reported previously that I had gotten word that NORAD >had detected a "fast walker" on March 13th. Some satellite >tracked an unknown intruder into US air space. >Also previously reported was the interview with the president >of American Computer Company, Jack Schulman, talked about >an Air Force satellite that had been disabled on March 13th. >This is a follow-up on those reports and I have Linda Howe >checking into this further. >One of our prime Phoenix witnesses, Mike Fortson, is responsible >for tracking this story. >The Army wants to shoot down an Air Force satellite with its >MIRACL laser installed at a sprawling base in the New Mexico >desert. The target is the Miniature Sensor Technology Integration >satellite, MSTI-3. The Air Force craft is the third in a series >of research satellites meant to improve the tracking of missiles >from space. The satellite, about the size of a refrigerator >and weighing 450 pounds, has telescopes and cameras for observing >hot rockets as well as the cool Earth, its imaging systems working >like those in spy satellites. >The camera on the satellite can see objects on the ground as small >as 30 feet across. >The satellite maker -- SPECTRUM ASTRO -- right here in Gilbert, >Arizona opposes having MIRACL fire its beam at the $60 million craft. >Mike Fortson called Spectrum Astro to talk with one of the engineers. >This engineer confirmed that on MARCH 13, the MSTI-3's batteries >suddenly went "dead" but now are functioning properly and he >cannot understand why the Army wants to destroy this satellite. >We now know that the first sighting in Arizona on March 13th was >at 5:30 pm mst in Crown King, AZ. Witnesses saw 3 solid V-shaped >craft and also stated that 3 F-16 fighterss came from the south >only to see the V's disappear and reappear minutes later when >the fighters left the area! >Admittedly, there are gaps in our knowledge of events on that day, >but new information is beginning to paint a picture of something >extraordinary. I hope to follow up this report with more later. >Linda may be reporting on these developments on DREAMLAND with >Art Bell this Sunday. >Sincerely, >Bill Hamilton >Exec Director >Skywatch International It seems that the satellite will be spared. The item was received from the newsgroup "alt.conspiracy.area51" October 19 at 18.53 local Danish time (GMT + 2 hours): Stig Agermose ********************************************************************* 19. October 1997 15.28.38 alt.conspiracy.area51 Item From: coug57@aol.com,usenet Subject: News - Laser, Stealth, Line item vetoes To: alt.conspiracy.area51 Laser Test on Hold The Pentagon has put a hold on its plan to fire a laser beam at a U.S. satellite in orbit. A dying Air Force space satellite was to used as a target in the controversial test of the ground-based laser. But the experiment has twice been postponed because of weather and computer software problems. Now it appears unlikely that the test will happen at all. Pentagon spokesman Navy Capt. Michael Doubleday said the satellite is not in the right position in orbit, and "there is some question that there will be any further opportunities" for the test. (Army Times news article) Russian Stealth A Russian stealth fighter plane with many of the same features as U.S. radar-evading aircraft has sucessfully completed its maiden flight, a Russian news agency reported this week. The S-32 fighter, developed by the Sukhoi design firm, flew for the first time from the Zhukovsky air base near Moscow Sept. 25, the ITAR-Tass news agency reported, citing a Russian government official. Two more test flights have been completed, the report said. (Army Times news article) Oct 15, USA Today Clinton uses line item veto to cancel the following: $39 million for the SR-71 Blackbird high altitude airplane. $37.5 million for research and development of anti-satellite technology. $30 million for research into using a space-based system to intercept an asteroid. $10 million for research relating to NASA's reusable-launch "space-plane". $6 million for research and testing of alternative fuel cell technology. Search for other documents from or mentioning: stig_agermose |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 19 Alfred's Odd Ode #191 From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com> Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 17:44:55 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 20:05:25 -0400 Subject: Alfred's Odd Ode #191 Apology to MW #191 (For October 19, 1997) "You're writing way off topic on political matters"! "Sociology distracts from the search we enjoy"! "What do you gain as you bad mouth our nation"? "Where is your loyalty, and where's it employed"? It's political matters that _cause_ obfuscation. It's our hate for each other where UFO's hide. I'd feel _much_ different were I born in Burundi, And I'm loyal to self, and with self I confide. "What's all this blather regarding conspiracy "? "Why do you brood on old history gone passed"? "How do you speculate watchers from space"? "Why do you dwell on the misery impasse"? CIA, ATF, FBI fill the papers! Our history's GONE, we don't KNOW what occurred! Life from some stars are conclusions of science, And I "dwell" so the "impasse" will at last be concurred! "What is your profit, if what you say's true," "And a few have the rest by the balls"? "Your success is deterred, as you gain further notice," "Even death more assured -- at their beck, at their call"! I'm not in it for profit -- I just write what I'm seeing. I don't want you confused that your care's in their heart. It's the writing itself that provides me a wage, And my death will become them that, each, take their part! "Work's more impossible, the word will go out." "How will you teach to a classroom of kids"? "How will you square all the lies and the dissonance "To collections of young minds that don't know how to bid." I can teach in a class where they think it wont matter. My children can't read, or divide, or subtract=85 I'll tell them the truth as I feel that I know it I'll perform enthusiastically, and I'll teach them with some tact. Lehmberg@snowhill.com =85And the whole bleeding time I teach in a special ED classroom I will go to bed, every night, knowing unquestionably that I am doing a GOOD thing, and the attendant shaving the following morning will _not_ be a problem=85perhaps I will even learn to forgive myself for my participation in Viet Nam. Viet Nam? Let me tell you about Viet Nam. My participation was a rook, a farce, a sham, and an atrocity. Since the beginning of time, probably, those fantastic people have beaten back every attempt to subvert or enslave them. Decades ago, right after the first world war, they came to us for association and aid. Wilson, Truman, and then Eisenhower rebuffed their extenuation fueled by callous, indifferent and inhumane racism. The French tried to continue an exploiting and unethical colonial imposition, until the "little brown men" tired of the abuse and disrespect, and ran imperialistic frank's froggy bottoms from Asian soil. In a pique of punctured eurocentric pride the United States tried to bring Viet Nam to heel, and was in turn driven from the land squealing like Ned Beatty in "Deliverence". Once we were gone, the Vietnamese let the Soviets know where the bear went through the buck wheat, and then not to be out done -- they kicked Chinese BUTT, when Peking started to make an incursion from the north. They have resisted ALL historical attempts to treat them with anything but the most profound respect=85 These people beat back the late 20th century WORLD, and SURVIVE to tell the tale!!! <<<It rather paints them as UBUR-MENCHEN -- doesn't it!>>> Again -- years later, after decades of misery, tragedy, and destruction, the people of Viet Nam are once again making overture for association, and aid. Hopefully, this time, we will bind ourselves to them with bands of honesty, trust, evenhandedness, appreciation, and the love of brother/sisterhood. We should _try_ to mix our essence with theirs -- the only people to beat us in a war, we _better_ make them friends -- hell, we'd do _well_ to make them a State! We tried, stridently, the alternative, and it blew up in our arrogant, ethnocentric faces. For my part, forgive me, people of Viet Nam, I knew not what I was doing=85 Know that you have my support, my admiration, and my respect. To the survivors of those lost on our side -- read a book, become informed, cop to our hideous, unbalanced, and contrived blunderous shortsightedness and waste -- COP, and move on. We were beaucoup, number ten, dinky dow -- let's admit and get over it! Demand our government give Viet Nam the recognition deserved. It's just the way to get UFO's to come out of hiding -- probably the only way, and an illustration why I always write on topic. You have to drain the swamp (excuse the metaphor) to even SEE the alligator shredding your butt cheeks. -- Explore the Alien View? http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/arecibo/46/ "I cleave the heavens, and soar to the infinite. What others see from afar, I leave far behind me." - Giordano Bruno, while burning at the fundamentalist's stake for wanting to get the word out. =B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1= =B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1= =B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1 Government or Social Harassment REPORT - Presently, "ZERO" Personal HARASSMENT; however, the harassment index is infinite for each of us. Consider the hic-cup in the world economy when Greenspan has a nocturnal emission.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 19 Last Message From UpDates 'til Saturday, Oct 25, From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 20:20:38 -0400 Fwd Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 20:20:38 -0400 Subject: Last Message From UpDates 'til Saturday, Oct 25, This is the last message from UpDates in Toronto until this coming Saturday, October 25.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 19 Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills From: Michael Christol <mchristo@mindspring.com> Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 21:27:41 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 15:44:37 -0400 Subject: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills >> >I did so. I was informed that it did not occur in 1942, but >> >in July, 1941, near a well known island in the South Pacific. >> >I don't wish to tell all of the details. I want to see if >> >someone else knows what I am talking about. >> >Just think little boy and fat man....<G> >> I have never heard of this alleged crash, but if Little Boy and >> Fat Man are leads I take it you mean the well known island of >> Bikini, where one the first nuclear explosions occurred. If my >> memory is correct, this was also the first hydrogen bomb. >Sorry Henny, I think you have the wrong island. If I had to make >a guess I would think he is referring to the island of Tinian, >where the bombers were loaded and from where they left to bomb >Hiroshima and Nagasaki. That has to be the island with the "Fat >Man and Little Boy" connection. So where, on or near this island, >was the object supposed to have crashed Mike? >Interested, >Don Ledger You are in the area Don. I can't tell you exactly where the object came down, but it was close to Tinian island. Good Job. Now, maybe some of the others, such as Bob Shell, Michael Lindaman, etc, can help add to this. REgards, Mike
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 25 UpDates Back On-Line From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 15:23:25 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 15:23:25 -0400 Subject: UpDates Back On-Line Tsk, tsk. Amazing how many subscribers to this List don't _actually_ read messages with headers whose 'Subject:' might just contain a very large clue as to why they've not received UpDates for the fast six days. i.e.: >Subject: Last Message From UpDates 'til Saturday, Oct 25 So, back in Toronto, video-shot and edited, Carpal Tunnel Syndrome rested, a plug in the November/December Issue of UFO Magazine (thanks, Graham) which hath brought forth a slew of new subscribers from the British Isles [please note that 'UpDates' does not necessarily connote 'All New UFO News', but rather this List reflects the observations, comments, and discussion of past and current cases, news and activities based around UFO phenomena] and happy to be home with the three females in my life - Sue, The Dancer & The Moo... So, to flash back in time and catch up, please click next message.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 25 Re: More on the Gulf Breeze copyright issue From: RGates8254@aol.com Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 21:50:32 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 19:55:43 -0400 Subject: Re: More on the Gulf Breeze copyright issue In a message dated 97-10-19 20:11:55 EDT, you write: > From: c549597@showme.missouri.edu [Barbara Becker] > Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 11:21:12 -0500 > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > CC: mcashman@ix.netcom.com > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: More on the Gulf Breeze copyright issue > > To: updates@globalserve.net > > From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com> > > Subject: More on the Gulf Breeze copyright issue > > Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 02:27:05 -0700 > > On p 134 of the MUFON Symposium proceedings, 1988... > > "In early December, the National Enquirer contacted Duane Cook > > about buying rights for a one-time publication of the photos he > > had published. The Enquirer offered Duane several thousand > > dollars for these rights. Since Mr. X had indicated that Duane > > could have the photos, Duane accepted the offer." > The only thing this confirms is that Duane Cook KNEW, when no one > else did, that Ed Walters was "Mr. X." For your information, > regardless of how you decide you want the law to be, ED WALTERS > owns the copyright, (registered at the LOC) for photos 1 through > 19 on his first copyright registration. So if Duane Cook "gave" > the photos to the ENQUIRER and if they used them "ONE TIME", then > it was with ED WALTERS NOT DUANE COOKS permission. > > I think there are two things clear from this about journalistic > > attitude toward copyright with regard to anonymous photos. 1) > > Cook believes that the Sentinel owns such photos and can legally > > sell rights pertaining to them, and 2) the Enquirer agrees, since > > they contacted Cook to make the deal. Having myself been in the journalistic/newspaper business several things come to mind. I have been seen many instances over the years of newspapers "publishing" unique photos that were later "officially copyrighted/registered" by the owner of said photos. Also many newspapers have people sign a publication release either limited or general which allows them certain rights, and restricts the owner on his use for a certain period of time, i.e. so the photos don't show up in the competition newspaper the same day. As long as Ed Walters doesn't pursue the issue in court, the whole thing is a mute point. > The ENQUIRER contacted Cook because he knew how to contact Walters. > > Note that these are not the Believer Bill or Jane photos - Cook > > actually has a contact with regard to these photos, unlike the > > situation with Bill or Jane where total anonymity is the case. > > Yet Cook still accepts the offer. This would tend to substantiate > > that he would believe he would have the right to assign copyright > > to Ed. > Cook cant "assign" anything to anybody. He doesnt own any of the > photos nor does he own the copyright. No matter how hard you > wish Dorothy, it aint gonna happen. > BB I can tell you haven't been to involved in the journalistic/publishing side of life. This sort of thing happens in the publishing industry. For example if I submit an article and photos to newspaper X or magazine Y, and I sign a contract/release at or before the time of publication THAT PUBLICATION CAN LEGALLY CLAIM COPYRIGHT even though the photos were MINE and the article came from my head. AGAIN IT ALL DEPENDS ON WHAT SORT OF RELEASE/CONTRACT WAS SIGNED BETWEEN ED AND THE NEWSPAPER. Another example is Oped pieces of letters to the editor. In theory once published they can be covered under the publications copyright umbrella unless the author otherwise specifies. Over the years, again depending on the release/contract that was signed, if the author/owner say wanted to include that story and photos as part of a book, he would have to request permission from the magazine originally submitted to. Cheers, Robert
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 25 Re: Solved abduction cases? From: James Easton <pulsar@compuserve.com> Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 20:54:11 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 19:49:44 -0400 Subject: Re: Solved abduction cases? Regarding... >Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 01:22:34 -0500 >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Solved abduction cases? John wrote: >Henny writes, >>Not only is the ET hypothesis taken seriously outside the USA, >>government officials of several countries, such as Chile, >>Belgium, Mexico and Russia, have openly stated that their air >>space has been violated by craft that do not originate on this >>earth. >Now this is one piece of reality that you'll never see debated! John, The reality is, if I may paraphrase, that, with rare exceptions, there is no indication the ET hypothesis is taken seriously by the vast majority of government officials, either within the USA or elsewhere. >Here we have "official" government releases of information, some of >it formidable as in the case of the Belgium government, (military, >radar data, reports from credible sources on the ground -Gendarme- >etc.) and yet it is still not taken as an "official announcement" >that something 'out of the ordinary,'...'possibly not of this earth' >is -hoopty doin it- in our skies. The Belgium reference is a good example of the questionable data which some government officials base their beliefs on. It could be pointed out that rather than an ET origin, the reports of triangular UFOs which proliferated from December 1989, might have a connection with the unidentified isosceles-triangle shaped aircraft which recognition expert Chris Gibson witnessed flying with a KC-135 Stratotanker and two F-111s only three months previous. Or that the F-16 radar data from the Belgium flap was _officially_ explained by the Belgian Air force as ground clutter and no pilot ever witnessed an actual object. Etc. >About a year ago I put this same piece of information on the >table in another thread Henny, the silence was deafening. It must >be a hard set of facts to rationalize/debunk I guess! The facts are that a few such individuals believe the ET hypothesis to be true. No government which, as an entity, refutes the question of ET visitations, and last I heard that was all of them, seems currently troubled by any suggestion to the contrary. Or would appear to give the matter more than a passing thought. That wasn't necessarily so some 40-50 years ago, but the ET question is long assumed to be answered and, dare I say, isn't terribly challenged by contemporary scientific evidence. There seems to be no case, certainly in context, for any government being concerned that their air space is being violated by ET spaceships. There are for sure some apparently unexplained intrusions, but it seems nothing of sufficient consequence to tag on an ET label. I do however wonder about the 6 January 1995 UK airmiss with a "wedge-shaped" object. If this was really a true "unknown", as officially recorded in the Commercial Air Transport Airmiss Report, what was the outcome when those in serious power took stock. Did they sit looking at one another and collectively shrug shoulders. I suspect when we're old and grey, the CIA will reveal that in the 1980s and 90s, their then top secret stealth spy plane was responsible for 52% of all UFO reports. James. E-mail: pulsar@compuserve.com
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 25 DISPATCH # 72 -- the weekly newsletter of ParaScope From: ParaScope@AOL.COM Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 21:52:48 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 20:06:07 -0400 Subject: DISPATCH # 72 -- the weekly newsletter of ParaScope DISPATCH # 72 -- the weekly newsletter of ParaScope S O M E T H I N G S T R A N G E I S H A P P E N I N G 10/18/97 Quote of the Week "The great advances of civilization, whether in architecture or painting, in science and literature, in industry or agriculture, have never come from centralized government." -- Milton Friedman Rant of the Week: "Deni All Knolge" Every week we pick the wackiest, scariest, nastiest or funniest rant from the hundreds of letters received by us here at ParaScope headquarters, and present it to you as our Rant of the Week. This week, "Matt" leaves his spell-checker at home as he dashes off a plea for details on any sightings of the infamous Men In Black. But what does this have to do with Oprah!? Enjoy. "Listen carefully. I wish to know of any men in black sightings around the world. If it has to do with MIB give me the scope.You can contact me at AOL. "That is all. "Please deni all knolge of this message." [Reprinted with spelling and grammar goofs unchanged. Names changed to protect the ranters.] -+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Things That Go Bump Online ParaScope is working on a killer line-up of creepy tales and spooky stories, just in time for Halloween. Actually, we're a bit early, but that gives you a chance to get the jump on your friends and read up on everything from the Ghosts of New Orleans to the mysterious case of the Spastic Elastic Gastric Plastic. No one knows the weird, the scary and the just plain creepy like your old pals and ParaScope, so check back every day from now through Halloween for the latest stories, scoops and insights into one of our favorite holidays. -+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ CIA InTERRORgation Manual Available in Print "Resistant sources" can be broken with carefully chosen, concentrated psychological forces, according to the CIA's 1963 guidebook on interrogation. The "KUBARK Counterintelligence Interrogation" manual, declassified in January 1997 after the Baltimore Sun threatened to launch a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, offers an inside view of the agency's hostile interrogation strategies -- methods for inducing mental and physical agony. Throughout the manual, the CIA cites its covertly funded mind control research to explain the optimal means of making people talk. ParaScope was the first news service to make this important document available on the Internet, and now ParaScope is the first publisher to make the KUBARK manual available in print to the general public. Serious students and critics of the CIA will want a hard copy of this document for their libraries, and ParaScope's meticulously-proofed verbatim transcript is a bargain at $5.95. To order send $5.95 to: ParaScope Kubark Offer P.O. Box 6 Chapel Hill, NC 27514 -+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Coming Up Next Week! Catch all these stories next week on a daily basis on America Online, or all at once next Friday on the web site! Roby Ridge: Standoff in Illinois For nearly a month, an 18-man tactical squad has surrounded the home of Shirley Allen in Roby, Illinois because she refused to submit to a court order for an involuntary psychiatric examination. As the situation drags on, many concerned individuals are beginning to question the legitimacy of the police seige. Are the cops just doing their jobs, or are they acting as Big Brother's Thought Police? ---------------- UFO Roundup All the latest UFO news and sighting reports. Aussie helicopters stalked by UFO; black helicopters sighted in three states; controversy over a British UFO sighing & more. ---------------- Varginha Incident Update Were live extraterrestrials captured by the Brazilian military in January, 1996? Several eyewitness "close encounter" accounts led to these allegations, and now a new eyewitness has come forward with information about the case which was previously unknown. Bob Pratt, a UFOlogist who has closely researched the Varginha Incident, reports on the latest news in this controversial case. ---------------- Conspiracy Newsline: Updated Daily Conspiring minds want to know! Appeals court orders New Orleans DA to turn Jim Garrison's JFK files over to the Assassination Records Review Board; Supreme court rules that the FBI does not have to purge its files on a citizen's legal activities; new report recites tired old conclusions in the latest Vince Foster suicide investigation & more news. ---------------- Ghosts of Old New Orleans New Orleans native Adrian Nicholas McGrath provides an in-depth narrative history of thirteen of the more celebrated ghost stories from the Crescent City. From the haunted streets of the French Quarter to the spooky tales of the St. Louis Cemetery, you'll find plenty of big chills in the Big Easy, complete with atmospheric photography by the author. ---------------- Halloween Fortean Slips! D. Trull serves up a special Halloween edition of dispatches from the paranormal fringe. Ex Ghost Facto: A court rules on the legality of selling a haunted house without advising the purchaser of its haunted history. Chop Logic: Macabre tales of demonic dismemberment and a severed head that lived. Electronic Possessions: A mysterious digital poltergeist attacks the heart and soul of a family -- their phones and TV. Spastic Elastic Gastric Plastic: Kids' Halloween prank creates the modern miracle of edible plastic. ---------------- In Search of the Pink Lady Some 80 years ago, a young woman fell to her death from the upper levels of the Grove Park Inn, a posh hotel in Asheville, North Carolina. No one knows if her death was accident, suicide or murder. In the years since, the historic resort has been said to be haunted by the Pink Lady's restless spirit. Ghostbuster Joshua P. Warren reports on his search for real evidence of the spectre's existence. -+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Receive Free Money For Playing A Game!!! As a special, limited-time, you can receive a $5 rebate for Temujin? -- a new supernatural adventure game from SouthPeak Interactive. Temuejin features intriguing characters, challenging puzzles and the revolutionary Video Reality? - the all-immersive technology that puts you in the game. Simply stop by your local retail store and purchase Temujin before the November 30, 1997 deadline. Temujin is available at CompUSA, Electronics Boutique, Babbages, Egghead, Circuit City, Best Buy and Computer City. Then mail in your original, dated sales receipt, the UPC code from the bottom of the box, along with the following information and the handwritten code "parascope-Tem1" to: Name______________________________________ Address____________________________________ City______________State_________Zip__________ email address_______________________________ Phone #____________________________________ Code:______________________________________ In the United States, mail to: In Canada, mail to: SouthPeak Interactive SouthPeak Interactive Temujin Rebate Offer Temujin Rebate Offer P.O. Box 2575 P.O. Box 2576 Ridgely, Maryland 21681 Ridgely, Maryland 21681 Submissions must be received by January 31, 1998. Please allow 6-8 weeks for delivery. Offer valid in the US and Canada only. Rebate checks will not be mailed to PO boxes, unless accompanied by a street address. Limit 1 per household. Hurry before it's too late! -+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Jane, Stop This Crazy Thing! Thought you were tough enough to handle the Dispatch and now you realize you're not? Starting to think you've made a wrong turn off the info highway? Well, we're only going to go over this once, so listen up! To unsubscribe yourself from Dispatch: 1) Send e-mail to: listserv@listserv.aol.com 2) In the body of your mail, type: unsubscribe dispatch That's all there is to it! Likewise, to unsubscribe: 1) Send e-mail to: listserv@listserv.aol.com 2) In the body of your mail, type: subscribe dispatch ---------------------------------------- ParaScope 11288 Ventura Blvd., #904 Studio City, CA 91604 America Online -- keyword: parascope parascope@aol.com World-Wide Web -- http://www.parascope.com info@parascope.com Search for other documents from or mentioning: parascope | listserv |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 25 Re: Questions for Abductees From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 22:10:15 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 20:31:07 -0400 Subject: Re: Questions for Abductees >Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 00:57:07 -0400 >From: Peregrine Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith] >Subject: Questions for Abductees >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >The Duke of Mendoza presents his compliments. >>From: wlmss@peg.apc.org [Lawrie Williams] >>Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 04:57:14 +1000 (GMT+1000) >>To: updates@globalserve.net >>Subject: Questions for Abductees Hello Lawrie, the Duke, (and all others that have expressed their opinions of Lawrie's handling of these girls.) Lawrie, I know that you only tried to do your best and that no harm was ever intended by you, to the contrary, it is clear that you were trying to help. But,...at some point in the game the peer review that you have recieved on this list (and such a unanimous one from so many people on both sides of the fence) that it has got to reach you. Judging from your defensive response to my post that hasn't happened yet, so I'll just remind you that the road to Hell is paved with 'good intentions!' Mendoza wrote, >Nobody knows (except, it seems, you) what happened to them. Instead of >trying to find out what did occur, you make one monstrous assumption and >then tell this kid that she can expect to be rogered and made pregnant by >an alien. Terrific. Not terrific, horrific! >Now here is this little gem: >>you should know that the person in question K was >>not distressed before or after the experience. I have never even >>met her in fact! >So, never having met her, on what basis can you *possibly* judge >her reaction to the alleged events or to your thoroughly stupid, >unjustified and (let's think the best here) irresponsible prediction? >How did you communicate? By phone? Fax? E-mail? Tell, please do. Peter said it first and makes the point as clearly as anyone could so I won't reiterate it Lawrie but I think the point is a valid one. >Why am I so bloody annoyed? >Gather round children let me tell you a tale: >Sir Cedric, a handsome but somewhat self-absorbed youth, (snip the saga of Sir Cedric! <G>) >(Curtain, seditious jeers from peasants and groundlings, &c) >The only connexion between you and Sir Cedric in this parable is >your prattishness and your incapacity to judge a situation from >anything but your own point of view. Do you get the point? Do you Lawrie? The things we say to those who are in a vulnerable state (especially in the case of inexperienced young ones) can have life altering effects. What you did (with all the good intentions in the world) was to hand that girl a lit stick of emotional and psychological dynamite! The fuse could go at any time. Because she seems OK now doesn't mean she won't be tomorrow when you have been long gone from the scene. She may have an adverse reaction (at any time) Do you understand the possible negative implications of your actions? >>Nobody can say I am not even-handed in the people I upset. I'll give you that one Perigrine! <G> PB> True. Some might pause at the significance of this. After all Messrs >Velez and Turrel (on one side, and also abductees) and Mendoza and >Malone (on the other) are not exactly famed for their luvvie-duvvie >agreement on what abductions really are. But they are agreed that >the welfare of the experient is paramount. You've just royally screwed >this up, potentially (assuming the lady K is not having you on - >ever think of that?). When a mob of such generally opposed persons >jump on you with both feet, does it not cross your mind - never a >long journey, it would seem - that you might be just a teensy, eensy, >weeny bit mistaken? Apparently not. Actually she's accomplished a bit of a minor miracle. She actually has you, me, Roger, Jerry, (and countless others) to agree on one thing unanimously! It's actually quite a novelty to find us all wearing the same colors. But it's for a good cause and I respect all of you for speaking out. I only hope that Lawrie listens for the sake of any future "conversations" she may conduct with someone who suspects that they are being abducted. Especially a minor! For legal reasons alone she should have declined involvement. >Somewhere or the other Plato has Socrates say to an acolyte: "Go, >tell no one, and drown thyself." I don't know about hari-kari but I do hope that Lawrie learns from all of this. >What you are up to now is potentially dangerous, deeply stupid, and >without an iota of concern for the consequences to the subject >in question. You show how truly half-witted your ideas are by the way >you *defend* them and dozy actions. Blunt, but it's justified. Needs to be said in as perfunctory a fashion as possible. Testify Mendoza! <G> >How old are you, by the way? Was wondering that myself! John Velez, E pluribus unum John Velez jvif@spacelab.net
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 25 Re: ACC: Remarkable Update By Bob Wolf From: RGates8254@aol.com Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 22:05:26 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 20:13:00 -0400 Subject: Re: ACC: Remarkable Update By Bob Wolf > Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 22:14:48 -0500 (CDT) > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net> [Dennis Stacy] > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: ACC: Remarkable Update By Bob Wolf > >From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose) > >To: updates@globalserve.net > >Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 12:45:50 +0100 > >Subject: ACC: Remarkable Update By Bob Wolf <brevity snip> > And why are we arguing about a 1947-48 issue, anyway, when Corso > the Conqueror didn't even claim to have appeared on the scene > until 1961? On the one hand, Wolf and others have US scientists > cracking the transistor code in a matter of days or months, > whereas Corso tells us most secrets weren't cracked until two > decades later -- after he miraculously arrived on the scene and > took up the arduous task of enlightening mankind. > Don't you people realize when you're being had? When will you > stand up and resist rampant rumor and innuendo and *demand* > incontrovertible proof of every and anything? > Never mind. > Dennis > Unfortuntaly their is a cadre of gulliable fools who will believe any wild story/claim just as long as it's published somewhere, Internet, book, whatever. For example last year breathless stories were circulating right after the August NASA mars rock announcement to the effect of "Well according to my insider-never-wrong-intelligence agency source that the big ET reality announcement from the government is going to happen before the election, blah blah. Never Happened. Big announcement to take place just after the election. Never Happened Sheldon Needle and various mass landings dates between November and January 1997. Never Happened. Lee Shargel and his Jan 24, 1997 to be the big date when ET radio waves would bathe the earth and and new day would begin for humanity --this according to insider-never-wrong-space-scientests who worked at Pine Gap Australia facility. Never Happened. Yellowbook/10,000 year history of ET's on earth/Christ was an ET/ mass landings to happen in the Desert SW on April 24th 1997.....blah blah. Never happened. Mass landings to happen in mid March 1997 at the trinity site. Never Happened. Mass landings, big ET reality announcement to happen at Roswell at the 50th aniv. Never happened. This is illustrative of the few who come along and unload incredible tales (that can't be verified or proven) on the Internet, and in print. Gulliable fools come along and say "Well its on such and such Web site and even though all they are repeating is somebody's (usually nameless sources) else's rumor/gossip, its just got to be true..... I hope I am wrong, but the ACC tale will go the way of all the others. Cheers, Robert
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 25 Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills From: Michael Christol <mchristo@mindspring.com> Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 21:56:08 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 21:11:22 -0400 Subject: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills >From: Chris Penrose <penrose@sfc.keio.ac.jp> >Date: Sun, 19 Oct 97 20:24:06 +0900 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills >>>Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 20:27:42 -0500 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >>>From: Michael Christol <mchristo@mindspring.com> >>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills >>Say Mike, >>Instead of playing games, if I were you I would spend some time >>improving my geography. Tinian is in the North Pacific, not the >>South. >>>Psychology will get you everywhere, Sean, except when dealing >>>with me. <G> squeek, squeek...scurry, scurry.... >Mike's behavior reminds me of the phonies (in my perception) >that call in to the Art Bell show and speak in silly riddles. >It is a childish power trip usually employed as a sort of >hypnotic fishing hook to gain personal attention and affection. >Mike seems to have a need to squander his information as if it >were some egolifting treasure that has given him affiliation with >some imagined 'elite' community. >Chris >penrose@sfc.keio.ac.jp So, I give you a little info, that you did not possess, and because I don't spell it out completely, you are ungreatful? Hmmm.... If I knew where the exact site was, I would call someone who was directly capable of investigating the incident. I guess, my source was right. It is better to keep certain info to yourself. People don't appreciate the opportunity they have before them. Thanks for being so supportive of my efforts. Only those who are interested in riddles need reply to me. <G> REgards, Mike
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 25 Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills From: Michael Christol <mchristo@mindspring.com> Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 21:32:01 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 21:10:13 -0400 Subject: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills At 02:18 AM 10/19/97 -0400, you wrote: >Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 06:52:54 +0200 (MET DST) >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills >>Hi Sean... >>No, this has nothing to do with that case. >>I was given some information by a friend who is supposedly, >>"in the know." He stated that there was a crash in 1941, >>in the South Pacific, around July 4, from which the "transistor" >>was derived. So, they did not have from July 1947 to Dec. 1947 >>to back engineer the "transistor." According to my friend, they >>had "six years." That makes a difference, doesn't it? >Say Mike, >Instead of playing games, if I were you I would spend some time >improving my geography. Tinian is in the North Pacific, not the >South. OK....thanks. <g> >>Psychology will get you everywhere, Sean, except when dealing >>with me. <G> squeek, squeek...scurry, scurry.... >Is this the kindergarten section? It's whatever you want it to be...<G> REgards, Mike
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 25 Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculoso From: Gunslinger Peat <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith] Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 21:41:52 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 19:46:54 -0400 Subject: Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculoso The Duke of Mendoza presents his compliments between guffaws. >Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 20:17:08 +0200 (MET DST) >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculoso >I eyeballed the date months ago and I phoned the New Scientist >editors in London. The article was not an April Fools' joke. If you'd care to post the name of the editor you spoke and the date you did so, I'll happily cross check this. >Gunther Nimtz is a real person and has appeared in television >documentaries. So has Kermit the Frog. I'm sure Dr/Prof/Herr Nimtz has a sense of humor too, should he be real. [snip] >The argument that ET visitation >is improbable because such speeds don't exist is obsolete even >according to present day human science. Whatever this tangled sentence is supposed to mean, I didn't raise this issue in my post and am not interested in discussing it in this connexion. But, for the record, I don't think ET visitation is improbable because FTL speeds are impossible - and I'm prepared to accept they are, oddly. As Stan Friedman says, in so many words, if ET is, or was, living in a nearby star system, all ET needs is the wherewithal and the determination to travel through space for a few years to get here. Stan may fall off his chair at hearing it, but this seems pretty reasonable to me. >You would have found that >out had you read some real science magazines. Perhaps you'd also care to tell me and the rest of the world what I do and don't read, as you seem to keep pretty sharp tabs on it. I ask because I tend to forget so easily these days and, like Ed Stewart, I don't seem to be able to get out of my armchair. Now, will you tell me how someone can measure the exact speed of a signal traveling at FTL speeds with instruments that operate at or less than the speed of light? Or how an EM microwave can travel at FTL speeds without turning into something different from an EM microwave? Have you any idea of how long it takes EM radiation to cross 12cm of space at c? 1/2,500,000,000 of a second. Know any cheap kit that can measure periods of time like that? And do please show us all where Snowbird, Utah, that world-renowned conference center, is on the map. I may want to visit one day. And do please use the brain the good Lord gave you, just for once. Yours &c Polyfilla D. Mangrove Swamp Light
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 26 Re: 'The Gulf Breeze Paper' From: c549597@showme.missouri.edu [Barbara Becker] Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 22:52:27 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 07:26:01 -0500 Subject: Re: 'The Gulf Breeze Paper' > Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 23:09:02 -0400 > From: bruce maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com> > Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: 'The Gulf Breeze Paper' > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > To the 1 or 2 people following this discussion: Here is my > latest respose to Barbara's criticism of the Ed Walters case. > > MY COMMENTS ON BARBARA BECKER'S COMMENTS ON MY RESPONSE TO HER > > PAPER, "ONE PICTURE IS WORTH A THOUSAND WORDS" > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > 1) Here is my comment on her paper: > > > HERE IS BARBARA'S COMMENT on what I said. > > None came forward before Walters. Myself and others interested in > snip > danger of contamination of witness testimony the longer time goes on. > > HERE IS MY COMMENT ON HER PAPER: I am aware that the GB skeptics > > have tried, unsuccessfully, to discredit all the other witnesses. > > There are about a dozen Gulf Breeze witnesses who say explicitly > > that they saw what was in Ed's photos. > **** BB: There were NONE that came forward before Ed and only > ONE, a man named Thompson, who described and drew a picture > similar to Ed's. > >>>>>BSM, 10/17/97: The following people stated they saw a UFO > like or the same as what appeared in Ed's photos (list taken > from GULF BREEZE WITHOUT ED, a paper presented at the 1991 MUON > Symposium): *****BB I have many of these reports. Unfortunately, with the exception of Thompson, the other sketches of witnesses in 1987, are NOT identical to Walters UFo. ANd once again, most of the reports were taken much later. > >In UFOS ARE REAL, HERE'S THE PROOF (Avon. 1997) there are photos from > > people around the world who have seen the same thing. > >**** BB: I have that book. Maybe we are having a problem of > >semantics. SAME means being exactly alike, identical. There are > >only three reproduced in that book that I would call identical. > >Oddly enough, they are from around Costa Rica, where Walters said > >he and his wife and children lived for a while...oddly enough > >again, Tommy Smith said that Walters told he and another friend > >that Ed had hoaxed UFO photos while he lived in Costa Rica. Go > >figure! :) > >>>>BSM 10/17/97: everyone should have a copy of "that book" > which contains both verbal and pictorial descriptions. Persons > who wrote to Ed in response to the publication of his first book, > THE GULF BREEZE SIGHTINGS to say they saw the same or a similar > thing: > Clararence Barrons( "they are almost identical to the one I > saw on Nov. 14, 1971....in Mississippi), Cliff Baer ("I saw that > same object appear from behind some trees years ago...in the ack > woods of Pennsylvania), Helen Brown (Crestview...30 miles from > gulf Breeze....in summer of 1954....there were three objects ust > like the one in your photo 19...) , John Duquette (I saw the > Gulf Breeze UFO back in 1976...felt I must have been hallucinating), > Randy Duke (...Nov. 1991....saw the UFO in photo 23...), Carol Parks > (..I've seen this thing too....craft seemed almost as wide as the road > and hovered two or three feet above it...), Robert Fuller (I have > seen te Gulf BReeze UFO...in 1980 ...near Ogden, Utah...), Michael > Storm (I was incredibly shocked when I saw the cover of your book > because that is almost exactly what I saw while in Zimbabwe), Daniel > Leshibis (Germany; ....The UFO looked exactly like the one you have > photographed...), Alex Stutzamen (Germany; ......I realized that the > object you photographed is exactly what I saw [in 1986]), Revis > Vannistish(Switzerland;...I saw the pictures about the UFO [in Ed's > book] and I know that's it...). There are dozen or so other sightings > reported in the book by people who DID NOT say they saw the same > thing, but they clearly saw SOMETHING wierd. As for the photos we > have: Baker Watson (June, 1976, "I know the detail I saw is exactly > what's in your book"; photo is very much like Ed-type); Harry > Bordersfield (Jan 1980, coming out of Carlsbad Caverns; photo looks > like what Ed got July 10, 1991), Susan Keiley (Jan 1980,UFO over the > Grande Canyon, somewhat resembles Ed-type), Gary Tomlinson( April > 1986, Monterrey, Mexico), James Warnerfred (March, 1989,El Progresso, > Guatemala, two photos, some resemblence to Ed-type), Ray Harcourt > (Canaima, Venezuela, January, 1990, looks like Ed-type UFO > hovering and sending down a beam), Bryan Hampton (July, 1990, Las > Vegas, somewhat like Ed-type), Carlos Medoso (Campo Grande, > Brazil, December, 1991, similar to ed-type), James Parker (Fiji > Islands, March, 1992, similar to Ed-type). > *****BB Bruce you can personally attest that you have seen each and every one of these letters, and that they are written differently different people? Afterall, you co-authored a book with this man, surely you wanted to see for yourself what was being sent. > Your comment that only three photos are similar is debatable (it > could be more, depending upon the degree of similarity). > Your comment, "Oddly enough, they are from around Costa Rica, > where Walters said he and his wife and children lived for a > while." is really a useless statement. On two photos taken by > one man during one sighting are from the vicinity of Costa Rica, > and that sighting was in Guatemala. > ****BB Are you saying that this person's sighting was reported in a newspaper, thus recorded and the time and place of the sighting is recorded? > Furthermore, Ed and family lived in Costa Rica in the 1970's and > the Guatemala photos were taken in 1989. Perhaps you are > suggesing that Ed created a hoax UFO in Costa Rica in the middle > 1970's and then it somehow got into Guatemala and fooled people > ten or more years later? ****BB I really dont know what you are saying here but...Has this one been in the newspaper? Which of the South American reports and sightings were recorded in a newspaper at the time of the sighting? > Your reference to a Tommy Smith claim that Ed hoaxed UFO's while > in Costa Rica is another useless statement. Tommy is hardly an > unbiased witness in this regard. ****BB Neither is Ed. BIGBIGBIG snip. > > Barbara continues > > In addition... In July 1991 I wrote to Maccabee and asked about > <big snip> > > If photo 21 is the one Walters took in Cook's presence and used in > > GBS, then what is 21 A that specifically names Cook? > > IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO KNOW MANY PHOTOGRAPHS WALTERS TOOK. > > My (Bruce's) comment: Shortly after the first (UFO) photo with > > Cook Ed took a second photo for comparison. > >**** BB: It is still impossible to know how many photgrpahs Ed > >Walters actually took. Look at Oeschler's serial numbers. 20, > >21, 21A, 22, 23, 14A and 19A (and there were more) all have the > >same "serial numbers". There is no control here. > >>>>>>BSM: 10/17/97 Ed also used his camera to take photos of other > things, such as construction sites. In retrospect it probably would > have been "better" if he had used it only to take UFO photos so that > all pictures could be placed in a continuous series. However, he did > have other things to do with the camera besides tajing UFO photos. > SO, you are right, there was "no control," which is not surprising. > > NOTE: The GB investigators have been accused of sloppy work, etc. > > However, I would like to point out that to make her argument about > > the photos Barbara has used the very diligent efforts of Bob > > Oechsler to catalogue every photo related to the UFO sightings that > > Ed took with that camera. None of the skeptics undertook this > > effort. > >**** BB: Anyone with the slimmest doubt was kept away from this > > case. No skeptics allowed...only believers. > >>>>>BSM: 10/17/97 Skeptics including Willy SMith, Bob Boyd, Ray > Stanford had access to data and their reports prove that the did. > However, it is true that after they went public with their > positive claims of hoax before the investigation was completed, ****BB Before it was completed? MUFON went public BEFORE the investigation was completed!!! Andrus even said he was breaking precedent. > and even before the sightings were over, they began to lose > contact with the main investigation. HOwever, that did not > stop them from gathering their own data and loudly proclaiing > their conclusions. ****BB According to you the sightings are still going on. Would that mean that nothing should have been, nor should ever be, written about GB until the last red light dies? > > 3) Here is another of my comments on her paper > > MACCABEE : Tommy Smith did not "come forward" publicly until June, > > 1990. His testimony about Ed faking photos is about as solid as a > > Swiss Cheese. Ed told the UFO investigators in January 1988 that a > > young man had shown Ed UFO photos. > **** BB: AFTER Tommy spoke with his father and AFTER Tommy cutoff > his relationship with Walters Ed Walters told the MUFON > Investigators that he was Mr. Ed. It was then that he showed Ware > et al. the remaining photos to 18. > > The young man had told Ed that he was exploding firecrackers in Gulf > > Breeze when a UFO had appeared and he had photographed it. > <snip> > >**** BB: This is Ed's version. This IS NOT Tommy Smith's > >wersion. > >>>>BSM: 10/17/97 I am not surprised that it is not Tommy > Smith's version, since his version is whatever he wants it to be. > ****BB Same about Ed. > > Ed's testimony was supported by another young friend of Tommy's who > > told me and other investigators that Tommy had told him, in late > > 1987, about exploding firecrackers and seeing and photographing a > > UFO. > >**** BB: I have a copy of a statement taken by a certain memebr > >of CUFOS from a girl named "Carol" who was this "other" friends > >girlfriend and who attended Columbia College in Chicago with this > >"other" friend who claimed that this "other" friend had been > >offered money to help Ed in the hoax. This "other" friend was > >promised money for film making (like video?) and school etc. I > >trust this person in CUFOS I have no reason to doubt the > >statement since the CUFOS person thought it was truthful and > >sincere. AS with evryhting in this case, this "carol" was afraid > >to come forward. > >>>>BSM: 10/17/97 Tsk, tsk. People who are accusing Ed > areafraid to step forward....excetp Tommy Smith, of course, > So, we are to believe an anonymous ("Carol") teenage girlfriend > of Rob M. , the "other friend" of Tommy Smith (not a friend of > Ed), when she ostensibly (though an anonymous CUFOS investigator) > says Rob M. was also "bought off" by Ed? I begin to wonder just > how many people ed has supposedly "bought off" in this "Grand > Conspiracy." All the other witneses, too? ****BB Did I mention Rob M.? Guess you didn't do any follow up at the time? > > The person Tommy "came forward" to with his story was his > > father. According to his father, lawyer Thomas Smith, at a press > > conference in June, 1990, Tommy told him in late 1987 of a UFO > > sighting with pictures. According to Thomas Smith, a few days or > > weeks later Tommy told him the pictures had been faked by Ed. > > Neither Smith said anything in public about these allegations > > until June, 1990. At the press conference Mr. Smith was careful > > to avoid criticizing any of the other Gulf Breeze witnesses, > > including those who claimed to have seen exactly the same thing > > that Ed photographed. Tommy's photos were analyzed. Tommy > > had claimed that Ed had faked them by double exposure methods. > BSM: 10/17/97 Readers: note well the following paragraph: > > However, analysis revealed no evidence of double exposure and, > > in fact, the photos appeared to be just single exposures, not double > > exposures as Tommy had indicated. The shape and color of the > > depicted UFO was consistent with what Ed had photographed. ****BB It should be, Ed took the photograph. > > **** BB COMMENT: This is strictly disinformation damage control. > > In the first week of January 1988, Tommy Smith confessed his role in > > Walters hoax to his father, who then discussed it with his law > > partners, Mayor of Gulf Breeze, Ed Gray and Police Chief, Jerry > > Brown. So there is no lack of credible witnesses to what Tommy said > > and when. All of whom believed MUFON would discover the hoax and it > > would go away. It didn't. At this time Tommy cut his ties to > > Walters. This was when alters executed his own damage control. He > > told Ware et al., that he was definitely, "Mr. Ed." and showed the > > remaining 12 or so photographs he had taken. To my recollection it > > was Walters who came out with the preposterous story about Tommy > > Smith. > > My comment on her comment: > > I have never heard of any testimony that in January 1988 Tommy Smith > > told his father, who told his law partners, the Mayor of Gulf > > Breeze and the Police Chief. If it is true, that the Police Chief > > had a witness to a hoax as early as January 1988, then I guess he > > could be guilty of nonfeasance of duty to inform the public, > > inasmuch as there was a lot of interest in the sightings at the > > time. > >**** BB: I cant speak for any of these people but everyone makes > >a bad call once in while...even you Bruce. > >>>>>Yeah me.....and even You, Barbara. > ****BB Bruce. The above line is childish. > > 4) Here is my comment on her paper: > > This discussion about the copyright does not prove Ed > > created the Bill and Jane photos. Hence Barbara's claim that > > "this demonstrates his ability...." is also not proven. In > > contradiction to Barbara's conclusion, many other factors in this > > case indicate that Ed told the truth because many of the photos > > he took were beyond his capability to fake. > > ** BB COMMENT: You can make up any story you want to believe, > > whatever makes you feel better. But the FACT of law is: IF ED > > WALTERS OWNS THE COPYRIGHT TO THE BELIEVER BILL AND JANE PHOTOS AS > > HE DECLARES, THEN HE MUST EITHER HAVE A TRANSFER AGREEMENT, WHICH > > HE DOESN'T OR BE THE PHOTOGRAPHER. > > My comment: Can you prove the "Bill" and "Jane" didn't intend to > > abandon all rights to their photos? > >**** BB: Read my copyright paper. ASlo, copyright is inherited, > >Bill said: "I'll keep the negs for my grandkids." (GBS p107) > >>>>>BSM: 10/17/97 When it comes to deciding who's right, you > grasp for legalities is you wish; I'll stick to the physical > analysis. ****BB Your physical analysis can be wrong. Law, at least this copyright law, is very specific. And it VERY specifically says that if Ed Walters owns the copyright to the B&J photos, AND he does not have a transfer agreement, which he doesnt, the he MUST BE THE PHOTOGRAPHER. SNIP > >(Bruce) My comment: he had been advised to copyright the > > photos by the UFO investigatotors so the photos wouldn't be > > circulating with no control at all. > >**** BB: That's not the point. He had the crap (alegedly) scared > >out of him and the thing he thinks about doing is filling out his > >copyright application and getting it in the mail? It makes > >perfect sense for someone pulling a hoax. But it doesnt make > >sense for someone in fear for the life. > >>>>>Sometimes people do thinkgs that "don't make sense." ****BB It makes plenty of sense when put in the context of a hoax. SNIP > >BB: ENDING COMMENT: Hey Bruce....Is Ed dead????? If nothow about > >calling him on the phone (surely you have his number) and ask him > >why he doesnt have a transfer agreement and why he owns the > >copyright to the B&J photos? Thats simple. And please no BS > >about Duane giving him the photos. > BSM: (10.17/97) (Ending Comment)^2: no transfer agreement > because Bill and Jane can't be contacted. ****BB Close but no cigar. All Walters needed to do, to protect himself against a willfull infringment suit was to put an ad in the GB Sentinel Newspaper, declaring his intention to publish a book, and asking the rightful owners to please contact him privately. Their anonymity would be respected. > Had either one left a return address or a phone number Ed would have > called. Bill and Jane have had nearly 10 years to make contact and > assert their copyrights. Presumably they are aware of the > publication of Ed's book in 1990. Look's like a hung jury as far as > Bill and Jane are concerned. ****BB People who don't exist have a real hard time making contact. <snip> ****BB I'll repeat the question. Maybe you overlooked it the last time I asked. Hey Bruce....Is Ed dead????? If not how about calling him on the phone (surely you have his number) and ask him why he doesnt have a transfer agreement and why he owns the copyright to the B&J photos? Thats simple. And please no BS about Duane giving him the photos. BB
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 26 Re: Becker Claims Copyright Infringement by From: c549597@showme.missouri.edu [Barbara Becker] Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 22:58:23 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 07:28:48 -0500 Subject: Re: Becker Claims Copyright Infringement by > From: "WHITE" <mjawhite@digitaldune.net> > To: <updates@globalserve.net> > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Becker Claims Copyright Infringement by Maccabee > Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 07:09:36 -0700 > To EBK, List, and any who have followed BB's travails > regarding her "gulf breeze" paper, and particularly those > who may have actually written some commentary on it: > >Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 18:59:52 -0800 > >To: updates@globalserve.net > >From: campbell@ufomind.com (Glenn Campbell, Las Vegas) > >Subject: Becker Claims Copyright Infringement by Maccabee > >Cc: brumac@compuserve.com, steve@konsulting.com > <snip> > >Barbara Becker has claimed copyright infringement in an on-line > >article by Bruce Maccabee posted to this list on Oct. 4. > <snip> > >Becker has threatened to file a lawsuit against Glenn Campbell, > >Bruce Maccabee, Errol Bruce-Knapp and another party to seek > >"injunctuive, punitive and statuatory damages from Glenn and > >punitive and statuatory from the rest of you...." > Comment: Jeepers. > Brad Templeton writes a pretty > good general piece on copyright and e-mail; > particularly regarding "fair use" and commentary > on net postings. > http://palimpsest.stanford.edu/mirrors/faq/copyright/myths/part1 > For the hardcoreworrywarts, the American Bar Association > puts out a real humdinger on copyright at: > http://www.abanet.org/intelprop/comm106/106copy.html > After I read the Templeton piece, I had a greater appreciation > for EBK's posting rules. (Sorry, EBK, about that x-posting I > forwarded on Stealth fighters equipped with "alien" technology > it won't happen again.) > John White mjawhite@digitaldune.net THIS HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH THE COPYRIGHT PIECE I WROTE IN OCTOBER 1997. It has to do with a paper I wrote, copyrighted and posted to MY OWN BBS in 1990. I told Maccabee that he could quote parts of it but I did not want it chopped up the way he did. Maccabee said fine and Glenn Campbell turned NAZI. Search for other documents from or mentioning: c549597 | mjawhite |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 26 Re: ACC: Remarkable Update By Bob Wolf From: Ted Viens <drtedv@smart1.net> Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 22:28:45 -0700 Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 07:39:50 -0500 Subject: Re: ACC: Remarkable Update By Bob Wolf > From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose) > To: updates@globalserve.net > Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 12:45:50 +0100 > Subject: ACC: Remarkable Update By Bob Wolf > Found at: > http://www.sightings.com/ufo/accandloseufo.htm > ************************** > SIGHTINGS > =BF > ACC/Transistor Origin Update > and Did the Air Force > LOSE a UFO?! > by Bob Wolf > 10-17-97 > (Note: The following key points were edited from > Bob Wolf's lengthy ACC update by Stig Agermose) > =BF > Scientists at S.G. Thompson, RCA Research, Lawrence Livermore, NASA, > ACSA, Sarnoff Research and the Department of Defense all agree that the > Transistor was "brand spanking new" in December of 1947, had no > precedent and appeared to be inadequately and hastily researched, and > was unconnected to any prior technology. > =BF > Also: Nasa Astronaut Edgar Mitchell agrees with the basic idea of the > technology transfer at that time and later, "from a UFO captured by the > Defense Department". (See http://www.sightings.com/ufo/mitchell.htm > and > http://american-computer.com/mitchell.htm > - editor's note) > =BF > And: if you really knew anything about the Transistor's > phenomenological physics, you would know that there is NO WAY that > William Shockley could have stumbled onto it by studying "High Back > Voltage" Germanium Diodes. > =BF ---Snippety, hack, hack, cut-cut-cut--- No Foolin' Some of the original production runs of the actual Shockley Point Contact Transistors are still being found in old warehouse diggin's and are being sold by some electronic surplus dealers. Item No.: G5040 Antique Transistor These were among the first transistors made and we are selling them as a collector's item. The case is one of the most common metal cases for these early transistors. This one was made by Sprague and has long wire leads. The Electronic Goldmine 800-445-0697 8 am to 4:30 pm Arizona time. http://www.goldmine-elec.com Some twenty five years ago, I ordered an identical appearing transistor from an electronic surplus dealer near Peabody, Mass. They described it as a point contact transistor. In all of the surplus buys of transistors I have made in the past thirty years, I have never bought one called functional in the old style metal case. And I do remember the excitement in the hobby market when germanium transistors were suplanted by silicon. To be sure that these were not early planar transistors, but actual point contact transistors, one would have to be cut open and examined under a microscope. The point contact transistor would not have any visible surface patterns. Warning... Warning... The following comments are purely Conjecture... This is mere speculation on what I think really happened. Also some suggestions for different approaches in researching this contentious issue. Naturally, mindless speculation is most valuable when it serves as a hook for hanging more historically accurate information. Solid state diodes were only available in a couple of flavors. Point contact diodes derived from early cat's whiskers and metal-metal oxide diodes of the selenium or copper variety. Dopant effects creating P or N germanium were not yet well understood or appreciated. Shockley et al were primarily focused on the surface charge effects of purified germanium. One of them was studying the bulk surface charge properties, another the effect of over-zapping the whisker to the substrate and probably Shockley was diddling two whiskers on a common substrate and noticed the interdependant current effects. After a few months of diddling, a sufficiently repeatable combination of substrate purity and crystal orientation, and whisker metallurgy, placement and bonding, and device performance where discovered to permit thinking about prodution. Production techniques were devised and a few trusted manufacturers, such as Sprague, began production of the Shockley transistor. One small problem. The Shockley transistor was fragile, limited in performance, and widely varied in characteristics. They are usable but not very satisfying. Worse than this, there were few evident paths for the evolution of this solid state technology. Perhaps a covert activity was on a converging path. Soon after the Shockley team begins diddling two whiskers on a germanium substrate, intelligence officers show up and take one or two of the team into a secure room and show them the early investigation of a peculiar device. Microscopic studies revealed most of the surface of what is believed to be an electronic control device to be too intricate to decipher with a few larger patches of peculiar alloys often paired together. Metallurgical analysis had already determined that one of the alloys was a very pure silicon with a trace of boron, the other with a trace of arsenic. The selected team member was asked to speculate on these revelations and how they might be incorporated into the teams work. "Serendipitously" the member begins researching lightly doped semiconductors quickly focusing on boron and arsenic. Bonded layers and soon planar deposits are forming more rugged and repeatable transistors. Within a year, the fabrication lines are switched from making fully earth devised point contact transistors to producing back engineered non-earth planar transistors. Within another few years, transistors are being advertised in the Journal of the IRE for commercial production. Much of the support for the historical account of the discovery of the transistor is in the scientific papers highlighting the milestones in its development. The fault in this proof are the missing records of failure along the way. When researching an unknown technology, many mistakes and wrong paths will be taken. Lab notes should disclose these faults. I suspect that in the development of the Shockley point contact transistor there are many varieties of substrate tried, several alloys of whiskers, and a range of electronic parameters. Lab notes probably recount most of these experiments. My suspicion is that the body of lab notes revealing the many false attempts at selecting the best dopants and the best geometries for the junction transistor technology will be strangely inadequate. In the libraries of the former Soviet Union there exists peered reports and laboratory documents that prove the transistor was invented there. Yet we know that these papers reveal the effort of back engineered research. What would it tell us if the timeline and the paper trail of the introductin of the transistor in the old Soviet Union closely echoed the earlier historical development here? A couple of issues allow me to contemplate a non-earth source for modern semiconducter technology. One is the shortage of reported faulty research paths and broad sample variations. The other is the short timeline from crude proof of technology to commercial availability of an untried revolutionary device. Bye... Ted..
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 26 Re: Abduction - Oct 4 1997 From: wlmss@peg.apc.org [Lawrie Williams] Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 15:06:35 +1000 (GMT+1000) Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 07:49:08 -0500 Subject: Re: Abduction - Oct 4 1997 > Date: Sun, 19 Oct 97 07:24:41 > From: "Roger R. Prokic" <rprokic@ibm.net> > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Abduction Sat 4 Oct 1997 >>From: wlmss@peg.apc.org [Lawrie Williams] >>Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 03:05:26 +1000 (GMT+1000) >>To: ufo-l@mb.protree.com, updates@globalserve.net >>Subject: Re: Abduction Sat 4 Oct 1997 >>Lawrie Williams, the abductee who dared give an >>informed opinion to another abductee. > .... you are more like a rapist or killer. Well, I am glad you write balanced files, for a moment I thought it was going to be another crackpot. > You should under no means tell these girls that they were > impregnated by an alien and their babies were stolen by them... > This really is dangerous. I invite you to quote where I ever said that. > .....as the > child gets older you have by then convinced the child they have > been abducted/abused by aleins and have possible caused trauma, > and psychological damage to your own child. Maybe in your world. Abductees are sometimes discovering the opposite is happening. Unprompted, children are reporting such contacts. These are happy, healthy and normal children. Try that on for size. It has made more than one skeptic into a knower. > This is just my opinion standing on the sidelines of this game... > thinking you were very wrong to feed this dangerous > misinformation to someone. Get your facts correct first. I had some remarkable events to report, but I find every time I log on there is more crap like this. Lawrie______________
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 26 Re: Abduction Oct 4 1997 From: wlmss@peg.apc.org [Lawrie Williams] Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 15:08:27 +1000 (GMT+1000) Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 08:02:27 -0500 Subject: Re: Abduction Oct 4 1997 > Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 00:57:07 -0400 > From: Peregrine Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith] > Subject: Questions for Abductees > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > The Duke infers nothing of the kind. The Duke observed with a micture > sorry (but look it up!) mixture of despair and disgust that you > blithely predicted to a 16-year-old girl that she would be > impregnated by aliens.... Mistake #1. I did not say anything like this, blithely or otherwise. This is clearly wooly thinking. Or is it that cheap political debating trick, to attribute something false to someone, then wax sarcastic about something they never said? > ...........Because "the person K" has reported something like a > abduction experience *does not* mean that is what they had. Nobody > knows (except, it seems, you) what happened to them. Instead of Mistake number #2. I told her friend that nobody knew what was going on. As recorded in my initial file. More false attribution. I note that Peter's spam is working well. Just got another message in my mail box from "Roger" who has framed his views from the false information propogated by Peter Brooksmith. > trying to find out what did occur, you make one monstrous assumption No Peter. Opinion is not Assumption. There's mistake #3 for you. > and then tell this kid that she can expect to be rogered and made > pregnant by an alien. Terrific. Now you employ cheap sexual innuendo against a child. You have three times misrepresented the information I introduced to the discussion. There was not a lot of it but you have nevertheless managed to make a complete cock-up of it. This is either sloppiness or obfuscation. Three strikes and you were out, my friend, even before you lurched into inflammatory smut. > Why am I so bloody annoyed? That is easy to answer. Your style betrays the presence of a pubescent mind in a post-adolescent body. In other words wooly thinking - quite likely a genetic trait in need of careful control. And self-evidently it is because you address issues far too complex for your intellect to grasp adequately. Rather than accept not being up to it, you get stroppy. I suggest you don a pair of gumboots and go for a good long walk to clear your mind. Peter, I can handle your grief. I prefer that to seeing you attacking abductee womenfolk, people who are trying to rear children in a stable environment. And you presume to get moral with me, old fruit. You seek to make a name for yourself by writing about fact while trying to convince the world it is fiction. William Tenn would have been proud of you, it surely puts you in a klass of your own. It is the poison and spite that skeptics put abroad that generates the real angst and trauma for countless abductees, 16 year old girls included. It gives many of the proles an excuse to taunt and intimidate them, to call them liars and accuse them of mental illness. It puts us under immense social pressure. It can even lead to suicides in people who cannot endure the conflict between what is happening to them and the denial and pressure from those around them. So they kill themselves, especially vulnerable young kids. That is the kind of harm I have to deal with, and it stands head and shoulders above the petty and false accusations you sling at me. You and your kind fuel the denial. You judge me quite falsely for the very real harm and hurt that YOU do to thousands, nay, tens of thousands of individuals via the power of the print and tv media. And you do it to line your pockets, for blood money for propoganda that drives kids to their graves. Those pseudo-sophisticated fantasy games of yours are a poor mask for the very real evil you do. Its a great earner no doubt, editors will buy debunker-spiel. But when you try the same stunts on real abductees you are out of your league. No wonder you then have to resort to fairy stories: > Gather round children let me tell you a tale: > Sir Cedric, a handsome but somewhat self-absorbed youth, [ 72 lines of totally wasted bandwidth followed as a singularly negative contribution to ufology from Peter Brooskmith ] > The only connexion between you and Sir Cedric in this parable is > your prattishness and your incapacity to judge a situation from > anything but your own point of view. Do you get the point? That you misread files, get emotional when they confuse you, and then resort to ad hominim. Yes, I would say I get that point. > ....... When a mob of such generally opposed persons > jump on you with both feet, does it not cross your mind - never a > long journey, it would seem - that you might be just a teensy, eensy, > weeny bit mistaken? Apparently not. Skye merely clipped my ear. John Velez started hollering but he is inclined to that kind of thing. The other 2 were just anxious daddies realizing at last that their little ones could be next and lashing out at the messenger. I was flattered, not flattened. Hardly a mob! How about "A Small Gang"? Say, half a per cent of everyone who saw the original message? If that. I think *your* involvement was spurious and intended to waste list time. Far be it for me to say you are unable to relate to the feelings of others. I expect you to become much more emotionally involved when I move you on to the very promising Gnostic debate you have just started.... For I have evidence that the mute phenomenon is related to the Artemis tradition and I have some testable theories. With Artemis the Huntress at large you will need to take extra care of your special sheep these coming winter nights. Hang onto those gumboots, keep looking forward and maintain a firm grip on all that wooliness. I hope this helps. > Yours &c > Palfreyman D. Mountingblock > Stable Hand Lawrie Williams_________________
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 26 Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 15:59:44 +0100 Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 08:49:22 -0500 Subject: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills >Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 20:27:42 -0500 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Michael Christol <mchristo@mindspring.com> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills Hi Mike >Hi Sean... >No, this has nothing to do with that case. >I was given some information by a friend who is supposedly, >"in the know." He stated that there was a crash in 1941, >in the South Pacific, around July 4, from which the "transistor" >was derived. So, they did not have from July 1947 to Dec. 1947 >to back engineer the "transistor." According to my friend, they >had "six years." That makes a difference, doesn't it? It sure would! >Psychology will get you everywhere, Sean, except when dealing >with me. <G> squeek, squeek...scurry, scurry.... Psychology is always best when done in reverse. Are you a man or a mouse, come on squeek up! Sean Jones reply to--sean@tedric.demon.co.uk Homepage--http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Zone/1745/index.htm Reasearch page --http://www.tedric.demon.co.uk/ Search for other documents from or mentioning: tedric | mchristo |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 26 Re: Solved abduction cases? From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 16:19:16 +0100 Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 08:50:32 -0500 Subject: Re: Solved abduction cases? >From: DevereuxP@aol.com [Paul Devereux] >Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 02:15:28 -0400 (EDT) >To: updates@globalserve.net >Subject: Solved abduction cases? Hello Paul > Ufology needs >reinventing because there is, indeed, something to be understood >within it, at the level of some experiences had by some people. So you don't think that Ufology evolves as new people/researchers come into this field? Are you a man or a mouse, come on squeek up! Sean Jones reply to--sean@tedric.demon.co.uk Homepage--http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Zone/1745/index.htm Reasearch page --http://www.tedric.demon.co.uk/ Search for other documents from or mentioning: tedric | devereuxp |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 26 Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills From: Chris Penrose <penrose@cmlab.sfc.keio.ac.jp> Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 17:15:34 +0900 (GMT+0900) Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 08:51:47 -0500 Subject: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills >From: "WHITE" <mjawhite@digitaldune.net> [John White] >To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills >Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 21:28:55 -0700 >But what I find interesting, given Sean Jones' forwarded post of >the London newspaper picture of the 1990 Moscow photo, is that >the Phoenix folks working on the Mexico footage haven't weighed >in on it by saying, "Yes/No, the 'Moscow' photo is/isn't a still >from the Mexico video." But maybe they haven't seen the post, >and when they do, they'll let us know. Perhaps they'll point you to my posting on the subject where I give evidence that the buildings are different. Chris Penrose penrose@sfc.keio.ac.jp
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 26 Re: Questions for Abductees From: Michael Wayne Malone <wayne@fly.HiWAAY.net> Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 03:59:47 -0500 (CDT) Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 08:55:27 -0500 Subject: Re: Questions for Abductees > From: wlmss@peg.apc.org [Lawrie Williams] > Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 04:57:14 +1000 (GMT+1000) > To: updates@globalserve.net > Subject: Questions for Abductees > Reluctant as I am to confuse such cerebro-avian reasoning with > actual facts, you should know that the person in question K was > not distressed before or after the experience. I have never even > met her in fact! How can you know the distress level of someone you've never met? > I did recount a conversation with her friend D, which file 4 - > now 5 - people have clearly failed to read carefully enough > despite its brevity. They have instead larded on their own > preconceptions of where I am at. This says more about them than > me. And perhaps even more about the perceived rights of free > speech between abductees by believers and skeptics alike. I must > some time slip in another couple of buzz words and watch if the > same identities get in a flap. Don't know that anyone but you have ever made this a "free speech" issue. But free speech doesn't give you the freedom from responsibility when you say something that hurts someone else. > Nobody can say I am not even-handed in the people I upset. That > is the benefit of being a moderate caught between extremists, one > so foolish as to insist his very real experiences are very real, > and the other insisting on mental theories more elaborate than > the simple and factual explanation - humanoids in a hovering > craft, based on axioms that were readily accepted by this list. A moderate between extremists? Hardly. You've closed your mind to any phsyological or pshycological explination to the abduction phenomenom, that defines you as an extremist. The moderates are those who don't know what the abduction phenomenom is and are keeping an open mind to all possible explinations until evidence removes one or elevates another. And currently there is no solid evidence to accept the axiom that humanoids in a hovering craft steal people out of their homes. > As for the person in question, I did not introduce any ideas > other than the one I mentioned, which was intended to alert her > to any possible reproductive system anomalies. Any memories of > being on a spaceship on a table and surrounded by entities remain > as pure as the driven snow, ready to be scooped up and placed in > a sterile container, to no doubt be labelled "iatrogenic". Hardly pure. You've not only solidified any past experience, but you've told a young girl, albeit through a friend, that not only is the experience 100% authentic, exactly as she "remembers" it, but that it is going to get worse. Everything from now on is tainted. But not only that, you told this child that she was abducted by "humanoids in a hovering craft" and you've never even met her. When I jumped to the assumption that you personally told this child she would get pregnant and the baby would be stolen I thought it was bad. That was a kneejerk reaction, I admit. But to then learn that it is even worse, you tainted everything this subject may have been able to share because you diagnoised her situation THROUGH ANOTHER. That's low. > At last report D and K are happily getting on with life and still > there is no sign of the trauma so eagerly anticipated for their > mythical counterparts by fantasizers elsewhere on this globe. How do you know, you've never met her. You sure know a great deal about the mental trauma of someone you've never met. > How anyone can draw such extensive inferences both factual and > moral from the minimal information I provided is quite beyond me. > My file was brief and lucid before consumption, and related to a > very real event. Now it has become a mini-myth and has taken on a > life of its own. I am mightily entertained. Mightily entertaining to watch you as well. How did you draw such an extensive inference of facts about a child's experience without interviewing the subject? You actually took second hand information, drew a definite conclusion, predicted an uncheckable hypothesis, tainted an abduction information source and insulted field researchers all without leaving the comfort of your chair of interviewing the original subject. Nice peice of work.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 26 Re: Abduction Sat 5 Oct From: Michael Wayne Malone <wayne@fly.HiWAAY.net> Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 04:19:22 -0500 (CDT) Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 09:00:59 -0500 Subject: Re: Abduction Sat 5 Oct > From: wlmss@peg.apc.org [Lawrie Williams] > Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 03:04:06 +1000 (GMT+1000) > To: ufo-l@mb.protree.com, updates@globalserve.net > Subject: Re: Abduction Sat 5 Oct > > Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 03:40:20 -0500 > > What full truth? You didn't give them a "truth" you gave them > > your "belief" based on unsupported data..... > My truthful opinion. Your baised, if truthful opinion. > > While you were at it, why did you hold back from giving the girl's > > parent's the "full truth" if you are so ethical and everything? > So as not to involve confidential information. Oh I see, a kidnapping and what in your "truthful opinion" will end with a rape and pregnancy of a minor falls with-in the bounds of "confidential information." > mwm>>> If they have any experiances that in any way match what you told > >>> them, there is no way of knowing the real from the imaginary planted > >>> by you. > I have been abducted, it is not like that at all. It is very hard > to lead abductees. You've based this entire learned aproach on a data-set of one? Your abduction does not make you an expert on anothers abduction. > I supplied the information needed to help them know what to watch for. > Who is the most scientific? Who has the biggest one? Who is reacting > in the most extreme way? You told the subject "what to watch for?" Perhaps you should read the extensive studies on "Medical Student Syndrom" before you give a subject something to watch for. > Abductees are above all else just people who want honest opinions. > True, if I was still trying to prove the humanoids in saucers axiom > I could have withled that knowledge from her, but that has already > been accepted on this list. I know because I put it up and there > were no valid objections to that step forward. Remember? You were > part of the decision. Is it going too fast for you? And I posted an unreplied message denying the axiom that humanoids in hovering crafts is valid without further proof of these humanoids or these craft. I've talked with Errol before, and haven't seen a list of "accepted axioms" that one must follow to participate on this list. Your deluded sense of what is "accepted" looms large. Even if we do accept the axiom that these things exist, we don't automatically accept the axiom every time some one screams abduction. > > ... I thought we were on a UFO discussion list, and were discussing > > ufology and abductions. Perhaps you and I can discuss the evils of > > modern media in an approprate mailing list. > No. You were discussing how flawed information gets transmitted and > you and several other guys wanted to make me a scapegoat. You > cannot trick me that easily. I was discussing bad investigation, not transmision of information. > > As a counsler, your job wasn't to give advice, but to help the > > subject deal with the unexplainable emotional side-effects of her > > alleged abduction. > The only drama comes from you and 2 or 3 others. You've already admitted to the list that you haven't met the subject, so this entire discussion is moot. Your poor investigations have extended to far beyond simple taint. > > As a ufologist, you were to investigate without taint, without > > bias, and without preconcieved ideas as to the end result of your > > research. > I know exactly what I am doing. Apparently not. > > And as a responsible human being, you were not to scare young > > women with the worst case senerio. > There is a continuum? > 1 share freely with old males, > 2 With old women or young males you have to withold some data, > 3 With young females you have to withold a lot more for their own good > This is ufology? Is this to be part of some code of conduct? > BTW I assure you I know of "worse cases"! Hardly, but if you wish to fence... 1 Share freely with researchers for the subject of peer review 2 Take care not to taint your subject or extrapolate from bad data 3 proceed with caution > > What evidence did you have that this is how her abduction > > experience would turn out. > Plenty. Had you the same experience, you would know. Point in fact, I have been "abducted." But since you've already decided the truth of abductions, the fact that my experince doesn't fit into your scenerio probably eliminates me from you acceptable database. > > .... Perhaps if you had recieved stronger peer review before, you > > wouldn't have made such an untrained rookie mistake. > You are my peer? The current state of ufology makes everyone who participates in this forum your peer. Sad as that may be. > > But that aside, how objective are you in your research? > If I was dishonest with myself then I'd learn less. I've never implied nor suggested that you are dishonest. Simply closeminded and a poor researcher. > > From the post, I found you to have closed your mind completely to > > everything but what you've already determined as TRUTH. > I reported a simple conversation for the benefit of science. And that is supposed to deny what?
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 26 Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculoso From: Mike Smith <mickey@anix.co.uk> Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 12:23:56 +0100 Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 09:52:23 -0500 Subject: Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculoso Hi All, Interested parties may well like to read the following web page. It provides a simple critical appraisal and some references for the subject presently under discussion. http://lal.cs.byu.edu/ketav/issue_3.2/Lumin/lumin.html Ok, so the appearance on a single web page proves nothing. But there is much more information available out there. If people would look before making comments, it would certainly help matters. The Cologne work is not the only work in this field, a trawl through any of the scientific web resources available would have revealed this. I think I'm gonna go back to lurking. Regards, Mike
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 26 ASJA Contracts Watch 52 [electronic & subsidiary From: BOB SHELL <76750.2717@compuserve.com> Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 07:31:07 -0400 Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 09:58:19 -0500 Subject: ASJA Contracts Watch 52 [electronic & subsidiary Hi all. I'm forwarding the latest on electronic and subsidiary rights from the ASJA. If you are already on their e-mail list, let me know and I will not forward future posts from them. Or if you just aren't interested in this issue, let me know and I won't forward future posts. Bob **************************************** ASJA CONTRACTS WATCH 52 (vol 4, #13) CW971014 October 14, 1997 [The American Society of Journalists and Authors encourages reproduction and distribution of this document for the benefit of freelance writers. Reprint or post as many items as you wish, but please credit ASJA for the information and don't change the content.] News of FAMILY CIRCLE, WOMAN'S DAY, EMMY, LOG HOME LIVING, NEW YORK OBSERVER, PARENTING and more.... * * * * * * * * FAMILY CIRCLE or WOMAN'S DAY? Once upon a time, if a freelancer had a story that might fit either magazine, WD was the place to go. After all, its owner, HACHETTE FILIPACCHI MAGAZINES, was one of the first big publishing groups to agree to pay for electronic use of articles (although not unless the writer asks). And on request, WD could turn the usual company claim of broad e-rights forever into a limited license: America Online for a year. Things have changed. WD's editors still offer pay for some e- rights (if the writer asks), but now insist on the right to electronic use forever, as often and in as many ways and places as the publisher chooses. Another sore spot: Hachette's refusal to OK warranty language that reasonably reduces the author's risk, language ("to the best of your knowledge...") that's fine with most magazine publishers today. In fact, writers report that WD editors increasingly seem to resent discussing contract issues at all. As a result, WD appears to be losing the good will it had earned. Meanwhile, according to repeated reports from writers, Family Circle editors understand that a contract is a negotiable instrument, and they have the authority to turn the standard, overreaching GRUNER + JAHR contract into a fair deal. For the asking, they amend G+J's usual free e-rights clause to include a fee to be negotiated if the rights are exercised. And fixing the warranty presents no problem at FC. If these and a couple of other improvements that FC routinely makes for individuals were incorporated into the boilerplate, the magazine would have a home run...and a lot of writer-editor negotiation time would be saved. ***** EMMY, the magazine of the Academy of Television Arts & Sciences, is asking contributors for permission to post their articles on a hoped-for section of the Academy's site on the World Wide Web. Did someone say something about money? Sorry, editor/publisher Hank Rieger tells ASJA Contracts Watch: "We're nonprofit. We don't have any money, so we can't pay." "Can't?" Is the Webmaster being paid? Is the Internet service provider being paid? Well, yes. How odd that the Academy, an organization of creators, should be in the rear guard on an issue as important as creators' rights in new media. But Emmy isn't insisting on handouts--the magazine's letter to contributors ends with a choice of two lines to check, saying yes or no to the request. No money? No time limit? The choice is easy. Adds Rieger: "We may or may not get on the Web. It depends on whether enough writers give us the rights. We can't have a Website without copy." ***** A new contract from LOG HOME LIVING (HOME BUYER PUBLICATIONS) is fair on some points (an extra fee equal to half the original article fee for print anthologizing; third-party reprint requests referred to the author) but not on others (free reuse in a "reprinting" of the magazine "in any medium" and "all Internet rights"). But a writer reports negotiating a 50-percent payment for "any medium" reuses and a small fee for one month's Internet rights. ***** The weekly NEW YORK OBSERVER is reportedly set to launch an online venture. In preparation, the newspaper's management has jumped in with a sledgehammer. They've just sent frequent Observer freelancers a hurry-up-and-sign-it-or-else letter decreeing their contributions works made for hire, taking unto the paper every right for the rest of time. The letter adds that writers will see a half-share of print income "directly attributable" to their articles--a slippery setup that can yield writers nothing when their work is relicensed as part of a package. "Online/interactive/electronic media/electronic database" income would stay with the publisher. A cover note from Observer president Brian Kempner says the paper is "requiring all of our freelancers to sign" by October 15, but ASJA Contracts Watch has already heard that several of the paper's well known columnists are rejecting the demand. Says one long-time contributor: "Over the past several years I've logged $66,000 from secondary rights--much of it from pieces I published first in the Observer. I wouldn't give that up, and I wouldn't let anyone else make deals with my columns unless I share. I'll be happy to license the Observer the right to use my work on AOL for a week, if that's what they want, or forever for a decent yearly fee. But I don't sell my rights outright, and I certainly don't give them away--I license them. That's what being freelance is all about." Kempner wouldn't comment. ***** PARENTING, which for a time paid writers a super-modest $25 per article for a license of about a year on its Website, has been offering another $25 to renew, this time for two years. At least one writer reports talking the fee up to $50, which keeps the yearly rate the same. Now, parent TIME INC. insists that writers hand over all online rights forever, so those still willing to write for Parenting today won't have the pleasure of negotiating renewal fees of any sort. Is that the same TIME INC. that issued a written policy statement on e-rights payments for photographers and promised the same for writers and illustrators? Yep. ***** A report from Canada tells of a recent Ontario court case in which a professor who usurped credit for a graduate student's research paper was found guilty of copyright infringement. According to a story by Chris Bodnar in the Fulcrum, a University of Ottawa newspaper, a business professor published the student's paper and delivered it at a conference under his own name. The judge blasted the university for its "cavalier attitude" in dealing with the student's complaint and added, "The university cannot stand idly by while its professors blatantly breach copyright laws." The award to the student: $7,500 in damages plus legal costs. * * * * * * * * Many ASJA members and others send a stream of contracts, information and scuttlebutt so that these dispatches can be as informative as possible. Thanks to all. To receive each edition by e-mail automatically (and at no charge), send the following message: To: ASJA-MANAGER@SILVERQUICK.COM Subject: CONTRACTS WATCH Complete Text: JOIN ASJACW-LIST Only official dispatches: no feedback, no flooded mailbox. ***** Check Before You Sign A complete, searchable archive of ASJA Contracts Watch is available on the World Wide Web. Find it--with other valuable information and tips on freelance contracts, electronic rights and copyright--at the Web address below. ***** Inquiries and information from all are welcome. Contracts Committee, ASJA 1501 Broadway, New York, NY 10036 tel 212-997-0947 fax 212-768-7414 e-mail ASJA@compuserve.com Web page http://www.asja.org/cwpage.htm Search for other documents from or mentioning: 76750.2717 |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 26 Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculouso From: Bob Shell <76750.2717@compuserve.com> Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 08:09:01 -0400 Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 09:59:34 -0500 Subject: Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculouso >Date: Sun, 19 Oct 97 06:50:19 >From: "Roger R. Prokic" <rprokic@ibm.net> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculouso >>Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 13:02:13 +0100 >>From: Mike Smith <mickey@anix.co.uk> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculouso >>However, it now appears that this is not the case. As >>was stated in my previous post some physicists >>believe that they have transmitted Mozart at 3.7 c, >>using microwaves. They have not as yet 100% ruled out >>experimental error, but are working on doing so. >Since when did electromagnetic waves travel faster than the speed >of light... (It still takes me about 20 minutes to send a >command signal to Mars). There's an article in the current issue of Discover that everyone ought to read. The article is titled "Quantum Honeybees", and is essentially an exploration of why honeybees behave in a quantum rather than Newtonian manner in communicating with each other. Physicists have had a "line in the sand" for a long time maintaining that on a subatomic level the universe follows the strange laws of quantum physics, but on a macroscopic, everyday level, the universe behaves in a Newtonian manner. If this research on bees proves out, it will be the first example of a macroscopic system in nature behaving in a quantum physics manner. The suggestion made in the article, that honeybees can detect and interact with quarks and use this in navigation is a chink in the wall of traditional biology and physics, and could lead to major changes in both of these sciences. If some renegade biologists are right and the human brain functions as a quark detector, then we have a physical model of how ESP and other borderline phenomena could work. Bob Search for other documents from or mentioning: 76750.2717 | rprokic |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 26 Re: Questions for Abductees From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net> Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 19:58:17 -0400 Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 10:05:53 -0500 Subject: Re: Questions for Abductees Peter finally replies! > From: Peregrine Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter > Brookesmith] > Subject: Questions for Abductees > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> I had observed to and about him that: > >Any belief that alien visits here are improbable is simply a > >prejudice. (As would be the belief that they're likely or > >inevitable.) > >Allow me to predict, in closing, that any rebuttal you make will > >prove to be based on circular reasoning. And he replies: > I find myself in a slight difficulty here, made slightly more > embarrassing because it is all my own fault. I've just been asked > (commissioned) to write at length on this very subject for a > respected but nonetheless commercial international magazine (oh, > hype hype). If I spill my best beans here, both the client and I > are somewhat compromised. Oh, balderdash, I say, being as much of a professional writer as you are. You'd only sharpen your ideas in our debate, and write a better piece. (Interesting, by the way, your assumptions that you have your best ideas already.) Why do I anticipate that your argument would be circular? Because you've made one here before. As I recall, you invoked a picture of blue sparks shooting from a toaster. What would we assume, I believe you wrote -- that we should call a toaster repairwoman, or suppose that something paranormal is going on? That's circular. We know about toasters. We know what goes wrong with them. We know nothing about aliens. We have theories, but absolutely no facts. So if you compare the probability of an alien visit with the probability of something beyong all understanding going wrong with a toaster, you're assuming your conclusion. You're assuming we know about aliens the way we know about toasters. And we don't. Elsewhere you've invoked Occam's Razor. According to that principle, as you understand it, alien visits should be the last conclusion we ought to come to about any UFO event, because it's good science to support the more likely explanation over anything wildly improbable. But again -- how do you know alien visits are improbable? Frankly, I'm surprised at the vulgarity of your thinking. Occam's Razor is appropriate when we know the parameters of what we're dealing with. It's useless when we're dealing with a complete unknown. But even if Peter thinks his thinking is inviolable, and not subject to discussion or debate until he's already made a fool of himself -- for all he knows -- by publishing prematurely, he at leasts suggests a reading list. > Meanwhile, I suggest you bend an eye to: > Stephen Jay Gould "Wonderful Life" ISBN 0-14-013380-1 > Michio Kaku "Hyperspace" ISBN 0-19-508514-0 > Robert Baker 'Alien Dreamtime' in "The Anomalist" #2 > Mike Davis 'Cosmic Dancers...' in "The Anomalist" #5 Oh, Peter, Peter, Peter, Peter...I've read Hyperspace, haven't read the others, but have read tons on this subject, particularly from the SETI scientists. What they offer are theories, which at the present state of our knowledge can't be proved or disproved. You're free to believe the theories, but to think you can bring them to bear on factual arguments -- was that light in the sky a spotlight or an alien spaceship? -- is just plain silly, and no less so because all sorts of distinguished scientists have made the same mistake. Frank Drake, for instance, is very sure aliens won't visit here, or in fact travel at all in interstellar space, because of familiar relativistic difficulties -- can't go faster than light, takes huge amounts of energy to go even close to that speed, etc., etc., etc. Theories. Might be true, might be not. Our science supports these thoughts. An alien science way ahead of us might not. Main thing, though, is that these theories -- as they're applied to beings a billion years ahead of us -- as Drake applies them, are entirely metaphysical. That is, they can't be disproved in any way. Drake -- and you -- simply assume their eternal validity. What you need -- and can't possibly have -- are facts. How many alien races are there in our galaxy? how many of them travel through space? How far do they travel? How close are they to us? Once you have that data, you can begin to make somewhat confident assumptions about whether an alien visit here is likely. Without data of that kind, you -- and Michio Kaku )(whose new book was amusingly demolished in this Sunday's NY Times Book Review -- are just whistling in the dark. > In a very oblique way, Teilhard de Chardin's "The Emergence of Man" > is relevant too, as it shows how a powerful belief system - which > did not exclude elements of National Socialism - can sophisticate > itself out of the bleak implications of neo-Darwinism. Science, too, is a belief system. When you apply Occam's Razor to alien visits, you're applying the belief system of science, rather than the scientific method or scientific data. And here I thought you weren't a religious man! I'll say it once more -- you have no data -- nada, zero, zilch, nothing -- from which you can judge the liklihood of alien visits. You have theories, which find support in our science, but unfortunately concern the capabilities of alien science, which we don't know one thing about. And what makes it all especially funny is this -- while people still imagine that nobody can travel the distances between stars at anything exceeding lightspeed, there has already been at least one respectable scientific conference right here on earth on how to do that. Not to mention a fair body of scientific opinion saying that no faster than light drive would be necessary to make our planet simply swarm with aliens. The argument you're going to make will not only be circular -- it will be, shall we say, somewhat selective in its use of science. Good luck! Greg Sandow
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 26 Re: Becker Claims Copyright Infringement by From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com> Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 11:32:54 -0700 Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 10:16:05 -0500 Subject: Re: Becker Claims Copyright Infringement by > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > From: xalium@netwrx.net (Tom King) > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Becker Claims Copyright Infringement by > Maccabee > Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 22:38:10 EST > BTW: The Internet is full of cases for copyright infringement lawsuits. > Either its photos, videos, or text files. Once they get posted to several > thousand people isn't it public domain? Can anyone site a case were someone > sued and won damages because of the net? The number of times copyright is violated does not affect whether or not the copyright is retained. It doesn't matter how many people see it, the holder still keeps their rights. A while back I posted a reference to a paper on web copyright. I think there are some cases listed there. ------ Mark Cashman, creator of The Temporal Doorway at http://www.geocities.com/~mcashman - Original digital art, writing, and UFO research - Author of SF novels available at... http://www.infohaus.com/access/by-seller/The_Temporal_Doorway_Storefront ------
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 26 Re: Questions for Abductees From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 14:57:50 +0100 Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 10:27:56 -0500 Subject: Re: Questions for Abductees >Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 00:56:59 -0400 >From: Peregrine Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith] >Subject: Questions for Abductees >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >>Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 15:59:29 +0100 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >>From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Questions for Abductees >>Are you ever lost for words? :o) > Course not. Oh goody. >>>And I'll give you a minimum of four logical reasons, >>Please do. >Sean is referring to my resistance to the ETH, I hope. Your hopes are correct in this case. >But also dread. >For I have also been thrumming the fingers (11/8 time, like hell) Ah, so you can type with more the two fingers eh? >every now and then this last fortnight at the immense labors demanded >by >I find myself in a slight difficulty here, made slightly more >embarrassing because it is all my own fault. I've just been asked >(commissioned) to write at length on this very subject for a >respected but nonetheless commercial international magazine Where, when etc will this witty verbose of writing that you drum at 11/8 time appear? >(oh, hype hype). > If I spill my best beans here, both the client and I >are somewhat compromised. It is gratifying to know that you have some principles. >Whatever some people think about the >notion of intellectual property being everyone's to grab and repro- >duce, I have to fulfil that contract first, I think. >But when that job is done, a version of it may well appear here - >perhaps with additional jokes, perhaps with fewer. I will then of >course gladly engage Greg (or anyone) in debate as to whether my >arguments are circular. I would like to be the first in the queue to find out why. >In a very oblique way, Teilhard de Chardin's "The Emergence of Man" >is relevant too, as it shows how a powerful belief system - which >did not exclude elements of National Socialism - can sophisticate >itself out of the bleak implications of neo-Darwinism. Put simply do you believe in evolution or evolution SINCE creation? >I know this must be frustrating, and it's my fault Your apology accepted. >for not >anticipating this commission. Meanwhile, for you two and everyone >else, a small consolation prize. >To contact our group of 'liberal minded' adults, check >out http://www.[snipped: details available on request with proof of >Texan residence] >Which brings me to Sean quoting/saying How did this bring you onto me???? Finally young Dukum my compliments on your diction, your are obviously a "read man". So how is it you come do discount the ETH so utterly? Are you a man or a mouse, come on squeek up! Sean Jones reply to--sean@tedric.demon.co.uk Homepage--http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Zone/1745/index.htm Reasearch page --http://www.tedric.demon.co.uk/ Search for other documents from or mentioning: tedric | 101653.2205 |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 26 Re: Important Conference! From: Ktperehwon@aol.com [Karl T. Pflock] Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 16:21:19 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 10:33:13 -0500 Subject: Re: Important Conference! >Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 12:34:25 -0500 (CDT) >To: bufocalvin@aol.com >From: leahmarc@IX.NETCOM.COM (Leah Haley) (by way of Curious Curator ><erik@cro ssfields.com>) >Subject: Fwd: Important Conference! <snip> >Announcing CONTACT 97 MEMPHIS >CONFIRMED SPEAKERS INCLUDE: >Colin Andrews--Crop Circle Update >Jeanne Marie Robinson--A Quest to Understand Contact >Lyssa Royal--Preparing for Contact >Vance Davis--The Future of America >Leah A. Haley--Debunking the Debunkers >Marc Davenport--What Your Government is Afraid to tell You >Licia Davidson--UFOs, Black Helicopters, and Government >Interventions >Forest Crawford--Update on the Oscar Case >Jim Dilletoso--Phoenix Lights Video >Anita Albright--Reptilian Abductions >Robert Buck--Awakening to the Omega Point Thght this was an IMPORTANT conference.... Geez!! -- KARL, Currier of Favor with the UFOlogical Elite (recently so dubbed by Robert Todd--all part of the Cover-Up Conspiracy, of course) Search for other documents from or mentioning: ktperehwon | bufocalvin
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 26 Re: 'The Gulf Breeze Paper' From: Geoff Price <Geoff@CalibanMW.com> Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 17:40:38 -0700 (PDT) Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 10:47:45 -0500 Subject: Re: 'The Gulf Breeze Paper' >Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 23:09:02 -0400 >From: bruce maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com> >Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: 'The Gulf Breeze Paper' >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > [...] >... As for the photos we have: Baker Watson >(June, 1976, "I know the detail I saw is exactly what's in your >book"; photo is very much like Ed-type); Harry Bordersfield (Jan >1980, coming out of Carlsbad Caverns; photo looks like what Ed >got July 10, 1991), Susan Keiley (Jan 1980,UFO over the Grande >Canyon, somewhat resembles Ed-type), Gary Tomlinson( April 1986, >Monterrey, Mexico), James Warnerfred (March, 1989,El Progresso, >Guatemala, two photos, some resemblence to Ed-type), Ray Harcourt >(Canaima, Venezuela, January, 1990, looks like Ed-type UFO >hovering and sending down a beam), Bryan Hampton (July, 1990, Las >Vegas, somewhat like Ed-type), Carlos Medoso (Campo Grande, >Brazil, December, 1991, similar to ed-type), James Parker (Fiji >Islands, March, 1992, similar to Ed-type). Can I ask about the status of some of these other photos? Not a critical request, I'm simply interested. The Harcourt (Canaima) photo, for example, featured on the cover, is more detailed and dramatic even than anything credited to Ed. Has anyone had access to the original film, been able to interview the witness, etc.? Geoff
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 26 FYI - URGENT: ProSpace Action Alert From: Beatheveto@aol.com Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 16:56:19 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 10:39:39 -0500 Subject: FYI - URGENT: ProSpace Action Alert ******************************************************* * ProSpace Legislative Action Alert * * Alert No. 97-15, 10/19/97 * ******************************************************* * 1) President Clinton vetoes 2 important space * * projects on misleading advice from a Bureaucrat * * * * 2) ACTION NEEDED NOW by all prospace Americans * * * * --> Call the White House budget office (OMB) * * * * --> Call the Members of the House and Senate * * Committees who are reviewing the vetoes. * * * * 3) Get your space friends and colleagues to help! * * * ******************************************************* **************************************** * To be ADDED to this List, or * * to be REMOVED from this List * * send a request to BeaTheVeto@aol.com * **************************************** ************************************** 1) President Vetoes DoD Space Projects ************************************** Acting on the advice of Deputy Secretary of Defense John Hamre, on Wednesday, October 15th, the President used his new line-item veto authority to line out two space programs strongly supported by the citizens' space movement. Leading the list was $10 million in startup funding for the "Military Spaceplane" program which would develop reusable technologies needed to radically reduce the cost of space transportation. The Military Spaceplane program was one of ProSpace's top legislative priorities in 1997. It was the primary focus of congressional briefings during the 1997 March Storm when we briefed Members of Congress who sat on defense related committees. In fact, Military Spaceplane has been a grassroots priority since the first March Storm in 1995 when we helped create the first "RLV technology development" program at the Air Force Phillips Laboratory. In our opinion, you will never find a more perfect example of a critical "dual-use" technology. Also vetoed was Clementine II, the Department of Defense mission to send a miniature probe to collide with an asteroid. Clementine II would result in a significant increase in our knowledge of the structure and composition of asteroids, and at the same time demonstrate technologies that could be used to defend against ballistic missiles. This probe is being developed by the same people who produced Clementine I, the probe which produced evidence of water at the south pole of the Moon, a critical resource for future lunar settlements. Why did the President veto these two programs? ProSpace believes the President had no knowledge of the extent of public support for these two programs, and responsibility lies with Mr. Hamre. During the White House press briefings, Hamre made it clear he was the one who came up with the final list of cuts. Before his promotion to Deputy Secretary of Defense, Hamre was the Comptroller of the Office of the Secretary of Defense, where he shut down the DC-X Delta Clipper program for nearly a year by refusing to release its funding. Meanwhile, the White House's main purpose is to establish a process for using their new line-item veto authority. They had already admitted they did not understand every program they were vetoing. Mr. Franklin Raines, the White House Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), stated several times that he is focusing on how this will change the overall relationship between the White House and Congress on budget matters, instead of the programmatic details. This focus, combined with the impossible task of understanding the huge amount of issues encompassed by the budget, has opened the door for bureaucratic abuse. Deputy Secretary of Defense Hamre stated "these are the items for which we really don't have a military requirement in the Department." In the case of the Military Spaceplane (MSP) this is, at best, misleading and a total misrepresentation of the facts. ProSpace has seen the letter from CINCSPACE, the general space command in the Air Force, calling MSP a "key program" and describing its progress. Numerous independent sources report that CINCSPACE now has a formal military requirement for this program, including a "concept of operations" and inclusion in the Air Force Program Objective Memorandum, the Air Force's future budget-planning document. Although Hamre's office was informed of these facts on Friday, October 10th, he chose to ignore them. In our opinion, Hamre is trying to kill MSP just like he tried to kill the DC-X, the reusable rocket which helped revolutionize how our nation thinks about space transportation. The bottom line - in the case of MSP, we believe John Hamre told an intentional "untruth" to OMB Director Franklin Raines and to the President of the United States. **************************** 2) Citizen ACTION Needed Now **************************** We can not let this bureaucratic attack go unanswered. Several years ago, when Hamre tried to kill DC-X, the grassroots space movement was there to defend it. Today we are stronger than ever. Working with our friends and allies, ProSpace has developed an immediate plan of action to deal with the issue. CALL NUMBER ONE: Call OMB Director Franklin Raines This line item veto is just the first step in what we believe could be a multi-stage process to overturn some of the vetoed items, or to find funding for them in other ways. We believe OMB Director Raines will have another chance to review the importance of Military Spaceplane - possibly in the very near future. Thus, Mr. Raines must be made to understand that the President was misinformed by the Pentagon as soon as possible. The White House needs to know that the public supports "Cheap Access to Space" and that we consider Military Spaceplane, starting in FY1998 at only $10 million, and the Clementine II asteroid missions to be wonderful investments in the future of this country. **** Leave a polite message for OMB Director Raines **** a) Call 202-395-3080. b) Ask to "Leave a message for OMB Director Raines". c) BE POLITE! It always counts, particularly if their phones are ringing off the hooks. d) THE MESSAGE: "The President made a mistake in vetoing the Military Spaceplane and Clementine II programs. You were misinformed by the Pentagon on these very important issues. I believe these two programs are among the best investments in the federal budget." (OR use your own words.) e) Leave your Name and Geographic info, if they ask. CALL NUMBERS 2-5: Call Congressional Leaders The Congress gets back into session this week, and both the House and Senate are convening rush hearings on this issue. The House Committee on National Security is holding a hearing on Wednesday. It was reported to ProSpace that the Senate Committee on Armed Services will also be holding a hearing this week, but the day is unknown. These Members of Congress, Democrats and Republicans, need to hear from you NOW! They are meeting to decide how to respond to the Clinton vetoes, and are wondering what the public thinks of these issues. This is the perfect opportunity to put Military Spaceplane and Clementine II at the top of the national political agenda. Below is a list of Members of Congress who sit on those two Committees. **** Call as many Members as you can **** a) First, call the Committee Chairmen and the Ranking (Minority) Member. b) Second, call all the Members in your home state. (They are sorted alphabetically by state) c) BE POLITE! d) MESSAGE to leave with Receptionist: "Please work to over-ride the vetoes of Military Spaceplane and Clementine II. I believe the President was misinformed about these important programs by the Pentagon. (OR use your own words.) e) Leave your Name and geographic info, if they ask. **** LIST OF MEMBERS TO CALL **** Senate Committee on Armed Services (LEADERSHIP) Chairman: Strom Thurmond (R-SC) Ranking Member: Carl Levin (D-MI) PH: 202-224-3871 House Committee on National Security (LEADERSHIP) Chairman: Floyd Spence (R-SC) Ranking Member: Ron Dellums (D-CA) PH: 202-225-4151 Senate Committee on Armed Services (MEMBERS) John McCain (R-AZ), 202-224-2235 Joseph Lieberman (D-CT), 202-224-4041 Max Cleland (D-GA), 202-224-3521 Dirk Kempthorne (R-ID), 202-224-6142 Daniel Coats (R-IN), 202-224-5263 Pat Roberts (R-KS), 202-224-4774 Edward Kennedy (D-MA), 202-224-4543 Olympia Snowe (R-ME), 202-224-5344 Carl Levin (D-MI), 202-224-6221 Robert Smith (R-NH), 202-224-2841 Jeff Bingaman (D-NM), 202-224-5521 John Glenn (D-OH), 202-224-3353 James Inhofe (R-OK), 202-224-4721 Rick Santorum (R-PA), 202-224-6324 Strom Thurmond (R-SC), 202-224-5972 (personal) John Warner (R-VA), 202-224-2023 Charles Robb (D-VA), 202-224-4024 Robert Byrd (D-WV), 202-224- Full House Committee on National Security (MEMBERS) Vic Snyder (D-AR), 202-225-2506 Bob Stump (R-AZ), 202-225-4576 Terry Everett (R-AL), 202-225-2901 Bob Riley (R-AL), 202-225-3261 Ronald V. Dellums (D-CA), 202-225-2661 Duncan Hunter (R-CA), 202-225-5672 Sonny Bono (R-CA), 202-225-5330 Loretta Sanchez (D-CA), 202-225-2965 Howard P. "Buck" McKeon (R-CA), 202-225-1956 Jane Harman (D-CA), 202-225-8220 Joel Hefley (R-CO), 202-225-4422 Jim Maloney (D-CT), 202-225-3822 Joe Scarborough (R-FL), 202-225-4136 Tillie Fowler (R-FL), 202-225-2501 Allen Boyd (D-FL), 202-225-5235 Saxby Chambliss (R-GA), 202-225-6531 Robert A. Underwood (D-Guam), 202-225-1188 Neil Abercrombie (D-HI), 202-225-2726 Lane Evans (D-IL), 202-225-5905 Rod R. Blagojevich (D-IL), 202-225-4061 John Hostettler (R-IN), 202-225-4636 Steve Buyer (R-IN), 202-225-5037 Jim Ryun (R-KS), 202-225-6601 Ron Lewis (R-KY), 202-225-3501 Martin T. Meehan (D-MA), 202-225-3411 Roscoe G. Bartlett (R-MD), 202-225-2721 Tom Allen (D-ME), 202-225-6116 Ike Skelton, (D-MO), 202-225-2876 James M. Talent (R-MO), 202-225-2561 Gene Taylor (D-MS), 202-225-5772 H. James Saxton (R-NJ), 202-225-4765 Walter B. Jones Jr. (R-NC), 202-225-3415 Mike McIntyre (D-NC), 202-225-2731 Michael Pappas (R-NJ), 202-225-5801 Jim Gibbons (R-NV), 202-225-6155 John M. McHugh (R-NY), 202-225-4611 J.C. Watts Jr. (R-OK), 202-225-6165 John R. Kasich (R-OH), 202-225-5355 Paul McHale (D-PA), 202-225-6411 Curt Weldon (R-PA), 202-225-2011 Patrick J. Kennedy (D-RI), 202-225-4911 John M. Spratt Jr. (D-SC), 202-225-5501 Floyd Spence (R-SC), 202-225-2452 (personal) Lindsey Graham (R-SC), 202-225-5301 Van Hilleary (R-TN), 202-225-6831 Ciro D. Rodriguez (D-TX), 202-225-1640 Solomon P. Ortiz (D-TX), 202-225-7742 Silvestre Reyes (D-TX), 202-225-4831 William M. "Mac" Thornberry (R-TX), 202-225-3706 Jim Turner (D-TX), 202-225-2401 James V. Hansen (R-UT), 202-225-0453 Norman Sisisky (D-VA), 202-225-6365 Herbert H. Bateman (R-VA), 202-225-4261 Owen B. Pickett (D-VA), 202-225-4215 Adam Smith (D-WA), 202-225-8901 ***************************************** 3) Get your Friends & Colleagues to Help! ***************************************** Do you really want to get the attention of our national leaders? Are you willing to be responsible for the future of this country? --> Then distribute this alert to all of your prospace friends and colleagues, and ask them to call the listed Members of Congress too! *********************************************** A society of sheep must in time beget a government of wolves. - Bertrand de Jouvenel ************************************* "Opening the Space Frontier for ALL People, and as soon as possible" E-mail: BeaTheVeto@aol.com Web: www.prospace.org *************************************
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 26 Project 1947: Early Military Regulations From: Jan Aldrich <jan@CYBERZONE.NET> Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 11:57:35 -0700 Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 12:29:01 -0500 Subject: Project 1947: Early Military Regulations Does anyone have a copy of: 1) AR 200-3, 2 July 1952, title unknown. It deals with CIRVIS reports. I may have a draft copy in the lastest material obtained from Archives II, however it is not identified as such. 2) JANAP 186, in 1952 it was in working draft form concerning MERINT reporting by US Merchantmen and MSTS. While we are on it, has anyone ever seen a MERINT UFO report (the Naval version of the CRIVIS report)? -- Jan Aldrich Project 1947 http://www.iufog.org/project1947/
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 26 PUFORI UFO News From: "Anthony Chippendale" <ufos@chipp.clara.net> Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 06:27:50 +0000 Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 12:25:38 -0500 Subject: PUFORI UFO News The completely error free URL for PUFORI UFO News Issue 2 is: http://www.chipp.clara.net/news2.txt I apologise for any problems you have had in viewing issue 2. Anthony Chippendale, Editor.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 26 Crop Circle Connector Mailing List #47 From: Mark Fussell <mjfussell@marque.demon.co.uk> Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 01:06:06 Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 12:30:36 -0500 Subject: Crop Circle Connector Mailing List #47 Hi WHAT`S NEW on the Crop Circle Connector at:- http://alpha.mic.dundee.ac.uk/ft/crop_circles/anasazi/whatsnew.html Updated Monday 20th October 1997 (Members 2229 on 13-10-97) *************************************************************** DELUXE, GLOSSY 1998 CROP CIRCLE CALENDAR *****BUY NOW BEFORE THE CHRISTMAS RUSH***** EMAIL TO RESERVE YOUR CALENDAR NOW Stunning 30x40 photographs of the 1997 formations with the Calender in four different languages for that International appeal! email for details:- calendar@marque.demon.co.uk *************************************************************** THE GIANTS TRAIL A special report on a rather unusual marking found while flying in the general crop circle area in early August. Its presence was fascinating enough to place into the Crop Circle 1997 Listing What do you think? ************************************************************** New two ground shots at Nieuwerter Dreischor, Netherlands Interesting additional shots of this controversial formation *********************************************************** THE EARLIEST CROP CIRCLE? A transcript from the Deadsea Scrolls may indicate a Crop Circle event from the time of Jesus? Please give this attention, as this is an amazing piece from this ancient Biblical record. *********************************************************** A new article called THE HIGH ART OF CROP CIRCLES GJ Pritchard shares his thoughts and feelings on the crop circle situation today, and asks questions on the effect this extraordinary phenomenon has on the public. ********************************************************** SC MAGAZINE ISSUE 69 OCTOBER 1997 OUT NOW! ******************************************************** UFO NEST IN BRAZIL? A fascinating marking in grass in South America, is this an event to be continued in this region. Please take a look at this report and picture, is it part of the phenomenon? ******************************************************* All the best Mark and Stuart * The Koch Fractal, Silbury Hill, 1997 :/\: .-- --. . :\ /: . *__/\__/ \__/\__* :\ /: ./__ __\. Mark Fussell: ':\ /:' mailto:mjfussell@marque.demon.co.uk .'__/ \__'. \ / Subscribe: :/_ __ __ _\: news:alt.paranormal.crop-circles * :\/: \ / :\/: * . :/ \: . The Crop Circle Connector Web Site at: .-- --. http://www.marque.demon.co.uk/connector/connector.html :\/: *
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 26 Re: Researching Abduction Cases From: Pat Parrinello <pparri@crossfields.com> Date: Wed, 22 Oct 97 00:35:59 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 12:33:35 -0500 Subject: Re: Researching Abduction Cases John Velez, struck with the concept of magnitude, responded to a guy named Jim by invoking the supposition of Deity when he said... >>However, if it were one of those million-person affairs, it would >>then likely gain the attention of a few brave, open-minded >>reporters and succeed partially. >Jim, I pray that I can never muster one million abductees! -That- >would be truly frightening. If there -are- a million of us, then >God help us all. John, I would that you consider the possibility of 6 billion. It is my considered opinion that such is the case. ~Pat~
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 26 UFOs and Spirits in the Congo From: wlmss@peg.apc.org [Lawrie Williams] Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 07:15:04 +1000 (GMT+1000) Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 12:49:06 -0500 Subject: UFOs and Spirits in the Congo UFOs & Spirits in the Congo. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ A 1926 report based on interviews in the Congo relates: "....the Azande believe that witchcraft emits a bright light that can only be seen in the daylight by witch-doctors and by witches themselves, but which is occasionally visible at night to persons who are neither witches...nor witch-doctors. The light of ~mangu~ is described as being similar to the little lights of firefly beetles, which move about like sparks kicked from a log-fire, only it is ever so much bigger than they..... a so much greater and brighter light." [1] "Those people who see witchcraft when it goes by night to injure someone say witchcraft is on its way shining bright like fire, it shines a little and again it obfuscates itself." [1] During this activity the witch is asleep on his bed in his hut. The spirit he has despatched removes spirit-flesh (mbisimo pasieni = spirit-flesh-his) to be devoured. It can be used to kill. All of this testimony was collected at a time in the congo when missonaries were active and witchcraft was being actively condemned by every white person that came by. More recent studies have shown that this bias has distorted the real roles played by witchcraft and sorcery in these situations. For instance sorcerers in a variety of cultures are credited with healing in a similar manner. The power of witches comes from their mangu, which they get from their parent of the same gender. So a woman's daughters will be witches, a man's sons will be sorcerers or witch-doctors. The child'e mangu is like a child, but he usually grows in power and ability. Sometimes older mangu become violent and unscrupulous. The mangu is centered on the gall-bladder. Mangu was involved in all sorts of everyday events. A Zande who injured his toe said that mangu had prevented him from seeing the stump and mangu was preventing the wound from closing up again. The mangu in a witch is based around his stomach region. After death a witch becomes a spirit called ~agilisa~. Lawrie Williams______________ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Also from Africa: "The impundulu is the lightning bird.....which is there when the thunder strikes. An izulu (impundulu) is always posessed by a female witch, and it appears to her in the form of a very beautiful young man, who becomes her lover...... [1] The manner by which it kills is a mystery." (Hunter 1936 pp 282-284 ) "Impundulu can cause miscarriages, blindness and death to man and stock. I myself found that in the Eastern Cape, the impundulu sucked blood from its victims and that its insatiable hunger drove its owner to kill for "meat". Long wasting illnesses accompanied by coughing, stabbing pains and shortness of breath are believed to be caused by these vampire-like activities: sudden death from being kicked by the "bird of heaven"." (Hammond-Tooke 1970 pp 28-9 ) [2] ....Izithunzela are extremely tall and black and have the power of hypnotizing a person so that he will be drawn toward them like a bird attracted by a snake. (Hammond-Tooke 1962 p 287 ) Their appearance is so ghastly that those who see them go mad." [3] "Thikoloshe is a small hairy being, having the form of a man, but so small that he only reaches to a man's knee. He has hair all over his face and coming out of his ears, and his face is squashed up like a baboon's. The penis of the male is so long he carries it slung over his shoulder, and he has only one buttock. All thikoloshe speak with a lisp...." [ Hunter 1936 pp 275-8] [4] 1 Lagae C.R. (1926) "Les Azande ou NiamNiam." Biblitheque Congo vol 18 1926 p 108 2 Hammond-Tooke W.D. (1970) "Urbanization and the Interpretation of Misfortune....." Africa vol 40 3 Hammond-Tooke W.D. (1962) Bhaca Society Oxford Uni Press 4 Hunter M. Reaction to Conquest 1936 Oxford Uni Press
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 26 Re: Alfred's Odd Ode #192 From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com> Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 19:41:33 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 14:00:38 -0500 Subject: Re: Alfred's Odd Ode #192 Apology to MW #192 (For October 23, 1997) Beginnings insured you were true to your school, A mark on the school was dishonor. All my life at the whim of societies rule, Histrionics that impugn on my honor. Distracted by football too early to care, I was distant, and coarse to the feeble. I hadn't the courage, bereft of a pair, Then I killed, or had killed, ethnic people. I'm hounded by patriots all manner of stripe, Conveniently placed, most are rightists. Wattles all shaking, awash in rich tripe, Compassion is where they're the lightest. "My country right or wrong, my own land," They pontificate behind their walls. It's what lingers on the fingers of their well appointed hands, They made up all the rules, they're knowing all the stalls. And I bought it wrongly thinking that I'd gotten the whole story. But the word I got was missing massive chunks!!! I was flushed with founding fathers that were steeped in golden glory, When the research clearly shows that most were glad impassive skunks! What of oceans of difference twixt primary source, And the text books you'd think would concede them. The text books -- disingenuous, students conned -- but of course. When the primary source could inspire them again. Our text books are PAP that impugn on the spirit. The kids KNOW that they're being conned! Their mommies and daddies were taught well to fear it, Or their looking glass world would dissolve, and be gone. The UFO's hide in this cognitive dissonance. They soar free as birds where you _will_ yourself blind. The watchers all wait for a moment of incidence, When, at last, _you_ regain individual mind. Lehmberg@snowhill.com It's a shock, but a good shock, because it encourages individual responsibility. This is the final target of the manipulator, or society, or culture, and has always been=85 . YOU, that which _you_ make, and the water that _you_ heat! Their institutions evaporate away in their own imaginations when YOU withdraw your support -- why they try so hard to keep _you_ if they think _you_ may be valuable to their cause. This explains all their rage and retribution as they begin to accept that _you_ have slipped away. The purpose of their school is to promote their concept of a *reliable* citizen. To that end there are grievous distortions made to the TRUE histories of each bit of consciousness in the society or culture, and that consciousness therefore inhabits, in fact (!), contrived castles in the air. Very little actually happened the way you thought it did. A walk on a summer afternoon beach at Panama City, Florida, when MTV is there, is to be surrounded in the purest hokum. Contrast it by the same beach on a blustery day in November to see how tenuous your reality is, knowing the November day is vastly superior on more levels. Empty and tortured, hounded by the sea, and threatened by the sky, but it's real. Regarding UFO's, another probable reality -- I am amused how every 'name' authority can pontificate the relative surety of intelligent life _*anywhere else*_ in an ever expanding multiverse, but will not cop to _any_ potential that that same intelligence is not peering down un-guessed at instruments this very moment, is not standing inside our closet with us as we furtively grope our <detested> genitals, or that we shan't feel hot alien breath on embarrassed cheeks even as we speak. -- Explore the Alien View? http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/arecibo/46/ "I cleave the heavens, and soar to the infinite. What others see from afar, I leave far behind me." - Giordano Bruno, while burning at the fundamentalist's stake for asking questions about what he learned in school. =B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1= =B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1= =B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1 Government or Social Harassment REPORT - Presently, "ZERO" Personal HARASSMENT; however, the harassment index is infinite for each of us. Consider the Scientific coward.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 26 MIRACL Laser Successfully Fired At Aging Satellite From: koch@wad.berlin.fido.de (Joachim Koch) Date: 23 Oct 97 00:17:00 +0000 Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 13:59:37 -0500 Subject: MIRACL Laser Successfully Fired At Aging Satellite [ Article crossposted from alt.paranet.ufo ] [ Author was CircusMan ] [ Posted on 20 Oct 1997 22:04:00 GMT ] REUTERS 14:18 10-20-97 by Charles Aldinger WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The military has fired a powerful ground-based laser at an Air Force satellite in a test to measure the vulnerability of American satellites to laser attack, the Defense Department said Monday. Army Col. Richard Bridges, a Pentagon spokesman, said the results of Friday's test -- in which the Army's 'Miracl' laser based at White Sands, New Mexico, was fired successfully at an aging satellite -- were still being determined. Bridges said two powerful light beams, the first of less than one second duration and the second about 10 seconds, were fired from the 'Miracl' laser at the orbiting satellite Friday night, Mountain Daylight Time. "It was illuminated by the laser. The results are still being studied," Bridges told Reuters of the first such firing of a U.S. laser at a satellite. Defense Secretary William Cohen Oct. 2 approved a plan to use the Mid-Infra-Red Advanced Chemical Laser (Miracl) at White Sands to illuminate the satellite. The test had been delayed several times by cloudy weather before Friday's shot. The Pentagon has repeatedly said the 'illumination' of the satellite by potentially destructive beams of light would not violate any treaties and was not an attempt to build a satellite killer weapon. Instead, the department said, it was an attempt to measure whether a laser beam could damage the satellite's ability to operate. Miracl produces a beam of light six feet across using millions of watts from burning buel. An extended beam of light from the laser would be capable of burning up a target. The laser's target was the Air Force Minature Sensor Technology Integration program's third satellite, which according to the Pentagon has exceeded its useful lifetime. The laser was fired at the satellite with only a few days to spare before the orbit of the satellite will be changed Thursday to save battery power. That change would move it out of range of the laser. Even if the shot did not violate any treaties, some State Department officials have privately voiced concerns that the test might cause repercussions in Russia, where members of parliament have balked at ratifying the Start-2 nuclear arms reduction treaty. The U.S. Army has test fired lasers at missiles and other objects in test flights before, but has never tested them against a satellite. Military officials have said the controversial satellite test was aimed only at achieving a greater understanding of how to protect U.S. satellites from laser attacks. But defense experts also say the test might provide data that could be used to refine the laser for future military conflicts or to develop other lasers for anti-satellite use, envisioned in the futuristic U.S. weapons program of the 1080s known as 'Star Wars'. The United States has not shown it can destroy satellites, but the development of any U.S. weapon to dominate space arms could in turn, endanger American satellites, according to analysts. REUTERS@ 14:18 10-20-97 --- * Origin: Usenet:TU Braunschweig, Germany (242:7000/1)
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 26 Re: Questions for Abductees From: "Clark Hathaway" <earthwrk@doitnow.com> Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 19:08:19 -0700 Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 14:09:02 -0500 Subject: Re: Questions for Abductees > From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > To: updates@globalserve.net > Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Questions for Abductees > Date: Saturday, October 18, 1997 6:18 AM > From: clark@canby.mn.frontiercomm.net [Jerome Clark] > Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 20:03:10 PDT > To: updates@globalserve.net > Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Questions for Abductees > Hi, Duke and everybody, Hello to you... I can recall reading your column on occasion when you wrote for Fate Magazine. That column was the main reason I bothered subscribing to that particular publication. I never did get around to writing you though, as to some of your commentary. > For some damn reason I can't get into Duke's recent > posting. When I tried to print it out just now so to > have it at hand while responding, it wouldn't print out, either. I have that problem on occasion with W95. Usually some sort of misplaced .dll or other resource. Usual fix: reinstall. > I respect Duke's intelligence and good humor (the latter > not always apparent here) while thinking he's wrong about > many things ufological. Which will not stop me, by the way, > from recommending his books, which are well written, smart, > and stimulating even when I disagree -- and we often agree. To date, I only have one. I agree with your assessment totally. > As I've told him, his treatment of Dark Side mythology in the > recent UFO: The Government Files is the best I've seen > anywhere. (A plug here: I deal at length with the same > subject in my just published The UFO Book [Visible Ink > Press], a 700-page trade paperback in your bookstores > this week.) It is undeniable that a dynamic mythology has been in the creation process as to UFOs/Alien's/Alien Abduction/Gov Complicity etc. for a very long time. In some quarters, this mythology has nearly taken on a Neo-Religious fervor. It is curious to me that many if not most of my fellow experiencers seem to relish taking part in the above circumstances to one degree or other while I seem to view the phenomena from a completely different standpoint. I do of course, have my private conjecture as to why this is so. Although I for one can unreservedly state that the phenomena (Abduction) is quite real, I can also state with equal certainty that I DO NOT believe that the vast majority of it constitutes a phenomena occurring within third dimensional, physical reality as we know it. <snip> > Here's a story about my other early abduction investigation: The > couple who had the experience went separately to a psychiatrist > who thought the idea of UFOs was nonsensical. He'd never heard > of UFO abductions until the psychologist who referred the couple > to him explained the concept (this was in 1974). On hearing it, > he expressed incredulity and even contempt. Thus he was shocked > out of his skull when, separately, the two reported an abduction, > with -- yes -- little gray men. He was so visibly startled that > he actually scared his subjects. He told them he did not want to > see them again. I think it's safe to say he wasn't leading > them. Interesting story. :-) Having had a few conversations with his eminence that have at least touched upon this subject, I did not come away with this impression at all. Having stated that however, I AM reminded of watching one special or another presented I believe on the Discovery Channel which subject was the Methodology of Budd Hopkins. As I observed his interaction with a young child who apparently was one of the experiencers along with other members of a particular family, I was struck by the leading questions being put forth to this child. I AM familiar with MUFON methodology in regards to UFO investigation and have always found it to be the finest model to base one's own endeavors on. I cannot recall guidelines being extended to treat the abduction issue however. Therefore over the years we have witnessed the arrival of one 'expert' after the other upon the scene each with a variance of the others modality. We are led down the garden path of one assumption after the other each increasingly inane if not insane. Let us all wake up to the reality that there exist NO experts nor professionals in these endeavors. Most who engage in this from my viewpoint, do so from a position of potential monetary gain and notoriety. PERIOD! What we need here is some HONEST research. Research that takes the TRUE welfare of the experiencer into account and is responsible. This research would STOP perpetuating the concept of victimization as regards the Abductee as well as the growing mythology in regards to these phenomena. <snip> > The usual answers -- which, for all his protestation to the > contrary, Duke keeps coming back to -- don't work, as Stuart > Appelle and others have shown. In the most puzzling cases (e.g., > Hill, Allagash, et al.) interaction with ETs is a reasonable > hypothetical explanation. Right now, in fact, it's hard to > imagine another one. I will agree to disagree. There is nothing within this known physical universe that is going to allow for people being floated through a solid plate glass window from a 12th story apartment. Nothing. Likewise as in my case, no one is capable of being pulled bodily through the locked steel and glass rear doors of a 1979 Ford Van without experiencing some sort of extreme physical rearrangement. These and other occurrences which are rife within the annals of Alien Abduction Experience Data constitute what can only be described as paranormal phenomena. This does not make it any less REAL or potentially dangerous however. >Which doesn't mean another one couldn't > come along at some point. All I know is that we haven't seen it > yet. This may indeed come about when those who profess to seriousness in their interest regarding the Abduction Experience begin to study the paranormal equation. Until then, no experiencer is being served well by any so-called researcher. Allow me to make a few related points: With one lone exception, there is to date NO evidence, physical, circumstantial or otherwise, to tie in the experience of Alien Abduction with a widely reported UFO sighting. That lone exception is the Travis Walton Case. While not a widely reported sighting, each of the witnesses have passed rigid polygraph examination. A few of these upon multiple occasion. To date, there is NO evidence of physical implant having been perpetrated by Alien Beings. Show me a thoroughly documented and analyzed alien implant! I have to date, seen absolutely NO compelling evidence to lead me into believing that hybridization between Aliens and Humans is taking place or that tissue samples are being collected from human subjects by Alien Beings. I state these things with some passion you must understand, even though I AM a multiple Abduction Experiencer. I will also allow that I DO have a substantial depression in my right calf that has never been adequately explained. I do have some conjecture as to how it got there however, that is related to the abduction experience. I hypothesize that I caused it to appear. <snip> > Strangeness. Suffice it to say Peter is an educated John Keel, > except with rose-colored glasses and a pleasant personality. > Keel even confided to me once that Peter was going to carry on > his work. I would have to say that puts him in good company. It is my considered opinion that it is from the minds of John Keel and Dr. J. Vallee that the most enlightening concepts in regards to these phenomena have come. Most others are mere legends within their own minds in my humble opinion. > Cheers to all, most of all my friend and fellow Forrest City Joe > fan, > Jerry Clark Kindest Regards... Clarke Hathaway
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 26 Re: Witness Anonymity From: "Clark Hathaway" <earthwrk@doitnow.com> Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 20:22:22 -0700 Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 14:14:17 -0500 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity ---------- > From: ujack@pop3.scrapcity.cnchost.com [Mark Medford] > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > Date: Wed, 8 Oct 1997 08:49:00 +0000 > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity Clark Hathaway wrote.... > > [1] It is claimed that you were "floated through the closed window of > > your 12th-storey East Side Apartment" by 2 or more Aliens to rise up > > through a beam of blue light to enter a UFO hovering above. > > {a} Does this appear to be a normal third dimensional reality > > occurrence to you Linda, or one more properly described as > > paranormal? Mark Medford wrote....... > Dear Friends, > As a new list member, I confess to not being up to speed on this > entire thread. I would, however, like to make a comment on the above > question. > Such an event could have happened, as described, within our third > dimensional reality. As we learn more and more about our physical > world, our understanding of matter - and our ability to manipulate it > - increases. We are, after all, a collection of molecules. A more > technologically advanced race, being thousands of years ahead of us > on the learning curve, could very well have mastered molecular > decomposition, transport and reassembly. Once broken down into its > smallest component, matter (still physical, still three dimensional) > might then be transported through other matter. Like flour through a > sieve, both the flour and the metal mesh are physical, yet one passes > through the other quite easily. Not personally being well read in quantum physics, I will concede the possibility. It seems however that you are here 'hinting' at 'transporting' ala Star Trek, correct? Were this the case Mark, then Ms. Napolitano along with her abductors would have been reduced to their simplest components and as energy transmitted upward through all of the layers of matter between them, into the awaiting ship above. Or, AM I missing something here? This was not the case however. She is stated to have been 'floated' through a solid plate glass window located 12 stories above the ground. I submit that were this indeed the case in physical reality, Ms. Napolitano would have experienced some serious physical rearrangement. <g> > As to "floating" - dispersed molecules would be far less dense and > therefore lighter. We move information along beams of light and can > levitate objects (in a vaccum) with sound waves. Well, that is very nice. From my lifelong study of metaphysics, I have come across various hints as to how this can be accomplished in other ways as well. That however, is aside from the point. Your conjecture seems to hinged upon two separate factors here: [1] She was 'teleported' through the solid plate glass window... and [2] She was then made lighter in density via sound vibration and lifted into the ship. I beg to point out that if these beings possess a 'transporter' or teleportation' device Mark, than why was it necessary for them to first 'float' her out the window? Why indeed Mark, did the UFO find it necessary to be in the vicinity in the first place were a transportation or teleportation device been made of? > My point is, some events are only labelled "paranormal" because we > have yet to understand them. The label is a temporary one. With > knowledge, many magical things have made the transition into everyday > reality - fire, magnetism, etc. Not so long ago, the brightest minds > of the day believed that the earth was flat. Nothing could go faster > than the "speed of horse"! Poppycock! The Flat Earth theory doesn't apply. It is a strawman Mark. You do seem to have a valid point however. I hasten to inform though that I have been in pursuit of let us say alternative knowledge, for a very long time. As such I AM perhaps a bit more comfortable with what is loosely termed even by myself as the paranormal. I have even come to terms with various understanding as to the mechanics of some of these phenomena. To put these into mundane terminology however, is quite another matter. Some of these can only best be described as a 'Feeling' thing. You need to understand moreover, that I AM a multiple abduction experiencer and as such DO have considerable experience with various paranormal aspects of abduction. Some of these I understand. :-) Another point I would like to make is that I have been successful at stopping an abduction event during it's beginning. It has occurred on a number of occasions. This is accomplished by coming to an understanding of who and what these beings are and realizing that you possess more native ability in the realms in which they operate than do they and therefore utilize them. > This is not to say that there is no spiritual realm or level of > consciousness that we have yet to - or may never - comprehend. > Certainly there are dimensions beyond the ones in which we operate > daily. I would just caution against categorizing anything that lies > outside of our current understanding as metaphysical. What Linda > describes, in my opinion, doesn't require - in these days of > microwaves, fiber optics and artificial hearts - THAT much of a > stretch of the imagination. While it is within the realm of my understanding that Mankind is a multidimensional Being, I agree to disagree with you in so far as Ms. Napolitano's story goes for the reasons that I have set forth above, among a few others. Furthermore, I suspect that her story was contrived and is so much science fiction not unlike your weak attempt at explanation above. Her motivation? That is the simplest of all. Monetary. In so far as your understanding of the term 'metaphysics' and metaphysical' is concerned, it has a misty quality for me. Metaphysics encompasses any number of philosophies and disciplines. I AM left wondering how well read you are within the genre that you make such an argument as that above. > Best, > Mark Sincere Kindest Regards... Clarke Hathaway
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 26 Mexican UFO Video Tape From: Graham William Birdsall <106151.1150@compuserve.com> Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 06:39:57 -0400 Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 14:32:13 -0500 Subject: Mexican UFO Video Tape Dear Colleagues, The emergence of yet another UFO video tape from Mexico has caused quite a stir. I am of course referring to the sequence which was allegedly taken in Mexico City on 6 August 1997. I had previously seen the still images, and in Brisbane, Australia, saw the complete footage for the first time, courtesy of Italian Giorgio Bongiovanni, who was sent a copy by his friend, Mexican TV Producer Jaime Maussan. My own copy arrived in the UK while I was in Brisbane, attending the Australian UFO Symposium organised by the Queensland UFO Network (an excellent and extremely well organised event). My copy was sent by Mexican UFO researcher Santiago Garza, who I had telephoned in Mexico City to try and discover more about the stories which were breaking out all over the Internet some weeks ago. I would like to share with you some of his written comments to me which accompanied said video tape: - START - "It was presented for the first time on television here in Mexico, on Sunday, 28 September 1997, during the TV show '3er. Milenio' (3rd Millenium), a journalist-orientated programme that focuses on UFOs and ecological subjects. "The show is hosted by Jaime Maussan and Daniel Munos, good friends of mine. "The video presents an alleged big, disc-shaped craft with oscillating movements, that flies very slow at low altitude between two known buildings in the heart of Mexico City. "Unfortunately, the film lasts just a few seconds. The quality is poor and the voices you hear supposedly belong to the persons making the recording. "Daniel Munos told me that almost all the audio was censured due to the 'hard language'. "Now, there is a general feeling among the researchers here in Mexico that the film is a hoax. "However, Jaime Maussan took the original video to Jim Dilletoso [sic] in Phoenix, Arizona, for analysis. I've seen this footage before but didn't pay much interest since I considered it highly suspicious and besides, these past few months there have been a lot of fakes (some sent to our offices - Contacto OVNI), and we are aware of a possible 'trap'. "I interviewed Daniel Munoz, Jaime's assistant, by phone after you contacted me and he gave me details of the story. "On 24 September 1997, a package was received in the 3er. Milenio production offices, sent to Jaime Maussan from an anonymous source. It contained the video, supposedly filmed on 6 August 1997 in downtown Mexico City. "A letter that accompanied the video tape said that two friends made the recording from the top of a building during a lunch brake. They wanted to remain anonymous because they didn't want any trouble from their employer. Jaime and Daniel located the building and claim to have found several witnesses. "However, Daniel told me that they discovered during their investigation that the people who made the recording, work in a company with high quality computer software, and that these offices are situated at the very top of the building from where the recording was allegedly made. The whole thing is highly suspicious. "A second showing on TV was noticeable for several contradictions - one witness said the footage was filmed at night!" - END - A major UFO conference is being staged in Acapulco, Mexico between 4-7 December, an event sponsored and organised by Jaime Maussan and Televisa (Mexico TV Network), so I'm sure that whatever analysis has been conducted on the video tape will receive due attention. For our part, initial analysis suggests that the footage is highly suspect and points to an elaborate hoax. All video tapes carry a time signature at the top of the footage - we suspect several such signatures might well feature on the "poor copy" received by Jaime Maussan, although he makes no mention of this. Nor does he state whether he received 8mm film or a first generation copy. The more signatures that appear, the more likely the tape has undergone the 'treatment'. The object is in focus throughout - an extraordinary feature when combining manual and auto focus. The 'spinning' effect on the object demonstrates the same sequence over and over again. The cameraman appears to anticipate the movement of the object - as though he knew when and where it was going in advance. When the object disappears behind an apartment block, one would expect the cameraman to pan back, go left and right to see where it might have gone - it doesn't happen. These are basic observations arrived at in less than 30 minutes. The object does appear to have been 'brush stroked' in part, and our provisional analysis suggests that the skyline and apartment blocks have been filmed in advance, and the computer generated 'UFO' then laid on top. Given one has the right sort of computer software, and a little money and energy to spend, all things are possible. On first glance, I can understand the excitement of those who consider this footage to be the most impressive ever taken of a UFO, but I'm afraid the analysis tells a different story. I will be showing the footage during my lecture at the Contact International (UK) conference in Oxford this coming Sunday - probably the first UK showing if I'm not mistaken. Those who turn up can judge it for themselves. The conference runs from 11.00am - 5.00pm and is being staged at Exeter Hall, Kidlington, Oxford, on the main road to Banbury. Details can be obtained by calling the organiser, Brian James, on 01235 851319 or 01865 784200. Best regards, Graham W. Birdsall (Editor) UFO Magazine [UK]
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 26 UFO VIDEOTAPE: Porter, Indiana From: Kenny Young <task@fuse.net> Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 13:18:45 -0700 Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 14:50:59 -0500 Subject: UFO VIDEOTAPE: Porter, Indiana Indiana UFO Videotape: The following information comes courtesy of a cordial and highly professional staff member of the WXIX channel 19 Newsroom, who was contacted this afternoon in regards to a piece which aired on their 11:30 a.m. newscast (an alert Mr. Paul Koch of Western Hills spotted the report). The gentleman at WXIX-TV searched through the computer and retrieved the script which was used to convey the story of the UFO to the TV audience. He was helpful to re-read the script, which follows. Channel 19 inserted 'sound-bite' interviews with the witnesses and also included a video insert portion of the UFO recording over the dialogue. ----------------------------------------------------- "A mysterious UFO videotaped in INDIANA?" Caption: Newsreel segment >From WFLD TV in Chicago, Illinois... This is something a fan of the X-files may enjoy. A young brother and sister from Indiana were startled by a mysterious light in the sky Wednesday night. Christy and Tony Venandor were in their backyard in Porter, Indiana when they recorded these images of a light streaking across the sky. You can see it right above the treeline. They say the light lasted only a few seconds and disappeared without a trace. Insert: interview with witnesses. "We saw a white dot being trailed by flames. We thought it was crashing, but wasn't sure." The eyewitness said it was like a rocket after take off. It wasn't a plane crash, and there are no official reports of a comet, so the light show over Porter, Indiana remains a mystery. -------------------------- Filed: Oct. 24, 1997 KENNY YOUNG -- UFO Research http://home.fuse.net/task/
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 26 Re: ACC: Remarkable Update By Bob Wolf From: jared@valuserve.com (Andromeda.net- Anderson, Jared) Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 15:01:28 -0700 Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 14:55:52 -0500 Subject: Re: ACC: Remarkable Update By Bob Wolf > From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com> > Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 10:23:29 -0400 > Fwd Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 17:48:26 -0400 > Subject: Re: ACC: Remarkable Update By Bob Wolf > Dennis- > Are you saying that the ACC/Transistor allegations have no > credence because Corso's story indicates otherwise? This must, > of course, mean that you have had a change of heart regarding > some of Corso's story and that "Corso the Conquerer" comment was > merely a holdover from previous beliefs. > I don't know much about Bob Wolf, and still find the ACC story of > interest. You seem to want to link Corso with the ACC story, > which makes no sense (as you point out). ACC hasn't indicated > any linkage, and Corso certainly didn't, and the continuing > discussion of such a relationship (even in passing) merely serves > to muddy the waters and doesn't lead to a rational discussion of > the situation. Of course, I can gather from your tone that you > believe this entire discussion is nonsense and not worth wasting > time on. Several prominent researchers would probably disagree, > including one who believed there was a lack of continuity in the > development of the transistor long before Corso or ACC hit the > scene (but I'll let him speak for himself). Although I am not directly investigating the ACC story any more I feel compelled to comment on some of the balanced opinions here. Linking ACC to Corso's information in his book would probably be unwise like Steve says as Corso provided very few details to an incident he had no first hand knowledge of. In my discussions with Jack Shulman he stated that he had not read Corso's book and I got the impression that he had no plans to in the immediate future for concern over "contaminating" his own information and research that he had acquired independantly through the wonder consultant. > Your skepticism is healthy, but let's keep the discussion on a > level playing field and not add to the confusion. It does little > more than provide your critics with ammunition. > Of course the "transistor code" (or transistor technology) wasn't > developed in a matter of weeks or months. There is a paper trail > that shows semi-conductor research had been ongoing for years. > However, that would not preclude the incorporation of concepts or > technology that was based upon the examination of foreign > material. The military did this with captured weopens of war, > and it would be no different for a capture alien craft. I have > contended in other posts that our scientists and engineers would > not have been able to understand any technolgy unless we already > had the technological foundation to understand it. If we were > already very close to developing an effecient transistor, and > several viable "hints" dropped out of the sky, then they could be > quickly adopted in the manner described. If the source of those > "hints" was protected by national security, then a paper trail > would have to be developed to prevent (or defend against) any > patent challanges. Shulman has indicated that the original > transisotr patent was only given tentative approval at first > because the application failed to show a clear development > history. I would like to see if there are any Patent Office > files in the archives to show how that application was handled, > but there's so much to do and so little time. The first two things I did when I decided to look into this matter were to ask John Greenwald to make a FOIA request on one Project Starpoint and to send a note of inquiry to Rob Swiatek of the U.S. patent office and board member of the Fund For UFO Research regarding the matter. Rob replied by sending me an e-mail on his opinion which is now well known to most members of this list. Excerpt: "In short, I'm real dubious about an alien origin for the transistor. I see no need to invoke one given the nice smooth technological curve that preceded it in the 30s and early-40s. Semiconductor development at Bell Labs and other places has proceeded apace in logical steps from the late 1800s to the present, with people in the early-1940s even predicting the transistor would be invented within the next few years. Thus, you can see where I stand. It sort of galls me that some people don't credit the human race with having the brains to develop technological devices such as fiberoptics, integrated circuits, night vision scopes: No, we owe it all to aliens apparently." Granted I feel the same way, but the question of whether human beings could develop such technologies is really not the issue so much as is "what actually happened?" I certainly feel that if the UFO technology somehow influenced transistor research to some degree it probably would not have been much longer before it was discovered independantly as the research projects were documented as being quite far down this road prior to July 1947 anyhow. This in effect makes the picture even more dubious in my opinion. I've read many of the wildly religious opinions on the whole alien transistor issue since this whole thing started from the gullible proponents to the naive naysayers. To take the conspiratorial point-of-view for a moment I find it deeply troubling that people think that officials in a major communications entity like Bell Labs would be so incompetent that they could not properly conceal classified information. I would consider it to be highly likely that the scientists that worked on the projects in question were probably never even told the origins of the "foreign technology" that was placed in their hands for research if such technology was present in the first place. The magnitude of something like UFO technology influencing the current technological trends of that time period would certainly be considered priority 1 in all areas including security and logic dictates that all other priorities would have been rescinded. It would be a mistake to underestimate the time, money, and resources that would be spent on the deflection of attentions surrounding something this significant. It's another example of the same old attitude "if I can't find any evidence than none must exist" that's beeen plaguing ufology for years. In summation, I am generally skeptical of UFO conspiracy within the scientific community or corporations possibly barring...say, military or defense contractors. The evidence for the alien transistor appears to be very, very weak largely consisting of heresay from 2 independant sources. Jack Shulman has stated that he has come into possession of documentary evidence to support his assertions in the form of a work book or lab book. A board member of the Fund for UFO Research told me that ACC's meeting with Air Force and DOD officials at Princeton did, in fact, take place. It would be nice to hear more first hand accounts from sources not associated with ACC or Bob Wolf. Jared.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 26 Department of Army FOIA Response From: UFOLAWYER1@aol.com [Peter A. Gersten] Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 19:23:46 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 15:05:02 -0500 Subject: Department of Army FOIA Response The following is the Department of Army's FOIA response to my FOIA request concerning Lt. Colonel (Ret.) Corso's 'Day After Roswell:' Dear Mr. Gersten: This letter is in response to your Freedom of Information request, dated September 10, 1997. You are requesting a copy of all records, memorandum, notes, reports, documents, letters and/or any other equivalent recordation, including sketches, photographs and film, pertaining to Lieutenant (Ret.) Phillip J. Corso's recently released book, "The Day After Roswell." As a matter under its purview, we have referred your request to the following agency for action and direct reply to you: Department of the Air Force OL-P, 11CS/SCSR(FOIA) 1000 Air Force Pentagon Room 4A1088C Washington, DC 20310-1000 Telephone: (703) 697-3467 If this office can be of further assistance to you, please contact Phyllis Walls of my staff, or myself, at the above address. The telephone number (703) 607-3379. Sincerely, Rose Marie Christensen Chief, Freedom of Information And Privacy Acts Office The following is my response and appeal of that decision: Peter A. Gersten, Esq. 7349 Via Paseo Del Sur Suite 515-194 Scottsdale, Arizona 85258 Telephone: (602) 818-8248 E-mail: UFOLAWYER1@aol.com October 24, 1997 Department of the Army Freedom of Information and Privacy Acts Office 1725 Jefferson Davis Highway Suite 201 Arlington, Virginia 22202-4102 Re: FOIA #97-1441 Attention: Ms. Rose Marie Christensen Dear Ms. Christensen: This letter is in reply to your response, dated October 3, 1997, to my above-referenced FOIA request. On this date I contacted your office and was told, by a gentleman on your staff, that any records pertaining to the Roswell crash, including the records I had requested, would have been transferred to the Air Force as a matter of policy. I am hereby supplementing my original request to include: 1) any and all records acknowledging, verifying, and /or corroborating any and all of the records I had requested as having been sent to the Air Force; 2) a list of which documents were sent to the Air Force; and 3) any all documents generated as a result of my previous request, particularly any and all documents on which you based your conclusion that any and all documents relating to my request would have been sent to the Air Force. I hereby include by incorporation any and all representations made in my original request pertaining to fees and time limits. Please be advised that, though I have interpreted your response as a non-compliance with my original request and filed an appropriate appeal with the Office of General Counsel, I fully expect compliance with my supplemental request. Very truly yours, Peter A. Gersten October 24, 1997 Peter A. Gersten, Esq. 7349 Via Paseo Del Sur Suite 515-194 Scottsdale, Arizona 85258 Telephone: (602) 818-8248 E-mail: UFOLAWYER1@aol.com Office of the General Counsel Department of the Army 104 Army Pentagon Room 2E725 Washington, DC 20310-0104 Re: FOIA #97-1441 To Whom It May Concern: I am hereby appealing the Army's non-compliance with the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act, specifically the above-referenced FOIA request. My appeal is based upon the Army's action in simply referring my request to the Department of Air Force without conducting a search for the documents requested, as required under the requirements of the FOIA. My request was directed to the Army because, according to Army Lt. Colonel (Ret.) Corso , it is the Army which last had custody of the records requested. I thus expect the Army to act in accordance with Congressional intent and provisions of law in conducting an appropriate search. not routinely shifting responsibility to another agency. Please be advised that if my appeal is denied or if you do not respond within the time limits prescribed under the FOIA, I am fully prepared to institute judicial proceedings in the proper District Court. Very truly yours, Peter A. Gersten
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 26 UFO Photos From: Philip Mantle <el51@dial.pipex.com> Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 01:18:00 +0000 Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 15:13:18 -0500 Subject: UFO Photos Dear colleagues, I am currently a consultant on a proposed book project dealing with UFO's in Russia. The autjor of the book will be Paul Stonehill of the Russian Ufology Center in the USA. The company publishing the book is looking for UFO photo's both from the former Soviet Union and from around the world. Below is a letter from Chris Stone at Quadrillion outlining exactly what he is loking for. He has a large budget available for such material and I would therefore hope that there are those out there that can help. FROM: Chris Stone - Quadrillion Publishing. My company, Quadrillion Publishing, are currently producing a book entitled the 'Soviet UFO Files' which will be widely available in Britain, Europe and the USA in autumn of next year. It is the follow up to our highly successful, 'Aliens: Encounters With The Unexplained'. Perhaps you have seen it ? the 'Soviet UFO Files' is being written by the highly respected director of the Russian Ufology Center, Paul Stonehill, with Philip Mantle acting as a consultant, but we are very keen to locate photographs. I have seen that there are a multitude of photographs on the WWW, originating from a variety of places, and I was wondering if anyone could team up with us to provide, not only images, but also offer advice on where we might locate others. A substantial fee would be payable to anyone for the reproduction of such pictures. I have a large budget for this book, most of which would be payable to those supplying photo's. I really need 50 - 100 top quality images (a lot of UFO evidence is poor to say the least) and preferably in colour. Now, I realise already that UFO evidence from the Soviet Union is in short supply so I am not expecting all the pictures to be from Russia, but if there were some good, miscellaneous and uncredited images that would be fine too. Also unidentified lights in the sky would be fine to supplement this total. How do I acquire this material ? Are they all on disc, or are there hard copy transparencies ? Are there CD Roms available ? Are there any good libraries of material thsat you are aware of ? I would appreciate a quick response as deadlines have to be met. Although the book will not be printed for some time, I need to have my end of things tied up by the beginning of December, not much over a month, and that includes photographs. Kind Regards, Chris Stone. Quadrillion Publishing, Godalming Business Centre, Woolsack Way, Godalming, Surrey, England, GU7 1XW. Tele: 01483 426 277. Fax: 01483 426 947. E-Mail: cxs@QUAD-PUB.CO.UK PLEASE FORWARD TO ANY AND ALL INTERESTED PARTIES
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 26 Electromagnetic 'healing'/Corso book; ACSH info From: bikebob <bikebob@MO.NET> [Bob Soetebier] Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 13:49:32 -0500 (CDT) Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 15:24:24 -0500 Subject: Electromagnetic 'healing'/Corso book; ACSH info Even though it is only tangentially related to the UFO subject (in regards to info stated in Philip J. Corso's recent "Roswell" book), I would hope that at least some of you might find of interest the following info that I've resecntly come across Bob Soetebier St. Louis County, Missouri ---------------------------------------------------------------------- On pages 193 and 194 of Philip J. Corso's 1997 book, The Day After Roswell, Corso states [that when he was the assistant chief of staff in Rome, Italy, in the 1940's, where he had become friends with some of the members of the graduate faculty at the University of Rome]: "Then Professor Franck introduced me to another one of his colleagues, the celebrated research biologist and physician Doctor Castellani, who had many years earlier isolated and identified the disease called 'sleeping sickness' and perfected what during the 1930s and 1940s became know as 'Castellani Ointments' as treatments for a variety of skin diseases. Where other doctors, he said, had focused on treating only the symptoms they could see on the skin, Doctor Castellani said that the problems of many skin rashes, psoriasis, or inflammations that looked like bacterial infections were, in fact, correctable by changing the skin's electromagnetic resonance. The ointments, he said, didn't attack the infection with drugs; they were chemical reactants that changed the electrostatic condition of the skin, allowing the long, low-frequency waves from the brain to do the healing." [Now, the most significant part here seems to be the statement that: "...that changed the electrostatic condition of the skin, allowing the long, low-freqency waves from the brain to do the healing." -- Bob S.] [On page 192, Corso states -- regarding a written statement by a "medical examiner" on the "barely alive" "EBE" -- that]: "The medical examiner wrote that the measurements of brain activity taken from the EBE who was still barely alive at Rosewell showed that its electronic signature, at least what they were able to measure with equipment in 1947, displayed a signal similar to to what we would call long, low-frequency waves. And the examiner referred to a description by one of the Rosewell Air Field doctors that the creature's brain lobes seem to have been not just physiologically and neurologically intergrated but intergrated by an electromagnetic current as well." [On page 194 Corso continues.]: "All three men were using these these electromagnetic waves to promote healing in ways I considered astounding. They made claims about the ability of electromagnetic treatments to affect the speed at which cells divide and tumors to grow. They claimed that through directed magnetic wave propagation they could cure heart disease, arthritis, all types of bacteriological infections that interfered with cell function, and even certain forms of cancer." ---------------------------------------------------------------------- [Now after having read the above, the information below may (or, may not) be of interest to some of you, too. -- Bob Soetebier] The following information appeared in the Vol. 9, No. 3, 1997, issue of the American Council on Science and Health's [ACSH] "Priorites: For Long Life and Good Health" publication. The ACSH web site URL is: http://www.acsh.org/ The article's (Not All Acupuncture is 'Quackupuncture') URL is: http://www.acsh.org/publications/priorities/0903/quackupuncture.html ------------------------------------------------------------------ Not All Acupuncture is 'Quackupuncture' by Dr. George A. Ulett [....] Science-Based Acupuncture "In 1972 our group at the University of Missouri Medical School received a grant from the National Institutes of Health to compare the effects of acupuncture and hypnosis on experimental pain. We concluded that acupuncture is not a form of hypnosis and that, while acupuncture without electrical stimulation had some beneficial effect, electroacupuncture was twice as effective." [....] "I traveled widely in search of scientific explanations. I learned that nerve cells in the brain responded to electroacupuncture.... In China I Prof. Han, author of The Neurochemical Basis of Pain Relief by Acupuncture: A Collection of Papers (Beijing Medical University Press, 1987). Han had increased the pain threshold of a 'nonacupunctured' animal by introducing into it the spinal fluid of an 'electroacupunctured' animal. Later, Han discovered that different frequencies of electrical stimulation give rise to different neurohormones in the brain.... And he developed an electroacupuncture device that makes needling patients unecessary: Polymer conducting pads on the surface of the skin suffice. In short, the key to consistently effective acupuncture is electrical stimulation...." [....] George A. Ulett, M.D., Ph.D., is a clinical professor of psychiatry at the Missouri Institute of Mental Health, St. Louis, of the University of Missouri-Columbia. He is the author of Alternative Medicine or Magical Healing: A Factual Look at Unconventional Healing (1996) and Beyond Yin and Yang: How Acupuncture Really Works (1992). ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 26 Re: ACC: Remarkable Update by Bob Wolf From: bikebob <bikebob@MO.NET> [Bob Soetebier] Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 13:34:55 -0500 (CDT) Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 15:20:55 -0500 Subject: Re: ACC: Remarkable Update by Bob Wolf >From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose) >To: updates@globalserve.net >Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 12:45:50 +0100 >Subject: ACC: Remarkable Update By Bob Wolf I have a good friend who is a retired engineer. I forwarded on the ACC/Bell Labs info to him that Stig Agermose posted. The posting had something to do with some sort of (incredible?) update regarding Bell Labs by one "Bob Wolf." In the info, it apparently referred to "Homedell Bell Labs" in New Jersey in *1947.* Well, it just so happens that my engineer friend (according to his recent "conversation" with me) is THE person who was responsible for building the Homedell Bell Labs plant, and he says it was NOT built until 1952-53! Right now, he wants to remain anonymous (and, he may wish to retain that status indefinetly.) Let me just say that, having known him very well (we've ridden our bicycles together, as frequently as once or twice per week in the past since the mid-1980s...and, I've known him since 1980; he comes over our place to visit fairly regularly, and/or we go over his place) I can vouch for his honesty and integrity 100%! If he says he "built the Homedell plant in 1952-53," (which he did/does), then THAT IS exactly what occurred. Hopefully, you all can use this info to set things straight. Good luck. Bob Soetebier St. Louis County, Missouri Tailwinds to you... See you ON the road! /// BICYCLE BOB /// bikebob@mo.net
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 26 Millennium Raises Hopes, Fears From: RSchatte@aol.com [Rebecca Schatte] Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 15:27:36 -0400 (EDT) Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 16:42:56 -0500 Subject: Millennium Raises Hopes, Fears --------------------- Forwarded message: Subj: Millennium Raises Hopes, Fears Date: 97-10-25 12:11:20 EDT From: AOL News .c The Associated Press By DAVID BRIGGS WASHINGTON (AP) - Jesus Christ is about to return, and the 1,500 folks packed into the Sheraton Washington ballroom couldn't be happier. For 16 hours a day, the End-Time Handmaidens pray and sway, singing of the day they will ``dance on streets that are golden.'' Around them, middle-aged women clad in white and gold robes glide through the aisles while other believers blow into rams' horns, their shrieks announcing the Second Coming. The end is near. The end-timers are here. ``We're running out of time. We're running out of time,'' Sister Gwen Shaw, the group's 72-year-old matriarch, says at the Handmaidens' annual convention. ``This is God's last call.'' While these Handmaidens may be on America's evangelical fringe, their beliefs about the millennium and Christ's Second Coming are remarkably mainstream. According to a recent Associated Press poll, nearly one out of every four Christian adults - an estimated 26.5 million people - expect Jesus to arrive in their lifetimes. Nearly as many - an estimated 21.1 million Americans - are so sure of it that they feel an urgent need to convert friends and neighbors. The results are consistent with other surveys that have found a widespread belief in the Second Coming. But the AP poll, conducted last spring by ICR of Media, Pa., probes how Christians are acting on their beliefs. The most fervent end-timers gather at prophecy conventions such as this one in Washington, but their dreams and fears reverberate throughout the country. America may have already entered what one apocalyptic scholar calls the ``hot zone'' of end-time speculation: The year 2000 is far enough away to be plausible as Christ's Second Coming, yet close enough to spark intense proselytizing. ``I look at prophecy as a Polaroid picture that takes five minutes to develop,'' says Zola Levitt, a Dallas evangelist on The Family Channel. ``I'd say we're at four minutes, 55 seconds.'' At the end-timers' convention, believers pay hundreds of dollars for Jewish liturgical instruments fashioned from rams' horns - for the chance to play their own small part in announcing the Second Coming. In unpracticed hands, these shofars sound like a third-grade orchestra warming up. Others, both in and out of the mainstream, are also blowing horns of warning. There are best-sellers such as Pat Robertson's ``The End of the Age.'' Scores of broadcasters, from Jack Van Impe to Hal Lindsey, are preaching of the end times. And the Internet offers more than 100 popular millennial sites, including Apocalypse Now, This Week in Bible Prophecy and The Jehovah's Witnesses' Homepage. For evangelical Christians, the Second Coming is what's new about the new millennium. According to the AP poll, almost 40 percent of Christians expect Jesus to arrive in the 21st century, if not sooner. They are looking past Jesus' own admonition that ``no one knows the hour.'' By their reckoning of Biblical clues, the time is soon. Belief in Jesus' return has underpinned Christianity from its earliest days. Each week, Christians throughout the world recite the Apostle's Creed, invoking Jesus who ``will come again to judge the living and the dead.'' Each day, many begin The Lord's Prayer, passed down by Jesus, with ``Our Father, who art in heaven, hallowed be thy name, thy kingdom come.. But what makes today's prayers so earnest? What separates this generation of end-time prophets from those of the last two millennia? Israel. The New Testament compares the kingdom of God, near at hand, to the growth of a fig tree. Some believers substitute Israel for the tree. They say the Second Coming is near at hand when the tree shoots forth branches - when Israel becomes a nation. And that happened in 1948. ``Verily I say unto you, `This generation shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled,''' Jesus says in Luke 21:32. Since many end-time prophets also place the apocalyptic Armageddon in Israel, developments there continue to stir interest. In 1967, when Israel reclaimed much of Jerusalem from Jordan, the prophecy in Luke was only strengthened. During the 1991 war between the United States and Iraq, many evangelists - from Billy Graham to John Walvoord, chancellor of the Dallas Theological Seminary - envisioned the beginning of the end. And when the 1993 Mideast peace pact was signed, radio evangelist Monte Judah of Norman, Okla., identified the beginning of seven years' tribulation heralding the Second Coming. For evangelicals, signs of the end can be found anywhere, anytime. Worldwide disasters - floods, wars, earthquakes - are what Jesus, in the Gospel of Matthew, told followers to look for. The Hale-Bopp comet, famine in Africa, developments in the European Common Market, even the convergence of full moons and Jewish religious festivals - all are sifted for clues of the apocalypse. ``There's a lot happening in our time that would give most people a concern and an excitement that the Lord is going to return,'' Thomas A. McMahon says. He is executive director of the Berean Call, a religious newsletter out of Bend, Ore., that circulates to 80,000 Christians. ``Every day has significance. Every political, social, economic event has significance,'' says Philip Lucas, general editor of Nova Religio: The Journal of Emergent and Alternative Religions. ``Your whole experience of time is greatly heightened.'' If the time is near, why not sometime around the year 2000? For end-timers who cite a divine plan, great things tend to happen in 2,000-year periods. Abraham and Isaac, patriarchs who established a covenant between God and humans, were born around 2000 B.C. Two millennia later, Christians believe, God became man with the birth of Jesus. Those who believe human history is 6,000 years old wait with special expectancy. Consider the mathematics in Peter's Second Letter: ``One day with the Lord is as a thousand years.'' For these believers, the new millennium starts on the seventh day of creation. For them, after 6,000 years of strife and turmoil, it's time for 1,000 years of heavenly rest as Jesus rules over the Kingdom of God on Earth. ``A lot of people think maybe the year 2000,'' says Leon Bates, head of the Bible Believers' Evangelistic Association in Sherman, Texas. ``I would go along with the thought that it would be just like the Lord to have an overall 7,000-year plan.'' Oleeta Herrmann believes the end could come any time. She traveled to the end-timers' convention from Xenia, Ohio, where three 25-foot crosses in her back yard warn neighbors to get right with God. Like others at the convention, she has heard the rustle of angels preparing the way of the Lord. One night, she says, Jesus appeared in her bedroom to reassure her that nieces and nephews would not be left behind when she is lifted into the clouds to join others in her family who have died. ``You're bringing the rest of them with you,'' were the Lord's words, she says. Willie Mae Johnson, at the convention from Lighthouse Free Methodist Church in St. Louis, has no such assurances. What will happen to her father, her children and other relatives who have not accepted Christ? She is beginning to waver as 2000 approaches. ``I don't want to leave anyone behind, so you say yeah, and you say no,'' she says. ``I want Jesus to come back right now, but just wait a little while, Jesus.'' Even vendors at the end-timers' convention raise provocative questions, selling T-shirts that feature three frogs plopped on a lily pad and asking: ``Where are you goin' when you croak?'' Many people are not going to make it through the tribulation. ``He has given us...a burden for lost souls,'' says the Rev. Dorothy Mottern, accompanied to the convention by church members from Virginia. For those who read Revelation as a literal forecast, the future is frightening for people without God's seal on their foreheads. In that Book, a third of the Earth burns, and angels kill a third of those who survive. For others, torture is so severe that ``people will seek death, but will not find it; they will long to die, but death will flee from them.'' Warnings like these can change lifestyles. In the AP poll, 98 percent of those who believe Jesus will return in their lifetimes say they urgently need to get right with God. About 21.1 million Americans, the poll estimates, have decided to get others right, too, wanting to convert friends, neighbors and relatives. Among age groups, the urgency is felt most widely among Baby Boomers. By region, it is most prevalent in the South. This urgency has created sweeping evangelistic campaigns. Celebrate Jesus 2000, a Minneapolis-based coalition of evangelical churches and ministries, wants to reach the ``entire nation for Christ'' by the third millennium. In an unprecedented action, the 15 million-member Southern Baptist Convention, the nation's largest Protestant denomination, last year vowed to make special efforts to evangelize the Jews. Of course, the end of the world has been predicted many times before. But dates for the Second Coming have come and gone. In the 1840s, followers of William Miller quit jobs, sold belongings and moved to upstate New York to await the return of Jesus. He didn't come. Two successful churches arose from the Millerite Movement: The Seventh-day Adventists and the Jehovah's Witnesses. Both continue to anticipate the end-times but no longer specify the date. Charles Taze Russell, founder of the modern-day Witnesses, predicted that the millennial age would begin in 1914. World War I raised hopes he was right, but the movement's catchword - ``Millions now living will never die''- gradually lost its urgency. Two years ago, the Witnesses officially dismissed date-setting as speculation, declaring Jesus was right that ``no one knows the place and the time.'' The Worldwide Church of God also no longer sets dates for the end-times, partly because founder Herbert W. Armstrong was so often wrong. Hal Lindsey's ``Late Great Planet Earth'' raised end-time fears in the 1970s. Now he has a new best seller, ``Planet Earth - 2000 A.D.'' So what will happen this time, if life goes on? Some worry that fringe end-times movements may act in increasingly desperate ways. They point to the mass suicides of the Heaven's Gate and Branch Davidian communities, whose charismatic leaders believed they had special word from God about end-times. ``There's generally an element of ego involved for anybody who believes,'' says Stephen O'Leary of the University of Southern California, author of ``Arguing the Apocalypse: A Theory of Millennial Rhetoric.'' And many leaders believe that ``the crisis must happen while I am alive,'' he says. However, most experts on evangelical Christianity think believers will accept delays - and perhaps even be a bit relieved. In the AP poll, only 61 percent of Christian respondents who believe Jesus will arrive in their lifetime are praying for his quick return. Walvoord, of the Dallas Theological Seminary, says it reminds him of a Sunday school teacher who asked the class who wants to go to heaven. When only one boy failed to raise his hand, the teacher asked: ``Don't you want to go?'' ``Yeah,'' the boy replied, ``but I thought you were getting a load to go right now.'' AP-NY-10-25-97 1203EDT Copyright 1997 The Associated Press. The information contained in the AP news report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or otherwise distributed without prior written authority of The Associated Press.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 26 Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculoso From: Ed Stewart <egs@netcom.com> Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 19:02:34 -0700 Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 16:56:13 -0500 Subject: Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculoso Hello Duke, Hello Henny, and a special Hello to Mr. Mxyzptlk > Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 21:41:52 -0400 > From: Gunslinger Peat <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith] > Subject: Zeta Notso Ridiculoso > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>, > The Duke of Mendoza presents his compliments between guffaws. > >Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 20:17:08 +0200 (MET DST) > >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > >From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl> > >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculoso Henny is observed making the following statement of ufological wisdom: > >The argument that ET visitation > >is improbable because such speeds don't exist is obsolete even > >according to present day human science. The above statement is totally incoherrant with present day science. Tachions do exist on the mathematical scratch pads of modern day science, but the real problem according to the physics FAQ on tachions found at: http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/physoc/physics_faqwww is the following: "The bottom line is that you can't use tachyons to send information faster than the speed of light from one place to another. Doing so would require creating a message encoded some way in a localized tachyon field, and sending it off at superluminal speed toward the intended receiver. But as we have seen you can't have it both ways - localized tachyon disturbances are subluminal and superluminal disturbances are nonlocal." So, the same mathematics that predicts tachions, also predicts that information can't be sent faster than the speed of light. That, I am afraid is the real issue and show stopper. Those practicing ufological wisdom need to regroup and reconsider their options. > ...if > ET is, or was, living in a nearby star system, all ET needs is the > wherewithal and the determination to travel through space for a few > years to get here. Stan may fall off his chair at hearing it, but > this seems pretty reasonable to me. It certainly doesn't require a tachion turbodrive. (GRIN) > >You would have found that > >out had you read some real science magazines. > Perhaps you'd also care to tell me and the rest of the world what I > do and don't read, as you seem to keep pretty sharp tabs on it. I > ask because I tend to forget so easily these days and, like Ed > Stewart, I don't seem to be able to get out of my armchair. I finally got out of mine. It seems that being a bookworm does have its paydays. (GRIN) I am surprised that the FTL proponents never have ran into that one show stopper regarding the transport of information at superluminal speeds in the acquisition of their ufological wisdom at subluminal speeds. > Now, will you tell me how someone can measure the exact speed of > a signal traveling at FTL speeds with instruments that operate at > or less than the speed of light? Or how an EM microwave can travel > at FTL speeds without turning into something different from an > EM microwave? Can't be done according to the mathematics. See the FAQ above. Where is Mr. Mxyzptlk when you really need him? Ed Stewart ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Ed Stewart egs@netcom.com | So Man, who here seems principal alone, There is Something | Perhaps acts second to some sphere unknown. Going On! ,>'?'<, | Touches some wheel, or verges to some goal, Salvador Freixedo ( O O ) | 'Tis but a part we see, and not a whole. --------------ooOO-(_)-OOoo------- Alexander Pope, Essay on Man -------
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 26 Declassified Russian UFO Documents (Voice Of From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose) Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 03:32:26 +0200 Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 17:01:26 -0500 Subject: Declassified Russian UFO Documents (Voice Of The following is a transcript of part of the feature "Science And Engineering In The Commonwealth", which was subjoined to Voice Of Russia's news broadcast October 23 at 0900 UTC. You can hear it in Real Audio at http://audio.wrn.org/audio/1700.ram from the WRN (World Radio Network) Internet Audio Services (audio@wrn.org). The main site of which is at http://www.wrn.org/index1.html Boris Belitsky is Voice Of Russia's science correspondent. The interviewer was Esther Winters. ******************** Esther Winters: ...But just now we have to turn to another subject, and we keep getting letters about unidentified flying objects, yes UFOs. The latest questions on this subject come from Ban Hong Hue (?) in Burma and from Paul Brown in (unintelligible), England. So tell us first of all, Boris, when the first UFOs were spotted over Russia! Well, we all know that in the United States the first reports of flying saucers, as they were dubbed on that occasion, came in 1947, and that was when a group of rapidly moving, glistening objects were observed in the daytime near Mount Rainier, Washington. Now, what about Russia? Are UFOs a relatively new phenomenon here? Boris Belitsky: Oh, no! This is evident from recently declassified documents of the Russian Ministry of The Interior which inherited documents of the Russian Imperial Ministry of The Interior dating back to the beginning of the past century. Now, among those documents there is a very unusual report to the Tsar from his Third Department of The Chancellery, as the government's secret police was known in those days. W: And what is unusual about this report, Boris? B: It describes certain extraordinary light effects observed in the sky by the inhabitants, the police and military in the city of Orenburg on the night of December 26, 1830. The observations amount to what today we would call a typical UFO sighting. (Orenburg is a large town (519.000 inhabitants) in Bashkiria in the south-eastern part of European Russia - on the right bank of the Ural river - and a center of the trade with Central Asia.) W: But surely this wasn't the only report of this kind in the archive of the Tsar's secret police, was it, Boris? B: No, it wasn't. There were others, too. A similar sighting was reported from the city of Ushtug (?) in Central Russia on January 30, 1844, and still other reports are dated 1846 and 1847. In short UFOs appear to have been sighted over Russia as far back as the first half of the past century. W: Boris, excuse me for interrupting, but this isn't a case of the Russian trend to be first in yet another area, which was so common in the recent past? B (laughing): Oh, no! Russian ufologists readily accept that UFOs were sighted long, long before that. A Russian history of UFO sightings refers to sightings in Norway in the ninth century, in Ireland in the tenth century, and in England in the twelfth century. Not to mention a large number of later sightings in the fourteenth century, the fifteenth and the sixteenth. W: Boris, to return to more recent times. Now, the UFO craze in our country, as we said, began soon after the Second World War with a sighting near Mount Rainier in the United States. What was the reaction of official Moscow, though, to that report? B: Well, of course you have to remember that the cold war had already begun, in fact it was well under way, and the Soviet reaction was therefore quite predictable. A Radio Moscow broadcast at the time dismissed the American report by declaring: "The American imperialists have invented some silly nonsense with a view to further their warmongering aims, intimidating taxpayers and the Congress, so as to quickly secure approval for an exorbitant military budget". W (laughing loudly): Tell us! Were there other similar reactions in other Soviet media? B: For a number of years there was total silence on the subject. It was completely taboo. Then in 1961 on January 8th came a salvo from the Communist party's biggest caliber guns, the newspaper Pravda echoed by the newspaper Komsomolska Pravda. Pravda printed a definitive article on the subject under the heading "The Myth Of Flying Saucers". The article was an interview with the prominent Soviet physicist Lev Archimovitch. The physicist pooh-poohed the whole idea of UFOs as optical illusions, and condemned their exploitation by unscrupulous individuals. W: Has he been supported by investigations since then? B: To a very large extent, yes. The vast majority of so-called UFO sightings has been identified as either effects caused by space launchings or unconventional aircraft, or aircraft under uncommon weather conditions, or aircraft with unusual light patterns, or meteorological and other high altitude balloons, or flocks of birds, or reflections of searchlights off clouds, or similar optical illusions. Some sightings have also been attributed to psychological factors. W: Psychological factors - now, what do you mean by psychological factors quite frankly, Boris? B: Well, it seems that in some cases flying saucers serve to replace gods whom science has deposed. With their distant and exotic origins and their pseudo-scientific associations UFOs appear welcome to some people who reject traditional religious frameworks and yet need some article of faith. W: Boris, you said that the vast majority of UFO sightings have been identified as being due to natural causes. What about the remaining minority, though? B: It's true. There is a small minority of sightings that so far defy such explanation. But that of course is not proof of their extraterrestrial origin. It's merely an argument in support of further studies of this at times baffling subject.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 26 Re: Mexico City Video From: James Easton <pulsar@compuserve.com> Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 22:50:45 -0400 Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 17:06:55 -0500 Subject: Re: Mexico City Video Courtesy of the CompuServe "Sightings!" forum, some comments from Michael Hesemann, which, if I had more time, I would have asked for permission to cross-post, but in the interest of sharing information, assume is quite agreeable: FACTS: 1. I called my friends working in the tower of Mexico City International Airport (Benito Juarez Airport). The object was NOT located on radar at the time in question. 2. The witness situation is rather dubious. There are a couple of people who called and claimed they saw the same craft either at daylight or at night. The sighting took place in the Lomas Chapultepec area of the Tecamalchaco-district, 6 miles NW of the city center, what is just nothing in a 20-million-town - it's so close to the city center! The two tall buildings visible in the film are office buildings, one belongs to "a jewish company" (whatever that means... a branch of an Israeli company? Jews from the US? From Mexico?). Televisa-coworker Daniel Munoz tried to interview the people working there, but was not able to do so.. 3. It was NOT in the news or papers in DF (Mexico districto federal) the days after. 4. The video was sent anonymously to Jaime Maussan. [...] PRELIMINARY CONCLUSION: In the moment there are some indications that the film indeed might be a clever hoax, UNLESS the witness situation changes. Since state-of-the-art computer techniques make it nearly impossible to detect any FX forgery on video, ONLY SOME GOOD AND CREDIBLE WITNESSES CAN SAVE THE SITUATION. Since I fly to Mexico in 5 weeks I will perform a field investigation on site and try to find those, of course using all interviews Jaime did as a starting point. Let's see what comes out of it but, until then, stay rather sceptical. [End] I did ask Mike if I could quote him that, "state-of-the-art computer techniques make it nearly impossible to detect any FX forgery on video". The video can now be downloaded from: ftp://os.inf.tu-dresden.de/pub/incoming/ufomex6aug.mov or ftp://judy.sfc.keio.ac.jp/pub/ufomex6aug.mov This is a 4.6 Mb file. James. E-mail: pulsar@compuserve.com
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 26 {83} part 1 - United Kingdom UFO Network From: United Kingdom UFO Network <ufo@holodeck.demon.co.uk> Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 20:39:05 +0000 Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 16:48:09 -0500 Subject: {83} part 1 - United Kingdom UFO Network ______ _______ ____ ------ / / // ____// |---------------------------------------------- U K / / // ___/ / / ' Oct 25th, 1997 / / // / / / / N E T W O R K part 1 Issue 83 --- (_____//__/ -- (_____/------------------------------------------------ The United Kingdom UFO Network - a free electronic magazine with subscribers in over 40 countries. This issue comes in 3 parts. If any part is missing please mail: ufo@holodeck.demon.co.uk giving the issue number. The issue will be reposted to you. Please put the details as below in the subject section e.g. Repost {83} part 1, part 2 or part 3. In this issue: -------------- Editorial --------- I wondered who would spot that first Thank you Dan Sherman United Kingdom News ------------------- [UK 1] Name a Star [UK 2] Couple's UFO shock [UK 3] Short Wave Magazine - July 1997 [UK 4] Official They've Been Here! [UK 5] UFO approaches British warship off Lancashire shore World News ---------- [W 1] Biggest baby in space [W 2] Zombies [W 3] Ozone [W 4] Galileo finds life, by Jupiter [W 5] Hollywood admits to Bigfoot hoax [W 6] Mexico City UFO Video [W 7] Sparkling Celestial Affair Stirs Southern Australia. [W 8] New Russian Stealth Fighter [W 9] Global Surveyor will photograph 'Face On Mars' say NASA [W 10] Global Surveyor's Orbit Raised While Solar Panel is Analysed [W 11] Still no radio contact with Pathfinder [W 12] A breath of fresh airline [W 13] American navy set to deploy robot planes Amusing UFO stories ------------------- A FEARFUL SYMMETRY ------------------ A TRUE STORY OF ALIEN INTRUSION INTO HUMAN LIVES By D. Lynne Bishop Editorial ========= Thank you for bringing to my attention the fact that I dated the last issue totally and irrefutably wrong ;-) As Captain Mainwaring of the classic comedy 'Dads Army' would say: "I wondered who would spot that first." --- Thank you We would like to thank all those of you who have sent us in reports from newspapers, magazines, video's etc etc. We know that this takes precious time and effort. We just want you to know how grateful we are. Please, please keep them coming. --- Dan Sherman Readers will remember Dan Sherman as written about in issue {80}. Dan is shortly to be guesting on our UFO irc channel. The date of the meeting will be posted when known. Dan's story is really fascinating and we would urge you to read it in issue {80}. Dan has a web site with various information including how to go about purchasing his new book: http://www.earthworld.com/ppd/ An account of Dan's story has just appeared in the latest issue of Alien Encounters magazine - issue 18 - November 1997. The Real Audio sound track of Dan's interview on 'Sightings On The Radio' can be downloaded from the following addresses: http://web.ukonline.co.uk/colin.light/uk-ufo-nw/sounds/dan_pt1.ra http://web.ukonline.co.uk/colin.light/uk-ufo-nw/sounds/dan_pt2.ra http://web.ukonline.co.uk/colin.light/uk-ufo-nw/sounds/dan_pt3.ra http://web.ukonline.co.uk/colin.light/uk-ufo-nw/sounds/dan_pt4.ra dan_pt1.ra - 2.155kb dan_pt2.ra - 1.948kb dan_pt3.ra - 1.856kb dan_pt4.ra - 1.165kb United Kingdom News =================== [UK 1]****** Source: Numerous national newspapers Date: October 1997 uk.ufo.nw says: The below advertisment has appeared in numerous national newspapers and magazines. We have no other information other than what you see below. However we would be interested to hear from anyone who has. Name a Star Millions of stars remain unamed. Many rich and famous have named stars. Now you can name a star for only 39 pounds and 95 pence! * Have your star name in the constellation of your choice. * Your star name will be permanently recorded in our register. Only 39 pounds and 95 pence (inc P & P) Gift Set Includes: * Certificate of registration (completed by hand) * Astronomical chart (showing star's location) * Philip's colour map of the night sky * Information & constellation guide * Registration and entry into 1998 publication Christmas * Valentines Day * Birthday * Wedding * Anniversary * New born * Naming a star is symbolic rather than scientific * For full details or colour brochure, call..Tel: 0181-208 3333 Universal Star Listing, Millenium Business Centre, 3 Humber Road, London NW2 6DW [UK 2]****** Source: NF Focus - (Free paper in Tunbridge & Tunbridge Wells, Kent, area) Date: 9th & 10th September 1997 From: Address withheld by request. Couple's UFO shock A Tunbridge Wells couple are recovering from a brush from the other side after a late night trip home turned into a close encounter with a mysterious flying object. Sally Rouse and Craig Rock were travelling down the A21 at 1.30am on their way home from Biggin Hill (to Tunbridge) when they caught sight of a brightly lit disc-shaped craft hovering nearby. Recounting the chilling tale, Miss Rouse, 22, of Mountfield Rd, said "As we were driving along I looked beside me and thought "what's that?". I thought it was a helicopter with a spotlight underneath. Craig got really excited and said "It's a UFO"." "It was round with flashing lights going one after the other lighting up the clouds around it. I was scared we were going to crash because Craig was not concentrating on the road. It was hovering and then disappeared." They turned off the road (A21) at Tunbridge but had not seen the last of the strange object which appeared again as they were driving up Quarry Hill". (in Tunbridge) "This time it was much closer and we felt like it was following us. It was very creepy. That's when I was really scared and started shaking. Craig wanted to stop the car and take a look but I just wanted to go home," she added. Despite a few sceptical comments from people she has spoken to about the incident Miss Rouse remains adamant that her close encounter was all too real. "We have all seen Men in Black recently so maybe our imaginations are going wild, but I know what I saw and it couldn't have been a helicopter or a plane," she concluded." *** Items in ( ) added by me for clarity. Date of encounter not given. As an addition/confirmation of this my son, 32, also saw an object that meets the description given on 29th Aug 22.15ish GMT from the garden of his girlfriend's home in East Peckam, nr Tunbridge. It was in the WNW, travelling south and visible for some 30 seconds, total, between the trees, at an estimated distance of some 8 miles. Neither of us are strangers to various aircraft in the area as I'm ex RAF and both of us Airband listeners/spotters and Sat-watchers. My son flies model helicopters. Airlanes G1/UG1, A20/UA20, R8 & UR37 are all within a few miles and a Gatwick App/Dep route comes over the house, together with local Light & Heli traffic flying VFR from Biggin, Rochester and Lashenden (Headcorn),and a regular Mil Heli route. A daily total of some 250-300 movements. Regards Annon [UK 3]****** From: ardent@cix.compulink.co.uk (Roy Dent) Date: Sunday 29th June 97 Short Wave Magazine - July 1997 The following item, which may be of interest, appears in the 'Scanning' column of 'Short Wave Magazine' July 1997 issue. STRANGE ENCOUNTERS An anonymous letter about 'strange encounters' informs me of an incident. Birmingham ATC were informed by a number of aircraft that another, unidentified, aircraft was flying in their vicinity. Birmingham ATC had no knowledge of this....the local police helicopter, on finals, reported close visual contact with an unidentified aircraft, which was also unknown to ATC at that point. My correspondent asks if this was an F-117 or other 'stealth type' aircraft....and reports that there are similarities between Birmingham at night from the air, and Bagdhad! As this was Farnborough week, could a 'training sortie' to show off such 'secret' capabilities have been put in to display the potential of the aircraft's invisibility to radar..? Now a letter from Mr A Pritchard of Chandlers Ford. A keen astronomist, which is an adjunct to his scanning hobby, he noted a satellite in high orbit travelling North, tracking towards Cassiopeia. He also noticed a second satellite coming in from the East, at right angles to the first. he informs me that the first satellite was at 8 degrees from the zenith when it was intercepted, indicated by both merging. He said that he then waited for the satellites to part, but they did not. Both continued in company North/South track for eight or nine seconds before the first broke clear and continued on its original East/West course. His question is: objects moving at that speed cannot abruptly make a right angle turn - can they? He asks if any readers can assist him in determining what happened - without going into theories around non-Newtonian motion and aircraft, meteors, etc. If you think that you can assist him, then please write to him at: A Pritchard, 18 Swanton Gdns, Millers Dale, Chandlers Ford, Nr Eastleigh, Hants. [UK 4]****** Source: The People newspaper Date: 5th October 1997 From: Calb1701@aol.com OFFICIAL THEY'VE BEEN HERE! Aliens have been visiting Britain for more than 50 years - and that's official. Secret Government documents reveal that some spacecraft have even crashed-landed here. But the details have been kept hidden from all of us in a giant cover-up similar to that in TV's The X-Files. That is until now. A sensational new book A Covert Agenda reveals that the alien visits are fact and non fiction. The author, full-time UFO researcher Nicholas Redfern, maintains the Ministry of Defence and the RAF have known for half a century about spacecraft which have crash-landed throughout Britain. At least SEVEN UFOs have crashed in Britain since the end of the Second World War. Hundreds more UFOs have been sighted since 1940s. Redfern, 33, from Walsall, West Midlands, also reveals details of a secret MoD base where reports of crashed UFOs are compiled. He has spent years investigating official memos and uncovered top-secret documents which prove that the Government does not want us to know how much it knows about aliens. And in the book he describes how dozens of spacecraft have flown over military bases, by-passing flight security systems. At the height of the Cold War, the Government was so concerned about UFOs that it contacted the Soviet Union to establish a joint task force to examine the security implications of alien craft. But it is the evidence that UFOs have ALREADY landed in Britain which is the most scandalous cover-up in British UFO history. Now turn the page for the full amazing story... REVEALED: SECRET UFO LANDING CASE HISTORY No 1: The British Roswell SIGHTINGS of strange flying objects - later known as Foo Fighter - were reported throughout the latter part of the Second World War by both Allied and Nazi servicemen. The reports certainly went through official channels. American journalist Dorothy Kilgallen was told by "a British official of Cabinet rank" about a Foo Fighter which had crashed in Britain - a case similar to the famous Roswell incident in New Mexico 50 years ago when alien corpses were recovered. Kilgallen was told: "British scientists and airmen examined the wreck of one mysterious flying ship and are convinced these strange aerial objects are not optical illusions or Soviet inventions but are flying saucers which originate on another planet." Retired diplomat and intelligence officer said he believed Kilgallen's source was Lord Louis Mountbatten. Kilgallen's story was backed up by Dr Olavo Fontes, a Brazilian UFO researcher of the 1950s. In 1958, Fontes - already known as Brazil's government was visited by two men who said they were from Navel Intelligence. Fontes claimed that, after initially trying to persuade him to give up his work, the officers revealed that six UFOs had crashed throughout the world during the Second World War. Three were in North American, one in the Sahara Desert, one in Scandinavia - and one in Britain. Fonte wrote in a letter to the Aerial Phenomena Research Organisation: "I was told all of these discs were small craft - 32, 77 or 99ft in diameter. In all of them were found crew members' bodies. "They were little men", and raged in height from 32 to 46in. They were dead in all cases, killed in the crashes. "The examination of the bodies showed they were definitely humanoid, but obviously not from this planet." CASE HISTORY No 2: Penkridge, Staffs, 1964 SPECIAL snatch teams appear to be on stand-by, ready to go into action to retrieve wreckage from UFO crashes. Just before he died in 1994, retired US Air Force intelligence officer Leonard Stringfield told Redfern: "Some time in 1964, a specially rigged navel flagship received a coded radio message. "Artefacts had been recovered with three dead personnel." According to his informant, the decoded report stated that a UFO had crashed in two parts: the main section was in Penkridge, Staffordshire, the remainder in West Germany. Wreckage and the bodies were shipped to Wright-Patterson Air Force Base in the States. The informant added that there was more to the incident, involving coded information, that he preferred to keep confidential. Redfern said: "The disclosure, while sketchy, may spotlight only the tip of the iceberg as to the scope of military crash retrieval operations in foreign lands. It is my suspicion that US special retrieval teams have been, and still are prepared to go into action into any crash location within its sphere of military or economic influence such as was exercised with NATO in the artefact retrievals in England and West Germany." CASE HISTORY No 3: Corwen, North Wales, 1974 A WAVE of phantom helicopters black with no identifying markings - were sighted in areas of Britain where UFOs were reported in 1973-74. They were probably rapid deployment teams sent to investigate UFOs, according to Redfern. One such event happened at 8.3-pm on January 23, 1974. A UFO crashed into Cader Bronwen, a 2,000ft peak in the Berwyn Mountains near Corwn, North Wales. One witness, Anne Williams, said: "I saw a bright light in the sky. It had a long, fiery tail which went dim and then very fire which keeps coming to life. "It was like an electric bulb in shape, with rough edges. The object fell behind the hills at the back of my bungalow and the earth shook." Off-duty police officer Gwilym Owen was drinking in The Dudley Arms pub when there was a roar, a bang and glasses in the pub shook. The sky was lit up over the mountains. Police stations as far away as 60 miles received phone calls reporting the tremor. At the Institute of Geological Scientices in Edinburgh, the crash measured four on the Richter Scale. They told journalists that a meteorite had come down on Cader Bronwen. Witness Ken Haughton saw a "luminous sphere" 90 minutes after the crash in the area. He said the sphere was 400ft across and travelling at a height of about 15,000ft. Army personnel were quickly dispatched to the scene. The next day, a mountain rescue team went to investigate, while the RAF carried out a photographic survey of the area. No trace of a craft or any meteorite was found. "One can only assume," said Redfern, "that unless the UFO exited on its own volition, it was removed by the army." Yet another UFO was seen in the area at 7.15pm that day. "I believe it may have been searching for the remains of the vehicle which struck the Berwyn mountains," said Redfern. CASE HISTORY No 4: Lake District, 1977 A UFO which was sighted over the Lake District wasn't witnessed by just members of the public - 10 police officers saw this extraordinary sight too. Shortly after midnight on August 28, 1977, a large object described either as triangular or diamond-shaped was seen over the Windermere area of Cumbria. As officers reported seeing the craft, colleagues along the UFO's path also confirmed the sighting. After 20 minutes, as the ship hovered above the A592 at Bowness, PC David Wild spotted it at a height he estimated to be 1,500ft. It eventually vanished, witnessed by two other officers, at sea over Morecambe. The most detailed description was given by John Platt. He said: "I was looking up into what appeared to be a giant ocean-going catamaran with twin hulls. A large structure at the front supported what appeared to be two giant lights. Its surface was a dull, shadowy, charcoal colour." CASE HISTORY No 5: Ipstones, Staff, 1991 A Witness known only as Mr M L was visiting friends in the Churnet Valley, Staffs, on July 19, 1991, when he saw an object fall from the sky at nearby Ipstones. The time was 10pm. M L described the object as metallic - like aluminium - 10ft long, cigar-shaped and very bright. He immediately contacted police. They searched the woodland. A helicopter was used as well. No object was located but an area of newly broken branches was found which gave the impression that something had crashed through the trees from above. The search was eventually abandoned. CASE HISTORY No 6: RAF Boscombe Down, 1994 A SMALL twin-tailed aircraft crash-landed on the runway at RAF Boscombe Down, on Salisbury Plain four miles from Stonehenge, at about 11pm on September 26, 1994. Several aviation enthusiasts listening on airband radios drove to the air base next day. They were stopped by police at roadblocks. Before being ushered away, several enthusiasts saw a disabled craft at the end of the runway covered by tarpaulins. Two days later, the wreck was flown to a California military base. Although the craft was initially believed to be a then secret US military plane known as TR-3A, one witness said the crashed craft was completely silent and was able to hover vertically abilities the TR-3A didn't possess. A month before the crash, a lorry driver reported seeing a UFO over Salisbury. Its description matched that of the crashed craft. CASE HISTORY No 7: Hepton Hill, Wilts, 1994 Villagers in the Cotswolds reported seeing a barrel-shaped craft fall into an isolated field on the evening of Halloween in 1994. But they were later told it was a bale of straw. The incident happened at Hepton Hill in Wiltshire near the villages of Church Lench and Norton. The strange object was described by one witness Paul Brooke as resembling a 40-gallon drum. Police sealed of the field and people were warned to keep away. The object was loaded on to a Royal Navy lorry and taken away. Residents raised the matter with both the Fleet Air Arm and the RAF, each of whom later denied any knowledge of the incident. A police spokesman said : "Our investigations reveal it was a bale of straw that was on fire and which the fire brigade put out. Reports of something falling from the sky are either hoaxes or somebody has said something had come to the wrong conclusion." Brooke replied: "What do the police think that we are all mad around here?" CASE HISTORY No 8: East London, 1964 Bus driver Bob Fall was driving the 123 bus from Walthamstow to Tottenham when he had a narrow escape with a UFO. He told a reporter: "I just glanced into the sky and saw something coming towards me very, very fast. It flew straight across the road and, had I been a few yards further, it would have hit the top deck of the bus. There was a loud crash as it struck the bank of the River Lea and a big splash in the water. The craft was at least 9ft long, cigar-shaped and silver." As soon as Fall reported the incident, police arrived and dredged the river, but the object had vanished. An MoD wing-commander was appraised of the details of Fall's encounter - implying that the MoD took his initial report seriously, The MoD files available now are sent and Redfern believes the full story is buried somewhere in Whitehall. SECRET BASE'S COVER IS BLOWN UFO enthusiasts have long believed that highly classified investigations into UFO activity take place at Rudloe Manor in Wiltshire. Redfern offers proof. It is officially acknowledged that Rudloe Manor is the headquarters of the RAF Provost and Security Services (P&SS), where investigators are trained in counter-intelligence. But Rudloe Manor is also the base of the Flying Complaints Flight, which investigates cases of low flying military aircraft. A former special RAF investigator said: "I'm sure that all investigations into UFOs are carried out by P&SS investigators serving in a small secret unit with Flying Complaints Flight." A report of one sighting in 1962, in Taunton, Somerset, was forwarded by the RAF straight to P&SS. The report was not forwarded to the Air Ministry for nearly two months, Redfern said: "Given that department S6 at the Air Ministry was supposedly the focal point for receiving UFO reports, it seems odd that P&SS would neglect to inform S6 of the details for almost two months. "Unless, as seems to be the case, P&SS have a mandate to conduct their own independent inquiries." A letter received by Redfern written by Air Commodore J L Uprichard, the P&SS director, confirms that they have investigated UFO sighting being treated as a low flying incident and investigated accordingly." Redfern said: "The importance of this letter cannot be over-emphasised. Although such investigations are rare, this is documented proof from the director of P&SS himself that UFO encounters have been treated as low-flying incidents." Retired RAF medic Jonathan Turner told Redfern: "UFO sightings by military pilots were never recorded in their flight logs. The station commander would be advertised of the situation and, form there, all information would be forwarded to P&SS. "If national security was considered an issue, the pilots and crews would be advised to keep quiet and reminded they were bound by the Official Secrets Act." The Ministry of Defence has admitted P&SS involvement in UFO sightings. A spokesman said: "Rudloe Manor is the headquarters of RAF Police. In the past it was indeed the RAF co-ordination point for reports of unexplained aerial sightings. The role came to an end in 1992." HOW THEY TRIED TO HUSH IT UP An alarming number of UFOs were sighted around military bases in 1957. One sighting at RAF West Freugh, Wigtownshire, was published by several newspapers. A secret Air Ministry report declassified after 30 years, reads: "It is unfortunate that the Wigtownshire radar incident fell into the hands of the Press. "We suggest that the Secretary of State does not specifically refer to these incidents as sightings on radar." Six years later, after another batch of sightings, the Air Ministry tried to dampen speculation but they failed to point out that many reports were by RAF pilots and radar operators. One of the most controversial sightings took place in Belfast eight years ago. The following is an extract from a report in official Civil Aviation Authority files about an incident on November 11, 1989. "UFO passed above aircraft at 11,200ft and burst into a cascade of lights. Heading due west. Proximity of cloud intensified brightness of light. Sighting confirmed by another aircraft and tower." [UK 5]****** Source: UFO Roundup Editor: Joseph Trainor UFO approaches British warship off Lancashire shore On Friday, October 10, 1997, talk show host Tony Newman of Red Rose Radio at 999MW received over 30 calls from listeners, who claimed to have seen UFOs flying over Lancashire the previous night. Two calls came from men identifying themselves as sailors aboard the HMS Shetland (P298), which was on a cruise in the Irish Sea west of Lancashire. The men reported that "a bright light was approaching the ship." The UFO paced the 60-meter (198-foot) vessel for a few minutes before flying away. Tim Matthews of the Lancashire UFO Society (LUFOS) stated that his group had contacted the UK Ministry of Defence, and a spokeswoman confirmed that HMS Shetland had been offshore at that time. Other callers to the Newman show reported "anomalous lights and spinning discs" over Burnley, Blackpool, Crosby, Southport and Bamber Bridge. Currently investigating the incident are Tim Matthews, Gloria Dixon of BUFORA, Eric Morris and Rory Lushman. (Many thanks to John Hayes for forwarding this report.) -[continued in part 2]-
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 26 {83} part 3 - United Kingdom UFO Network From: United Kingdom UFO Network <ufo@holodeck.demon.co.uk> Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 20:39:05 +0000 Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 16:52:54 -0500 Subject: {83} part 3 - United Kingdom UFO Network ______ _______ ____ ------ / / // ____// |---------------------------------------------- U K / / // ___/ / / ' Oct 25th, 1997 / / // / / / / N E T W O R K part 3 Issue 83 --- (_____//__/ -- (_____/------------------------------------------------ The United Kingdom UFO Network - a free electronic magazine with subscribers in over 40 countries. This issue comes in 3 parts. If any part is missing please mail: ufo@holodeck.demon.co.uk giving the issue number. The issue will be reposted to you. Please put the details as below in the subject section e.g. Repost {83} part 1, part 2 or part 3. Amusing UFO stories =================== In issue {80} of the e-zine I related an amusing story of what recently happened to me, in which I thought I had seen my first UFO. Infact it turned out to be a 'fairy' - a plant know as a dandelion. We asked for you to write in with your amusing UFO relates stories. Here are two of them. Thank you to all who sent your stories in. From: Dave Melton <slydemann@earthlink.net> Date: Monday 8th Sep 1997 An Amusing Story One weekend night in 1974 a friend and I camped on Brodwell Dry lake bed in the Mojave Desert, near Ludlow, California. It's a very desolate spot good for star gazing, as you can see the horizon in all directions. We had a late cook out and were looking at the stars, wondering if we might see a UFO. Later on into the night about 2:30 or so I was looking north when I saw a rather bright yellowish light suddenly blink on. Very soon after another blinked on, and still more until there were about eight to ten lights. We were stunned. My first thought was maybe they were floodlights on a huge radio tower, as they were relatively low on the horizon. But then I could see that they were all moving. My heart was pounding as I trained my telescope on one of the lights for a closer look. It was a bright yellowish light moving slowly down, and I could see smoke just above it, being illuminated by the light itself. Then it hit me. They were paratroopers carrying flairs on a night drop. They had to be. All the lights were the same color, slowly drifting down until they disappeared. While they were all still visible we began hearing the sound of a far away aircraft which sounded like a turboprop, probably a Hercules. The total duration of the sighting was around five minutes. Before we figured out what they were it was pretty exciting. Dave Melton ** From: Lisa SutherlandFraser <lfraser@petermac.unimelb.edu.au> Date: Monday 8th Sept 1997 Amusing Sightings I can totally relate to Dave's story about the "fairy" from the dandelion being mistaken for a UFO. Well mine is just as funny. In all my years searching the skies for UFOs I have never consciously remembered seeing one. About six months ago I'm walking home when it was just dark and over the top of houses in the distance I saw what looked like the moon, though it was very yellow and moving! I briskly walked further up the street so I could see what this was, my heart rate increased as I started thinking "Oh my god oh my god, they're here!". From what I could see it looked like a plasma craft as mentioned by Jaime Maussan in Mexico, it had a similar shape and was moving, well hovering slowly in the distance. I belted home, got in the car and feverishly decided to chase it, took the camera along for proof. Lost sight of it and then drove some 15kms in the direction it was headed. I was thinking at the time, "aren't people stopping, looking at it in awe". Can you imagine my absolute disappointment when finally stopping close enough to see the UFO at closer range, the words "Whitmans Chocolates" in full view plus cameras flashes going off, this was no UFO, it was the Whitman's Blimp which had just started to fly in the skies of Melbourne. Ross Howe of the UFO Reporting Centre had thousands of reports of this darned thing because from afar it is eerily very UFO like! God did I laugh at myself and the fever that overtook me to see my first UFO! Cheers Lisa SF Landing a robotic vehicle on a comet ------------------------------------ In issue {79} of the e-zine we posed the following question: Question: Would it be possible using todays technology to land a robotic vehicle on a passing comet? To record information as the comet travels it's orbit into deep space. To be collected the next time it passes Earth, whenever that might be. In issue {80} we printed some of the really interesting replies that we received. Here is just one more. From: sacpbl@cardiff.ac.uk Date: Wednesday 10th Sept 1997 Landing on comets After having written to you about the possibilities of landing on a comet I was interested to see that NASA are proposing such a mission for the next century. I cannot remember exactly what programme it was in, although it was on Discovery and the main basis of the programme was comets, could they kill us all, how much do we actually know about them. So I guess that NASA believes it is possible to land on a comet, send a probe into the core and hitch a lift until it comes back into the solar system and then eject the probe; then send back the information. Neat stuff! Paul Little --- A FEARFUL SYMMETRY A TRUE STORY OF ALIEN INTRUSION INTO HUMAN LIVES By D. Lynne Bishop A FEARFUL SYMMETRY Copyright 1995 by D. Lynne Bishop All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical including photocopying, recording or otherwise without prior permission of the publisher, except by a reviewer who may quote brief passages. First Printing September 1995 Printed in the United States of America BOOKFINDER PUBLISHING --- CHAPTER SIX At the end of my sister's session on July 12, we all met for an informal discussion with John and his assistant. When I entered the room, he gazed at me and asked, "I have just one question. What were you burying at your horse tree?" A cold chill went through me, and a feeling of guilt swept through on its heels. I had an immediate flash of memory of a piece of metal, lightweight, smooth and shiny, triangular-shaped. I knew it had come from the craft. But the memory scared me, and I told him, "Just my broken horses." I even joked about having buried one of the aliens. I simply couldn't admit to him that I'd had that flash of memory insight, and yet, upon leaving the office, I told my family members that I knew what he had referred to was a piece of metal. My sister smiled, but refused to divulge any further information, since the hypnotherapist had indicated he would like to have a session with me on that particular episode at a later date. The trip home was long. I sat deep in thought for a large portion of the drive, as unbidden memories began surfacing in my consciousness. Late that evening, as my husband and I prepared for bed, I told him what I had remembered about the object, and drew a picture of it. After describing it to him, he suggested that I should send the drawing and my description to the hypnotherapist. The following morning, I mailed the drawing and information to John. After communicating with me about the items I'd sent, the hypnotherapist set an appointment with me for another session, to be held on August 2. In the meantime, I was encouraged by a response to the letter I had mailed Budd Hopkins in February. Enclosed with a brief note was some information about the Intruders Foundation, located in New York. This was my first true glimpse into the magnitude of the alien abduction phenomenon. By the time August 2 arrived, I was anxious to explore more of my memories. I felt less isolated and more secure, and the extreme horror I'd felt at the outset was beginning to dwindle. My mother and I had begun to work through some of our differing opinions, and had become more at ease with each other. My sister's levity in the midst of all the "tragedy and suffering" I'd been feeling was an excellent counterbalance to my doldrums, and eventually won through even my resistance. In spite of myself, my sense of humor was returning. It was in that frame of mind that I attended my next session on August 2, 1992. There was a lengthy pre-hypnosis conversation, during which several potential encounters were brought up. The following excerpts were taken from this pre-hypnosis discussion. John: Okay, let's talk about some of your earlier memories. There was a time, around four or five . . . let's just refresh our minds on what you remember happening back then. Lynne: Okay. I was around four or five . . . and it's nighttime; real dark. I was looking out a window that had several smaller panes, and I see this face. It just burns into my consciousness. I think I had been sleeping, and got up. There's a light on in the house, and I remember that the face just really seemed to shine. I thought it was the bogeyman. I never told anyone about it . . . that seems kind of odd, now. I don't know why I didn't tell her, like, "Mom, I think somebody was out there the other night." John: All right. And what would be your guess as to how old you were? Lynne: I would have probably been about four years old. I asked Mom where we would have lived in a house like that, and she said there were only two homes she could think of. One was in Ft. Bragg, North Carolina. That was just before we went over to Europe, to Germany. The other was a house at Ft. Rucker, Alabama, and I would have been between seven and nine there. Mom said we only lived there shortly before moving onto the Base. I'm sure I was four, because the other age feels too old. John: Is there any other time, early in your childhood, that comes to you . . . any other puzzling memory? Lynne: Well, I've been trying to work on a chronology--there are a lot of weird experiences. I can think of possibly two or three over in Europe. One was when my brother, sister and I were out on a little lake area in Garmisch, Germany. We were playing by ourselves, and all of a sudden kind of looked at each other and said, "Oh, Mom's calling. We've got to go home." The thing was, we couldn't have heard her; she was too far away around the lake. When we got home we told her we heard her calling, and she just smiled. She said we had heard her calling "inside her mind," because she had wanted us to come home. But, we always . . . kind of lived that way, anyway. You know, there were always strange experiences. Another time, when I was around three or four, I was rocking in a little rocking chair on the front porch of our house. There were steps down, and I remember thinking maybe I could rock down them, so I tried, and fell down them, chair and all. I remember running into the house, screaming because I had a really bad cut on my knee that was bleeding a lot. Mom asked me about it, and I told her, "It was mital (metal), Mommy!" She took me to the doctor and he wanted to stitch it up, but I was so traumatized and upset that I wouldn't let him, so they just cleaned it and put some stinging medicine on it. I have a large scar on my knee where the cut was. John: Okay. Tell us about that memory of yours about burying something. (Referring to my sister's earlier session.) Lynne: Okay. Um, let's see . . . after my sister's session, you asked me, "What did you bury by the tree?" And the immediate thought I had was that it was a piece of metal. I remembered that I was ten. I had been at the tree, and my sister had come there and asked what I was doing. I handed her the piece of metal, and told her I thought I should bury it under the tree, that it felt like I should. This tree was my safe haven. It's where . . . I used to collect horse figurines, and whenever they would get broken . . . I hated the thought that Mom would pitch them out. So, I would take them before she did, and go down to the tree. I didn't actually bury them; I just sat them at the base of the tree, and periodically I would go down there and play with them. In fact, the only thing I recall ever burying there is that piece of metal. I didn't get it buried very deep, because that ground was pretty hard! (Laugh). Very rocky down there. Um, but my sister never came to the tree, because that was . . it was mine . . . and . . . she was not into that at all. Uh, she always thought it was kinda ridiculous. But this one time, she came there. The metal piece was rounded, not jagged . . . rounded on one end, with a definite point on the other. To me, it seemed triangular or trapezoidal, but rounded--not angular. And when she came to the tree that time, I buried it. It seems like my sister just wandered off after that, and I stayed a few minutes longer. And it's funny, because after I buried that . . . there was a point where I quit using the tree. After that, I would go sit on the bank of the pond and watch the water, but I never did the tree-thing much after that. HYPNOSIS SESSION August 2, 1992 >From this point, hypnotic regression has been induced. Much of the description of the metal piece and the prologue that followed were the same or similar to the pre- hypnotic memories, so that part is omitted. Where there is a broader scope of description, it is included here. John: . . . Look very closely at this object, and see how it contrasts with the sandy area under the tree . . . Lynne: A bright flash . . . It's about two or three inches in size. There's a bend to it, an S- curve. Fairly thin, maybe half-an-inch thick, not like paper or foil . . . more substantial. It's light, almost reminiscent of aluminum . . . John: . . . drift to the first moment when you saw it .. . Lynne: I see a long . . . like a long neck . . . forming . . . like a pole or something. The top is fanned out. It's in a room . . . and I can see . . . like a flying buttress. Oh, man . . . this room . . . it's so full of equipment, like machinery. Almost like a water . . . reminds me of pipes, fairly good sized . . . maybe three or four inches in diameter. And it comes down to . . . something almost like a fountain affair. Because of the pipes, it makes me think of a fountain. I'm not seeing water, though. The pipes are just that stupid gray color. John: Slowly pan the room and look around. What do you notice in this room? What do you see? Lynne: Ooh . . . I have the feeling I took something! There was something on the side of those pipes . . . it almost made me think of a sink. There's a piece . . . something . . . laying on the left-hand side of it--the side that was near to me. I kiped it. For a moment, I wasn't being watched. They left me alone in here for a moment, and the thing wasn't too far up, so I grabbed it and put it in my left pocket. Then I went and stood back where I was. John: What did you feel as you grabbed the thing? Lynne: Well . . . I kinda had the feeling I wasn't supposed to do that. (Humor evident). Also a mixture of excitement and . . . fear of being found. John: Why would you take it? Why would you risk trouble? Lynne: I think . . . (Crying) . . . I just wanted something . . . so I could say it was really happening. John: Did it feel good to have something in your pocket as proof? Lynne: Uh, huh! John: Okay, so what happens next? How does the scene change? Lynne: The door opened behind me. I didn't turn around, because I was afraid I would look guilty. It's one of the little guys. He comes up to me and just . . . kinda waves his hand. John: And what happens then? Lynee: The next thing is he's holding my hand. You know, he's almost taller than me. John: What happens next? Lynne: We walk out of the room. Whew! (Small whistle) . . . Wow! It's like . . . uh, coming down, falling down. It's like . . . the floor opens up. It's just like . . . all of a sudden . . . It's almost a tube-effect. I was right in the center of this motion. It's fun. It's like a free-fall. A gentle motion down. I don't think I can move. John: Are you alone? Lynne: No. That little guy who was with me in the room is over on my left. Strange . . . Ooh . . . They have weird movement! He turned his head to look at me, and it's not a really smooth move. Almost like he turned his head in stages. Like it didn't really want to bend that way, and he had to really work to move it that way. He looked into my face . . . John: And how does it look to you? As you look very carefully at his face . . . Lynne: So inhuman. He's so inhuman. John: What do you feel as you stare at his face, and he stares at yours? Lynne: I'm trying very hard not to think of that metal piece. I'm afraid he'll read my mind and know I've got it. I'm trying really hard to just act normal. Trying so hard . . . I'm trying to clear my mind. John: You really wanted that piece. Lynne: Yeah. I really wanted it. John: What happens next? Lynne: He drops me off at the tree. Oh, wow! That's why I buried it! (Crying) . . . so stupid . . . I buried it so they wouldn't find it! John: And how did all of this begin that day? Lynne: It was pretty early in the morning, and I went out to play with my horses. I guess it was right around 10:00 A.M., or so. It's funny, I didn't see the ship this time. Must have been right overhead, or something, and I didn't see it approach. 'Cause the first thing I knew was that same little one was just there at the tree. There was no sound. I was just sitting there, doing my normal thing. He stepped from around the tree, or at least that's when I first saw him. Something made me look up. I didn't scream and run. John: Why not? He's so inhuman; why didn't you scream and run? Lynne: (Sigh) . . . I've never been able to. He just looks . . . He just looks at 'ya. And you just go with 'em. John: Does he say anything to you? Lynne: Just the word, "Come." It's inside my head. It's like . . . when you think to yourself, and this thought comes to you . . . so it's like you hear your own voice saying it. Or what you sound like to yourself, inside. And . . . I go. It's not really very far . . . I just walked a few steps, and then . . . up. John: How does that feel? Lynne: It's kind of neat. Take a step, and then I . . . it's like a force that whisks you up. I feel safe. I know I'm not going to fall. It's hazy in the force. I don't see the ground. There's a shimmer . . like a shimmery haze. I don't see the trees or the ground; everything just kind of disappears. But there's a kind of luminosity to it . . . a glow . . . almost like a hazy curtain. John: Okay. And so you buried that thing, 'cause you didn't want them to find it and get it back. Do you ever remember trying to dig it up again? Lynne: I went back once with Mother, years later . . . and I didn't even know why I went back to the tree. But I remember going back there, feeling like I had unfinished business. I forgot it was there. That's so pitiful. (Sad laugh). John: You got your evidence, and then you buried it and couldn't remember it. Well, maybe you can picture exactly where you buried it. Maybe you'll find it, yet. Now, drift back in time, and let's think about a house you were living in, back when you were four or five years old, somewhere around in there. And you can picture where you were living . . . you can picture the house where you thought you saw something in the window . . . Describe what it looks like. What do you notice? Lynne: Um . . . a green footlocker. It's a toy chest. Seems like bunkbeds. John: Where were you sleeping; on the bottom or the top? Lynne: My sister and I alternated, 'cause neither of us liked the top. John: Okay. You can remember how that room looks . . . Describe the room . . . Lynne: There's a night-light, and a light on in the bathroom. I was always having nightmares. Oh, God . . . did I ever! I can remember waking up and being so terrified! I always thought there was a monster that lived under my bed. John: What did it look like? Lynne: Hands. That's so funny! I was always afraid. For years and years, I always jumped out of my bed when I woke up, so it wouldn't grab me. John: So, could you see at all, at night? Lynne: Uh, huh. Mom always left the bathroom light on, so we could find it at night. She knew I was really bad about having nightmares. I used to run into Mom and Dad's room all the time, and wake them up in the middle of the night. I just always dreamed of monsters. John: What did they look like? Like gorillas, or the Frankenstein monster, or a mummy, or a werewolf . . . ? Lynne: Oh, just hands and eyes. John: And what do the hands look like, the ones that live under your bed? Lynne: Oh . . . long fingers. Long, thin . . . white. They weren't . . weren't like our hands. They didn't have five fingers. I was always afraid . . . that it lived under my bed. John: Where did you see it? Lynne: Outside the window. It had big black eyes. Something woke me up. John: Okay. Be very aware of how something seemed to wake you up. Lynne: I remember . . . when I went to sleep, I always had to be sure that my feet and hands were on the bed, and not hanging over the edge. (Humor evident). Because . . . something could grab me. John: So, what got your attention that night? Lynne: I don't really know what woke me up, but I took the cover off . . and I see my bunny slippers. I put them on. I think . . . I think . . . I wanted a glass of water. Went . . . hall . . . I walked down the hall. I turned on the light, and I'm standing in the front room. After I turned on the light, I looked out the window. There's a face . . . there's a face! It's outside the window. It showed up . . . so stark. It's almost sh . . . almost shining! It's white! I'm on a higher level . . . than the face first was. I think I'm on a different level. John: What happens next? Lynne: I'm scared. John: Do you scream and run? Lynne: No, I just freeze. And it's . . . coming through . . . the window. The face comes through. It's kind of . . . a little man. The little guy . . . picks . . . He's picking me up! He just floated in. I didn't see him walk. He just kinda slid. I was scared when I first saw him. I was acting like a rabbit. (Laugh) . . . I was acting like a rabbit, because a bunny freezes. I'm trying not to be noticed. I'm not very big, and he picks me up. It feels like we're going up. I can see the furniture and stuff underneath us. It's funny . . . I know I shouldn't be able to go through the ceiling, but he seems to think he can! (Laugh). I feel protected . . . a protected feeling . . . and safe. It feels like a pull, when we go through the ceiling. John: Can you describe the little man? Lynne: His mouth isn't . . . isn't right. He's just got a straight line. No lips. He's got big eyes. They're not ugly, but they don't have an eyelid. They're dark black. There's something . . . like a lens. They've got a shiny, kind of reflective . . . it doesn't look like a normal eye. John: What do you feel, when you look at those eyes? Lynne: Um . . . kind of lost. There's something above us. It's roundish . . . there are some colors . . . blue . . . going around. And some white. We move closer to it, and there's a little panel . . that slid back. It's kind of dark, at first, but as we're getting closer, it lights up, or something. It looks like a little room. It's all metal-looking, inside. A dull metal. It's a round room; there aren't any corners. No toys to play with. No playmates. There's just him, right now. It's kinda neat, though. He was holding me and brought me on in, and then he put me on the floor, so I'm standing. And, boy, is he bald! (Laugh). He's going over to the right side . . . and he opened a door. Doorway. He's come back toward me, and I know I'm supposed to go with him. I'm walking with him, and he's gliding by me. There's another guy like him walking off to the right, and another to the right. But, they're not involved in what we're doing. John: And what are you doing? Lynne: There's an area on the floor . . . and it looks liquid. I can't swim, but I was really good at floating. He's letting me know I'm supposed to get in this pool. John: So, what happens? Lynne: Oh, I took off my clothes and got in. (Laugh). It's wet, but it's dry. I don't seem to get wet. It was like a bathtub, and I sat in it. Then I lay backward in it. I got totally submerged. I had the feeling I was taking a bath. After a while, I knew I should get out, so I did. I'm standing there, but my clothes are still just laying there. He didn't give them back to me. I had the feeling that I was being prepared for something. --------------------------------------------------------------------- UNITED KINGDOM UFO NETWORK STATEMENT uk.ufo.nw statement: The articles or text appearing within these pages are not necessarily the views or opinions of United Kingdom UFO Network. REPORTS Please forward all reports to: ufo@holodeck.demon.co.uk WWW Visit us on the World Wide Web at http://www.holodeck.demon.co.uk/ BACK ISSUES & FILES For information on receiving back issues and other files send mail with REQUEST INFO in the subject area to: ufo@holodeck.demon.co.uk IRC - (INTERNET RELAY CHAT) The meetings take place at 11pm (2300hrs) each and every Saturday night. Times will vary depending on your location in the world. If you would like to know the time in your part of the world send a mail to: ufo@holodeck.demon.co.uk In the subject section put: IRC TIME INFO In the message of your mail please put: a) Your Country b) Your location c) Nearest major City Connecting to our weekly UFO meetings on the IRC (internet relay chat) is now easier than ever. If you are using at least one of the following web browers: Netscape 3 ++ MS Internet Explorer 4 ++ Simply visit one of the below url's (world wide web) addresses. When the 'ultrachat' page has loaded you will see a large grey filled box somewhere on the screen. It may then take a few more seconds for the java script to load and run. The grey area will then turn white and you will be asked to enter a nickname. Your own name or a nickname will suffice here. Once you press return you will be presented with various bits of information scrolling up the screen. After a few seconds you will be connected to the uk.ufo.nw #UFO channel. Down the right hand side of the screen you will see a list of the people currently on channel. At the bottom of the screen is where you type your messages. The large upper left section of the screen is were you read and follow the proceedings of the meetings. Don't be shy. We are all a friendly bunch. Give it a go. You'll soon get the hang of it. We'll be happy to offer any assistance that you may need. http://www.holodeck.demon.co.uk/ultrachat.html http://www.maygale.org/07/eyesonly http://www.geocities/Area51/Cavern/2646 http://www.tedric.demon.co.uk/ultrachat.htm http://www.ultranet.org/webchat/ufo.html http://web.ukonline.co.uk/colin.light/ultrachat.htm http://web.ukonline.co.uk/phil.light http://www.ufo.grid9.net/ufo.html http://www.us.ultranet.org/webchat/ufo.html http://www.no.ultranet.org/webchat/ufo.html http://crowman.demon.co.uk/ultrachat.html If you are using one of the dedicated IRC programs such as the excellent MIRC available free from: http://www.mirc.co.uk/index.html enter one of the below irc server addresses into your program. The nearer the server to your location the faster the connection. If one fails then try another. London.UK.EU.UltraNET.Org Belgrade.YU.EU.UltraNet.org Kalemegdan.YU.EU.UltraNet.org Singidunum.YU.EU.UltraNet.org Bor.YU.EU.UltraNet.org Zemun.YU.EU.UltraNet.org Gloucester.UK.EU.UltraNET.Org Uppsala.SE.EU.UltraNET.Org Johnson-City.TN.US.UltraNet.Org Haifa.IL.AS.UltraNET.Org Mons.BE.EU.ultraNET.Org Neuilly.FR.EU.UltraNET.Org Hofors.SE.EU.UltraNET.Org Bergen.NO.EU.UltraNET.Org Once you are connected to a server join channel: #UFO The uk.ufo.nw #UFO channel is open 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Visit the channel at any time. There is usually someone there to talk to. For those of you needing help connecting to our IRC meetings send your questions to: ufo-irc-advice@crowman.demon.co.uk If you want to be a little more adventurous and perhaps use one of the dedicated IRC programs such as the excellent MIRC visit the below urls for advice: http://www.crowman.demon.co.uk/ultranet.htm http://web.ukonline.co.uk/phil.light/irchelp.htm SUBSCRIPTION INFORMATION The UK.UFO.NW free fortnightly e-zine covering UFO reports and information from the UK and around the world is now available by subscribing to our new List Server. Send mail to: listserv@sjuvm.stjohns.edu In the main body of the mail put: subscribe ufo fn ln note: in place of fn put your first name. in place of ln put your last name. For example: subscribe ufo John Smith A confirm mail will then be sent to you which you need to reply to within 48 hours to be put on the e-zine mailing list. If you have problems you may also subscribe by sending mail to: ufo@holodeck.demon.co.uk In the subject section of your mail type: SUBSCRIBE Search for other documents from or mentioning: ufo | slydemann |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 26 Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculoso From: Peregrine Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith] Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 23:08:29 -0400 Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 17:17:09 -0500 Subject: Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculoso The Duke of Mendoza presents his compliments, a revelation, and a consolation prize. Equal quantities of egg and chagrin are to be found plastered temporarily on the Mendoza escutcheon. True, Snowbird, Utah may not be in The Times Atlas of the World (my 2 minutes' worth of initial research), although lots of other titchy places are there all right, but there are about 14 Websites for the place. Which gave me an IDEA. By way of a few stabs at the keyboard I found that Guenter (not Gunther) Nimtz can be contacted by e-mail. So can Kermit the Frog, I suspect, but Guenter answered my first query with the words: "It was not a joke." Having watched "Schindler's List" on Lady Amarintha's wind-up tee vee the night before, I found this slightly chilling at first. But Herr Nimtz also offered to send me a review of his experiments. I said Yes please & fired off a few additional questions. When I get all this info, I'll post it here. I was also pleased to find that the NS has posted on its Website a copy of its lead review by Ian Morison this week, which is entirely relevant to this thread, and follows under the dotted line. Moral: whatever Freud said, sometimes a cigar is *not* just a good smoke, and Loy can stop looking sheepish. I'm getting to work with the egg-scraper. Icky wicky. Yours &c Precipitate D. Mistaken Psychic Detective ------------------------------------------------------------ [REVIEW] Search the skies Planet Quest by Ken Croswell, Free Press, $25, ISBN 0684832526 [book cover of Planet Quest] _____________________ FEW areas of research have attracted as much public and media interest as that covered by Ken Croswell in Planet Quest--the long and sometimes tortuous path that has finally led to the discovery of planets orbiting other suns. Our fascination with this find is, of course, down to the widespread belief that planets and their satellites are the most likely setting for the evolution of life. This is an integral part of the story that Croswell skilfully unfolds. We are first given a thorough grounding in the science of our own Solar System, and reminded how its other planets were discovered. The abortive searches for Vulcan, which was believed to be closer to the Sun than Mercury, and Planet X, thought by some to exist beyond the orbit of Pluto, are included to help make us aware of the pitfalls that can occur along the way. We learn how the giant Jupiter protects the inner planets of our Solar System from the vast majority of cometary impacts, and so may allow periods of calm long enough for life to evolve. The heart of this book is naturally about the first discoveries of planets around distant stars. Croswell presents this fascinating story very well. He often quotes those directly involved in the search, allowing us to share their feelings as hopes were dashed or tentative discoveries confirmed. An apt analogy to convey the fundamental problem of detecting extrasolar planets is that it is like trying to observe a glow-worm sitting on the rim of a searchlight. Astronomers are thus forced to use indirect methods to infer the presence of a planetary system. Two such methods have emerged so far. Both depend on the fact that a planet and its star move in orbits around their common centre of gravity. The star will have a cyclic motion as well as its linear movement through space. The cyclic movement can manifest itself in two ways. First, the star will follow an oscillating path that may be detected by astrometric techniques, involving very precise positional measurements taken over many years. Second, its spectral lines will show small periodic changes in wavelength due to the Doppler effect. The astrometric method has a long history--indeed, the "wobble" of Sirius was observed in 1844, and its white dwarf companion star confirmed in 1925. But planets are far smaller than stars. The deviations they cause in stars' paths are far smaller than those caused by the more massive white dwarf star, making reliable detection exceedingly difficult. Investigators have claimed detection of several planets using this technique, most notably two that were supposedly in orbit around nearby Barnard's star. None of these claims has stood the test of time. Accurate measurements of very small changes are also needed for the Doppler method. Here, tiny shifts in the position of lines in a star's spectrum are the target, but the accuracy of the measurements is limited, and this method will not pick out planets much smaller than Jupiter. Success, Croswell tells us, finally came from a completely unexpected direction, as astronomers observing stars similar to our Sun were refining their techniques. A neutron star is the remnant of a supernova--a giant star whose life ends in a massive explosion. The core of the supernova, with a mass somewhat greater than the Sun's, has collapsed down to a diameter of just 20 kilometres or so. The collapse causes it to spin rapidly, and as it rotates it emits beams of radiation that sweep across space. From Earth, we observe these as regular pulses of light or radio waves--hence the name "pulsar" for this type of star. Their actual periods are so precise that minute changes in the observed period, caused by the effects of even a small companion planet, can be detected. Croswell tells us how Alex Wolszczan and Dale Frail discovered a family of three planets around pulsar B1257+12. The innermost is just under half the mass of Mercury, with the outer two around three to four Earth masses and located at distances from the pulsar that are similar to Mercury's distance from our Sun. Planets in orbit around pulsars would be places highly inhospitable to life as we know it, as they are swept by beams of gamma rays many times a second. Perhaps this is why these first extrasolar planets have elicited a rather lukewarm response from other planetary researchers, many of whom are driven by the search for the grail of extraterrestrial life. For them, only planets in orbit around stars like our Sun are really interesting. It should not be forgotten, however, that the pulsar technique is the only one to have shown that planets of masses similar to the Earth's do exist. It will be a long time before it will be possible to detect planets of this mass ranged around normal stars. The first planet around a Sun-like star has, however, finally been found. At Geneva Observatory, Michel Mayor and Didier Queloz use a Doppler technique capable of detecting Jupiter-sized planets. In September 1994, they first observed 51 Pegasi, a star in the constellation Pegasus. By December it was obvious that something strange was occurring, and further measurements showed that the motion of the star varied periodically--every 4=B72 days. The size of the variation implied a planet with around half the mass of Jupiter, but circling the star at a distance of only five solar diameters. Such a weird planet worried them. Not until the following October were they confident enough to announce its discovery. At this time in California, Geoffrey Marcey and R. Paul Butler had already built an even more sensitive system, but one that required considerable computational effort to produce results. Partly because of this, their search had not revealed any planets up to that point. Within a few days of learning of the new planet's discovery from Geneva, however, Marcey and Butler were able to confirm its presence and were soon to discover further planets whose signatures had lain buried within their observational data. Though most of these planets, like the one orbiting 51 Pegasi, were very close to their parent star, one--discovered in orbit around 47 Ursae Majoris--has a mass around three times that of Jupiter, and is twice as distant from its star as our Earth is from the Sun. So for the first time a solar system like ours was beginning to be revealed. These techniques are not sensitive enough to reveal Earth-like planets, but Croswell consoles us by describing how techniques such as adaptive optics and infrared interferometry may be able to do so in the future. It is even possible that, by spectral analysis of their atmospheres, we might detect the presence of ozone, an excellent marker for the presence of oxygen, which could indicate a life-bearing planet. Croswell ends this excellent book with a 50-page section containing a glossary of scientific terms used, and notes linked to each chapter. These give references to an exhaustive bibliography of papers stretching as far back as 1860. This section is just one indication of the detailed research Croswell has put into his book, making it a joy for any student of the subject. I find it hard to see how anyone could have done a better job in bringing this exciting field to the general reader. Ian Morison is a radio astronomer at the Nuffield Radio Astronomy Laboratories, Jodrell Bank From New Scientist, 18 October 1997 =A9 Copyright New Scientist, IPC Magazines Limited 1997
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 26 {83} part 2 - United Kingdom UFO Network From: United Kingdom UFO Network <ufo@holodeck.demon.co.uk> Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 20:39:05 +0000 Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 16:51:12 -0500 Subject: {83} part 2 - United Kingdom UFO Network ______ _______ ____ ------ / / // ____// |---------------------------------------------- U K / / // ___/ / / ' Oct 25th, 1997 / / // / / / / N E T W O R K part 2 Issue 83 --- (_____//__/ -- (_____/------------------------------------------------ The United Kingdom UFO Network - a free electronic magazine with subscribers in over 40 countries. This issue comes in 3 parts. If any part is missing please mail: ufo@holodeck.demon.co.uk giving the issue number. The issue will be reposted to you. Please put the details as below in the subject section e.g. Repost {83} part 1, part 2 or part 3. World News ========== [W 1]****** Source: Daily Mail newspaper Date: Thursday 9th October 1997 It is 280 millon miles across and 100 million times brighter than the sun. So why can't we see the biggest baby in space? by Julian Champkin This is big - monstrously big. It is bursting with energy. And, above all, it is bright. Scientists have found what they say is the biggest and brightest star in the universe. They have called it the pistol star - after the dust-cloud of that shape which surrounds it. One hundred million times as bright as our sun, it is of a sort technically known, reasonably enough, as a super giant. It is about as big as a star can be - and, possibly, bigger. Which makes it a bit of a mystery. And, relatively speaking, as such things go in space, it is not very far away. The universe is made up of millions of galaxies, each one a disc or spiral shape, each composed in its turn of millions of stars. Our own sun is a fairly insignificant star two-thirds of the way out towards the rim of our galaxy - at its unfashionable end, as it says in The Hitch-Hiker's Guide To The Galaxy. The Pistol star, by contrast, is not insignificant at all - and it has what you can only call a fashionable address. It lies almost at the centre of our galaxy, by the spot where all the radiating spirals of stars begin. Its size and its strange position may be connected. Take its size first. Pistol is 200 times the mass of our sun. That used to be thought impossible. Our sun is a mere 864,000 miles across; Pistol is rather bigger. Its diameter is somewhere between 186 and 280 million. If it were placed at the centre of our solar system, it would stretch out passed the orbits of Mercury and Venus; it would engulf the Earth; it would reach the orbit of Mars. An object that big, filled with incandescent helium, sends out a lot of light. It is 4,000 million miles from us, so its light takes 25,000 years to reach us - but in intergalactic terms that is not really so far away. Our galaxy is 60 light years across, and we can see many, possibly most, of its stars. The Milky Way - the white band of stars that arches across the night sky - is made up of hundreds of them. They are the stars of our saucer shaped galaxy, seen edge-on from our position somewhere within its rim. So if Pistol is that bright, and that close, you might think that you would be able to see it somewhere in the Milky Way in the constellation of Sagittarius. Unfortunately, there is something in the way. The dust and gas of the Pistol nebula blocks off almost all the light that comes from the very centre of the galaxy. "Only one photon of light in every million million that it sends out reaches us," says Dr Robin Catchpole, of the Royal Greenwich Observatory. Dr Catchpole did see light from the star, back in 1986, using a telescope in South Africa. "But we could not tell if it came from one big star, or from a cluster of smaller stars close together," he says. It took the giant Hubble space telescope, orbiting 400 miles above the Earth, to show that Pistol was, actually, a single giant. Even then, Hubble had to study light from the infra-red part of the spectrum, invisible to our eyes - and the apparatus to do that was only installed on it recently, in a space-walk by NASA scientists who gave the telescope its three yearly service in orbit. But even the Hubble telescope cannot penetrate the murk that blocks out the visible light from our our new giant star. We still do not know what colour this star would be beneath the curtain of dust that is hiding it. Despite its size, it is young. It was born perhaps a million years ago, three million at the outside. That compares with an age of 4,5000 million years for our own solar system. Even the Earth was in being 4,000 million years ago, before this giant baby began. So it has grown quickly, monstrously fast, in fact. It is a big but sickly baby, outgrowing its own strength. "This big star is burning its candle at both ends," says Mark Morris of the University of California in Los Angeles, one of the co-investigators of the star. "It is so luminous that it is consuming its fuel at an outrageous rate." In six seconds, this star gives out as much energy as our sun does in a year. Despite its size, it simply cannot stand the pace. "It will have a short life and an abrupt end," say its discoverers. "Big stars go through their cycle from birth to death much faster. This one is burning energy at such a rate, that it will explode quite soon," says Dr Catchpole. By 'quite soon' he means in three million years or less, so do not hold your breath. But our sun, in contrast, has five billion years of life left in it. When Pistol goes, it will be in a very big bang. There will be a huge explosion - visible across the galaxy. The last massive suppernova took place in AD 1054, a few years before the Battle of Hastings; and was recorded, among others, by the scribes in ancient China, as well as by Indian astronomers. Pistol is so big that it is near, or possibly beyond, the limit of what astronomers thought possible. "If a star is too bright, it blows itself apart," says Dr Catchpole. "The pressure of all the radiation inside it overcomes the gravity that is the only thing holding the star together." That limit of size and brightness is called the Eddington Limit, after a British astronomer of the Thirties. A star around 100 times the mass of our Sun is approaching the Eddington Limit; and, as we have seen, the Pistol star is either very close to the limit, or actually beyond it. If that turns out to be the case, the astronomers will have to re-think the mathematics of what keeps stars together. "The centre of the galaxy is a strange place," says Dr Catchpole. "There is a great bulge of stars a little distance out, which are all quite old. Astronomers have been debating whether young stars can get born in the very centre, or whether it is a dead, cold region." The Pistol star seems to settle that question: it is young, thrusting, positively bursting with youthful energy. It shows that the centre of the galaxy is a place where stars get born. Still, it is quite a monstrous birth. "It is perhaps no accident that this extreme-mass star is found near the centre of the galaxy," says Mark Morris. "Star formation processes there may favour stars much more massive than our our modest sun." But modesty is often a virtue. Pistol's speed of growth has limited it. Can it have planets around it, and life? "No chance," says Dr Catchpole. "A planet trying to form around this star would have been swamped. This one is just too violent. The dust that comes together to form planets would have been swallowed up." Similarly, its pace of existence would have given no time for life to evolve on any circling planet that did survive. "On Earth, our gentle sun has given us 4,000 million years for us to evolve from amoeba. The Pistol star is just doing everything too fast," says Dr Catchpole. Other galaxies also have centres; and in them, too, similar frenetic giants may be forming and dying. But ET, if he exists anywhere, will be avoiding these overblown speed-merchants. Life elsewhere will have formed around a much more considerate star - something much more like our own. Our sun may not be the biggest, but lets not knock it. After all, it suits us rather well. Big may be more interesting for the astronomers, but for our life forms, at least, middle-sized and longer-lived is best. [W 2]****** Source: Teletext Strange But True Date: Saturday 11th October 1997 Zombies Zombies, corpses brought back to life in Haiti by black magic, are probably (uk.ufo.nw says: "probably!!!") individuals with psychiatric disorders. Up to 1,000 new zombies are said to be created each year, and are frequently recognised by the local population. The study was carried out by Professor Roland Littlewood, from University College, London. [W 3]****** Source: Teletext World News Date: Saturday 11th October 1997 Ozone Antarctic: The ozone hole over the South Pole now covers nearly 8.5 square miles. [W 4]****** Source: Daily Mail newspaper Date: 11th October 1997 Galileo finds life, by Jupitor Life could exist on one of the moons of Jupitor, say scientists. They have discovered evidence that Europa may have all the three ingredients essential to life. Europa, about a quarter the size of Earth and the fourth-largest of Jupitors 12 moons, is known to have two - water and an energy source. Scientists say they have discovered the third - organic compounds - on two of Jupitors other moons. That means the molecules are also likely to exist on Europa. There is speculation that there could be a warm organic 'soup' below Europa's ice-cap, ideal for the evolution of life. The findings, reported in the journal Science yesterday, are based on data from Nasa's Galileo space probe. Nasa scientist Dale Cruikshank said the discovery would intensify work on Europa, which was already 'of very special interest'. [W 5]****** Source: Sunday Telegraph newspaper Date: Sunday 19th October 1997 Hollywood admits to Bigfoot hoax By Mike Lewis and Tim Reid A PIECE of film, which for 30 years has been regarded as the most compelling evidence for the existence of Bigfoot, the North American "abominable snowman", is a hoax, according to new claims. John Chambers, the man behind the Planet of the Apes films and the elder statesman of Hollywood's "monster-makers", has been named by a group of Hollywood make-up artists as the person who faked Bigfoot. In an interview with Scott Essman, an American journalist, the veteran Hollywood director John Landis revealed "a make-up secret only six people know". Mr Landis said: "That famous piece of film of Bigfoot walking in the woods that was touted as the real thing was just a suit made by John Chambers." He said he learned the information while working alongside Mr Chambers on Beneath the Planet of the Apes in 1970. The claims contradict the findings of a forthcoming study by the North American Science Institute that the creature is real. It has analysed the footage and detected the movement of skin over muscles which could not be duplicated by the wearing of an artificial costume. But Howard Berger, of Hollywood's KNB Effects Group, said it was common knowledge within the film industry that Mr Chambers was responsible for a hoax that turned Bigfoot into a worldwide cult. Mike McCracken Jr, a make-up artist and associate of Mr Chambers, said: "I'd say with absolute certainty that John was responsible. A gorilla-suit expert, Bob Burns, said that the alleged Bigfoot shows evidence of a water bag in the stomach area - a trick used to make a gorilla suit move like real flesh. This liquid-stomach technique was developed by Charlie Germora, with whom Chambers worked at Paramount." Mr Chambers, 75, who won an Academy award for his ground-breaking ape masks in the Planet of the Apes feature film in 1968, is now in frail health and lives in seclusion in a Los Angeles nursing home. He has refused to confirm or deny the reports, yet experts say that only he possessed the know-how to create a suit which several examining experts have termed a masterpiece. Tomorrow is the 30th anniversary of the day the Bigfoot hunters Roger Patterson and Bob Gimlin emerged from the wilds of northern California with the celebrated film, perhaps the only footage of unexplained phenomena which has stood up to rigorous scientific examination. Mr Patterson died in 1972 convinced that he had filmed a real Bigfoot. But Howard Berger told a Bigfoot investigator, Mark Chorvinsky: "It was like a gag to be played on the guy who shot it. The guy never knew it was a hoax his friends played on him." Mr Chorvinsky, editor of Strange magazine, who studied the background of the Patterson film for a year, said Mr Chambers created monster suits for the Lost in Space television series of the mid-1960s which look very similar to the creature in Patterson's film. Mr Chambers was also known to have participated in another Bigfoot hoax: the Burbank Bigfoot - a 7ft 4in carcass painstakingly built over a plaster cast of the actor Richard Kiel, best known as Jaws in the James Bond films. The subject of the Patterson film - a large, hairy, upright walking creature with wobbling breasts - is seen walking left to right, turning briefly to glare in the direction of the cameraman before disappearing into the trees, "for all the world like a classic Charlie Chaplin fadeout", according to one critic. Another observer described the creature in the film as a "cross between a gorilla and Mae West". The film was hailed as proof of Bigfoot's existence by British and Russian scientists and expeditions were organised to try to capture the creature. The episode turned Bigfoot into the world's favourite monster and even spawned the popular Harry and the Henderson's television comedy series. But Mr Chorvinsky believes that the scientists have followed a false trail. "Every make-up artist I have spoken to believes it is a guy in a fur suit," he said. Bigfoot enthusiasts disagree. Chris Murphy, a Bigfoot researcher, said: "Very high computer enhancements of the film show conclusively that, whatever it was, it was not wearing a suit. The skin on the creature ripples as it walks." [W 6]****** Source: Sightings On The Radio http://www.sightings.com/ Video screen captures can be seen at: http://www.sightings.com/ufo/mexufo1.htm Mexico City UFO Video Here are four video screen 'captures' from the sensational Mexico City UFO video which is currently under extensive computer analysis by Brit and Lee Elders, Jim Dilletoso at Village Labs, and a major University in Mexico. The video was taken on August 6,1997 and was delivered anonymously to legendary Mexican UFO journalist/researcher Jaime Maussan who then sent it to Brit and Lee Elders in the U.S. The Elders and Jim Dilettoso were Jeff's guests on Sightings On the Radio on October 5. The Elders termed the footage the most spectacular and important they have ever seen and that, if real, it could constitute a veritable "Rosetta Stone" in the history of UFO research, unlocking the reality of the phenomenon to the general public. Jim Dilettoso went into considerable detail explaining the highly sophisticated computer technology being used to evaluate the tape. The October 5 program can be heard on RealAudio Archives through the Sightings website. The video itself lasts just less than 30 seconds and shows the object, about 50 feet in diameter, moving in and around some Mexico City highrise apartment buildings at a height of about 200 feet under overcast conditions. At the point in the video where these two scenes were taken, the craft has just been noted to 'wobble' slightly and then darts behind one of the buildings never to appear again. Cloaking exposed? When the tape was first put up on Jim Dilettoso's three computer monitors, the craft did NOT appear on one of them...it just wasn't visible. Everything else was. As Brit and Lee Elders explained to Jeff, when Jim tweaked the gamma setting on the monitor, the craft suddenly appeared. This, according to the Elders, opens up a whole new realm of possibilities. It could well be that these craft commonly use a relatively simple radiation technique to cloak themselves and appear invisible in broad daylight - especially in overcast conditions. While this remains thoroughly speculative, it is nevertheless therefore possible that the people in this craft thought their cloaking shield was up and operating on that day. Perhaps when someone began videotaping them they realized through some sensing ability that they were being taped and were visible! That might explain why the craft suddenly darted behind the highrise building and never reappeared. If what we see in these pictures is indeed real, it would seem foolish not to assume that such cloaking is an easy technology for these people who have mastered so much else. It would furthermore seem a logical assumption that there just might be craft, hundreds...or even thousands of them, flying around major cities in broad daylight, touring right down major boulevards, looking into the private lives of countless highrise residents, and generally making like Claude Rains in the "Invisible Man"! Just a thought... Brit and Lee Elders also told Jeff that at least 10 witnesses to the event have now been identified by Jaime and that extensive investigations into the sightings are underway. Furthermore, the building from which the video was taken has apparently been identified and the employees will be asked to participate in the investigation. It is now known that these pictures came from Mexican UFO Researcher Fernando Camacho who actually videotaped them from a television program hosted by Jaime Maussan. Fernando's report: This report was submitted to UFOINFO by Fernando Camacho: The images I am attaching were extracted from a video broadcasted the 28th of September 1997 in "Tercer Milenio" hosted by Jaime Maussan. This program is on every weekend here in Mexico. Maussan is a well-respected Mexican Ufologist. On this broadcast he was noticeably excited about the video. He said that he received it on Friday the 26th. Then he proceeded to read a letter that came accompanying the video. After that he showed an amazing piece of footage. On it you see a huge UFO hovering over a building. He estimated its size at 20 meters. You can clearly see the UFO is rotating over its axis. It has a very peculiar motion, as if earth's gravity is affecting it as it flies. For a few seconds the UFO stays fairly static, then it begins to move. It travels from left to right and goes behind a building, reappearing again on top of the same building. It keeps traveling at a slow pase until it goes behind a second building and we never see it again. On the audio you can hear the voices of two guys very excited, shouting and screaming as they tape the UFO. Maussan analyzed the video by testing various "display modes" with a computer and by zooming digitally on the image. He concluded it was highly likely that is was genuine. The following week on the broadcast of October 5th he continued the investigation. He went to the site where the video was shot and found several witnesses that corroborated the event. He was calling it "the Supreme evidence" of the UFO Phenomena. He said that it was the best video in existence of a UFO, and that he would continue with the investigation. I made 4 image grabs of the video. I recorded it on VHS over-the-air so the grabs are not of the highest quality. [W 7]****** Source: CNN From: baylissl@gwent-tertiary.ac.uk Date: Friday 17th October 1997 Sparkling Celestial Affair Stirs Southern Australia. SYDNEY, October 14th 1997 (Itar-Tass) - The telephone of the Australian national bureau for monitoring unidentified flying objects was attacked throughout last Saturday, with avalanching reports of an UFO from hundreds of witnesses. The story of residents of the eastern coast of Australia was that a bright greenish-silvery object was seen floating in the sky for a few minutes before to fall apart in sparkles that rained on the earth. Australian military experts and scientists of the New South Wales observatory are in hypothesis-making, while news media have come up with an explanation that the enigmatic sparkling affair was space junk from the Russian orbiting space station Mir. [W 8]****** Source: Teletext: World News In Brief Date: Friday 24th October 1997 New Russian Stealth Fighter Russia: A new Stealth fighter, described as superior to the US radar-evading plane, has carried out a series of successful test flights, reports said. [W 9]****** Global Surveyor will photograph 'Face On Mars' say NASA On the 12th September 1997 NASA announced that the Global Surveyor spacecraft will infact be taking higher resolution photographs of the Cydonia area (Face On Mars). The spokesman for Planetary SETI Research, an organisation that has published many papers on this fascinating subject, Professor Stanley McDaniel said that there is a "reasonably high probability" that at least some of the objects will be artificial structures designed by intelligent extraterrestrial beings. The main fear at the moment is just how much of the Cydonia region will be photographed. The hope is of course that the entire area will be covered. The resolution of the photo's will be five times higher than any previously taken. [W 10]****** Source: NASA press release Date: Tuesday 14th October 1997 Global Surveyor's Orbit Raised While Solar Panel is Analysed [edited for length] The lowest point of Mars Global Surveyor's aerobraking orbit has been raised temporarily, and aerobraking has been suspended while the flight team analyzes data to understand why one of the spacecraft's two solar panels, which had not fully deployed, exhibited unexpected motion during a recent dip through the upper Martian atmosphere. The spacecraft's current 35-hour orbit around Mars, which was taking it down to 75 miles (121 kilometers) above the Martian surface during each of its closest passes over the planet, has been raised to 105 miles (170 kilometers). The orbit was raised Oct. 12 by the operations team at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), Pasadena, CA, and Lockheed Martin Astronautics, Denver, CO, by performing a brief, 5.15-mile-per-hour (2.3-meter-per-second) propulsive burn at the farthest point of the spacecraft's orbit around Mars. The panel's performance has had no effect on spacecraft power. "We're taking a hiatus from aerobraking for the next few weeks while we study data to try to model and understand the apparent deflection of the solar panel that never fully deployed and latched in place after launch," said Glenn E. Cunningham, Mars Global Surveyor project manager at JPL. "This delay in the aerobraking process will probably change the spacecraft's final mapping orbit from the originally planned 2 p.m. local Mars time passage over the planet's equator to another time, and we are studying several other orbits that will give us nearly the same quality of science results." Several other mapping orbits are available to Mars Global Surveyor to carry out its science objectives. The flight team will explore alternatives in the next few weeks to accomplish the lowest orbit possible and achieve a "sun-synchronous" orbit that will allow Global Surveyor to fly over the Martian equator at the same local solar time each orbit. These sun-synchronous orbits are designed so that the spacecraft's instruments always see Mars at the same lighting angle on every pass over the surface. Additional information about the Mars Global Surveyor mission is available on the World Wide Web by accessing JPL's Mars news site at URL: http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/marsnews or the Global Surveyor project home page at URL: http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov [W 11]****** Still no radio contact with Pathfinder On Wednesday, October 15, 1997, the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena attempted to send a series of commands to the Pathfinder spacecraft on Mars. The commands were uploaded via the Deep Space Network's 100-kilowatt transmitter in Madrid, Spain. The site has two 26-meter steerable antennae and a steerable dish antenna 64 meters in diameter. "In both cases, they had not received a 'transmitter on' signal on the ground, indicating that the commands had been received by the spacecraft." The last successful contact with Pathfinder took place on October 7. A JPL spokesman said, "We fear the signal is falling on deaf ears." [W 12]****** Source: The Times Interface Newspaper Date: 22nd October 1997 A breath of fresh airline By Anjana Ahuja How appropriate that a car should go supersonic on the 50th anniversary of the sound barrier being broken in the air. On October 14, 1947, Charles (Chuck) E. Yeager, a test pilot with the United States Air Force, exceeded Mach 1 in a Bell XS-1 rocketplane. Now Brigadier General, Yeager is still in the business, and acts as flying adviser at Edwards Air Force Base in California. As Aviation Week and Space Technology notes this week, people are already looking towards hypersonic flight, which entails speeds more than Mach 5. Nowhere is this more apparent than in the Hyper-X programme, a Nasa experiment in propulsion. Initial tests on the air-breathing plane will be conducted in a temperature tunnel. The advantage of air-breathing technology is that it takes oxygen from the air for its combustion and propulsion system; this means oxygen does not have to be carried on board. This allows for a bigger payload, or for the vehicle to extend its range. After those initial checks, a B-52 will loft the slender, 12ft plane into the air and release it at about 20,000ft. A booster rocket will kick in, sending the plane to about 95,000ft, when the engine will fire for just seven seconds. In the first test flight, scheduled for mid-1999, the plane is supposed to reach Mach 7. Subsequent test flights will see the plane reach Mach 5 and Mach 10. On each occasion, the plane will arc upwards and then splash down off the coast of California. And the first test plane will be on a kamikaze mission there are no plans to retrieve it from the ocean. Over the next five years the programme will cost $160 million. At the same time, Nasa has also been working on high-speed civil planes. The designs, which look like Concorde, are supposed to be environmentally friendly and economically viable (which cannot be said of Concorde) to encourage more widespread use. Boeing has joined the effort and cancelled its own plans to bring out a supersonic jumbo jet. But it will be different from Concorde in several ways. It will not have a drooping nose, nor a retracting windshield visor. In fact, the plan for the super sonic transport (SST) incorporates no plans for front windows, just side ones. The pilot will have to rely on cameras to see what's ahead. It doesn't worry Nasa it says that using conventional vision, pilots can spot onlyone in three potential hazards. The plane, designed to reach Mach 2.4 and carry 300 passengers, is costing billions to design and build. It will cruise at 60,000ft. To protect against the heat generated by supersonic speeds, the nose and edges will be made of titanium. [W 12]****** Source: The Times Interface Newspaper Date: 22nd Octoner 1997 American navy set to deploy robot planes By Chris Partridge PILOTLESS aircraft may be deployed by the US Navy to destroy enemy fleets and shore installations in future conflicts. The Naval Air Systems Command has awarded a six-month contract to Lockheed Martin to define a family of pilotless naval strike aircraft. Ideas include an aircraft that takes off horizontally but lands vertically, enabling it to take off through a forward port on the ship and come straight down on the upper deck after the mission. Another is a plane which would be fired vertically from the ship and come down in the same manner. The most revolutionary concept is a plane launched from the ballistic missile tubes of a submarine, subsequently landing at a friendly air base or ship. The robot planes would be used to attack targets such as airfields and radar installations and would be guided by a pilot either on board the carrier or even back in a naval base in the US. Pilotless planes are increasingly seen as the way of the future because they remove the most delicate and precious element (the human being) from the fighting machine. They will be able to turn at speeds which would kill a human pilot, and will have no windows the weakest point of any fighter. Once the pilot is removed from the aircraft it can be launched in ways that would be impossible with a man aboard, such as firing it vertically with a disposable rocket. Landing can also be much harder, which means flight decks can be shorter. Although unoccupied strike aircraft are expected to be used extensively in the wars of the future, pilots will still be needed in many roles. The US Navy is currently planning a fleet of large carriers known as CVX, and stealth designs are among the front runners. The stealth CVX would have a long tapering bow, sloping down to the surface like the ram on an ancient Greek trireme, and a flat, unobstructed flight deck. Ironically, the US Navy is seeking ideas for a stealth aircraft carrier just as it is trying to persuade Congress to fund a tenth nuclear aircraft carrier of the Nimitz class ships so big they could easily be picked up by radars on Mars. -[continued in part 3]-
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 26 Re: Alleged UFO Crash Video Tape From: Graham William Birdsall <106151.1150@compuserve.com> Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 06:40:00 -0400 Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 14:37:44 -0500 Subject: Re: Alleged UFO Crash Video Tape >From: updates@globalserve.net,Internet >Subject: Alleged UFO Crash Video Tape >Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 15:48:22 +1000 >From: Dave Everett <deverett@vir.idx.com.au> >Last night on Channel 10 news (here in Australia) they showed a short >video clip that I believe is being shown at the Brisbane UFO Symposium. >The video camera tracks a glowing object (looks cigar shaped or disc seen >from the side) as it travels from right to left. The object follows an arc >toward the ground, strikes the surface and bounces back into the air, >following a parabolic trajectory before hitting the ground again and >exploding into many glowing pieces. >The whole trajectory is reminiscent of a stone skipping on water. >The object is travelling at a high speed and appears to be quite large >(forgive me for those precise technical phrases). >Does anyone have more information on this video or have the faintest idea >what I'm talking about? >Dave Everett. The videotape segment you refer to was indeed shown to the audience at the Australian UFO Symposium, organised by the Queensland UFO Network (17-19 October). The (colour) tape was soundless and ran for approximately 15 seconds. It depicts a fairly bleak desert landscape, similar to White Sands, mountain ranges in the far distance. It is daylight. A very large, white glowing object appears from the right of the screen at low altitude, almost skimming above the surface, at I would guess no greater range than one to one-and-a-half miles distance from the camera. The speed of the object is very fast, probably 200-300 mph. The object travels horizontally for a short period, then dives below relatively minor sized hills in the foreground before rising up to continue what is a fairly erratic course. Finally, the object hurtles into the ground and 'explodes' into hundreds of bright, almost flare-like fragments. No vapour, no smoke no flames (even at the point of impact) were discerned. As the object travels across the desert, at least two wooden telegraph poles flash by - I noticed a jerky movement of the camera at the point where it passed behind the second telegraph pole. My immediate impression? Very difficult to form any definitive conclusion on the basis of one, and then several further private showings where the tape was played over back and forth. If it's a fake, then it's a good one. I can see how some conventional test plane might be masked over via frame-by-frame photo shop techniques. The fact that the tape starts and ends so abruptly and is devoid of anything which might further complicate a hoax i.e., people, vehicles, buildings etc, should be noted. The individual who brought the tape to Brisbane is Jonathan Eisen [sic] who speaks with an American accent but gives his address as Auckland, New Zealand. Source of tape is confidential at the moment, but Jonathan surprised me when I asked if he could tell me when it was shot - he said it was filmed this year. He did share with me a number of computer enhanced images which he claimed had been derived from intensive study of the footage - I believe he said that some three weeks had already been spent on analysis. It will be interesting to discover more about the background of the film, and what conclusions are drawn from those currently investigating its properties. No one should get too excited at the emergence of what is claimed to be the world's first videotaped footage of a UFO crash, until as such times as the full facts are known and the tape has gone through the 'mincer' of independent analysis. Interesting footage all the same. Best regards, Graham W. Birdsall (Editor) UFO Magazine [UK]
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 26 Arabian Sightings From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose) Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 03:37:26 +0200 Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 17:03:20 -0500 Subject: Arabian Sightings Both of these Arabian sightings were found on the ZERO WORLD site: 1) http://www.st.rim.or.jp/~cycle/UFOHE.HTML UFO IN KHARTUM In Arabic, UFO is called 'Tabaq Tahera,' which means 'dish plane.' For your information, Khartum is the capital of Sudan. Just in case, Sudan is in Africa, in the south of Egypt. A Saudi newspaper reported that UFO is witnessed in Khartum in October 1996. Around 4 a.m., a shining object flew from east to west and stopped for a minute 10 meters above the ground. A witness said, "It has round body with windows, from there red light was coming. And the white light was coming from the bottom." Another person said he picked up an object which looked like a piece of clear glass, but it suddenly dissappered. And the UFO stopped by a bakery! It stopped 5 meters above the ground in front of the bakery, but flew away when the crowds came. It seems like UFO is concerned all over the world. (ZERO WORLD HOMEPAGE) ******************************* 2) http://www.st.rim.or.jp/~cycle/UFOE.HTML UFO IN SAUDI ARABIA Perhaps Saudi Arabia is an unknown country for many people. Some of the differences are ... you can't drink there, and women cover their faces with black veil ... which give this country very mysterious image. But UFO didn't choose the place to appear. An Arabian economic paper, Iquetisahdiya reported the UFO story on April 1 of this year, which told that on March 28, some campers saw a blue oval light in the sky near Jebail, in the east of Saudi. (Hopefully this is not an April fool's joke, S.A.). You can find Arabian books on UFO in the bookstores in Riyadh, the capital of Saudi Arabia, although they were published in other Arabic countries like Lebanon or Jordan. *****************
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 26 NASA Ion Engine Ready To Make Sci-Fi Reality From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose) Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 03:34:30 +0200 Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 16:59:18 -0500 Subject: NASA Ion Engine Ready To Make Sci-Fi Reality Found at: http://www.abcnews.com/sections/scitech/ionengine1016/index.html *************************** Solar Electric Propulsion Ready for Deep Space Ion Engine Making Sci-Fi Reality SCI/TECH NEWS E-mail ABCNEWS.com For space science, we can take advantage of the lower cost and the advanced technology to get the same information [that NASA's getting now]. Jack Stocky, NASA DS1 spacecraft marks the first time ion propulsion, rather than chemical propulsion, will be used. (NASA) By Joe Feese ABCNEWS.com In an early episode of Star Trek called "Spock's Brain," evil aliens take First Officer Spock's brain and speed off in an ion-powered spacecraft. The Enterprise crew is devastated - how can they possibly catch an ion-propelled spaceship? Fret no more, Captain Kirk and fellow shipmates: Space technology has nearly caught up to science fiction. A futuristic form of spacecraft propulsion called ion engine propulsion is one step closer to becoming a reality. The ionic thruster (NASA) Deep Space 1 (DS1), the first launch of NASA's New Millennium program, will use ion propulsion (also known as solar electric propulsion) to power the craft on a deep-space mission next summer. This will mark the first time in the history of space exploration that ion propulsion, rather than chemical propulsion, is being used as the primary means of propelling a spacecraft. On Sept. 25, Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif., completed the most extensive test of an ion engine ever performed. Begun on June 17, 1996, the 8,000-hour endurance test of a prototype xenon ion engine verified that the engine has what it takes for long missions. DS1 is now set to launch on July 1, 1998. During its two-year test mission, the spacecraft will fly by Mars, an asteroid, and a comet, serving as a spaceborne test bed to validate new technologies. Little Engine That Could DS1's xenon ion engine, which fires electrically charged atoms from its thrusters, is just 11.8 inches in diameter and is powered by more than 2,000 watts from large solar arrays, which focus, collect and store solar energy. Using xenon, a heavy inert gas, for fuel, the engine ionizes (gives an electrical charge to) the gas and electrically accelerates it to a speed of about 18.6 miles per second (about 70,000 miles per hour). When the xenon ions are emitted at such a high speed, they then push the spacecraft in the opposite direction. The converted xenon appears as a ghostly blue haze that trails from the back of the spacecraft as it catapults through space. Perhaps the strangest thing about ion propulsion is that it provides about the same amount of thrust as the pressure of a single sheet of paper held in the palm of the hand. So how does that power a spacecraft? As more and more ions are emitted, this low thrust gradually changes the craft's velocity from low to high speed. Since the cumulative mass of the positively charged ions fired out of the thruster doesn't weigh much, the spacecraft moves only millimeters per second in its early stages of flight. But as the energy produced accumulates, the speed can eventually build up to 70,200 miles per hour, compared to just 10,400 miles per hour for the fastest chemical propulsion engines with the same vehicle launcher and amount of propellant. Staying Power In addition, the ion propulsion engine is so efficient that it can operate on a small amount of propellant for months - considerably smaller, and thus lighter, than the amount of propellant on board a chemically propelled spacecraft. This makes ion propulsion ideal for long missions. And since the ion-propelled spacecraft are lighter, they can launch from smaller, cheaper launch vehicles. "For space science, we can take advantage of the lower cost and the advanced technology to get the same information [that NASA's getting now]," explains Jack Stocky, manager of the NASA Solar Electric Propulsion Technology Application Readiness program. "That allows us to do more missions and makes the program more exciting and more interesting to the public." These factors contribute not only to tremendous savings for NASA but also greater public support for space exploration, making ion propulsion the likely choice for tomorrow's most distant missions. Copyright 1997 ABCNews and Starwave Corporation. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed in any form.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 26 Alfred's Odd Ode #193 From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com> Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 05:09:17 -0600 Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 22:37:17 -0500 Subject: Alfred's Odd Ode #193 Apology to MW #193 (For October 26, 1997) Been having SPAM for breakfast since the Updates went away. People selling sex and soap, their stuff in disarray. CNN and NBC, or even center FOX Won't touch the stuff that Errol prints, and sends out to my box. This song's about our Errol, and I see him in green tights <g>. And like Robin in dark Sherwood, it is he that brings the light. To go on any further is to fawn unentertaining, So, I'll discuss his motivation and entertain in the explaining. He's a government plant to keep track on the wackiness? He lulls us to false sense -- secure in his craftiness? A master -- black ops of the true M.I.B., Does he orchestrate our thinking, does he spy on you and me? Could he be an ET Alien that is saddled with the task Of breaking us in easy as he hides behind his mask? Does he keep a probe handy performing experiments That works to *our* use of his cooler accouterments <g>? A watcher unseen from the stars in the night? Does he make communication out of frame, and out of sight? Does he have unguessed agenda, is he busy at his work? Does he hover in dark corners, is he shadow, does he lurk? Rebecca says he's wonderful, but she's probably in his spell. He _is_ mondo friendly on the phone, with manners smooth as hell. But I'm not fooled, he's hiding something -- Updates is a front! I'll bet there's devil worship! I'll be Falwell's foil -- (a skunk)! I must alert the Christian Brotherhood, (tell the sisters "go along")! Mass against his Satan worship, be conservatively strong. E-mail from demon Updates is a weave of evil runes That causes masturbation, rock and roll, or those sexy devil's tunes! What are his secrets, what are his plans, <When will he publish the Updates again?> Doesn't he realize, doesn't he care There are thousands just sitting, awaiting -- a'stare. Eyes glued to useless monitors a'flicker with the tripe That comes from pocket picker's vile invasive spamming hype. I even read a "READ THIS," that went on about "free money" That I "get" by sending dollars to a man who _keeps_ them=85funny. I bet it's Errol gets those dollars -- in some mad cruel twist of fates. How else could he afford the time he spends on E-vil Updates! How else would he long tolerate imposition such as mine, As I paint that I appreciate his efforts with my rhyme? Lehmberg@snowhill.com I bet he's got a killer old lady, too. Just a feeling. Thank you Errol, for the valued service that you perform, and know I miss you when you're gone ... but for you, I would be a *self published* poet <g>. -- Explore the Alien View? http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/arecibo/46/ "I cleave the heavens, and soar to the infinite. What others see from afar, I leave far behind me." - Giordano Bruno, while burning at the fundamentalist's stake. Later on EBK would risk the _same_ stake. =B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1= =B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1= =B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1 Government or Social Harassment REPORT - Presently, "ZERO" Personal HARASSMENT; however, the harassment index is infinite for each of us. Consider the ubiquitous, extensive, and pervasive SPAM.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 26 Re: From: c549597@showme.missouri.edu [Barbara Becker] Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 22:16:09 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 22:17:39 -0500 Subject: Re: > From: RGates8254@aol.com > Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 21:50:32 -0400 (EDT) > To: updates@globalserve.net > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: More on the Gulf Breeze copyright issue > In a message dated 97-10-19 20:11:55 EDT, you write: > > From: c549597@showme.missouri.edu [Barbara Becker] > > Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 11:21:12 -0500 > > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > > CC: mcashman@ix.netcom.com > > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: More on the Gulf Breeze copyright > > issue > > > To: updates@globalserve.net > > > From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com> > > > Subject: More on the Gulf Breeze copyright issue > > > Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 02:27:05 -0700 > > > On p 134 of the MUFON Symposium proceedings, 1988... > > > "In early December, the National Enquirer contacted Duane Cook > > > about buying rights for a one-time publication of the photos he > > > had published. The Enquirer offered Duane several thousand > > > dollars for these rights. Since Mr. X had indicated that Duane > > > could have the photos, Duane accepted the offer." > > The only thing this confirms is that Duane Cook KNEW, when no one > > else did, that Ed Walters was "Mr. X." For your information, > > regardless of how you decide you want the law to be, ED WALTERS > > owns the copyright, (registered at the LOC) for photos 1 through > > 19 on his first copyright registration. So if Duane Cook "gave" > > the photos to the ENQUIRER and if they used them "ONE TIME", then > > it was with ED WALTERS NOT DUANE COOKS permission. > > > I think there are two things clear from this about journalistic > > > attitude toward copyright with regard to anonymous photos. 1) > > > Cook believes that the Sentinel owns such photos and can legally > > > sell rights pertaining to them, and 2) the Enquirer agrees, since > > > they contacted Cook to make the deal. > Having myself been in the journalistic/newspaper business several > things come to mind. I have been seen many instances over the > years of newspapers "publishing" unique photos that were later > "officially copyrighted/registered" by the owner of said photos. > Also many newspapers have people sign a publication release > either limited or general which allows them certain rights, and > restricts the owner on his use for a certain period of time, i.e. > so the photos don't show up in the competition newspaper the same > day. You are absolutely 100% correct. A work can be registered at the LOC at any time. ALso, you are talking about permission to use a work as part of an exclusive license. > As long as Ed Walters doesn't pursue the issue in court, the > whole thing is a mute point. Why would Walters pursue the issue in court? He owns the copyright to ALL photos from 1 through 19 on his January 12, 1988 copyright registrations. Ed Walters allowed Cook to allow the Enquirer to use the photos. Thats the point. When no one else was supposed to know who Mr. X was, Duane Cook did. Cook also slipped up when he put the first photo in the newspaper. (Nov 19, 1987) He wrote that the photos he printed in the Sentinel were taken IN THE FRONT YARD of "Mr. X's" house, and the only way he could know that was if he knew AT THE TIME he printed the photos, that Ed Walters took them. > > The ENQUIRER contacted Cook because he knew how to contact Walters. > > > Note that these are not the Believer Bill or Jane photos - Cook > > > actually has a contact with regard to these photos, unlike the > > > situation with Bill or Jane where total anonymity is the case. > > > Yet Cook still accepts the offer. This would tend to substantiate > > > that he would believe he would have the right to assign copyright > > > to Ed. > > Cook cant "assign" anything to anybody. He doesnt own any of the > > photos nor does he own the copyright. No matter how hard you > > wish Dorothy, it aint gonna happen. > > BB > I can tell you haven't been to involved in the journalistic/publishing > side of life. This sort of thing happens in the publishing industry. > For example if I submit an article and photos to newspaper X or > magazine Y, and I sign a contract/release at or before the time of > publication THAT PUBLICATION CAN LEGALLY CLAIM COPYRIGHT even though > the photos were MINE and the article came from my head. AGAIN IT ALL > DEPENDS ON WHAT SORT OF RELEASE/CONTRACT WAS SIGNED BETWEEN ED > AND THE NEWSPAPER. Right again. THAT'S CALLED A TRANSFER AGREEMENT. Where you or your authorized agent sign a contract legalling tranferring YOUR copyright (and all of its exclusive rights) to the publisher. HOWEVER, Ed Walters DID NOT relinquish his copyright tohis photographs. When Duane Cook allowed the Enquirer to use the photos, he did so with Ed Walters permission. > Another example is Oped pieces of letters to the editor. In theory > once published they can be covered under the publications copyright > umbrella unless the author otherwise specifies. > Absolutely right again. Just like the Bill and Jane photos. > Over the years, again depending on the release/contract that was > signed, if the author/owner say wanted to include that story and > photos as part of a book, he would have to request permission > from the magazine originally submitted to. Absolutley true...if the author relinquishes his/her copyright. BB
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 26 Re: Solved abduction cases? From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl> Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 04:44:37 +0100 (MET) Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 22:29:45 -0500 Subject: Re: Solved abduction cases? >Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 20:54:11 -0400 >From: James Easton <pulsar@compuserve.com> >Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Solved abduction cases? >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >Regarding... >>Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 01:22:34 -0500 >>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Solved abduction cases? >John wrote: >>Henny writes, >>>Not only is the ET hypothesis taken seriously outside the USA, >>>government officials of several countries, such as Chile, >>>Belgium, Mexico and Russia, have openly stated that their air >>>space has been violated by craft that do not originate on this >>>earth. >>Now this is one piece of reality that you'll never see debated! >John, >The reality is, if I may paraphrase, that, with rare exceptions, there >is no indication the ET hypothesis is taken seriously by the vast >majority of government officials, either within the USA or elsewhere. James, You missed the point. The reality of this discussion is that we were pointing out that the ET hypothesis was taken seriously outside the United States to demonstrate ET is not just popular in the USA. It's you who is now limiting this question to government officials, whereas I mentioned them only as further demonstration of my point. It is also you who now demands that there should be a vast majority of it them who take ET seriously, thereby doubly corrupting the discussion. >>Here we have "official" government releases of information, some of >>it formidable as in the case of the Belgium government, (military, >>radar data, reports from credible sources on the ground -Gendarme- >>etc.) and yet it is still not taken as an "official announcement" >>that something 'out of the ordinary,'...'possibly not of this earth' >>is -hoopty doin it- in our skies. >The Belgium reference is a good example of the questionable data which >some government officials base their beliefs on. It could be pointed >out that rather than an ET origin, the reports of triangular UFOs >which proliferated from December 1989, might have a connection with >the unidentified isosceles-triangle shaped aircraft which recognition >expert Chris Gibson witnessed flying with a KC-135 Stratotanker and >two F-111s only three months previous. Sorry, this is total hogwash. There is no human made craft around that can at the same time hover, fly at speeds of a few miles p.h. and accelerate with over 40 G's through the speed of sound and all that without making a sound. The aircraft you refer to is the Aurora spy plane which falls in the category of human made craft. One of the clues that this plane was flying were the results of measurements by the US Geological Survey. The USGS is the outfit that monitors earthquakes and they tracked Aurora when it went through the sound barrier. Does that sound like a plane that makes no sound? >Or that the F-16 radar data from the Belgium flap was _officially_ >explained by the Belgian Air force as ground clutter and no pilot ever >witnessed an actual object. >Etc. Hogwash again. I should simply say do some elementary research on this one, James. The people who were involved in this investigation would either have been insulted or would have rolled over the floor over this explanation. Ground clutter! The official explanation was 'unknown craft'. You are partially right that the F16 pilots chasing the UFO did not witness the object, but then we are talking about visual contact. There was radar contact, however, and the position and manoeuvers recorded on radar tape matched the observations of multiple witnesses on the ground. >>About a year ago I put this same piece of information on the >>table in another thread Henny, the silence was deafening. It must >>be a hard set of facts to rationalize/debunk I guess! >The facts are that a few such individuals believe the ET hypothesis >to be true. The facts are that a few individuals have a reluctance to do even the most basic research, which is very apparent from the fact that they are not even aware of the most popular debunkers 'explanation' of this case. __________________________________________ / Met vriendelijke groet/Best wishes \ Henny van der Pluijm hvdp@worldonline.nl Technology Pages http://www.worldonline.nl/~hvdp \______________________________________/
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 26 Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculoso From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl> Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 04:02:46 +0100 (MET) Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 22:20:09 -0500 Subject: Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculoso >Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 21:41:52 -0400 >From: Gunslinger Peat <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith] >Subject: Zeta Notso Ridiculoso >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>, >The Duke of Mendoza presents his compliments between guffaws. >>Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 20:17:08 +0200 (MET DST) >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >>From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl> >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculoso >>I eyeballed the date months ago and I phoned the New Scientist >>editors in London. The article was not an April Fools' joke. >If you'd care to post the name of the editor you spoke and the >date you did so, I'll happily cross check this. >Now, will you tell me how someone can measure the exact speed of >a signal traveling at FTL speeds with instruments that operate at >or less than the speed of light? Or how an EM microwave can travel >at FTL speeds without turning into something different from an >EM microwave? >Have you any idea of how long it takes EM radiation to cross >12cm of space at c? 1/2,500,000,000 of a second. Know any cheap kit >that can measure periods of time like that? >And do please show us all where Snowbird, Utah, that world-renowned >conference center, is on the map. I may want to visit one day. >And do please use the brain the good Lord gave you, just for once. >Yours &c >Polyfilla D. Mangrove >Swamp Light Peter, Having noted your apparent lack of physical and mental exercise these days, I suggest you get out of your armchair, use those legs the good Lord gave you and move yourself to the nearest university library. I'm sure you can find everything you want about this article there and more. __________________________________________ / Met vriendelijke groet/Best wishes \ Henny van der Pluijm hvdp@worldonline.nl Technology Pages http://www.worldonline.nl/~hvdp \______________________________________/
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 26 Re: Becker Claims Copyright Infringement by From: kwyatt3@juno.com (Keith E Wyatt) Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 09:42:54 pst Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 23:44:06 -0500 Subject: Re: Becker Claims Copyright Infringement by >From: c549597@showme.missouri.edu [Barbara Becker] >Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 22:58:23 -0500 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Becker Claims Copyright Infringement by > Maccabee >THIS HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH THE COPYRIGHT PIECE I >WROTE IN OCTOBER 1997. It has to do with a paper I wrote, >copyrighted and posted to MY OWN BBS in 1990. I told Maccabee >that he could quote parts of it but I did not want it chopped up >the way he did. Maccabee said fine and Glenn Campbell turned >NAZI. I think someone is making a mountain out of a mole hill. Under the law there is fair use and anyone can use fair use quotation to rip or praise a "published" work. To turn to slander of someone who uses your copyrighted work makes a counterclaim possible. If a person whose copyright is violated turns to slander of the copyright violator they have made a big mistake. To use the term NAZI is inflammatory since NAZI often refers to the murder of millions of people for their ethnic heritage. Something that a certain copyright violator was not or is not a party of. When you have a legal dispute it is better to communicate privately about such matters. While it is legally wrong to violate copyright sometimes it is better to work out a more friendly solution. Sometimes mediation works very well and can resolve issues more quickly and privately. Ref: RTC vs Lerma Keith ---------------------------------------------- Keith Wyatt <kwyatt3@juno.com> http://www.teleport.com/~kewyatt/yaufowp.html PGP Key available on request --------------------------------------------------
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 26 Re: Questions for Abductees From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com> Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 10:26:54 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 23:38:58 -0500 Subject: Re: Questions for Abductees >Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 03:59:47 -0500 (CDT) >From: Michael Wayne Malone <wayne@fly.HiWAAY.net> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Questions for Abductees >> From: wlmss@peg.apc.org [Lawrie Williams] >> Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 04:57:14 +1000 (GMT+1000) >> To: updates@globalserve.net >> Subject: Questions for Abductees >> How anyone can draw such extensive inferences both factual and >> moral from the minimal information I provided is quite beyond me. >> My file was brief and lucid before consumption, and related to a >> very real event. Now it has become a mini-myth and has taken on a >> life of its own. I am mightily entertained. >Mightily entertaining to watch you as well. How did you draw >such an extensive inference of facts about a child's experience >without interviewing the subject? You actually took second hand >information, drew a definite conclusion, predicted an uncheckable >hypothesis, tainted an abduction information source and insulted >field researchers all without leaving the comfort of your chair >of interviewing the original subject. >Nice peice of work. I am a little surprised that the legal ramifications of this matter haven't been discussed. I have watched this discussion with interest, and wonder if those who provide advice and counseling have taken the precaution of obtaining liability insurance to protect their assets. In this emotionally charged genre we have already seen legal suits brought against those who provide such counseling. In the "brief and lucid" information provided on this list, it is apparent that such action could be brought by the parents of the youth involved, and by the youth at some future date, if additional counseling were to show that this contact led to psychological difficulties. Even if the parents were to give permission, that would not entirely shield the "therapist" from legal action. I don't raise this issue as criticism of the current matter under discussion, since others have already chosen to make those points. But, there are legal issues involved here that should be kept in mind no matter how good one's intention may be. Steve
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 26 Casting Call for TV Show From: Beyond Boundaries <jmurphy@onramp.net> Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 23:13:47 -0600 Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 23:13:47 -0600 Subject: Casting Call for TV Show For major network weekly one hour TV show We are quickly assembling an international, English speaking, team of the world's top scientists for professional analyses of UFO related and other paranormal anomalous current events and expedition findings Need to fill consultant positions in the following fields of study: Psychology Physics Astrophysics Archaeology Anthropology Paleontology Molecular Biology Chemistry Gemology Geology Medical physician Clergy On camera experience helpful but not necessary Travel Expenses and Consulting fees paid, or course! If this opportunity interests you, and you are free to travel on call, then please send a resume / biographical sketch, a professional photo or polaroid of yourself, and a VHS tape expressing your interest in this position and why you qualify as the person of our choice to Beyond Boundaries - PO Box 250 - Rainbow TX 76077 for our receipt on or before 8 Nov 97. If you have questions please leave a message at 1-800-259-8747 BEYOND BOUNDARIES - Research and Expeditions Worldwide **************************************************************************** ************************************ New Website ( check it every few days for updates ) - http://rampages.onramp.net/~jmurphy **************************************************************************** ************************************ PO BOX 250 RAINBOW TX 76077
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 27 UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 2, Number 41 From: Masinaigan@aol.com Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 13:01:44 -0500 (EST) Fwd Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 00:00:03 -0500 Subject: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 2, Number 41 UFO ROUNDUP Volume 2, Number 41 October 26, 1997 Editor: Joseph Trainor MEXICAN UFO VIDEO IS NOW A QUICKTIME MOVIE The videotape of a dark gray saucer shot in Mexico City on August 6, 1997 is now available for viewing on the Internet as a Quicktime movie. On October 16, ufologist Fernando Camacho contacted a friend in Mexico who owned a MacIntosh AV computer. Camacho's friend translated the color 35-second video into a Quicktime movie. According to Camacho, the video was first aired on Mexican television on September 28 on the "Tercera Milenio" (Third Millenium) show. The broadcast was repeated the following Sunday, October 5. The Quicktime movie, Camacho said "is of good quality and lasts for about 60 seconds. Its size is 4.4 megabytes." According to CNI News, the videotape shows "a saucer-like object between 35 and 50 feet in diameter; the object is located approximately 1,200 yards from the camera; the object is rotating in a counter-clockwise motion; and it seems to have some kind of 'cylinders' attached to the flange, the center- line of the disk, that rotate with the flange in counter- clockwise motion. These do not appear to be portholes or lights but rather something that is attached." CNI News quoted Lee Elders as saying, "When you first see it, it appears to be 300 feet above the ground. We estimate that based upon the fact that the high- rise apartment house standing in front of the ship to the right seems to be somewhere between 400 and 450 feet in height, based on the numbers of floors." "The ship is hovering below the apartment house," Elders reported. "Then it rises up over 100 feet behind the apartment complex and then flies--not exactly over-- it's still behind the complex maybe 100 meters. Then it dips down behind the apartment house..." (See CNI News, volume 3, part 16, page 1 for October 16, 1997. Many thanks to Mike Lindemann of CNI News for forwarding this item.) One witness who saw the Quicktime movie had this to say: "It's definitely a 'must see.' Even though it's a low-res (low resolution) copy, the detail is really amazing. The creepiest thing is the way the flying saucer goes from a hover to forward motion without any indication of inertial lag, like it had no mass. I did like the way you can see the saucer through one of the windows in the (neighboring) high rise as it passed below." The Quicktime movie is available at a few locations on the Web. Christopher Penrose has it at this URL: http://www.sfc.keio.ac.jp/~penrose/eth/mexicocity.html Also see ftp://os.inf.tu-dresden.de/pub/incoming. The file is called ufomex6aug.mov. Also at ftp://judy.sfc.keio.ac.jp/pub/ (Muchas gracias a Fernando Camacho para eso articulo.) POLAROID PHOTOS OF UFO SHOT IN SOUTH AFRICA About a week ago, a photographer we'll call Derek Kuiper arrived at an industrial park on the outskirts of Eshowe, northern Natal, in South Africa, not far from the Indian Ocean. After parking his car, Derek took out his Polaroid camera and proceeded to shoot color photos of the park for a client. When the first photo emerged, Derek squinted at it in puzzlement. The scene showed "a small light on the horizon," one that had not been present when he looked through the viewfinder. "The second photo, which was taken very soon afterward, shows a strange object in the sky," reported Craig Thompson, who investigated the case. "The object was never seen. It only showed up after the photos were developed." The photos can be viewed at the following URLs: http://www.humanoidsoftware.com/ufo/ufo1-300.jpg and http://www.humanoidsoftware.com/ufo/ufo1-600.jpg. Enlargements can be found at http://www. humanoidsoftware.com/ufo/ufo2-300.jpg and at http:///www.humanoidsoftware.com/ufo/ufo2-600.jpg. Eshowe is 160 kilometers (100 miles) northeast of Durban, South Africa. The town is also 352 kilometers (220 miles) northeast of Mount Ayliff, where Mamlambo, the giant river monster, was reported last May. CHILEAN JETS PURSUE UFO OVER PUNTA ARENAS A Punta Arenas man claims to have witnessed two jet interceptors of the Fuerzas Aereas de Chile (FACh) in pursuit of a UFO over Punta Arenas, the southernmost city in Chile. According to a report by Dr. Carlos Munoz, an investigator for Agrupacion de Investigaciones Ovniologicas (AION), Chile's famouse UFO study group, the night of September 15, 1997, Jesus Montalvo "was on a road outside Punta Arenas when he heard this 'BOOM' like sound coming from behind his car. As he stopped to see what it was, a huge disc-shaped UFO flying very low came from behind and passed right over his car. And, for a bigger surprise, the UFO was being followed by two FACh jet fighters which had no lights on (combat mode). He watched the pursuit until the UFO made a fast acceleration, disappearing instantly from the sky, leaving behind the two jets." According to AION president Rodrigo Fuenzalida, FACh has been "on alert" since UFO videos shot in Punta Arenas and Iquique in northern Chile were aired on Canal (Channel) 7, Television Nacional de Chile, in Santiago de Chile, the nation's capital. (Muchas gracias a Luis Sanchez Perry para ese informacion.) NEW CHILEAN UFO FLAP IN THE VINA DEL MAR REGION On Tuesday, October 14, 1997, at 8:30 a.m., a UFO hovered near a school located in Santiago de Chile. Several dozen students and a professor spotted the daylight disc, which was arrayed with "many bright lights" as it "hovered for about 15 minutes and then did all sorts of maneuvers over Santiago." The UFO was also seen in the suburbs of Cerrillos and Quilpe, near Vina del Mar. The following day, Wednesday, October 15, two men fishing in Vina del Mar at approximately 8 a.m. "saw a UFO come out of the sea and head towards Santiago." (Otra vez, muchas gracias a Luis Sanchez Perry para esa historia.) THIRD UFO SIGHTING OVER LISMORE, AUSTRALIA On September 29, 1997, at 4:30 p.m., a pilot for Australia's National Broadcasting ABC News was flying near Lismore, New South Wales, about 300 miles (480 kilometers) north of Sydney. Suddenly, he "sighted a large black object flying over the Lismore area. It was flying (at) about 30,000 feet (9,090 meters), heading from east to west or (bearing) 110 degrees. This huge black object left behind the biggest (condensation) trail he had ever seen. He added that it was bigger than ten (Boeing) 747s and had a speed beyond that of something for its size." (Many thanks to Ross Dowe of Australia's National 24-Hour UFO Hotline. UFO ROUNDUP readers in the South Pacific who wish to report a UFO sighting to Ross Dowe should call this number: 61 190 224 3529.) STARLIKE UFO SEEN FLYING OVER SHEFFIELD On Saturday, October 18, 1997, at 9 p.m., Bert Bromley was "returning from the local store" in the south end of the industrial city of Sheffield in the UK "when I noticed a red light in the sky at roughly 45 degrees from my point of view (the horizon being 0)." "The brightness of the light was three or four times that of a typical airplane," Bert reported. "It appeared to be traveling on a south-southwest to north-northeast course." The UFO "seemed to flicker in intensity (not the rhythymic flashing of an airplane beacon), the exact colour being a warm red/orange. It was bright enough to look 'starlike,' like the special FX filter on camera." "I could see no shape within the flashing. I cannot comment on its size, other than 'a point of light.' After watching for about four minutes (the light passing overhead, now at about 110 degrees), I noticed a change in course, veering more directly north. By this time, the light got dimmer and appeared to be fading. For another five minutes, the light either hovered (over Sheffield--J.T.) or continued north-northwest until it disappeared. The light seemed to have a slight wobble as it moved" and remained "eerily perceptible" in a clear night sky with few stars." (Email Interview) ANOMALOUS LIGHTS REPORTED OVER CENTRAL WALES In recent weeks, residents of Maesiocyn, near Tywlch Llanidloes in central Wales, about 90 miles (144 kilometers) north of Cardiff, have reported sighting "lights resembling large stars" in the eastern sky, "which move to the right and left and up and down." Eyewitness Margaret M. said, "Definitely not planes. When looked at through the binoculars, they flash red and green and orange." "One night I saw what looked like an orange tennis ball fall in an arc towards Earth and disappear," Margaret said. "I can only reiterate that these are DEFINITELY not planes. Also, regular loud rumbling noises--like thunder or heavy guns--but nowhere near a (an artillery) range." Residents have also reported lights above the nearby Halfren Forest. (Email Interview) MORE UFOs SPOTTED OVER THE ISLAND OF SARDINIA On Sunday, October 19, 1997, at 1:35 a.m., an Italian motorist driving near Porto Torres in the Sassari region of Sardinia "saw a white trail rising in a trajectory arched toward the offshore island of Asinari." Thirty minutes later, another motorist driving just outside Sorso "observed a group of intense lights, iridescent in color but which was predominated by blue, at first stationary in the sky and then left at an amazing speed in the direction of the nearby countryside." The motorist pursued the UFO "for several kilometers" until the UFO "took off into the interior" of Sardinia. The sightings are being investigated by Antonio Cuccu of the Centro Italiano di Studi Ufologici (CISU). (Grazie a Edoardo Russo di CISU) TWO WOMEN WATCH UFO NEAR UKIAH, CALIFORNIA On Friday, October 3, 1997, at 9:45 p.m., Lucia A. and Paula D. "were driving south on Highway 101" in northern California, "south of Ukiah (population 12,035) and north of Hopland (population 900)." The area is about 120 miles (152 kilometers) north of San Francisco. Paula, "the driver of the car, saw a flash of light above the windshield of the car. She wondered if the flash was on a mountaintop or up in the sky." Lucia didn't see the original flash. "A minute or two later, we both simultaneously saw an explosion of light," Lucia reported. "It looked like a star exploding." Then "a smaller, starlike object fell/ dropped from it approximately 6 inches in the sky, from our perspective. The smaller object stayed in place behind the first one..." The first UFO then "hovered over the second one for a few minutes. It hovered long enough for us to notice it and then it moved slowly to the west toward the horizon, dipped a little, and then dropped from sight." The women pulled off the highway and parked beside a vineyard where they "saw a second small object close by off to the south of us and then a cluster of about six others a little toward the earth. They were blinking green/red and white colors." (Email Interview) MOTHER, DAUGHTER SEE SAUCERS NEAR ATLANTA On September 23, 1997, at 9:35 p.m., a Georgia woman and her 15-year-old daughter were traveling "on Frazier Road toward LaVista Road, near Northlake Mall in Tucker, Ga. (population 12,500)," a suburb 18 miles (28 kilometers) northeast of Atlanta. "When looking to the southeast, they saw an 'object hovering over a large tree in the backyard of a house.' Stopping the car and looking out the car's open window, they saw a saucer-shaped UFO with four to five large red pulsating lights on the bottom just hovering. The mother and daughter estimated that the dark grey UFO was the size of 'five minivans laid side by side.'" "They watched the UFO for approximately two to three minutes before it moved up and shot off in an arc to the northwest. While watching the UFO, the women said they saw no cars or heard the UFO make any noise. While the engine of their car was running, the UFO did not affect is operation except that, strangely, the speedometer of the car jumped up while the car was stationary and no gas was being applied." "A few minutes later, while in front of a church on LaVista Road, they saw the UFO again. Like the first encounter, it was hovering over some trees. The outer part of the UFO appeared to be rotating while the center remained fixed. It is possible, according to the pair, that it may have been only the lights rotating around the UFO's rim." Looking down LaVista Road, the women saw yet another saucer-shaped UFO hovering not far away. The first UFO approached the second "and appeared to be 'communicating.' This frightened the mother and the daughter and they left while the two UFOs" still hovered near each other. (See Filer's Files #42 for October 23, 1997. Many thanks to George A. Filer and John Thompson of MUFON for this news story.) STRANGE BLUE FLASHES SEEN IN NEW MEXICO On Saturday, October 18, 1997, at 9 p.m., "a man and his fiancee were going home to" Los Alamos, New Mexico (population 17,100), about 38 miles (61 kilometers) west of Santa Fe." The couple "observed a light blue flash that 'lit up the sky behind the Jemez Mountains.' They reported that the light faded slowly, then returned to its previous level of brightness approximately five minutes later." "The man turned the car around and drove back about two miles to a spot where he and his fiancee could sit and watch the sky. There was no repeat of the lights, so they continued driving home." About 45 minutes later, as the couple approached their house in Los Alamos, "the sky lit up with the same blue light, but this time it was on the opposite side of the Jemez Mountains. He reported that the light was so bright that the profile of the mountains was clearly visible in the night." (Many thanks to Steve Wilson Sr. for forwarding this story.) (Editor's Comment: A similar phenomenon took place at 8:50 p.m. on Thursday, September 4, 1997 just north of Beaver Bay, Minnesota. The light flashes were green, however, not blue. For more information, see UFO ROUNDUP, volume 2, number 35.) NASA ACKNOWLEDGES NO CONTACT WITH PATHFINDER On Friday, October 24, 1997, NASA told USA Today that "The Mars Pathfinder's radio transmitter is not communicating with Earth because its internal temperatures have fallen to an estimated 58 degrees below zero (Fahrenheit scale), NASA scientists believe. Communications were lost October 7, and scientists can't tell if the rover (Sojourner) is still roaming the planet. Controllers say they haven't given up hope of keeping the mission going." (See USA Today for October 24, 1997, page A-3) The rover Sojourner is equipped with radioisotope heaters fueled by 0.1 ounce of plutonium-238. The nucleide generates one watt of heat, which warms the heavily-insulated interior of Sojourner's electronics box. The insulation is a lightweight, porous silicate. Presumably Sojourner is still following its original early October upload commands and is headed for Twin Peaks. Pathfinder, however, may be a victim of the Mars Jinx. Of the 22 Mars missions flown by the USA and Russia since 1960, nine have ended in outright failure. Indeed, no Mars exploration mission has been an unqualified success since the landing of Viking 2 on September 23, 1976. In recent years, the two Russian Phobos spacecraft vanished enroute to Mars in the late 1980s. The U.S. Mars Observer stopped transmitting just before it entered orbit around the planet on August 22, 1996. And Russia's Mars 96 probe was destoryed when its rocket blew up on the launch pad on November 11, 1996. ANOTHER OUT-OF-PLACE ALLIGATOR DISCOVERED IN RHODE ISLAND On Monday, October 20, 1997, at 3 p.m., Wayne Milette, a City of Providence firefighter residing on Grandview Drive in Lincoln, R.I. received a call from a neighbor, Noel Chartier. Chartier "first pointed out the reptile to him Monday about 3 p.m. Milette didn't believe it." "Joined by Chartier's friend, Kate Boyle, they watched" a two-and-a-half foot caiman "swim from sunny spot to sunny spot" in Barney's Pond "for about an hour before they decided they should call the DEM (R.I. Department of Environmental Management-- J.T.) to take it away." "Officers lassoed the reptile, gently put it into a bag and took it to Tuffy's Aquarium and Pet Center in Warwick, which receives many of the state's exotic animals." (See the Providence R.I. Journal-Bulletin for October 22, 1997, page B-2.) ROUNDUP CORRIGENDA: Peter W------ of Melbourne, Australia has disavowed the story of the alleged UFO burn circles reported in a March 1997 issue of UFO ROUNDUP. Mr. W------ writes, "Please remove, immediately, any references to 'Peter W------, Ufologist' in the article...The information was obtained without consent and is totally inaccurate." UFO ROUNDUP has deleted all mention of Mr. W------ from the issue in question, thanks him for this clarification, and apologizes for any embarrassment that resulted. from the UFO Files... 1908: SPHERICAL UFO HOVERS OVER BRIDGEWATER One of the best-documented UFO sightings of the "Airship Era" took place in Bridgewater, Massachusetts during the early morning hours of October 31, 1908. The chief witnesses were two undertakers, John E. Flynn and Philip S. Prophett, who were driving a horse- drawn carriage shortly after 3 a.m. on Main Street from West Bridgewater to the center of Bridgewater. Here is Flynn's eyewitness account: "We saw the light, not exactly a searchlight but an unusually strong lantern of some sort, over the Stanley (Iron) works. We stopped the team and for ten minutes watched it, and saw it was moving and coming nearer and nearer to earth. At last, with the stars' light, and occasional bits of light from the lantern, we caught a glimpse of the shape of the balloon. We shouted towards it but heard no response or sound of any sort." "The balloon dropped down, and the light moved about, perhaps as though they were trying to get their bearings. Then it slowly rose and moved directly to the east, or slightly south of east. We followed it with our eyes for a long time." "Even after I got home, I sat in my room and watched it from the window for half to three-quarters of an hour. I knew that from the direction it was going it would reach the sea in 25 miles or so, and I expected to see it drop down." "It did not drop. Instead it kept steadily on, and I was surprised at how straight a line it kept. I was watching from a window and between two branches of a big tree some 50 to 60 feet away. It never deviated from the line to pass outside the branches, except once, just before I gave up the watch because the room was so chilly." In the days following, local residents attributed the "mystery balloon" to a hot-air balloon sent up from the fairground in nearby Brockton, Mass. Irritated by this, Flynn wrote a letter to the Brockton Times and offered further testimony. "It was not a searchlight, as was erroneously stated in the newspapers, but seemed to be about two feet and a half in diameter. I could see the outline of the large bag for it remained stationary and then moved up and down seemingly at the will of some individual." "I claim that a hot-air balloon could not move in a circle or perpendicular, as this one did...When first seen, it hovered above the Stanley Iron Works, seemingly about 100 feet from the ground, but when we returned (to Bridgewater at 3:10 a.m.) it was going in the direction of Plymouth. Prophett called his father, and he got up to watch this lighted bird, as it soared slowly away. All were in their right minds, and several reputable citizens of the town have since told me that they also are sure it was not a hot-air balloon, William Prophett (Phil's father) included." (See the Brockton, Mass. Times for October 31, 1908, "Mysterious Balloon Over Bridgewater," page 1; the weekly Bridgewater, Mass. Independent for November 6, 1908, "A Mysterious Air Ship," page 1; and the New York Times for November 1, 1908, "Can't Find Strange Balloon," page 1. See also THE COMPLETE BOOKS OF CHARLES FORT, Dover Press, N.Y. 1974, page 507.) That's it for this week. Join us next Sunday for more saucer news from "the paper that goes home-- UFO ROUNDUP." Here's wishing our American readers a happy and safe Halloween. UFO ROUNDUP: Copyright 1997 by Masinaigan Productions, all rights reserved. Readers may post news items from UFO ROUNDUP on their websites or in newsgroups provided that they credit the newsletter and its editor by name and cite the date of issue in which the item first appeared.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 27 Re: Researching Abduction Cases From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net> Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 13:58:44 -0600 (CST) Fwd Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 00:54:24 -0500 Subject: Re: Researching Abduction Cases >Subject: Re: Researching Abduction Cases >Date: Wed, 22 Oct 97 00:35:59 -0500 >From: Pat Parrinello <pparri@crossfields.com> >To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates> <snip> >>Jim, I pray that I can never muster one million abductees! -That- >>would be truly frightening. If there -are- a million of us, then >>God help us all. > John, I would that you consider the possibility of 6 billion. > It is my considered opinion that such is the case. > ~Pat~ And what's your count on the number of angels that can dance on the head of a pin? Or are you merely speaking metaphorically here, because... Let's see, if every abduction took only five minutes, as opposed to the industry standard two hours or so, that would be about 30 billion minutes. Anyone want to do the math on that by dividing 60 into it and telling us how many hours/years that would ad up to? Wouldn't any abducting aliens have a surfeit of sperm and ova by now? And don't these guys have anything else better to do, anyway? Dennis
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 27 BWW Media Alert 971026 From: BufoCalvin@aol.com Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 11:18:32 -0800 (PST) Fwd Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 00:34:15 -0500 Subject: BWW Media Alert 971026 Bufo Calvin, P O Box 5231, Walnut Creek, CA 94596 E-mail: BufoCalvin@aol.com Website: http://members.aol.com/bufocalvin ( <A HREF="http://members.aol.com/ BufoCalvin/index.html">BufoCalvin's Home Page</A> ) TAP (The Address Project) Bufo's WEIRD WORLD e-zine Bufo's WEIRD WORLD Media Alert Bufo's WEIRD WORLD Books ( <A HREF="http://members.aol.com/weirdware/books.ht ml">Bufo's WEIRD WORLD Books</A> ) ALL RIGHTS RESERVED (permission is granted to reproduce or redistribute this edition of Bufo's WEIRD WORLD Media Alert provided that attribution is made to http://members.aol.com/bufocalvin. It is good etiquette to check with strangers before you e-mail them something. If you forward this, please make sure it is clear that you are forwarding it). October 25, 1997 Well, gang, sorry I didn't get one out in time. My apologies especially to Lee Spiegel of THE EDGE OF REALITY, who tried to get me info on the show in time for me to run it. The fact is, I have been so swamped with the new job that I didn't have a chance. I did, however, score a 9.4 out of a possible ten on my first class (teaching Netscape Communigator 4.0, which is really quite complicated with several new features over the old one), and I'm proud of that. I tried twice to put together a quicky, unformatted version of some of the info, and once it unfortunately locked up in the middle and I lost it. Anyway, I don't really have time to do a full one this week, but I will toss a few things together here. It's faster for me to organize by channel rather than by date, so I'll do that...although this one may be a bit of a hybrid. Feel free to give me your opinion...is this worth doing, how does it compare to the regular way, etc. Oh, and for now, we are back to the old mailing system. NOTE: I got this far, ran out of time for now. Maybe more later this week... ON-LINE OMNI MAGAZINE (http://www.omnimag.com Omni Magazine ) is back to do real time conferences. The regular night for our kind of stuff is Tuesday 7:00 PM to 8:00 PM Pacific. TBA RADIO AND TELEVISION SYNDICATED RADIO: END OF THE LINE is now SIGHTINGS ON THE RADIO. This has resulted, among other things, in a new website: http://www.sightings.com. SIGHTINGS ON THE RADIO Next week's guests: SundaySusan Bedell: Bizarre UFO/ET Events In MissouriMondayChuck Lakin: New CD ROM: UFOs: Just The FactsTuesdayPaul Halpern: Quest For Alien Planets Outside the Solar SystemWednesdayWeekly UFO/ET Update with Michael Lindemann Dan Sherman: Genetically Altered To Communicate With ETs?Thursday Hans Holzer: Legendary Paranormal Investigator! Philippe Piet Van Putten: South America UFO ReportsFridayHalloween: Pending It can also be heard on your computer. Airtimes: M-F 7-10 PM Pacific (times given here are generally Pacific),. Sunday 8-11 PM Pacific. Archives of earlier shows are also available, so you can hear my previous broadcasts through this site. SYNDICATED TV: LOOKING BEYOND PSI-FACTOR (see http://www.psifactor.com for stations and airdates and other info). This series is supposedly based on real cases. CABLE CHANNELS A&E: Sunday (tonight) at 10:00 PM, James ("The Amazing") Randi has a debunking show, repeated Monday at 2:00 AM. Thursday at 10:00 PM, THE UNEXPLAINED does alien abductions, repeated Friday at 2:00 AM. Friday at 7:00 AM is ORIGIN OF THE VAMPIRE, about vampire beliefs. THE DISCOVERY CHANNEL: Today, Sunday, from 1:00 PM - 4:00 PM, a block of STRICTLY SUPERNATURAL (seance, tarot, and astrology, one hour each). 6:00 PM, today, ARTHUR C. CLARKE (ACC), CABINET OF CURIOSITIES (a nice mix). 6:30 PM, INTO THE UNKNOWN, THUNDERBIRD (this series is quite sensationalized, but kind of fun, with some rarely shown footage...and lots of computer animation and recreations)). Thursday at 9:00 PM, INTO THE UNKNOWN does SEA SERPENTS, repeated Friday at 1:00 AM. Friday at 5:00 PM, TRAVELLERS does HAUNTED HAPPENINGS in Salem Massachusetts. THE LEARNING CHANNEL: Today, Sunday, at 9:00 PM, WITCHES AND VAMPIRES (repeated at midnight tonight, which is technically Monday). At 10:00 PM today, CASTLE CHOSTS OF WALES, repeated at 1:00 AM Monday. At 9:00 PM Monday, UFOS AND ALIEN ENCOUNTERS (repeated at midnight), and at 10:00 PM Monday, MYTHICAL BEASTS AND MONSTERS (hosted by Mark Hamill), repeated at 1:00 AM Tuesday. Tuesday at 9:00 PM, WOLFMAN (repeated at midnight) and 10:00 PM, BIGFOOT (repeated at 1:00 AM) on Wednesday. Wednesday at 9:00 PM, CASTLE GHOSTS OF IRELAND (repeated at midnight), and at 10:00 PM, CASTLE GHOSTS OF SCOTLAND (repeated at 1:00 am Thursday). Thursday, 9:00 PM, BIGFOOT, 9:30 PM, PSYCHIC SCIENCE, 10:00 PM, HAUNTINGS ACROSS AMERICA (all repeated starting at midnight). Friday, 8:00 PM, REAL AMERICA - PSYCHICS AND SKEPTICS, repeated at 11:00 PM. There are a couple of shows in-between that I can't decide whether or not to include...so I won't this time :) . THE SCI-FI CHANNEL: Today, Sunday, 4:00 PM and 10:00 PM, SIGHTINGS #5066: - Ohio's Area 51! Anyone Can See The Light! Chicago's Most Haunted! Mysteries From Above! (aerial photographs of sacred places) THE SCIENCE NETWORK: I don't even know how you get this, but every Thursday (and into Friday morning) is a whole bunch of ACC's and a show called U.F.O. The schedule hasn't changed in months, and I don't know if this is even really on the air. This format gives me a chance to mention it, though. This is Bufo saying, "If =everything= seemed normal, that =would= be weird!" ____________________________ You can stop receiving this from me just by asking (note: it is commonly redistributed, and I can't control you getting it from those sources) by e-mail at BufoCalvin@aol.com. You can also subscribe or unsubscribe to Bufo's WEIRD WORLD (which covers theories and happenings) the same way. Also, please let me know if there is something in the media you think I should cover. Deadline is Tuesday, the week before. _____________________________ **OPUS is the Organization for Paranormal Understanding and Support. I am an Executive Boardmember, and Director of the OPUS Educational Institute. OPUS encourages its officers and Network Associates to express their own opinions: however, it is important to note that I do not speak for OPUS in this piece or others presented under my own name. The new OPUS phone number is (510) 689-4198 ______________________________ Bufo's WEIRD WORLD BOOKS ( <A HREF="http://members.aol.com/weirdware/books.htm l">Bufo's WEIRD WORLD Books</A> ) I'm very excited about this! Some of you know, I ran a bookstore for years, and it has always been a love of mine. I get asked often to recommend books (I do write reviews for several publications) on these topics, and now I can do it and actually give you a source for them at the same time! This is being done in association with Amazon.com, which has an outstanding reputation for the five "S"s of internet shopping: selection, searchability, service, savings, and security. If there is any specific book you want (or topic in which you are interested), let me know and I will do the research and e-mail you a link you can use to check it out more (and order it if you want). I will be linking to books within the Media Alert, to make it more efficient for you. If you click on the link, you will be sent to that title on Amazon. You do =not= have to buy it at that point! You may, but the option is yours.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 27 Discussion with author Dan Sherman From: "Yvonne Hedenland" <VONNI_H@classic.msn.com> Date: Sun, 26 Oct 97 22:30:44 UT Fwd Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 00:57:42 -0500 Subject: Discussion with author Dan Sherman Please join us Tuesday October 28th, 6pm, PT. for an interview with Dan Sherman author of Above Black: Project Preserve Destiny--- Insider Account of Alien Contact and Government Cover-up. The MSN UFO Forum is available at http://forums.msn.com/UFO. The UFO chats can be reached via any IRC client. The server name is publicchat.msn.com and the room/channel is #briefing.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 27 Re: Becker Claims Copyright Infringement by From: c549597@showme.missouri.edu [Barbara Becker] Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 15:41:22 -0600 Fwd Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 00:56:59 -0500 Subject: Re: Becker Claims Copyright Infringement by > From: c549597@showme.missouri.edu [Barbara Becker] > Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 22:58:23 -0500 > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Becker Claims Copyright Infringement by > Maccabee > > From: "WHITE" <mjawhite@digitaldune.net> > > To: <updates@globalserve.net> > > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Becker Claims Copyright Infringement by > > Maccabee > > Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 07:09:36 -0700 > > To EBK, List, and any who have followed BB's travails > > regarding her "gulf breeze" paper, and particularly those > > who may have actually written some commentary on it: > > >Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 18:59:52 -0800 > > >To: updates@globalserve.net > > >From: campbell@ufomind.com (Glenn Campbell, Las Vegas) > > >Subject: Becker Claims Copyright Infringement by Maccabee > > >Cc: brumac@compuserve.com, steve@konsulting.com > > <snip> > > >Barbara Becker has claimed copyright infringement in an on-line > > >article by Bruce Maccabee posted to this list on Oct. 4. > > <snip> > > >Becker has threatened to file a lawsuit against Glenn Campbell, > > >Bruce Maccabee, Errol Bruce-Knapp and another party to seek > > >"injunctuive, punitive and statuatory damages from Glenn and > > >punitive and statuatory from the rest of you...." > > Comment: Jeepers. > > Brad Templeton writes a pretty > > good general piece on copyright and e-mail; > > particularly regarding "fair use" and commentary > > on net postings. > > http://palimpsest.stanford.edu/mirrors/faq/copyright/myths/part1 > > For the hardcoreworrywarts, the American Bar Association > > puts out a real humdinger on copyright at: > > http://www.abanet.org/intelprop/comm106/106copy.html > > After I read the Templeton piece, I had a greater appreciation > > for EBK's posting rules. (Sorry, EBK, about that x-posting I > > forwarded on Stealth fighters equipped with "alien" technology > > it won't happen again.) > > John White mjawhite@digitaldune.net > THIS HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH THE COPYRIGHT PIECE I > WROTE IN OCTOBER 1997. It has to do with a paper I wrote, > copyrighted and posted to MY OWN BBS in 1990. I told Maccabee > that he could quote parts of it but I did not want it chopped up > the way he did. Maccabee said fine and Glenn Campbell turned > NAZI. John: Those are excellent web sites. I hope the people who are quick to criticize me, read them and understand the important function of copyright, trade mark and patents, not only in the United States but all over the world. The Internet is ripe for abuse. The only ehtics are those we impose on ourselves. BB Search for other documents from or mentioning: c549597 | mjawhite |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 27 Re: Questions for Abductees From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net> Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 13:38:50 -0600 (CST) Fwd Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 00:49:50 -0500 Subject: Re: Questions for Abductees >From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net> >To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Questions for Abductees >Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 19:58:17 -0400 >But even if Peter thinks his thinking is inviolable, and not >subject to discussion or debate until he's already made a fool of >himself -- for all he knows -- by publishing prematurely, he at >leasts suggests a reading list. >> Meanwhile, I suggest you bend an eye to: >> Stephen Jay Gould "Wonderful Life" ISBN 0-14-013380-1 >> Michio Kaku "Hyperspace" ISBN 0-19-508514-0 >> Robert Baker 'Alien Dreamtime' in "The Anomalist" #2 >> Mike Davis 'Cosmic Dancers...' in "The Anomalist" #5 >Oh, Peter, Peter, Peter, Peter...I've read Hyperspace, haven't >read the others <snip> Ahem, well, the above referenced issues of The Anomalist are available from me for only $9.95 each plus $2.50 s/h. But I'll go even one better. To anyone from the US or Canada who orders one or both issues, and says they saw it on the list, I'll pick up the postage. Sorry, all you "furriners," you're out of luck on this one. Checks or money orders payable to Dennis Stacy, Box 12434, San Antonio, TX 78212. >Frank Drake, for instance, is very sure aliens won't visit here, >or in fact travel at all in interstellar space, because of >familiar relativistic difficulties -- can't go faster than light, >takes huge amounts of energy to go even close to that speed, >etc., etc., etc. Theories. Might be true, might be not. Our >science supports these thoughts. An alien science way ahead of us >might not. Main thing, though, is that these theories -- as >they're applied to beings a billion years ahead of us -- as Drake >applies them, are entirely metaphysical. That is, they can't be >disproved in any way. Drake -- and you -- simply assume their >eternal validity. You really should be buddying up to Drake, Greg, old boy, as his equation -- not necessarily his own interpretation of it, of course -- is actually your best friend. My gripe with it is that's it's basically statistical in hope and of course assumes a whole lot of things that may or may not be correct about what is required for a habitable planet *and* the subsequent evolution of intelligent life capable of space travel, the two not necessarily synonymous. What Drake does is a hat trick of sorts. He starts with hughe numbers, 100 billion stars in our galaxy, 100 billion galaxies in the universe, and concludes that even a very small fraction of same would still amount to a very large number of intelligent civilizations in the universe, albeit still separated by theoretically insurmountable distances. His interpretation. Unawares or not, you're using the same numbers and equation and discounting the distances -- based on advanced alien technology. Your interpretation. Actually, there are now a number of suggestive findings, or findings and suggestions, if you prefer, that, when plugged into the Drake equation actually reduce his numbers dramatically. Much of this is brought out in the Michael Davies article referred to earlier ("Cosmic Dancers," TA5), although not necessarily in the same context, of course. What Cosmic Dancers is is an examination of our present solar system over an extremely long time scale. It's quite simply one of the best things I've read all year, so I don't want to spoil anyone's fun. A couple of tidbits (of which there are many), however. For example, it might be quite easy (if not actually the rule) to have a large number of habitable planets, by Drake's lights, that *never* develop intelligent life because they may be missing one or more necessary requirements. A tropical paradise of a planet might never result in a spacefaring civilization, then, because of the absence of evolutionary pressure. A seasonal tilt of relatively specific angle, resulting in seasons, and a magetic field of relatively specific strength may also be major, if not absolutely required, factors. It appears you might also need a gravity well in the form of a giant gas planet, placed just so in terms of distance and location, the latter acting as a defense shield for the habitable planet by sweeping up incoming artillery in the form of asteroids, comets and so on. Remember Shoemaker-Levy? The habitable planet might also require a satellite of just the right size and placement, and so on. Each of these requirements, if that's indeed what they are, start knocking off significant chunks of Drake's final numbers, perhaps by several factors, perhaps even "fatally," for all we know at this stage. >What you need -- and can't possibly have -- are facts. How many >alien races are there in our galaxy? how many of them travel >through space? How far do they travel? How close are they to us? >Once you have that data, you can begin to make somewhat confident >assumptions about whether an alien visit here is likely. Without >data of that kind, you -- and Michio Kaku )(whose new book was >amusingly demolished in this Sunday's NY Times Book Review -- are >just whistling in the dark. And you're just whistling in the sunshine, because you don't have any facts or data to the contrary, either. What you do have is a manifest desire to have your cake and it, too. So that when "problems," logical and others, are raised about light speed, distances, and the ability to beam people through walls, you answer with "advanced alien technology, about which we know nothing." Which of course is really no answer at all because it can be used to answer *any* objection or criticism. And when seeming anachronisms in advanced alien technology are suggested or pointed out, you simply change course and abscribe same to alien motives, as in "well, they probably could do it that way if they wanted to, but the available abduction evidence suggests that they might not want to do it that way." Your arguments and answers are ready made and you simply apply them as the questions or criticisms dictate. In short, your own reasoning seems pretty circular to me. That doesn't mean that you may not be ultimately right, just that -- in the meantime -- we might as well be arguing the evidence, or lack thereof, for the existence of God, demons and angels, who may be beings so advanced that they no longer need physical bodies for all I know. >And what makes it all especially funny is this -- while people >still imagine that nobody can travel the distances between stars >at anything exceeding lightspeed, there has already been at least >one respectable scientific conference right here on earth on how >to do that. <snip> >Greg Sandow If you're talking wormholes here, hey, what are we waiting for! Just out of idle curiousty, I wonder how long it would take and how many miles you would travel while effecting a course change at the speed of light, just to dodge the unexpected asteroid or other space debris? A problem for advanced calculus, indeed. Dennis
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 27 Re: Mexican UFO Video Tape From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@ucs.orst.edu> Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 14:42:47 -0800 (PST) Fwd Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 00:59:51 -0500 Subject: Re: Mexican UFO Video Tape > Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 06:39:57 -0400 > From: Graham William Birdsall <106151.1150@compuserve.com> > Subject: Mexican UFO Video Tape > To: UFO UPDATES TORONTO <updates@globalserve.net> > [...] > The object is in focus throughout - an extraordinary feature when > combining manual and auto focus. > The 'spinning' effect on the object demonstrates the same > sequence over and over again. > The cameraman appears to anticipate the movement of the object - > as though he knew when and where it was going in advance. > When the object disappears behind an apartment block, one would > expect the cameraman to pan back, go left and right to see where > it might have gone - it doesn't happen. > These are basic observations arrived at in less than 30 minutes. > The object does appear to have been 'brush stroked' in part, and > our provisional analysis suggests that the skyline and apartment > blocks have been filmed in advance, and the computer generated > 'UFO' then laid on top. > Given one has the right sort of computer software, and a little > money and energy to spend, all things are possible. Hello all, These types of observations by Graham are the reason why the actual visual witnesses in such a case are so important. According to Fernando Camacho, Jaime has located and identified about 15 witnesses; these probably include the two in on the video-taping. The witnesses will obviously have to be (or have been) intensely questioned and investigated to see if one or more have been bribed to report what wasn't there, or are otherwise in on a hoax. We must keep in mind that one or two fake witnesses who come forward after a UFO event is known, in order to try to debunk it, do not negate the testimony of honest witnesses. Jim Deardorff
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 27 Re: Questions for Abductees From: clark@canby.mn.frontiercomm.net [Jerome Clark] Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 18:11:53 PST Fwd Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 01:09:33 -0500 Subject: Re: Questions for Abductees > > Strangeness. Suffice it to say Peter is an educated John Keel, > > except with rose-colored glasses and a pleasant personality. > > Keel even confided to me once that Peter was going to carry on > > his work. > I would have to say that puts him in good company. It is my > considered opinion that it is from the minds of John Keel and Dr. > J. Vallee that the most enlightening concepts in regards to these > phenomena have come. Most others are mere legends within their > own minds in my humble opinion. Clarke, Thanks for an interesting post. I respect your experiences and the conclusions you draw from them, even if I disagree with them. I'm sure at least some other abductees would also disagree. But I haven't been in your shoes, and I'm not about to tell you what to think about what's happened to you. I will say, however, that from just about any point of view, Keel and Vallee have shed far more darkness than light on ufology's many vexing questions. Demonologist Keel has a great 13th-century mind, and Vallee is incoherent when he isn't being paranoia-addled, and vice versa. I urge you to read my essay on "Paranormal and Occult Theories about UFOs" in my just-published (and available at your local bookstore) trade paperback The UFO Book, or the much- extended discussions to appear in the second edition of my UFO Encyclopedia (due out in January 1998). That aside, I'm glad to have your insights. Let's hope that when this all gets sorted out, we'll all be the wiser. Best wishes, Jerry Clark
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 27 Re: Witness Anonymity From: ujack@pop3.scrapcity.cnchost.com [Mark Medford] Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 19:58:04 +0000 Fwd Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 01:16:11 -0500 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity > From: "Clark Hathaway" <earthwrk@doitnow.com> > To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net> > Subject: Paranormal flavor of abduction. > Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 20:22:22 -0700 Clark ends his post to me - regarding the possibility that some aspects of our three dimensional reality might be labelled "para" normal, simply because they are not yet fully understood: > In so far as your understanding of the term 'metaphysics' and > metaphysical' is concerned, it has a misty quality for me. > Metaphysics encompasses any number of philosophies and > disciplines. I AM left wondering how well read you are within the > genre that you make such an argument as that above. Metaphysics is, by definition, speculative philosophy. I have no doubt that many things within the human experience fall well outside the bounds of traditional science. My point was simply this - there are examples throughout history of events, experiences, behaviors, etc., that were at one time considered outside the known boundaries as well. With time, and greater knowledge, many of these things came to be viewed differently. Not all, but many. As to Linda's story, I have no opinion one way or the other. My comments were intended to address specific questions that you posed to the list - not to challenge or to defend her. I confess that I am not a multiple abduction experiencer - at least not to my knowledge. About all I can claim is a sighting and an episode of missing time when I was five. I have, however, had two NDE's following heart blockages a year apart. I know, without a shadow of a doubt, that life continues - in some form - once the physical body expires. I also happen to believe in reincarnation (which is often lumped together with crystals and auras as a New Age, metaphysical belief). My reading on topics considered metaphysical (as well as studies in quantum physics and the more traditional sciences), is fairly extensive. One thing seems very clear - in areas that are speculative, there is no shortage of ideas! We are still looking for the answers, and until we find them (until they are no longer viewed outside the realm of our understanding), all we have are theories, viewpoints that we embrace. I hope that we can all be intellectually flexible enough to consider the many angles that make up "reality". It will be interesting to see, several hundred years from now, what will be viewed as paranormal, and what will have become accepted as the "norm". Best, Mark
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 27 Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills From: Michael Christol <mchristo@mindspring.com> Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 20:20:54 -0600 Fwd Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 01:27:57 -0500 Subject: Re: Aug '97 Mexico City Stills >Hi Mike >>Hi Sean... >>No, this has nothing to do with that case. >>I was given some information by a friend who is supposedly, >>"in the know." He stated that there was a crash in 1941, >>in the South Pacific, around July 4, from which the "transistor" >>was derived. So, they did not have from July 1947 to Dec. 1947 >>to back engineer the "transistor." According to my friend, they >>had "six years." That makes a difference, doesn't it? >It sure would! >>Psychology will get you everywhere, Sean, except when dealing >>with me. <G> squeek, squeek...scurry, scurry.... >Psychology is always best when done in reverse. Sean... I have released the information dealing with the above date. The info can be found in a book, entitled: "THE CATCHERS OF HEAVEN....A Trillogy." By Dr. Michael Wolf. The information is on page 42. I thought by releasing it the way I did, I could find out if anyone already knew Dr. Wolf. If so, I was hoping they would come forward and acknowledge the date. However, no one bothered to come forward, so I thought I would just go ahead and tell everyone, since the book is already on the market. REgards, Mike
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 27 Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculoso From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl> Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 02:10:03 +0100 (MET) Fwd Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 01:18:32 -0500 Subject: Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculoso >Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 19:02:34 -0700 >From: Ed Stewart <egs@netcom.com> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculoso >Hello Duke, Hello Henny, and a special Hello to Mr. Mxyzptlk >> Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 21:41:52 -0400 >> From: Gunslinger Peat <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith] >> Subject: Zeta Notso Ridiculoso >> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>, >> The Duke of Mendoza presents his compliments between guffaws. >> >Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 20:17:08 +0200 (MET DST) >> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >> >From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl> >> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculoso >Henny is observed making the following statement of ufological wisdom: >> >The argument that ET visitation >> >is improbable because such speeds don't exist is obsolete even >> >according to present day human science. >The above statement is totally incoherrant with present day >science. Tachions do exist on the mathematical scratch pads of >modern day science, but the real problem according to the physics >FAQ on tachions found at: > http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/physoc/physics_faqwww Suffice it to say that I was not thinking about tachyons at all. However, I refrain from explaining myself here, because at this point I am tired of doing the explaining, and in the next round getting flamed on this list by a skeptic who is full of assumptions and short on facts. I don't mean you specifically and I don't mean your post specifically. I am referring to the repeated process of posting positive information that gets debunked by armchair analysts who spend more time debunking than finding facts. I think if there's one thing obstructing progress in this field, it's this attitude by debunkers. Which leaves us with the question why the UFO community tolerates this. __________________________________________ / Met vriendelijke groet/Best wishes \ Henny van der Pluijm hvdp@worldonline.nl Technology Pages http://www.worldonline.nl/~hvdp \______________________________________/
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 27 Re: Questions for Abductees From: Peregrine Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith] Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 22:21:56 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 01:36:53 -0500 Subject: Re: Questions for Abductees >From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net> >To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Questions for Abductees >Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 19:58:17 -0400 >Peter finally replies! Let me apologize again for the protracted neglect. Greg quotes me with amazing electronically-induced accuracy: >> I find myself in a slight difficulty here, made slightly more >> embarrassing because it is all my own fault. I've just been asked >> (commissioned) to write at length on this very subject for a >> respected but nonetheless commercial international magazine (oh, >> hype hype). If I spill my best beans here, both the client and I >> are somewhat compromised. And responds: >Oh, balderdash, I say, being as much of a professional writer >as you are. You'd only sharpen your ideas in our debate, and write >a better piece. (Interesting, by the way, your assumptions that >you have your best ideas already.) To which I say: Actually you're probably more of a professional writer than I am, but to avoid an enormous schmooze of mutual congratulation I would point out that each of us has his own way of working. There are already plenty of pro-ETH arguments to tangle with and, much as I enjoy tossing wheezes to & fro with you, I'm not at much loss for material. Taking those two things together, my way of working would be to hack out the whole article. In the nature of things (I've had an inter- esting response but this very day from A Friend to "Martian Cats", for example, after all this time) this would spin off into never-never-Internetland as some kind of engraving. Another version eventually appears in print. No thanks. There is enough confusion in cyberspace already without adding more, is my first point, and second as a sometime commissioning editor myself I'd be deeply pissed off if someone I'd asked to write a piece were to test his drafts in public and perhaps then not change a word for the final version. I'd be paying money for something that millions can read for free. Why pay? And why commission this character again if he's giving away his best beans for nothing every time to hoi polloi? Put it this way: if you'd bandied your best ideas about Ornette Coleman around on the net for weeks (let's assume you had the weeks), how'd you think the Wall St Journal would feel? Best beans, best ideas. Mine being in question. Whatever anyone else thought about them, they would surely emerge in the course of our (the List's) debate. They would be *given away*, whether they are the beans I now stew or the ideas that I may arrive at as a result of this public debate. I think I owe my publishers the privilege of getting this first, because they have bought access to those ideas (flawed as they may be) and to that extent now have first claim on them. Is that so hard to understand? Notwithstanding the plenitude of existing material with which there is to deal (some of it from your pen!), I'm not denying that whatever I publish *may* have been improved by prior debate. But, in light of the above, I don't see an honorable position from which I can begin that debate - the piece not being easily chopped for separate seminars on singular issues, thanks to my peculiar style of argument. And what goes around, comes around. I have this strange intuition that the debate over the ETH is not going to go away, and if in the post- publication debate someone makes an unanswerable point or even (it can happen, you know) improves on one of mine, or whatever along those lines, it'll find its way into print sooner or later. And so the process will continue. What's the urgency? I confess my previous analogy of the freaked-out toaster is now so ancient that tiz but a dim memory in my pickled brain, and you may well be correct in saying twas a circular argument. Leaving aside the rather naughty thought that you may be suggesting that I don't learn from experience - on the rare occasions I recall it - I'll pass on to: >Elsewhere you've invoked Occam's Razor. According to that >principle, as you understand it, alien visits should be the last >conclusion we ought to come to about any UFO event, because it's >good science to support the more likely explanation over anything >wildly improbable. But again -- how do you know alien visits are >improbable? Frankly, I'm surprised at the vulgarity of your >thinking. Occam's Razor is appropriate when we know the >parameters of what we're dealing with. It's useless when we're >dealing with a complete unknown. This is not quite the way I understand Occam, ad besides that we are not dealing with "a complete unknown". We are dealing with the possibility that the conditions for life may actually be unique properties of this solar system alone (read Mike Davis as cited). Further, we are dealing with a vast mass of knowledge about human perception of UFOs (read Allan Hendry, and Hartmann on the Zond IV re-entry in Condon) and a vast literature on perception in general, altered states of consciousness, sleep disorders, hallucinogens, lucid dreaming, cultural dispositions, God knows what-all else. Occam's razor applies with swift bright strokes. To get to aliens being here you need to set up a row of about (guess) 12 hypotheses. To get to any of the others requires no more than (guess) four. Whatever the real numbers, a terrestrial explanation for UFO experiences of any kind calls for fewer "entities", in Occam's terms. Move outside this world and more hypotheses arise. It's as simple as that. The fractal, ie chaotic, development of a life- supportive planetary system from a solar disk is where probability comes in. Occam is a separate principle. So much for vulgarity. The next answerable part of Greg's post begins: >Oh, Peter, Peter, Peter, Peter...I've read Hyperspace, haven't >read the others, but have read tons on this subject, particularly >from the SETI scientists. What they offer are theories, which at [etc, and snip] >The argument you're going to >make will not only be circular -- it will be, shall we say, >somewhat selective in its use of science. Good luck! I wonder with some concern if Greg is not here joining the growing band of psychics (Linda Cortibalone, Jerome Clark, Henny van der Pluijm, and Lawrie Williams being the latest recruits to this amazing congregation) who claim to be able to read my mind, my magazines, my emotional temperature, and for all I know my gas meter. So far I have not mentioned SETI among my mumblings and, if you really want to know, have some sympathy with Stan Friedman's characterization of it as a "Silly Effort To Investigate". (Time to fall off the chair twice in 48 hours Stan. Sorry mate, should have warned you.) Meanwhile, Greg, do please read the others, because therein you may see where the circle in the reasoning stops and where the selectivity does not even begin in principle. And finally: >Science, too, is a belief system. When you apply Occam's Razor to >alien visits, you're applying the belief system of science, >rather than the scientific method or scientific data. And here I >thought you weren't a religious man! I have no problem with being regarded as religious, but what that means is somewhat off-thread, involves no less skepticism than I bring to ufology, is extremely difficult (being tentative) to articulate, and doesn't have anything to do with what I think of the virtues of science. Meanwhile, I find the idea that science is "a belief system" bizarre in the extreme. The horrible fact is that science WORKS, and if it did not I could not sit here welded to my armchair communicating with you, Greg, 3000 miles away (more by way of Toronto) in this spectacular fashion that we all take so much for granted. And one of the joys of science is that it is incomplete - which is another clue to it not being a "belief system". Its greatest endeavor is to wreck itself in the service of greater & more profound knowledge. When experiments in nuclear physics are getting results where p is no greater than one in one million billion and better (bearable results being in the region of p=3D1:20), I begin to suspect that "science" (which I speculate you are confusing with Scientism) has actually latched onto genuine laws of nature. Real things. Not matters of belief like the gender of angels or whether Tony Blair is the anti-Christ or Princess Diana was murdered. Science leaves open the possibility that it is wrong - Popper's principle of falsifiability - and admits it is provisional. At the same time, it *works* on the basis of what we know so far. To argue from current scientific knowledge is not to argue in a circle, because it argues from what is known. It may not be complete know-- ledge but it's the best we have, and it's based on principles of unimpeachable intellectual honesty. And it's about what is *out there*, stuff you and I can't change whether we like it or not - just like folklore. If you want a circular system of thought, read Freud or Marx (which I'm sure you have) and ponder how much the underlying structure of those systems of belief have in common with ufology... and then read Popper and Polanyi (and for good measure the history of research into the HIV), and see not only how real science really works, but how little it has in common with real belief systems (name your choice). Mark Cashman gets to the heart of these things much more economically than I, so apologies to him at least for being (not unusually) so prolix. And, sorry, Greg, but I am not going to go further than this before that piece is published. Tear it to shreds after, by all means. I'm not that damn' proud. best wishes Prelibation D. Mystagogue Area Weapon
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 27 Re: Mexican UFO Video Tape From: xalium@netwrx.net (Tom King) Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 19:26:38 EST Fwd Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 01:26:29 -0500 Subject: Re: Mexican UFO Video Tape >Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 06:39:57 -0400 >From: Graham William Birdsall <106151.1150@compuserve.com> >Subject: Mexican UFO Video Tape >To: UFO UPDATES TORONTO <updates@globalserve.net> >Dear Colleagues, >The emergence of yet another UFO video tape from Mexico has caused >quite a stir. >I am of course referring to the sequence which was allegedly taken in >Mexico City on 6 August 1997. >I had previously seen the still images, and in Brisbane, >Australia, saw the complete footage for the first time, courtesy >of Italian Giorgio Bongiovanni, who was sent a copy by his >friend, Mexican TV Producer Jaime Maussan. >My own copy arrived in the UK while I was in Brisbane, attending >the Australian UFO Symposium organised by the Queensland UFO >Network (an excellent and extremely well >organised event). >My copy was sent by Mexican UFO researcher Santiago Garza, who I >had telephoned in Mexico City to try and discover more about the >stories which were breaking out all over the Internet some weeks >ago. >I would like to share with you some of his written comments to me >which accompanied said video tape: >- START - >"It was presented for the first time on television here in >Mexico, on Sunday, 28 September 1997, during the TV show '3er. >Milenio' (3rd Millenium), a journalist-orientated programme that >focuses on UFOs and ecological subjects. >"The show is hosted by Jaime Maussan and Daniel Munos, good >friends of mine. >"The video presents an alleged big, disc-shaped craft with >oscillating movements, that flies very slow at low altitude >between two known buildings in the heart of Mexico City. >"Unfortunately, the film lasts just a few seconds. The quality is >poor and the voices you hear supposedly belong to the persons >making the recording. Wrong Graham! The video is high quality as far as UFO videotapes go. Apparently you must not know much about the different aspects of VHS, 8mm, C-VHS, Hi-8, SVHS, and Digital Video Cameras. >"Daniel Munos told me that almost all the audio was censured due >to the 'hard language'. >"Now, there is a general feeling among the researchers here in >Mexico that the film is a hoax. >"However, Jaime Maussan took the original video to Jim Dilletoso >[sic] in Phoenix, Arizona, for analysis. I've seen this footage >before but didn't pay much interest since I considered it highly >suspicious and besides, these past few months there have been a >lot of fakes (some sent to our offices - Contacto OVNI), and we >are aware of a possible 'trap'. >"I interviewed Daniel Munoz, Jaime's assistant, by phone after >you contacted me and he gave me details of the story. >"On 24 September 1997, a package was received in the 3er. Milenio >production offices, sent to Jaime Maussan from an anonymous >source. It contained the video, supposedly filmed on 6 August >1997 in downtown Mexico City. >"A letter that accompanied the video tape said that two friends >made the recording from the top of a building during a lunch >brake. They wanted to remain anonymous because they didn't want >any trouble from their employer. Jaime and Daniel located the >building and claim to have found several witnesses. >"However, Daniel told me that they discovered during their >investigation that the people who made the recording, work in a >company with high quality computer software, and that these >offices are situated at the very top of the building from where >the recording was allegedly made. The whole thing is highly >suspicious. >"A second showing on TV was noticeable for several contradictions >- one witness said the footage was filmed at night!" Graham, what about the other witnesses that have a detailed describtion of the sighting, but didn't know a videotape existed. You are quoting a witness whos testimony doesn't fit with the videotape. What about the other witnesses who know of the UFO, but not a tape of it? It appears your spinning the facts to fit a certain category you want this investigation to head it. What happened to the other side of the story. Do you know what biased mean? >- END - >A major UFO conference is being staged in Acapulco, Mexico >between 4-7 December, an event sponsored and organised by Jaime >Maussan and Televisa (Mexico TV Network), so I'm sure that >whatever analysis has been conducted on the video tape will >receive due attention. >For our part, initial analysis suggests that the footage is >highly suspect and points to an elaborate hoax. >All video tapes carry a time signature at the top of the footage >- we suspect several such signatures might well feature on the >"poor copy" received by Jaime Maussan, although he makes no >mention of this. Nor does he state whether he received 8mm film >or a first generation copy. Graham, I saw the orginal copy sent to Jamie just days after he recieved it, there is no time stamp in the top of any tape, just a date stamp in the bottom corner. Nothing else on the tape, just a date stamp in the bottom right. BTW: Jamie recieved a VHS copy, not 8mm. He has never kept that fact a secret. >The more signatures that appear, the more likely the tape has >undergone the 'treatment'. What is the "treatment", is it an British slang? I don't recall it as any common term in UFOlogy used on the street. Please educate "the List" as to all the important details surrounding your term "treatment". What other signatures are you talking about, please post a still or .MOV file to point this out. >The object is in focus throughout - an extraordinary feature when >combining manual and auto focus. Graham, This doesn't seem to be a terrible problem with most videocamera operators, So what your really saying is? "When the average videocamera is turned on and you zoom in, you would expect your objects to go in and out of focus. Maybe a piece of junk videocamera will , DVC cameras can store presets and manual focus already set. Another thing, if it were on "autofocus", the autofocus would have set its sites mainly on the highrises, It had no reason to go out of focus it had very large buildings filling the images. >The 'spinning' effect on the object demonstrates the same >sequence over and over again. Thats because its rotating. >The cameraman appears to anticipate the movement of the object - >as though he knew when and where it was going in advance. Not true. >When the object disappears behind an apartment block, one would >expect the cameraman to pan back, go left and right to see where >it might have gone - it doesn't happen. This is typical of anyone taping an object thats moving in a consistant direction. He could have been expecting the object to appear out of the other side of the building. It didn't so your picking apart the video because of that? There are lots of daylight videotapes showing objects moving thru clouds, that never reappear out the other side. >These are basic observations arrived at in less than 30 minutes. >The object does appear to have been 'brush stroked' in part, and >our provisional analysis suggests that the skyline and apartment >blocks have been filmed in advance, and the computer generated >'UFO' then laid on top. This is true... It appears to be the only possible way this tape could have been made IF it was a hoax. The problem is you have eyewitnesses to the sighting. In order to bebunk this sighting, you have to discredit the witnesses to support debunking theories about the videotapes, ie..Phoenix Lights. ... >Given one has the right sort of computer software, and a little >money and energy to spend, all things are possible. >On first glance, I can understand the excitement of those who >consider this footage to be the most impressive ever taken of a >UFO, but I'm afraid the analysis tells a different story. What computer experts did you employ on your bizarre copy (with logos that aren't supposed to be there, and poor quality copies) that you consult computer experts to study it? Name your experts? >I will be showing the footage during my lecture at the Contact >International (UK) conference in Oxford this coming Sunday - >probably the first UK showing if I'm not mistaken. Those who turn >up can judge it for themselves. Good, great you said it all now. Your whole post is advertisement for you to make some money of your local schpeil in the U.K. So basically what your saying in your post is "I'm doing this lecture, I need people to show up. Mexico Video has alot of people following it. I have this footage, I'm skeptical of it and think its a fraud.But I'll show and jump on the bandwagon! But I'll be happy to recieve proceeds from your tickets of my fraudualent footage." Am I wrong? Did I read your post wrong? I thought that was what it was saying. >The conference runs from 11.00am - 5.00pm and is being staged at >Exeter Hall, Kidlington, Oxford, on the main road to Banbury. >Details can be obtained by calling the organiser, Brian James, on >01235 851319 or 01865 784200. >Best regards, >Graham W. Birdsall (Editor) >UFO Magazine [UK] Tom King, Skywatcher Arizona Skywatch director AZ Skywatch http://personal.netwrx.net/xalium/skywatch/skywatch.htm OVNI Chapterhouse at http://personal.netwrx.net/xalium/ufovideo.htm
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 27 Re: Abduction Oct 4 1997 From: Peregrine Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith] Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 00:03:12 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 01:42:14 -0500 Subject: Re: Abduction Oct 4 1997 The Duke of Mendoza presents his compliments with cross-eyed amazement and attempts to address: >From: wlmss@peg.apc.org [Lawrie Williams] >Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 15:08:27 +1000 (GMT+1000) >To: updates@globalserve.net >Subject: Re: Abduction Oct 4 1997 I think I'll keep this to the necessary minimum. The Williams quotes me and responds thus: >> The Duke infers nothing of the kind. The Duke observed with a >> micture sorry (but look it up!) mixture of despair and disgust >> that you >> blithely predicted to a 16-year-old girl that she would be >> impregnated by aliens.... >Mistake #1. I did not say anything like this, >blithely or otherwise. This is clearly wooly thinking. >Or is it that cheap political debating trick, to attribute >something false to someone, then wax sarcastic about something >they never said? Okay, sweet pea, this is what you said, back on 12 October: >I told D that she could reassure her friend she would come to no >harm. I was told J [sic] is not afraid, just very curious. Neither >girl would dream of trying to tell their parents about this. >I told her in my opinion the visitation was by an actual craft >with humanoids, because this is consistent with similar incidents >taking place around the world. I said the experience would have >slipped into a dream, like the part about running through the >woods. >I told D that K could expect a phantom pregnancy, but that it would >be ended with another visitation. I said this could be three months, >but that perhaps someone on the Internet could give me a more likely >"term". (K is unlikely to be pregnant by any human, so it looks like >a classic potential "maiden birth", what is mistakenly known as >"virgin birth" since ancient times - a mistranslation.) >I told her that it could be possible that the purpose of all this >was to make hybrids, half like us and half like them. Now, so far as I can tell, and my inability to perceive otherwise may be the product of certain genetic constraints (for details apply to the Williams), the only difference between what I said and what you said is this: you told K's friend D all this merry stuff, not K herself. And do you think D will not tell K? Can you guarantee it? Do I indulge in woolly thoughts and cheap debating tricks or do I just see the practical consequences of your genius for tunnel vision? (Repeat twice for the other "objections" that the Williams numbers.) Naturally I'm curious to know how you know it's unlikely that K will be made pregnant by any human, too. You hang out with Ed Dames and Thomas Rice, or what? Suppose she does get pregnant. Then what? A possible choice of reactions: "It's okay ma, it's just them aliens. Be gone in three months." "Holy shit, there's a monster inside me!" "Oh, god, help, help, help, no one will believe anything I say." But most reactions of 16-year-olds in this situation rarely make it into the realm of words. I wonder why. Do you? With your expertise in genetics I imagine you will have a ready response. I think several things about the loopy ideas you offer as to my contribution to the suicide rate among abductees. Of those who've met me and subscribe to this list I can tell from their recent posts that my company and ruthless skepticism has driven them to catatonic despair and a permanent state of existential nihilism. As they will doubtless confirm. Of course abductees have no one to blame but the wickedness and cruelty of skeptics and debunkers for their reactions to their experiences. Heavens, I'm surprised those of us who raise a few questions in the face of your wisdom haven't all been arrested for murder. And wasting list time with intent, natch. Damn hell the Williams can't even spell my name. And worse, the Lady Elfride scorned. This is *very* thin ice. Still, it'll be fun seeing how this character manages to finagle Artemis into the history of Gnosticism and the dreaded mutes. Perhaps Bishop Irenaeus was really a cow? Do we get the Secret Sayings of Snippy, too? Did Linda Mouldy Cowe really leap fully armed from a red earthenware jar at Nag Hammadi in 1945, as so many of us have so long suspected? Truly, this will be a feast for scholars. Just so there's no misunderstanding. The last time someone as obtuse as the Williams wound everyone up on this List, a gent from Sacramento I believe it was, of the Pee Aitch Dee class, he got the ol' heave ho in fairly short order. I objected to that, and I would object again were it to be suggested or enacted in this case. Someone has to keep an eye on the dangerous and deranged, and it may as well be us. That's an opinion not an assumption, by the way, that bit about dangerous and deranged. I do assume barking mad, and deaf to reason, however. Yours &c Pegasus D. Mistletoe Ghastly Mutation
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 27 Re: Abduction Oct 4 1997 From: Michael Wayne Malone <wayne@fly.HiWAAY.net> Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 00:01:12 -0600 (CST) Fwd Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 01:46:07 -0500 Subject: Re: Abduction Oct 4 1997 > From: wlmss@peg.apc.org [Lawrie Williams] > Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 15:08:27 +1000 (GMT+1000) > To: starfriends@esosoft.com, ufo-l@mb.protree.com, updates@globalserve.net > Subject: Re: Abduction Oct 4 1997 > > trying to find out what did occur, you make one monstrous assumption > No Peter. Opinion is not Assumption. There's mistake #3 for you. When one basis one opinion on something other than facts, then one is making assumptions as to the validity of ones opinion. When one puts forth ones opinion, by definition one puts forth that opinion as truth. Therefore when one puts forth truth via opinion without fact, one must be making an assumption. Ergo, no mistake. > > and then tell this kid that she can expect to be rogered and made > > pregnant by an alien. Terrific. > Now you employ cheap sexual innuendo against a child. > You have three times misrepresented the information I introduced > to the discussion. There was not a lot of it but you have > nevertheless managed to make a complete cock-up of it. This is > either sloppiness or obfuscation. Three strikes and you were out, > my friend, even before you lurched into inflammatory smut. So is it now your position that you did not tell "K" via her friend that she should expect impregnation and removal of the resultant fetus by aliens? > It is the poison and spite that skeptics put abroad that > generates the real angst and trauma for countless abductees, 16 > year old girls included. It gives many of the proles an excuse to > taunt and intimidate them, to call them liars and accuse them of > mental illness. It puts us under immense social pressure. It can > even lead to suicides in people who cannot endure the conflict > between what is happening to them and the denial and pressure > from those around them. So they kill themselves, especially > vulnerable young kids. First, I would like documentation of the study that shows those who have had what you are calling an "Abduction" are more likely to commit suicide under the care of a professional mental health provider than those "Abductees" who are under the "care" of a "Fellow abductee." > That is the kind of harm I have to deal with, and it stands head > and shoulders above the petty and false accusations you sling at > me. You have hardly proven the assertion (or is that opinion?) that skeptics and mental health professionals are less suited to handle abductions that those who profess the unsupported belief that abductions result in phantom pregnancies and stolen fetuses. > You and your kind fuel the denial. You judge me quite falsely for > the very real harm and hurt that YOU do to thousands, nay, tens > of thousands of individuals via the power of the print and tv > media. And you do it to line your pockets, for blood money for > propoganda that drives kids to their graves. Again, your assertion as to the number of "abductions" is hardly valid when the "abduction" senerio is no more than a theory. As for the lining of one pockets via skeptisism, it pays better than blind Ufo belief, but only in non-monetary terms. > > The only connexion between you and Sir Cedric in this parable is > > your prattishness and your incapacity to judge a situation from > > anything but your own point of view. Do you get the point? > That you misread files, get emotional when they confuse you, and > then resort to ad hominim. Yes, I would say I get that point. Alas, it is obvious that you do not get the point. But then again, perhaps you do, but wish to deny it. > > ....... When a mob of such generally opposed persons > > jump on you with both feet, does it not cross your mind - never a > > long journey, it would seem - that you might be just a teensy, eensy, > > weeny bit mistaken? Apparently not. > Skye merely clipped my ear. John Velez started hollering but he > is inclined to that kind of thing. The other 2 were just anxious > daddies realizing at last that their little ones could be next > and lashing out at the messenger. I was flattered, not flattened. > Hardly a mob! How about "A Small Gang"? Say, half a per cent of > everyone who saw the original message? If that. And the number of people who took up your defense? Michael Malone Search for other documents from or mentioning: wayne | wlmss |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 27 Casting Call for TV Show From: Beyond Boundaries <jmurphy@onramp.net> Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 23:29:46 -0600 Fwd Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 01:48:19 -0500 Subject: Casting Call for TV Show Unique Opportunity for right professionals Casting Call from Beyond Boundaries UFO Research Organization - (see http://rampages.onramp.net/~jmurphy) For major network weekly one hour TV show We are quickly assembling an international, English speaking, team of the world's top scientists for professional analyses of UFO related and other paranormal anomalous current events and expedition findings. Need to fill consultant positions in the following fields of study: Psychology Physics Astrophysics Archaeology Anthropology Paleontology Molecular Biology Chemistry Gemology Geology Medical physician Clergy On camera experience helpful but not necessary Travel Expenses and Consulting fees paid, or course! If this opportunity interests you, and you are free to travel on call, then please send a resume / biographical sketch, a professional photo or polaroid of yourself, and a VHS tape expressing your interest in this position and why you qualify as the person of our choice to: Beyond Boundaries - PO Box 250 - Rainbow TX 76077 for our receipt on or before 8 Nov 97. If you have questions please leave a message at 1-800-259-8747 BEYOND BOUNDARIES - Research and Expeditions Worldwide **************************************************************************** ************************************ New Website ( check it every few days for updates ) - http://rampages.onramp.net/~jmurphy **************************************************************************** ************************************ PO BOX 250 RAINBOW TX 76077
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 27 Downed UFOs in Africa From: Jakes Louw <louwje@telkom.co.za> Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 08:12:10 +0200 Fwd Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 02:10:04 -0500 Subject: Downed UFOs in Africa Errol Dunno if you want to make something of this mess that I have forwarded to you? Jakes E. Louw louwje@telkom.co.za +27 12 311-2668 082 923 6144 ------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 07:14:51 +0200 From: "Jan Lamprecht" <pbs@iafrica.com> To: PieterVN@hotmail.com,...@qit-ul-0104.telkom.co.za, CIS.List@qit-ul-0104.telkom.co.za Subject: Downed UFOs in Africa -Forwarded Pieter I've been a friend of Jan Lamprecht's for many years, and I see you've joined one of his mailing lists. The attached mail mentions that you have knowledge of a UFO crash in Nam in 1980. I assume you know of the two alleged crashes: Lesotho and Botswana? On several occasions I posted requests for information regarding these incidents on some of the top UFO mailing lists in the world, with a view to doing some research myself, but to date have received no concrete evidence that those crashes and retrievals took place. In fact, my requests were met with utter silence from the guys who claim to have the evidence (von Retyi, Koch, etc). So I can only conclude that those incidents were hoaxes cooked up for financial gain. Now in no way am I saying that this what you are doing: but what I must point out to you that if you allow your allegations to go out on the Net, you better have something to show at the end of the day, otherwise the entire UFO community WORLDWIDE will label you as an unreliable source. Cheers Jakes E. Louw louwje@telkom.co.za +27 12 311-2668 082 923 6144 --------------------------- Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 05:59:41 +0200 From: "Jan Lamprecht" <UFO-1@qit-ul-0104.telkom.co.za> To: pbs@iafrica.com,...@qit-ul-0104.telkom.co.za, CIS.List@qit-ul-0104.telkom.co.za Subject: Downed UFOs in Africa Hi All, Pieter Van Niekerk has joined our list. I've been saying that there's no evidence of downed UFOs in Africa. I met Pieter working at one of my clients. He used to belong to the SA UFO society but left because he was not happy with standard of it's work. He told me he investigated abductions and other UFO sightings. He promised to let me view Ray Santili's autopsy video in full. (I've seen part of it). Anyhow, he says his father was in Military Intelligence in the SA Army and that in the EARLY 1980's a UFO was shot down over Namibia. He says his father handled the documentation and that the SAAF and USAF came within a matter of hours and picked up the UFO and took it to the USA and cleaned up the desert so that there was not one iota of evidence of a UFO crash. Well, you all know of my opposition to this story, but what can I say? I'll ask him to tell me some more. Now he says that the incident which his Dad knew about took place in the EARLY 1980's in NAMIBIA. Now the other versions speak about Botswana, and/or Namibia in the LATE 1980's (1989). So I'm wondering if Pieter's story is the *ORIGINAL*? It's very strange indeed. I'll ask Pieter to get us more evidence and to tell me more. I doubt 2 or 3 UFOs were shot down. But did we really shoot a UFO down? Truly, I don't believe we have the laser weapons. But such testimony from a guy who claims his FATHER handled all the OFFICIAL DOCUMENTATION is just too good to resist. It blows my mind. Some of you may wish to forward this to various UFO lists because I know that many people have expressed an interest in the matter. Pieter can be contacted directly at: PieterVN@hotmail.com. --- Pieter, Please cc copies of your replies to me for forwarding to this and other lists. I'd like to hear what you have to say on the matter. All, Bloody bizarre! (It seems we South Africans committ too many crimes - and now Interplanetary Murder! <blush> <shame>) Search for other documents from or mentioning: louwje | pbs | pietervn
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 27 Re: 'The Gulf Breeze Paper' From: Ted Viens <drtedv@freewwweb.com> Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 23:13:56 -0800 Fwd Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 02:14:40 -0500 Subject: Re: 'The Gulf Breeze Paper' From: c549597@showme.missouri.edu [Barbara Becker] Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 22:52:27 -0500 To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: 'The Gulf Breeze Paper' --- I dun snipped so much here my new fangled scissors broke.--- >****BB Your physical analysis can be wrong. Law, at least this >copyright law, is very specific. And it VERY specifically says >that if Ed Walters owns the copyright to the B&J photos, AND he >does not have a transfer agreement, which he doesnt, the he MUST >BE THE PHOTOGRAPHER. I truly wished that BB had more to pin her argument on than this copyright straw dog... Even a brief reference to the two investigators championed by Kevin Randle for dismissing GB in his latest book would be some distraction from this harping on the copyright code. Some comfort was found when BB broke briefly from this topic and gave requested info on an unrelated subject to another hard working subscriber. This freed me from dismissing her as some vocal delusional paranoid. Without doubt, BB has properly related the letter of the copyright law as explained by her attorney. This attorney should be fired for not explaining to BB that any law is reflected in both its language and its common practice and that the widespread practice of any law takes precedence over its exact wording. There ain't no copyright police, no copyright mounties, no copyright cavalry sweeping down from the ridges to right the falsities of the errant filer. The justice department needs to be strongly induced before it will even cast an eye towards the copyright office. Copyrights as with patents, are enforced in the civil courts. In practice, anyone can make any claims on any copyright application and as long as this is not challenge in court by some other aggrieved private party, it will stand as legally binding. As long as the "real" photographers never challenge him in court, EW can declare himself the photographer even if he had never seen the camera, the negative nor a print of the image. Sure, technically this may be illegal, but the copyright office doesn't give a damn... Bye... Ted..
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 27 Edwards attacks Mexican Footage From: jared@valuserve.com (Andromeda.net- Anderson, Jared) Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 11:05:03 -0700 Fwd Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 20:06:07 -0500 Subject: Edwards attacks Mexican Footage I got this post from ISUR's web board at http://www.isur.com./public_board/messages/7398.html Mexico City UFO Video: Real Or Hoaxed? by Liz Edwards 10-25-97 As an avid investigative researcher and an artist I have a particular interest in the vast realm of the knowledge we are given today and, so, I wonder. =A0 What is real and what isn't? Through the miracle of the computer, limitless visual and sensory horizons have been opened to us. On the other hand, this new genie can also be led to do things that are less than genuine. So effectively, in fact, it is almost to the point now that we are sometimes forced to question what we perceive as 'reality' itself, so seductive to our senses, and analysis-resistant, can some of these computer spawned and enhanced creations be. =A0 Listening to Sightings.com on the radio on Sunday, October 5, with Jeff Rense, I was more than excited when he had longtime UFO researchers Lee & Brit Elders on as guests recently. They have deservedly earned great fame and respect as the key chroniclers of the massive and continuing waves of UFO sightings in Mexico which began during the 1991 solar eclipse as ancient Mayan and Aztec legends had predicted. The Elder's three videos showing but a few hundreds of the thousands of Mexican sightings are landmarks in UFO research. =A0 The big news, of course, was the less than 30 seconds of daylight video of a UFO allegedly taped by an anonymous source in Mexico City on August 6, 1997. The tape made its way into the possession of Mexican researcher-journalist Jaime Maussan who sent a copy to Lee and Brit, with whom he has worked closely for years. =A0 During the show with Jeff, the Elders, and computer analyst Jim Dilettoso, emphasized that nothing from the video would be released until complete computer analysis, from several sources, had been completed. Apparently, Jaime Maussan had other ideas and went on Mexican tv and aired the video to a vast audience South of the border. As you have seen on Jeff's website, at least one person taped the television broadcast and four 'video grabs' from it began appearing on the internet. =A0 Taking one of the freeze frames (ufomex3.jpg) into a program that I use to examine graphics , I was able to enhance the picture. I was able to raise the ufo into be more visible status and with more definition. It was my determination there was nothing corrupt or that had been added to this graphic, and so I happily sent it to Jeff at Sightings.com. The picture looked authentic and believable. That enhancement is available for viewing from the linked Headline on the site. =A0 I was so intrigued with these spectacular shots that I didn't stop there, however, and continued to work with the stills of the ufo. I was also spurred on knowing that top scientists were doing their own examinations which further underscored the importance of these pictures. =A0 On October 17, 1997, using my own formula and techniques, it became clear, to me at least, that one of the four pictures appeared to be very different. This particular shot reacted to my experiments in a peculiar way and produced something unusual which set off warning lights. If you look at this enhancement, you see a 'star burst' of pixels. I had no explanation initially but since then have come to a couple of important and compelling conclusions =A0 A few days after my discovery, the video itself began appearing on the internet offered via a huge download of almost 4 megabytes. Several UFO researchers sent the download to me and were raving about the stunning images in it. And it is an amazing piece of video. As I examined it I wondered who had made it available. When you access the download, there is no identification of the source....the download just starts moving. This also intrigued me as I remembered that Mexican investigator, Jaime Maussan, reported the video had first come to him via "anonymous" sources. As I probed and searched in an effort to identify the source of the internet download, I learned many things. =A0 This is what I now believe has happened. Please realize that this is a preliminary conclusion at this time and my investigation continues. We all want the truth. We deserve the truth...whatever it may be. Moreover, we should NOT be deceived by today's wondrous technology. =A0 1. First of all, we have a film sent anonymously to Jaime Maussan. This alone is highly suspicious. If YOU had taken the greatest daylight video in history, which could result in substantial financial gain, not to mention world notoriety and a place in UFO history...would you turn it over and hide? Would you lurk behind the scenes while others took your work and good fortune and profited and enhanced their reputations? I doubt it. =A0 2. Second, there are the enhanced pictures. You can see some definition in the first one and this has drawn attention to some of the famous Meier photos. The enhanced 'star burst' picture shows detail in pixilation that is questionable, and raises doubt about authenticity. =A0 3. Third. I have been able to discover that the Mexico UFO video download is tagged from an unidentified source site which is owned by a company that is TOPS in the field of 3D COMPUTER GAME PROGRAMMING. This is very strange. I will be talking to this company by phone on Monday morning and will question them about how they got tagged with the video, and why it is being offered from an unidentified source site. =A0 Brilliant graphics programs like "3D Max Studio" will let you design your own games...and can do many remarkable things. If you know what's out there, how it works, and how images can be manipulated and integrated into various formats, almost ANYTHING can be done. If a tape like the Mexican UFO video could be hoaxed, a company like this one might be a prime suspect. And to have discovered that it is, in fact, involved in the sudden distribution over the internet of the Mexico City tape is a strange coincidence to say the least. =A0 4. Fourth. At this time we are reviewing other UFO photos some of which are similar to some of the famous, or infamous, Billy Meier photos. It has been brought to my attention that they may be the same type craft as the Mexico City image. Extensive comparisons to these other pictures are currently being made and we will be posting them shortly. =A0 Now, here is how I think the Mexico UFO video could have been produced: =A0 1. Take the video footage of Mexico City with the apartment buildings in the foreground. 2. Place that footage into a high-powered state of the art computer game graphics program. 3. Immerse/insert the ufo into the Mexico City scene. 4. Code the graphics program to make the UFO "move". 5. Directly from the computer, copy the now UFO animated scene onto a videotape. 6. Take the tape and play it on a tv. 7. Use a camcorder and record the footage directly off the screen of the tv monitor. And, voila! You have a genuine "UFO video" which would show NO electronic, technical, or graphics discrepancies under subsequent analysis! That is why the Mexico City video has shown no discrepancies!!!!! =A0 I want to repeat, these are only my preliminary findings as of Saturday, evening, 10-25-97. It is up to each of you to consider these issues individually. The main purpose here is that we find the truth. That is what I am trying to do. I would prefer the Mexico City video to be real, but I refuse to be hoaxed by today's technology which is capable of some fantastic feats of deception. =A0 The UFO research community has been scored and ridiculed too many times for its beliefs, and it is dead wrong to assume that all UFO sightings are fakes or erroneous identification of various flying objects and 'natural' phenomena. For the UFO research community to be burdened now with a video that is manufactured but believed to be genuine is something that cannot be accepted or tolerated. =A0 My special thanks to my colleagues Kent Steadman, of Steadman Graphics, for his expertise in so many areas; and to Dave Zidek for his remarkable technical computer support. =A0 =A0 Liz Edwards I Wonder Productions
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 27 Re: UFO Photos From: "The Ufological Terrorist" <mcji5apb@fs1.me.umist.ac.uk> Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 13:12:32 GMT Fwd Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 20:23:06 -0500 Subject: Re: UFO Photos On Saturday, 25th October 1997, Sir Philip wrote: >Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 01:18:00 +0000 >From: Philip Mantle <el51@dial.pipex.com> >To: updates@globalserve.net >Subject: UFO PHOTO'S >Dear colleagues, >I am currently a consultant on a proposed book project dealing >with UFO's in Russia. The autjor of the book will be Paul >Stonehill of the Russian Ufology Center in the USA. The company >publishing the book is looking for UFO photo's both from the >former Soviet Union and from around the world. >Below is a letter from Chris Stone at Quadrillion outlining >exactly what he is loking for. He has a large budget available >for such material and I would therefore hope that there are those out >there that can help. >FROM: Chris Stone - Quadrillion Publishing. >My company, Quadrillion Publishing, are currently producing a >book entitled the 'Soviet UFO Files' which will be widely >available in Britain, Europe and the USA in autumn of next year. It is >the follow up to our highly successful, 'Aliens: Encounters With The >Unexplained'. Perhaps you have seen it ? Yes Chris, I have and it's pooh. Why!? I hear you cry..............because assuming it's the one I'm thinking of (by Marcus Day - is that his real name?), you couldn't even get the name of the ex-police officer involved in the Ilkley Moor 'Little Green Entity' case correct.[CHUCKLE, CHUCKLE] Even more comical was the discussion related to abductees in the final chapter entitled 'Have you been abducted?'. Listing the *symptoms* serves no useful purpose except to deepen the cultural contamination that is already in place, reinforcing the belief that grey space aliens are kidnapping human beings and abusing them. Andy Blunn
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 27 Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculoso From: Peregrine Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith] Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 08:39:56 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 21:18:06 -0500 Subject: Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculoso The Duke of Mendoza presents his compliments. >Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 02:10:03 +0100 (MET) >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculoso >I am referring to the repeated process of posting >positive information that gets debunked by armchair analysts who >spend more time debunking than finding facts. I think if there's >one thing obstructing progress in this field, it's this attitude >by debunkers. Which leaves us with the question why the UFO >community tolerates this. Much the same reason it tolerates clowns who presume to know about other people's genetic make-up, or their magazine reading habits, or the quantity of facts that clutter their minds, and who display intolerance. In fact, it's called being tolerant. Even debunkers get it right occasionally (which is progress). Even ufologists get it right occasionally (which is progress). I've long wondered why it appears to be acceptable among some ufologists for some people to sit in armchairs reading about UFOs and going "Gwwaaark! Gwok! Puk-puk-puk! Whaaaark!" like enchanted chickens and believing every word under their noses, but it is wicked to sit in an armchair and shout "Bollocks!" at the sight of the same manifest rubbish. But then I am not a ufologist so I only know from armchairs, already. Yours &c (lost in the rain in Juarez) Postiche D. Merkin Wig Wham
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 27 Re: Questions for Abductees From: wlmss@peg.apc.org [Lawrie Williams] Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 23:50:34 +1000 (GMT+1000) Fwd Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 21:38:20 -0500 Subject: Re: Questions for Abductees > Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 22:10:15 -0500 > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Questions for Abductees I see since this arrived several more accusatory rants have arrived. Never before in the history of ufology have so many become so excited about so little. > I know that you only tried to do your best and that no harm was > ever intended by you, to the contrary, it is clear that you were > trying to help. Condescension, soon to be followed by flames. > But,...at some point in the game the peer review This is not peer review. This is hounding since you reiterate points I spent hours dealing with. You may agree with me or agree to disagree with me, but either way do me a favour and make up your mind. > that you have recieved on this list (and such a unanimous one > from so many people on both sides of the fence) that it has got > to reach you. I don't consider about six people out of hundreds to be unanimous. One of the others at least cannot grasp the basic difference between "could" (my term) and "would" (his interpolation). I guess it is the same sort of statistics you apply to abductees. One loses the plot so you determine in your wisdom that we all should be told lies. i.e. guilty of insanity unless we can prove our sanity. > Judging from your defensive response to my post that hasn't happened yet Mud sticks if one does not reply. You rattle out a stream of falsehoods and accusations in ten minutes, but it takes all day for me to refute them rationally and now you have just rattled off the same stuff again! with 4 or 5 of you at it, it creates an impression of a furore. As if. I assume you and your friends will continue to take turns posting misinformation and false accusations until I either submit or leave the list. Is that your goal? Since I intend to do neither, can we arrive at a compromise? I shall promise to never make a posting to this list again but to join the intelligent majority and lurk. And you and your kind can then tell us all about how ufoes and people are allowed to interact. I'll even admit to deep regret that I tried to offer the list a different view, one based on experience, insight and strong moral values that have proven, regrettably, to not be in alignment with their UFO dogma. >...I'll just remind you that`the road to Hell is paved with good intentions!' Like your good intentions in making false accusations? I did not mind replying the first time, but having to do it all over again is absurd. Maybe I should put it all in a FAQ? Problem is, based on your recent performance, you would not read it anyway! pb>>Nobody knows (except, it seems, you) what happened to them. Instead of >>trying to find out what did occur, I did not intensively question them nor let others do so. I have seen the way people pester abductees overseas. That was driven home only today, seeing another taunting missive from Barbara Becker demanding that Ed Walters be further harassed. My own experience on this list is proof positive of how it happens. I just thank the gods I have not tried to copyright any photographs. As for finding out what did occur, I am spending some of these nights in a dark and windy situation, unarmed and alone, waiting to see for myself. And there are no armchairs out there, just discomfort and some risk. Another reason why I find your continuing comments so deeply insulting. And its just great to know what is being said about me while I am trying to find out what did occur in the most reliable way conceivible. And it has delivered results! But as I am still trying to extricate myself from the current iterative morass of innuendo, false assumptinos and moral judgements, don't anyone hold their breath waiting for any report. I take pride in my honesty and moral integrity and more importantly, I know too well how much time some people can waste. I'll say this now with complete confidence: paranormal effects *do* follow ufo visitations! > you make one monstrous assumption and >>then tell this kid that she can expect to be rogered and made pregnant >>by an alien. Terrific. jv> Not terrific, horrific! An horrific way to twist a clinical report of a clinical incident, a terrific example of assumption, bias and a stereotyped reaction. That kind of innuendo should be strongly condemned. John supports it! pb>> So, never having met her, on what basis can you *possibly* judge >> her reaction to the alleged events or to your thoroughly stupid, >> unjustified and (let's think the best here) irresponsible prediction? >> How did you communicate? By phone? Fax? E-mail? Tell, please do. > Peter said it first and makes the point as clearly as anyone > could so I won't reiterate it Lawrie but I think the point is a > valid one. The idea that abductees are not fit to be fully informed because an opinion might set off a psychosis is an outright insult to all abductees. So reporting an abduction is a possible sign of mental illness? Wow! Abductees should steer well clear of mainstream medicine if this value system is anything to go by. I have indeed learnt something vital from this interaction. Before this incident I thought some mainstream "professionals" had their heads screwed on. John Velez has proved me completely wrong. pb>> The only connexion between you and Sir Cedric in this parable is >> your prattishness and your incapacity to judge a situation from >> anything but your own point of view. Do you get the point? jv> Do you Lawrie? I certainly do, John. The lesson is that I honestly reported a brief conversation, then chose to defend my action, and then spent days and days of my life crafting thoughtful responses to people like you who just return time and time again to make the same accusations. I am persistently asked this question. It was known to the inquisitors as "Putting the Question." It was put until the accused broke and said what they were required to say. Do *you* get the point? > The things we say to those who are in a vulnerable state (especially > in the case of inexperienced young ones) can have life altering > effects. What you did (with all the good intentions in the world) > was to hand that girl a lit stick of emotional and psychological > dynamite! The fuse could go at any time. Because she seems OK now > doesn't mean she won't be tomorrow when you have been long gone from > the scene. She may have an adverse reaction (at any time) Do you > understand the possible negative implications of your actions? Feel free to post some verifiable statistics to back this up. In the meantime, ask yourself how professional you are when you come out with rhetoric like that above. And at least you are a cut about Peter B, with his reliance on personal attacks. Of course your statistics still only represents a sample of cases that come to the attention of professionals and will be only tenuously connected with our situation over here. That is if you even have any stats. So far all I have heard is opinions, the same opinions with different personal innuendo each time. Latest out of the email box: I am liable to be sued. How Pythonesque this is. Take note also my son's comments, posted separately. >>Nobody can say I am not even-handed in the people I upset. JV> I'll give you that one Perigrine! <G> Actually it was me, Lawrie who said that. The one who seeks to focus on the issues, not on ad hominim, corny games with surnames &tc. PB >> ever think of that?). When a mob of such generally opposed persons >> jump on you with both feet, does it not cross your mind - never a >> long journey, it would seem - that you might be just a teensy, eensy, >> weeny bit mistaken? Apparently not. JV> Actually she's accomplished a bit of a minor miracle. She > actually has you, me, Roger, Jerry, (and countless others) to Use your fingers, you will find you have enough with plenty to spare. > agree on one thing unanimously! It's actually quite a novelty to > find us all wearing the same colors. But it's for a good cause > and I respect all of you for speaking out. I only hope that.... Easy to explain. Therapists who make a living exploiting, er helping abductees have been going on for years about the wicked amateurs who mess with abductees heads and destroy vital data with unskilled hypnotic sessions. This group has been reviled by skeptics and by those who want scientific respectability. Abductees seem to have been saying that there are not that many shysters out there and that our real memories stay fresh even decades later. But that is ignored. It is just too useful a myth for all concerned. The professionals get to put the competition out of business. The skeptics have a basis for discrediting abductees. Disturbed abductees have someone else to blame for their confusion. It is known as a unifying stereotype. Until I was recently mistaken for one of these unauthorized therapists and subjected to these hysterical claims, I believed the myth. Not any more! Oh, I am a male, by the way. > Lawrie listens for the sake of any future "conversations" she may > conduct with someone who suspects that they are being abducted. > Especially a minor! For legal reasons alone she should have > declined involvement. Hollywood causes the trauma John. On a big scale. They mess with people's heads by the BILLIONS. This stream of accusations and personal attacks on me is absolute hypocrisy. And I still can see no end in sight. Consider that maybe cultural values are different over here. We have a mix of anglo-celtic with a lot of austronesian and some southern european. We don't have fundementalists teaching our young ones lies about demons and hellfire. Only rarely are kids over here subjected to christian ritual abuse, a major problem in the USA. The Kelly case is the only abreaction I have heard of in Oz although I am sure there are more in the urban areas. She was more embarrassed afterwards than traumatized, and by her own admission she was a christian. Christian fundamentalism causes far more trauma John. They mess with people's heads by the TENS of MILLIONS. They get little children and *promise* them eternal torture if they fail to comply. Their icon is a man under extreme torture and it is displayed in public. They put programs on TV in which they portray mythology as if it is factual. They go hunting for people in deep emotional trouble and then they pressure them to join their cults. There is where the real damage is being done. Get real John. I am saying you have no idea of how other cultures deal with these kinds of incidents. Your ad hominim attacks represent the "Ugly American" and "Pommy dickhead" syndromes at their worst. You presume to tell a mature and trusted Australian (first abducted 44 years ago!) what he should or should not say to other Australians on the shallow pretext that you know better! pb>>Somewhere or the other Plato has Socrates say to an acolyte: >> "Go, tell no one, and drown thyself." jv> I don't know about hari-kari but I do hope that Lawrie learns > from all of this. Yes, that we here in North Queensland can share no more and instead let "experts" like John & Peter (different sides, same coin) tell us what we are allowed to tell our kids. pb> What you are up to now is potentially dangerous, deeply stupid, and > without an iota of concern for the consequences to the subject > in question. You show how truly half-witted your ideas are by the way > you *defend* them and dozy actions. jv> Blunt, but it's justified. Needs to be said in as perfunctory a > fashion as possible. Testify Mendoza! <G> The informal support system that exists in our liberal but stable community should excite envy in New York rather than condemnation. We listen to one another. We are honest with one another. This recent spate of postings and most especially Peter's sexual innuendo has completely discredited whatever credibility he had. How come the moralists on the list are not up in arms about this? Slander is never pleasant and can never be ignored, especially when it is as intense as I have received. At least John has strived to be reasonable. But I see Peter has turned his attack on the girls themselves. Anything for a thrill and a giggle I suppose. With the permission of the list I'd like to print out all the discussion we have had and pass it on to the kids concerned. They deserve a good laugh at the star-chamber farce that this has become. And if anyone is to be sued for sexual innuendo or intemperate personal comments, I wonder who it is likely to be? >>How old are you, by the way? Forty-eight. Old enough to know in consierable detail what you will never, ever, know. Lawrie Williams________________dusting off his trusty old printer
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 27 Re: Mexico City Video From: Jean van Gemert <jeanvg@dds.nl> Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 20:04:19 +0100 (MET) Fwd Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 23:33:40 -0500 Subject: Re: Mexico City Video >Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 22:50:45 -0400 >From: James Easton <pulsar@compuserve.com> >Subject: Mexico City Video >To: UFO UpDates <updates@globalserve.net> >FACTS: >1. I called my friends working in the tower of Mexico City >International Airport (Benito Juarez Airport). The object was NOT >located on radar at the time in question. Which, I might add, doesn't say much as at the height visible in the tape it would be pretty much below any radar coverage. -- Jean van Gemert Jeanvg@dds.nl, j.v.gemert@tn.fontys.nl Eindhoven Polytechnic, Department of Physical Engineering __________________________________________________________________________ Science, Logic, and the UFO Debate: http://www.primenet.com/~bdzeiler/index.html -----------------------
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 27 Re: Solved abduction cases? From: "R.Bull" <RAB@cadcentre.co.uk> [Rob Bull] Date: Mon, 27 Oct 97 17:54:00 GMT Fwd Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 23:32:12 -0500 Subject: Re: Solved abduction cases? I remember reading an account of an "abductee" who was cured of being abducted by a course of pills prescribed to him by his shrink. I thought the account was either in Jim Schnabel's "Dark White" or John Rimmer's "The Evidence For - Alien Abductions" but I can't find it in either. Any thoughts on this? Rob Bull
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 27 Re: Researching Abduction Cases From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 02:05:39 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 23:28:03 -0500 Subject: Re: Researching Abduction Cases >Subject: Re: Researching Abduction Cases >Date: Wed, 22 Oct 97 00:35:59 -0500 >From: Pat Parrinello <pparri@crossfields.com> >To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates> > John Velez, struck with the concept of magnitude, responded > to a guy named Jim by invoking the supposition of Deity when > he said... >>>However, if it were one of those million-person affairs, it would >>>then likely gain the attention of a few brave, open-minded >>>reporters and succeed partially. >>Jim, I pray that I can never muster one million abductees! -That- >>would be truly frightening. If there -are- a million of us, then >>God help us all. > John, I would that you consider the possibility of 6 billion. > It is my considered opinion that such is the case. > ~Pat~ Hi Pat, The thought that 'they' have already gotten to -everyone- has crossed my mind too. If so, game over man! If they have done whatever it is they are doing to everyone, then about all any of us can do is hope that these guys aren't like us! (That, or yank our pantaloons down and kiss our sorry butts goodbye!) I'd hate to be on the recieving end of the kind of crap that indiginous native peoples have recieved at the hands of the, "more advanced societies" throughout our own recorded history. Hope you're wrong Obewon, it's our _only_ hope! <VBG> John Velez, One who bears the 'Mark of the Thyrsus.' John Velez jvif@spacelab.net
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 27 Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculous From: "WHITE" <mjawhite@digitaldune.net> Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 06:08:53 -0700 Fwd Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 23:22:44 -0500 Subject: Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculous To EBK, List, et al., While the List was inactive, I clicked around out of idle curiousity on some of the ideas being exchanged on the "Zeta Notso Ridiculous" thread re: FTL, etc., and found a posting for NASA research into the subject. It is very interesting and informative. http://www.lerc.nasa.gov/WWW/bpp/bpp_RELEVANT_PHYSICS.htm The main site for the research facility is: http://www.lerc.nasa.gov Best, John White mjawhite@digitaldune.net
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 27 Re: UFOs and Spirits in the Congo From: James Easton <pulsar@compuserve.com> Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 15:46:56 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 23:53:32 -0500 Subject: Re: UFOs and Spirits in the Congo Regarding... >From: wlmss@peg.apc.org [Lawrie Williams] >Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 07:15:04 +1000 (GMT+1000) >Subject: UFOs and Spirits in the Congo. Lawrie wrote: >"Thikoloshe is a small hairy being, having the form of a man, >but so small that he only reaches to a man's knee. He has >hair all over his face and coming out of his ears, and his >face is squashed up like a baboon's. The penis of the male >is so long he carries it slung over his shoulder, and he >has only one buttock...". Certainly a new slant on "half-assed". James. E-mail: pulsar@compuserve.com
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 27 Re: Millennium Raises Hopes, Fears From: RGates8254@aol.com [Robert Gates] Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 17:45:53 -0500 (EST) Fwd Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 23:57:48 -0500 Subject: Re: Millennium Raises Hopes, Fears > From: RSchatte@aol.com [Rebecca Schatte] > Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 15:27:36 -0400 (EDT) > To: updates@globalserve.net > Subject: Fwd: Millennium Raises Hopes, Fears > --------------------- > Forwarded message: > Subj: Millennium Raises Hopes, Fears > Date: 97-10-25 12:11:20 EDT > From: AOL News > .c The Associated Press > By DAVID BRIGGS > WASHINGTON (AP) - Jesus Christ is about to return, and the 1,500 > folks packed into the Sheraton Washington ballroom couldn't be > happier. <snip> > Others, both in and out of the mainstream, are also blowing > horns of warning. There are best-sellers such as Pat Robertson's > ``The End of the Age.'' Scores of broadcasters, from Jack Van Impe > to Hal Lindsey, are preaching of the end times. And the Internet > offers more than 100 popular millennial sites, including Apocalypse > Now, This Week in Bible Prophecy and The Jehovah's Witnesses' > Homepage. Not to mention the mailing during the Gulf War, from Jerry Falwell in which he reccomended and touted some guy that was preaching that the Gulf War was Armegeddon blah blah blah, the end of the world is not going to happen any later then 1995, etc, etc. > For evangelical Christians, the Second Coming is what's new > about the new millennium. According to the AP poll, almost 40 > percent of Christians expect Jesus to arrive in the 21st century, > if not sooner. > They are looking past Jesus' own admonition that ``no one knows > the hour.'' By their reckoning of Biblical clues, the time is soon. The time has always been "soon." When Christ left the apostles, they thought his return was or would be soon. Some years ago a historian documented all the then millennium/end of the world girations that happened at the end of the first millennium about 990 AD, i.e. everybody was in a frothing lather that the end would happen at 1000 AD. In 1968, the end of the world/Armeggeddon WAS absolutly without a doubt going to happen in 1975. Then 1980, Then 1985, then 1989, then 1995 and so forth. Now all the books/authors/experts are theorizing with various dates from 1998, 99, 2000, and some of them are even going into 2004. The nostrodaums "experts" have also fingered this or that date. Not to mention I have over the years seen "experts" pick 2004, 2007, 2014 as the year which the Mayand calender (hence the end of the world in their mind) ends. <snip> > Israel. > The New Testament compares the kingdom of God, near at hand, to > the growth of a fig tree. Some believers substitute Israel for the > tree. They say the Second Coming is near at hand when the tree > shoots forth branches - when Israel becomes a nation. > And that happened in 1948. > ``Verily I say unto you, `This generation shall not pass away, > till all be fulfilled,''' Jesus says in Luke 21:32. > Since many end-time prophets also place the apocalyptic > Armageddon in Israel, developments there continue to stir interest. > In 1967, when Israel reclaimed much of Jerusalem from Jordan, the > prophecy in Luke was only strengthened. > During the 1991 war between the United States and Iraq, many > evangelists - from Billy Graham to John Walvoord, chancellor of the > Dallas Theological Seminary - envisioned the beginning of the end. > And when the 1993 Mideast peace pact was signed, radio > evangelist Monte Judah of Norman, Okla., identified the beginning > of seven years' tribulation heralding the Second Coming. <snip> Many people have fingered the 7 years of tribulation/rapture to happen in the 60s, 70s, 80s, and 90s. Bottom line is we are going to live and exist on an earth that has terrible problems. We will see wars, and blood shed, natural disasters which will hurt people and their properties, earthquakes and many other calamitys. No one will be raptured. The year 2000 will come and go, and people will be focused on this or that date in the future, say 2009, or 2020, or 2005 or whenever. My personal opinion is the 2nd coming will happen at some point in the future BUT, I am probably more likely to meet Christ, should I get killed in a automobile accident then I am sitting around reading various books, by various experts all fingering this or that date as being the one. Cheers, Robert
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 27 Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculoso From: Jean van Gemert <jeanvg@dds.nl> Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 20:05:54 +0100 (MET) Fwd Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 23:52:04 -0500 Subject: Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculoso >Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 19:02:34 -0700 >From: Ed Stewart <egs@netcom.com> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculoso >So, the same mathematics that predicts tachions, also predicts >that information can't be sent faster than the speed of light. No, at most (if the argument is compelling enough, which I haven't looked at yet) it would exclude ONLY Tachyons from being used for interstellar communication... >I am surprised that the FTL proponents never have ran into that >one show stopper regarding the transport of information at >superluminal speeds Because, Mr. Smarty Pants, there's a variety of ideas that don't rely on tachyons. In fact, you couldn't use tachyons for propulsion anyway! >> or less than the speed of light? Or how an EM microwave can travel >> at FTL speeds without turning into something different from an >> EM microwave? >Can't be done according to the mathematics. See the FAQ above. I haven't seen any mathematics from you, so stating that mathematics proves it "can't be done" while you wouldn't be able to grasp that math yourself is rather ironic. I might also add that I've seen no more than a qualitative objection why you can't use tachyons to tell your wife you'll be late for dinner. Perhaps there's mathetical basis for this, but I'd have to see it first. But what's most important here is your extrapolation from tachyons to other possible methods to achieve FTL that's not supported. Eliminating one possibility doesn't flush 'em all down the toilet, Ed. -- Jean van Gemert Jeanvg@dds.nl, j.v.gemert@tn.fontys.nl Eindhoven Polytechnic, Department of Physical Engineering __________________________________________________________________________ Science, Logic, and the UFO Debate: http://www.primenet.com/~bdzeiler/index.html -----------------------
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 27 Re: Questions for Abductees From: Jean van Gemert <jeanvg@dds.nl> Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 20:03:55 +0100 (MET) Fwd Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 23:49:11 -0500 Subject: Re: Questions for Abductees >Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 13:38:50 -0600 (CST) >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Questions for Abductees [Some snippage...] >It appears you might also need a gravity well in the form of a >giant gas planet, placed just so in terms of distance and >location, the latter acting as a defense shield... Am I getting this straight? The argument is that gas giants were "placed just so in terms of distance and location" because of sheer randomness? If that's the idea you (and Davies?) intend to perpetuate, I think you might want to iron out a few misunderstandings. According to current research in planetary formation, the size and composition of the planets is regulated pretty much by distance from the central star. Rocky planets like Mars of the Earth will, because of this, appear in the inner regions of a star system and any gaseous giants will condense in the outer regions. No "randonmness" involved here, I'm afraid. For references see: D. Hughes', "Where Planets Boldly Grow," New Scientist, December 1992, pp. 29-33, and D. Black's, "Worlds Around Other Stars," Scientific American, January 1991, pp. 50-56. -- Jean van Gemert Jeanvg@dds.nl, j.v.gemert@tn.fontys.nl Eindhoven Polytechnic, Department of Physical Engineering __________________________________________________________________________ Science, Logic, and the UFO Debate: http://www.primenet.com/~bdzeiler/index.html -----------------------
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 28 Re: Questions for Abductees From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net> Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 17:43:42 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 00:10:38 -0500 Subject: Re: Questions for Abductees The always thoughtful Peter Brookesmith raises many points... > Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 22:21:56 -0500 > From: Peregrine Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter > Brookesmith] > Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Questions for Abductees On the subject of Occam's Razor (and its applicability to the ETH...I'd said that Occam's Razor is tricky to apply, since when it comes to life elsewhere in the universe, we're dealing with a complete unknown. Peter writes: >...we > are not dealing with "a complete unknown". We are dealing with > the possibility that the conditions for life may actually be > unique properties of this solar system alone (read Mike Davis as > cited). Further, we are dealing with a vast mass of knowledge > about human perception of UFOs (read Allan Hendry, and Hartmann > on the Zond IV re-entry in Condon) and a vast literature on > perception in general, altered states of consciousness, sleep > disorders, hallucinogens, lucid dreaming, cultural dispositions, > God knows what-all else. Occam's razor applies with swift bright > strokes. To get to aliens being here you need to set up a row of > about (guess) 12 hypotheses. To get to any of the others requires > no more than (guess) four. Whatever the real numbers, a > terrestrial explanation for UFO experiences of any kind calls for > fewer "entities", in Occam's terms. Move outside this world and > more hypotheses arise. It's as simple as that. When we talk about mistakes in perception, and other psychological issues, we're talking about things we can observe. We can make hypotheses about how often and under what conditions people report things that aren't so, and -- this is the crucial part -- we can test these hypotheses, falsifying some of them, and thus ruling them out of scientific contention. We can't do that with hypotheses about life beyond earth. All sorts of theories float around, about how life arises, how common it is, how often it evolves intelligence, and what those intelligent beings may then do. But none of these hypotheses can be falsified. They're just speculation, however scientifically grounded they may seem. Many scientific hypotheses are falsified when research makes new data available. And so here, Peter, there's a wonderful hidden assumption in your argument. You talk about the hypotheses we'd have to accept to make the ETH viable. One of them is an extremely basic point -- that life exists elsewhere, something that, as yet, has not been conclusively demonstrated. Thus, you argue, one makes an intellectual leap in concluding that UFO sightings can be attributed to vistitors from beyond. But, Peter, that's only true if we tacitly assume that life should be presumed not to exist until it's been found. Why should we assume that? As I said earlier, we can study perception, and come up with at least rough estimates of how often people misperceive things. So how can you come up with a rough estimate of the liklihood of alien visits? You can't. If there's lots of alien intelligence and it travels widely through the galaxy, then alien visits are very likely. If there isn't much of it, and what there is doesn't travel, then alien visits aren't likely at all. We don't know which situation is true. You say that alien visits should be presumed to be less likely than failures of perception, and that's exactly the kind of circular argument I earlier alerted the people on this list to. You have no way of knowing whether such a presumption is true. Facing a situation with many unverifiable hypotheses and no data, you choose to assume that alien visits are unlikely. Somebody else could just as reasonably -- or, really, just as unreasonably -- assume that alien visits are extremely likely, and therefore invoke Occam's Razor to suggest that UFO sightings are caused by aliens. The reasoning is equally silly on both sides, and equally prejudiced. Interestingly enough, some scientists have in fact made assumptions opposite to yours. I'm talking about Enrico Fermi's conundrum -- he rather famously assumed that there isn't any intelligent alien life, because if there were, it certainly WOULD have visited us. I don't know Fermi's attitude toward UFOs, but someone who held his position should, logically, be predisposed to look for real aliens behind UFO sightings. After all, if you think aliens, should they exist, would certainly visit, and you notice people reporting things that might be alien ships.... Your argument is no less circular than that one. You're loading the dice. More from Peter, countering my statement that science is a belief system, as well as a method of thought and research: > Meanwhile, I find the idea that science is "a belief system" > bizarre in the extreme. The horrible fact is that science WORKS, > and if it did not I could not sit here welded to my armchair > communicating with you, Greg, 3000 miles away (more by way of > Toronto) in this spectacular fashion that we all take so much for > granted. And one of the joys of science is that it is incomplete > - which is another clue to it not being a "belief system". Its > greatest endeavor is to wreck itself in the service of greater & > more profound knowledge. When experiments in nuclear physics are > getting results where p is no greater than one in one million > billion and better (bearable results being in the region of > p=3D1:20), I begin to suspect that "science" (which I speculate you > are confusing with Scientism) has actually latched onto genuine > laws of nature. Real things. Not matters of belief like the > gender of angels or whether Tony Blair is the anti-Christ or > Princess Diana was murdered. > Science leaves open the possibility that it is wrong - Popper's > principle of falsifiability - and admits it is provisional. At > the same time, it *works* on the basis of what we know so far. To > argue from current scientific knowledge is not to argue in a > circle, because it argues from what is known. It may not be > complete know-- ledge but it's the best we have, and it's based on > principles of unimpeachable intellectual honesty. I wasn't precise in my statement. I should have said that scientists, being human, often stretch scientific data to support beliefs that, logically, can't be falsified, and hence aren't proper objects of knowledge. Case in point: An e-mail exchange I had with Paul Davies, the Australian physicist who write speculative scientific books, especially about areas in which science and religion intersect. One of his books, "Are We Alone?" is about alien life. In it, Davies gives the usual arguments for the unliklihood of alien visits, but does pause to quote a colleague about one assumption on which his arguments depend. Remember that a key provision of many of these arguments -- not necessarily Peter's; I don't claim to read the Duke's mind -- is that nothing can travel faster than light, so that interstellar journeys of many light years seem forbiddingly difficult, if not outright impossible. Davies notes that, for this argument to be accepted, an assumption must be made -- that aliens, no matter how advanced, won't find a way to circumvent this barrier. No hyperspace drives, no tunneling through wormholes. And this assumption depends, in turn, on another one -- that our view of the laws of nature is correct, or in other words that we, after just a few hundred years of science, have settled some basic questions about the nature of the universe. Aliens a billions years ahead of us would have no quarrel with our beliefs. I e-mailed Davies to ask him how he'd justify such an assumption. If ever a statement was metaphysical, in Karl Popper's terms -- or in other words unfalsifiable, a matter of belief, not science -- this seems to be it. Davies' reply was amazing. He modestly noted that future science will, of course, invalidate many assumptions we now hold dear, but that, nevertheless, it would not be "science" to abandon these assumptions in our present thinking! In saying that, I believe that he confused two uses of scientific knowledge. The first is the business that Peter stressed -- the fact that science "works." We've learned how to build computers and toasters and cars and planes, which send e-mail, make toast, travel down highways, and fly. If you want to make a better plane, you HAVE to use current scientific knowledge. It won't do much good to design a plane that flies using unproved principles. The odds are you'll fail. But when you're dealing with a complete unknown, our scientific data may not be much help. Can aliens fly here? We do NOT have data on that. We have theories. We have beliefs. And as Peter points out, you have to pile up many beliefs to come down on either side of the question. The big mistake is to raise any of these beliefs to the level of certain knowledge -- which is what you do when you say that alien visits are unlikely, and therefore that thing your Aunt Harriet claims she saw hovering over her backyard should be presumed to be a weather balloon, or a trick of her mind. One last point. On the subject of discussing things here that later will be part of a published article, Peter says: >as a sometime commissioning editor myself > I'd be deeply pissed off if someone I'd asked to write a piece > were to test his drafts in public and perhaps then not change a > word for the final version. I'd be paying money for something > that millions can read for free. Why pay? And why commission this > character again if he's giving away his best beans for nothing > every time to hoi polloi? > Put it this way: if you'd bandied your best ideas about Ornette > Coleman around on the net for weeks (let's assume you had the > weeks), how'd you think the Wall St Journal would feel? I can't imagine why they'd care. Tomorrow -- meaning Tuesday, 10/27 -- I float the concept of "alternative classical music" in a Wall Street Journal review. I've been talking about it for a month, trying it out and refining it with people in the classical music world. If I were in the habit of discussing classical music on e-mail lists (nothing against it, I just don't have the time), I would have talked about it there, too. Suppose I'd written about "alternative classical music" in Symphony magazine, the publication of the American Symphony Orchestra League, as I easily might. The Wall Street Journal wouldn't be concerned. So what if they were about to expose their million-plus reader to ideas that had appeared in a publication read mostly by orchestra adminstrators? In fact, if my Journal editor felt that these ideas were talked about a lot in the classical music world, he'd be even happier to have them. These days I seem to have a specialty -- changes that are going on in classical music, as it reaches out to a wider audience -- and much that I write incorporates thoughts and turns of phrase I've published before, or put before people in the business in other ways. That's not only inevitable -- it's one of the ways I get work. That said, Peter should (and of course will) conduct his own professional life in the way that seems right to him. Greg Sandow
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 28 Re: UFOs in Scotland From: Dave Ledger <dledger@cableinet.co.uk> Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 00:03:58 +0100 Fwd Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 00:41:42 -0500 Subject: Re: UFOs in Scotland Hi group, I am quite a new subscriber to the list and i find these posts to be an incredible asset to any who may have an interest in ufology. I am writing to the group with a personal appeal for help with a project that i have recently undertaken,following a life changing experience myself and a few others had in August this year. My appeal is for any imformation available (photo's,pics,press cuttings,docs,sighting reports etc) concerning or related to, any sightings from Scotland or the surrounding area. The ages of the pieces are irrelevant as i'm interested in any Scottish connection at all from the past and present. I am presently constructing a web page relating to the ufo phenomena in and around Scotland and would greatly appreciate any help my fellow list members may be able to offer. Thankyou in advance. Dave Ledger......E-MAIL>>dledger@cableinet.co.uk
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 28 Re: Confirmed Sighting Report From: Don Allen <dona@totcon.com> Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 20:12:58 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 00:50:39 -0500 Subject: Re: Confirmed Sighting Report ** Originally posted in Fidonet's SKEPTIC conference by Kurt Foster =========================================== Incredible as it may seem, the following story is perfectly true! A very large number of flying objects has landed today (October 25, 1997) in the foothills of the Rocky Mountains, and they are continuing to land even as I type this. These objects have been visually sighted by numerous witnesses, and tracked on radar. They have been recorded on home videos and by TV film crews. Though quite small, they are very numerous. Their flight trajectories, and the sudden changes of speed and direction they undergo as they approach the ground,are far beyond anything possible by any aircraft of human design. To indicate the devastating effects of this landing, I relay the following items from news reports on local TV and radio stations. All are consequences of this mass landing. * Governor Roy Roemer has declared a State of Emergency in Colorado. All persons not assisting in emergency operations are ordered off the roads. * Interstate Highway 25, a major north-south artery, is closed from Walsenberg to the Arapahoe County line, and also in the area S of the Wyoming border. * Interstate 70, a major east-west artery, is closed from Watkins to the Kansas border. * Colorado Highway 94 and U.S. Highway 24 are closed east of Colorado Springs. * Colorado Springs Airport is closed. * The CS transit system is closed -- no bus service till further notice. * The Colorado Springs Police Department is advising people not even to TRY to drive (unless engaged in emergency operations of course). * The Falcon Division of CSPD, and local hospitals, are issuing public pleas for help with emergency transportation. * Fort Carson and Peterson AFB are closed -- except for "essential mission personnel". I conclude with a personal observation: these flying objects are unlike anything I've seen described in UFO reports. They are pure white; and although all are laid out in the same precise hexagonal pattern, closer examination reveals that each one of them has individually unique features! --- Maximus/2 3.01 * Origin: -Telegraph Road- Woodland Park,CO 719-687-4179 USR/V34+ (1:128/166)
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 28 Re: Department of Army FOIA Response From: RGates8254@aol.com [Robert Gates] Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 18:18:18 -0500 (EST) Fwd Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 00:36:23 -0500 Subject: Re: Department of Army FOIA Response > From: UFOLAWYER1@aol.com [Peter A. Gersten] > Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 19:23:46 -0400 (EDT) > To: updates@globalserve.net > Subject: Department of Army FOIA response > The following is the Department of Army's FOIA response to my > FOIA request concerning Lt. Colonel (Ret.) Corso's 'Day After > Roswell:' > Dear Mr. Gersten: > This letter is in response to your Freedom of Information > request, dated September 10, 1997. You are requesting a copy of > all records, memorandum, notes, reports, documents, letters > and/or any other equivalent recordation, including sketches, > photographs and film, pertaining to Lieutenant (Ret.) Phillip J. > Corso's recently released book, "The Day After Roswell." > As a matter under its purview, we have referred your request to > the following agency for action and direct reply to you: > Department of the Air Force > OL-P, 11CS/SCSR(FOIA) > 1000 Air Force Pentagon Room 4A1088C > Washington, DC 20310-1000 > Telephone: (703) 697-3467 > If this office can be of further assistance to you, please > contact Phyllis Walls of my staff, or myself, at the above > address. The telephone number (703) 607-3379. > Sincerely, > Rose Marie Christensen > Chief, Freedom of Information > And Privacy Acts Office As predicted they blew the request off to the Air Force, who will respond with a no records found answer. The appeals will be equally blown off/no records found answer. So if you want anything, you are going to have to sue, which will be a long involved process. Assuming that Carso is not a story teller (of which I have grave doubts) and assuming that the records still existed, you might try to request a search of Army R&D board records during Carso' time their. A request that large would involve probably 1-10 grand in search fees due to the probably large amount of material the people would have to go through. Even then you may not find those particular records. Naturally if no records are found the comment will be made: "Well everybody knows that MJ-12 or some similar group vacumed the files before they were turned over to the archives...blah blah.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 28 Re: Researching Abduction Cases From: Whitewolf <witewolf@neptune.on.ca> [Paul Witewolf] Date: Mon, 27 Oct 97 20:23:21 -0000 Fwd Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 00:56:38 -0500 Subject: Re: Researching Abduction Cases Se-ko (hello) Errol and list, >Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 13:58:44 -0600 (CST) >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Researching Abduction Cases >>Subject: Re: Researching Abduction Cases >>Date: Wed, 22 Oct 97 00:35:59 -0500 >>From: Pat Parrinello <pparri@crossfields.com> >>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates> ><snip> >>>Jim, I pray that I can never muster one million abductees! -That- >>>would be truly frightening. If there -are- a million of us, then >>>God help us all. >> John, I would that you consider the possibility of 6 billion. >> It is my considered opinion that such is the case. >> ~Pat~ Dennis wrote: >And what's your count on the number of angels that can dance on >the head of a pin? >Or are you merely speaking metaphorically here, because... >Let's see, if every abduction took only five minutes, as opposed >to the industry standard two hours or so, that would be about 30 >billion minutes. Anyone want to do the math on that by dividing >60 into it and telling us how many hours/years that would ad up >to? >Wouldn't any abducting aliens have a surfeit of sperm and ova by >now? And don't these guys have anything else better to do, >anyway? >Dennis Greetings Dennis, As long as we are pondering theories, and not that I believe all people are abductee's, but what if these beings are able to function outside of time as WE understand it? The number of XXXXXX abductee's becomes inconsequential. What if some of these beings life span far exceeds our own? What if their agenda includes and goes well beyond collecting sperm and ova? Which of us can say for sure that we know for sure, and provide scientific evidence for our theories. What if science has not discovered everything there is to know about the possibilities of existence... You make a good point, and there are still possibilities beyond our realm of understanding at this point in history, damn. Regards, Ona, Paul Whitewolf. "If you can't laugh at yourself, you might be missing the joke of the century." ...Dame Edna, 1997. Search for other documents from or mentioning: witewolf | dstacy |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 28 Crop Circle Stats From: Jacques Poulet <jpoulet@generation.net> Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 20:48:38 Fwd Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 00:44:17 -0500 Subject: Crop Circle Stats Hi All, Does anyone have statistics on how many crop circles were found, each year in England and/or in the world? Thanks, Jacques Poulet, Directeur SOS OVNI Qu=E9bec Case Postale 143 St-Jean-sur-Richelieu, Qc CANADA J3B 6Z1 http://ww.total.net/~flex01/index.htm (fran=E7ais) ICQ#:3959316 T=E9l:(514)536-0140 Fax:(514)536-0141
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 28 Re: Witness Anonymity From: "Clarke Hathaway" <earthwrk@doitnow.com> Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 17:31:37 -0700 Fwd Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 01:20:28 -0500 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity > From: ujack@pop3.scrapcity.cnchost.com [Mark Medford] > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 19:58:04 +0000 > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity > > From: "Clark Hathaway" <earthwrk@doitnow.com> > > To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net> > > Subject: Paranormal flavor of abduction. > > Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 20:22:22 -0700 > Clark ends his post to me - regarding the possibility that some > aspects of our three dimensional reality might be labelled "para" > normal, simply because they are not yet fully understood: > > In so far as your understanding of the term 'metaphysics' and > > metaphysical' is concerned, it has a misty quality for me. > > Metaphysics encompasses any number of philosophies and > > disciplines. I AM left wondering how well read you are within the > > genre that you make such an argument as that above. > Metaphysics is, by definition, speculative philosophy. I have no > doubt that many things within the human experience fall well > outside the bounds of traditional science. My point was simply > this - there are examples throughout history of events, > experiences, behaviors, etc., that were at one time considered > outside the known boundaries as well. With time, and greater > knowledge, many of these things came to be viewed differently. > Not all, but many. You have a right to your reality I suppose. Following however, is a good working definition of metaphysics. :-) met=B7a=B7phys=B7ics (m=E8t=B4e-f=EEz=B9=EEks) noun Abbr. met., metaph. 1. (used with a sing. verb). Philosophy. The branch of philosophy that examines the nature of reality, including the relationship between mind and matter, substance and attribute, fact and value. 2. (used with a pl. verb). The theoretical or first principles of a particular discipline: the metaphysics of law. 3. (used with a sing. verb). A priori speculation upon questions that are unanswerable to scientific observation, analysis, or experiment. 4. (used with a sing. verb). Excessively subtle or recondite reasoning. [Pl. of Middle English methaphisik, from Medieval Latin metaphysica, from Medieval Greek (ta) metaphusika, Greek (Ta) meta (ta) phusika, (the things) after the physics, the title of Aristotle's treatise on first principles (so called because it followed his work on physics) : meta, after. See META- + phusika, physics. See PHYSICS.] I would submit that there exist for some various attributes and abilities that work for them. These things most certainly are not theoretical and are demonstrable nearly at will. so-called solid Science (largely based upon theory as well) is at a loss to adequately describe the mechanics of these abilities, while certain tenets of various branches of metaphysics go a long way toward explaining them completely. > As to Linda's story, I have no opinion one way or the other. My > comments were intended to address specific questions that you > posed to the list - not to challenge or to defend her. Yes, I understand that and it is appreciated. I trust that I answered your thoughts with some manner of logic in showing why I have such reservation as to her tale. > I confess that I am not a multiple abduction experiencer - at > least not to my knowledge. About all I can claim is a sighting > and an episode of missing time when I was five. I have, however, > had two NDE's following heart blockages a year apart. I know, > without a shadow of a doubt, that life continues - in some form - > once the physical body expires. I also happen to believe in > reincarnation (which is often lumped together with crystals and > auras as a New Age, metaphysical belief). You have had some valuable lessons it would appear and are blessed. Fear is a debilitating thing. I would hope that no one here would mistake New Age for anything remotely having to do with metaphysics. New Age in my view, is "pop" metaphysics. These folks though perhaps well meaning, take a bit here from what looks good and a bit there from what sounds good and blends it all into an incoherent something that has no real basis in anything. I will take the book and it's sequels "The Celestine Prophecy" for example. This whole literary project is a result of "POP" metaphysics and is pure New Age. It is based upon a few facts, even more assumption and a whole lot of speculation. Still an entertaining read though for some. ;-) > My reading on topics considered metaphysical (as well as studies > in quantum physics and the more traditional sciences), is fairly > extensive. One thing seems very clear - in areas that are > speculative, there is no shortage of ideas! We are still looking > for the answers, and until we find them (until they are no longer > viewed outside the realm of our understanding), all we have are > theories, viewpoints that we embrace. I hope that we can all be > intellectually flexible enough to consider the many angles that > make up "reality". You are perhaps better read in the 'hard' sciences than I. I make no excuses for that. My life simply took a different path. I AM a successful Artist and have in the past been a successful musician. I have been successful in business and have lost every dime that I made. :-) What is real to me and seen is not to many. I submit however that it has been some of these things that can be directly pointed to as being largely instrumental in my being alive today. Therefore when one debunker or another skeptic states to me that a thing is impossible and couldn't be so ... I merely softly chuckle knowing that sadly this person lacks whatever necessary ingredient to allow for them also experiencing what I do. > It will be interesting to see, several hundred years from now, > what will be viewed as paranormal, and what will have become > accepted as the "norm". Oh, I rather think that it will get intensely interesting a LOT sooner than that Mark. There IS great change afoot in the world and with it. :-) Many of these little Gray Critters are extremely similar to many humans. They dislike intensely and have a great amount of trouble dealing with change especially when drastic. I feel that relatively soon the world (this Earth) will be a far different place on which to live than has been experienced before. Kindest Regards... Clarke Hathaway
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 28 Re: 'The Gulf Breeze Paper' From: Peregrine Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith] Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 20:55:43 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 01:22:14 -0500 Subject: Re: 'The Gulf Breeze Paper' The Duke of Mendoza presents his compliments. >Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 23:13:56 -0800 >From: Ted Viens <drtedv@freewwweb.com> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: 'The Gulf Breeze Paper' [snips] >There ain't no copyright police, no copyright mounties, no >copyright cavalry sweeping down from the ridges to right the >falsities of the errant filer. The justice department needs to >be strongly induced before it will even cast an eye towards the >copyright office. Copyrights as with patents, are enforced in >the civil courts. In practice, anyone can make any claims on any >copyright application and as long as this is not challenge in >court by some other aggrieved private party, it will stand as >legally binding. Nothing to do with Gulf Breeze at all, but this probably explains how (maybe even why) Budd Hopkins claims he holds the copyright on the witness drawings and photos of someone skipping in diaphanous gown upon the beach that are printed in "Witnessed". If you ask his agent if you may reproduce them, you get grilled on whether or not your opus is sympathetic to the case or not, too. All this while waving dollars with the hand not holding the phone. Nothing like a free exchange of data. Yours &c Polonium D. Manganese Periodic Whatnot
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 28 Re: Questions for Abductees From: "Clarke Hathaway" <earthwrk@doitnow.com> Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 18:19:24 -0700 Fwd Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 01:14:55 -0500 Subject: Re: Questions for Abductees > From: clark@canby.mn.frontiercomm.net [Jerome Clark] > Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 18:11:53 PST > To: updates@globalserve.net > Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Questions for Abductees > > I would have to say that puts him in good company. It is my > > considered opinion that it is from the minds of John Keel and Dr. > > J. Vallee that the most enlightening concepts in regards to these > > phenomena have come. Most others are mere legends within their > > own minds in my humble opinion. > Clarke, > Thanks for an interesting post. I respect your experiences > and the conclusions you draw from them, even if I disagree > with them. I'm sure at least some other abductees would > also disagree. But I haven't been in your shoes, and I'm > not about to tell you what to think about what's happened > to you. Jerome or do you prefer Jerry? <chuckle> I appreciate you stance and AM grateful that you are not more demonstrably in disagreement. You are correct that you haven't walked in my shoes nor have you had the experiences that Julie and I endured for an entire year while still residing in Sacramento, California prior to relocating to Farmington, NM for 15 months and then on to the Phoenix area. We would sometimes experience visitation for four and five nights in a row that were extremely ethereal in quality. Absolutely reeking of paranormal occurrences. Extremely similar to Ghost and Apparition phenomena. Perhaps one day given the time, I will sit down and put all of these recollections to paper. What is interesting is that Julie had absolutely no prior experience with UFOs and conjectured alien entities prior to her joining me from Spokane, Washington. Julie is a highly trained, Certified Hypnotherapist. She was certainly shocked when she began seeing little gray aliens. > I will say, however, that from just about any point of view, > Keel and Vallee have shed far more darkness than light on > ufology's many vexing questions. Demonologist Keel has a > great 13th-century mind, and Vallee is incoherent when he > isn't being paranoia-addled, and vice versa. I urge you to > read my essay on "Paranormal and Occult Theories about > UFOs" in my just-published (and available at your local > bookstore) trade paperback The UFO Book, or the much- > extended discussions to appear in the second edition of my > UFO Encyclopedia (due out in January 1998). I have a great amount of difficulty with the E.T. hypothesis. I find that there is little if anything to support it. Appreciate Vallee or not, he is correct when he infers that the UFO question is not one which science is equipped to solve. Having a limited military intelligence background, I can appreciate it when he states that it is an Intelligence problem. Who ever is perpetrating these events are doing it for their own purposes. They have controlled and continue to control the dissemination of information in regards to time, purpose and motivation of activity. That this activity is wide spread and upon diverse levels is undeniable. Only fools and those having a penchant for making foolish statements, are in denial of these phenomena. In the final analysis however, I no longer see much of a sinister nature to unknown seeming craft traversing our atmosphere. I feel that perhaps most UFO sightings constitute something far different than anything that has so far been conjectured. While information that has been placed at my disposal would seem to indicate that there are indeed some from elsewhere in this galaxy (as well as perhaps others), they have had little direct contact with those of this planet except on rare occurrences when called for. Others are here extradimensionally and the same details generally apply. I will state that I AM personally satisfied as to who and what these Gray, so-called Aliens are and what motivates them. Once one comes to these realizations and exercises what tools that this realization provides, one is able to rid oneself of the torment that their visitations most often bring. Forgive my seeming harshness when I state that many of my fellow Experiencers have grown into a sort of symbiotic relationship with those who perpetrate their visitations. It has been my direct observation that some have even developed a need for the role of victim. It supplies craved and ultimately needed attention that they would not otherwise receive. I hold in contempt the many Abduction researchers out there who only serve to perpetuate the abductee as a victim, ignorantly unrealizing of the facts that we individually have a great responsibility in our own reality and what occurs within it. > That aside, I'm glad to have your insights. Let's hope that when > this all gets sorted out, we'll all be the wiser. I AM pleased to have yours as well. I agree with your sentiments as to the ultimate results. Somehow I feel that the day is not too far off when this will all become much more clear. :-) Kindest Regards... Clarke Hathaway
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 28 Re: Edwards attacks Mexican Footage From: Penrose Christopher <penrose@sfc.keio.ac.jp> Date: Tue, 28 Oct 97 12:42:16 +0900 Fwd Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 01:23:29 -0500 Subject: Re: Edwards attacks Mexican Footage From: jared@valuserve.com (Andromeda.net- Anderson, Jared) To: Updates <updates@globalserve.net> Subject: Edwards attacks Mexican Footage >Third. I have been able to discover that the Mexico UFO video download >is tagged from an unidentified source site which is owned by a company >that is TOPS in the field of 3D COMPUTER GAME PROGRAMMING. Ms. Edwards fails to provide us with any information on where she downloaded the video from the internet. On my web site, http://www.sfc.keio.ac.jp/~penrose/eth/mexicocity.html I provide the names of all the sources of the quicktime footage that I have access to (Fernando Camacho etc.). Regardless, Ms. Edwards should focus on the source of the video itself, rather than upon the internet site that happens to have a link to the quicktime footage. The quicktime footage, I imagine, is proliferating like wildfire across the internet. This game company, unless they are the ones who mailed Jaime the initial VHS tape, is just using sharing the video like everyone else interested on the internet. Chris
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 28 Re: Questions for Abductees From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 09:53:19 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 09:53:19 -0500 Subject: Re: Questions for Abductees The following two messages from Lawrie Williams will probably be the last posted from him on this thread. As Peter Brookesmith suggested in a recent post, this is turning into another Sacramento-hot-tub scenario - see: http://www.ufomind.com/people/b/boylan/
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 28 Re: Questions for Abductees From: wlmss@peg.apc.org [Lawrie Williams] Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 23:51:23 +1000 (GMT+1000) Fwd Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 10:01:51 -0500 Subject: Re: Questions for Abductees > Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 22:10:15 -0500 > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Questions for Abductees These comments were written by one of my sons. He is 15. Unpromoted he sat down and keyed in the following. I chose to change none of it. Lawrie Williams. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > I know that you only tried to do your best and that no harm was > ever intended by you, to the contrary, it is clear that you were > trying to help. > The things we say to those who are in a vulnerable state (especially > in the case of inexperienced young ones) can have life altering > effects. What you did (with all the good intentions in the world) > was to hand that girl a lit stick of emotional and psychological > dynamite! The fuse could go at any time. Because she seems OK now > doesn't mean she won't be tomorrow when you have been long gone from > the scene. She may have an adverse reaction (at any time) Do you > understand the possible negative implications of your actions? Look I am quite frankly sick of this constant bickering amongst you lot. I'm not a member of this list as such but I do see and here about a lot of what goes on and this argument inspired by my fathers (Lawrie) posting regarding the 2 teenage abductees seems to be futile. Althou however much I condemn this futile conflict I feel obliged to interject as I am the one who first reported this particular abduction, and as it happens one of the girls in question is my girlfriend and the other is her best freind so I know them both well and new them well before the incident. So all those of you who continue to or at any time have inplied that she is or may become mentaly unstable as a consequence of what my father has said anoy me in the extreem and I can assure you that neither were overly worried about what he told them and have not even mentioned it since in fact they have more then likely forgoten the exact words he used and most likely only vaugly remember the gist of what he said and as for the future you Yanks have absolutly no idea about any culture but youer own and so you relate the rest of the world by youer own standards, Its like a man in an asylum saying that because I have paded walls every one else must as well. So get a grip and stop comparing the world to what youer own society is like because basically youer society by all accounts is sick and degenerate and it pretty much proves it when you continually guage the world by asuming its the same as what is in youer own back yard. Because basically everybody is not as psycologicaly unstable as the psycologists would like you to beleive. Arthur Williams ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ P.S. Sorry to those Americans not guilty as charged above. I dont dislike you all Just youer system of govournment and youer past. But then I can say that about most govournments including our own.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 28 Re: Questions for Abductees From: Jakes Louw <louwje@telkom.co.za> Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 09:30:25 +0200 Fwd Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 10:02:07 -0500 Subject: Re: Questions for Abductees I'm not going to even attempt to copy&paste anything from this thread: it's just not worth the effort. I just want to say one thing (or maybe a couple), Firstly, I think that until John can enforce his Abductee Investigators Code of Conduct, that this thread is a waste of bandwidth: as Lawrie pointed out, we've got everybody slinging mud, with no exceptions. Some posts are just more polite and erudite than others. Secondly, I don't think anybody can assume "expert" status in the abductee/abduction field, as there is really no empirical data on the subject, so therefore no way to classify the incidents, and also then to prescribe the type of investigation and/or treatment of the abductee. In some ways, I agree with John regarding caution when dealing with a potential abduction, but also with Lawrie, by saying that we will have to consider "horses for courses": that is, there are different approaches to various situations. Now, before I go off and delete this thread from my mailbox, my final 5c worth (penny if you're into Anglicisms): This is a good list, with some very experienced, influential people in various fields of Ufology: Let's get the act together, and if necessary use John's AIC to co-ordinate: - abduction case reports - abduction investigation methods - post-abduction advice&guidance - post-abduction treatment options - case studies and white papers Maybe Lawrie's right: who needs the professionals that are often nothing more than licensed providers of often questionable pharmaceutical products. Hasta la vista, babies. Jakes E. Louw louwje@telkom.co.za +27 12 311-2668 082 923 6144
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 28 Re: Questions for Abductees From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 04:31:50 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 10:02:07 -0500 Subject: Re: Questions for Abductees >From: wlmss@peg.apc.org [Lawrie Williams] >Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 23:50:34 +1000 (GMT+1000) >To: updates@globalserve.net >Subject: Re: Questions for Abductees. >> Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 22:10:15 -0500 >> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >> From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Questions for Abductees Hello All, As this thread is going nowhere fast, this will be my last on this one. It takes two people to communicate and we're apparently 'one short' here. <G> Lawrie again goes off, >I see since this arrived several more accusatory rants have arrived. >Never before in the history of ufology have so many become so >excited about so little. You are 'screwing' with the mind of a sixteen year old, it's dangerous and wrong and there was nothing "little" about it. It was just damned irresponsible. >> I know that you only tried to do your best and that no harm was >> ever intended by you, to the contrary, it is clear that you were >> trying to help. >Condescension, soon to be followed by flames. No Lawrie, not "condescension" I was trying to give you the benefit of the doubt. But in your usual immature fashion you choose to take umberage. >> But,...at some point in the game the peer review >This is not peer review. This is hounding since you reiterate points >I spent hours dealing with. You may agree with me or agree to disagree >with me, but either way do me a favour and make up your mind. 1. Yes, it _is_ "peer review" I am an abductee. And the others are involved in research in one fashion or another. You have claimed both by first counselling someone and then by proclaiming your source of knowledge as your own abduction experiences. If you're an abductee, you bet your bippy I'm one of your "peers." And if you are going to involve yourself in an " alleged abduction case" you better be ready to hear from those who have spent years studying or researching the phenomenon. 2. I have made up my mind, I thought I made that clear. I think you are an extremely irresponsible person at best, and if all of this was ego based to begin with (which I now strongly suspect based on your defensive responses to all concerned) you are a very sick one too. Is that clear enough Lawrie? >> that you have recieved on this list (and such a unanimous one >> from so many people on both sides of the fence) that it has got >> to reach you. >I don't consider about six people out of hundreds to be unanimous. Mr Malone asked you a good one and I'll just reiterate it. How many came to your defense Lawrie? It is -you- that have taken the feedback you have recieved and rather than learn from it, you have chosen to defensively 'react' to it. Shame. >> Judging from your defensive response to my post that hasn't happened yet >Mud sticks if one does not reply. You confuse my not dignifying your childishness with a response as a lack of one. Sometimes 'silence' speaks louder than words Lawrie but I'm sure such subtleties are completely wasted on you. I've raised two kids. When a child throws a tantrum the very best course of action is to ignore them until they calm down and compose themselves. That,...is what I was doing with you. Why the hell would I want to 'reward your behavior' with a response! I'm still waiting for you to get it together by the way. >I assume you and your friends will continue to take turns posting >misinformation and false accusations,... Jeez Lawrie, talk about the pot calling the kettle black! >...until I either submit or leave the list. Is that your goal? Yes Lawrie, good choice! Paranoia is an excellent addition to the other qualities you have demonstrated here. No-one is (or was) -out to get you- Lawrie. Errol Bruce-Knapp is the only one who can add or delete someone from this list. It is also possible for someone to eliminate themselves through beligerence, disruptiveness or antagonism. You've got a good head start on those. You should learn from the lesson of the 'good doctor' who will remain unamed. <nervous grin> (BTW Mendoza, you've invited the wrath the 'Great and Hairy Bearded One' by twice alluding to Heir Doktor. You know what grumbling that ellicits from him, watch yer ass! Never antagonize a bear that suffers from mood swings. <VBG>) No Lawrie, we aren't out to -get you off the list- (although your silence _would be_ most welcome at this stage! <EG> >Since I intend to do neither, can we arrive at a compromise? I shall >promise to never make a posting to this list again but to join the >intelligent majority and lurk. No Lawrie, no compromise, post all you want. Promise me you won't ever mess with another human beings head and life again and I'll be satisfied with that. >And you and your kind,... I'll just let this little beauty hang there for all to see Lawrie. Nuff said? >I tried to offer the list a different view, >one based on experience, insight and strong moral values that have >proven, regrettably, to not be in alignment with their UFO dogma. See how you've missed the point! It is -YOU- who bring "dogma" (or is that Dagmar?) to the discussion. It is your "Dagmar" that we've all been jumping on you with both feet about! You are one of a kind kid, I'll give you that. And based on your incessant defense of your indefensible behavior I agree that your "point of view" is different all right. Very different. The rest of your post is just more of the same so I'm going to spare the good readers any more of this tortuous nonsense. I won't be responding to anything else on this thread. It's been played. I suggest that Mike and Peter and Jerry and anyone else that tried to talk some sense into you to, 'hang it up guys.' It's a waste of time, the lights are on but there's nobody home! My daddy, in his infinite wisdom once said, "Son, -NEVER- beat a dead horse!" 48 years old eh? So am I..... John Velez, TIRED OF TRYING! John Velez jvif@spacelab.net
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 28 Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculoso From: Mike Smith <mickey@anix.co.uk> Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 12:57:32 +0000 Fwd Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 10:13:01 -0500 Subject: Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculoso [Lurk Mode Cancel] Hi All, Hopefully we can all calm down a little bit, before Errol terminates our thread. I for one apologise to anyone whom I might of slighted by saying that they should do a bit more research before they respond to postings. For my own part I have tried to be informative and helpful. The information that I've posted was on the whole completely non- controversial. The only problem was that the evidence that I've cited suggests that sending information faster that c is possible. Okay so it's only possible in a limited way, but it does appear possible. I have made no claims regarding tachyons, which are at present still only theoretical, in the same way that anti-matter was. I.E. All the maths suggest that they exist but no one has found any experimental/physical evidence of them, as yet. As to negative energy, this constitutes a facet of ZPF (Zero-point Vacuum Fluctuations (or 'Field' take your pick) and a great deal of research is presently being concentrated on this and other aspects of ZPF. Strangely enough this may also have super-luminal implications and some very interesting experimental evidence exists in the form of the Casimir Effect. [A web Search will produce references] I hope that that the super-luminal debate can continue peacefully as it's one of the aspects of UFOlogy that has always interested me greatly. Regards to All, Mike, [Lurk Mode Enable]
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 28 Re: Edwards attacks Mexican Footage From: Bob Shell <76750.2717@compuserve.com> Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 08:36:53 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 14:16:09 -0500 Subject: Re: Edwards attacks Mexican Footage >Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 11:05:03 -0700 >From: jared@valuserve.com (Andromeda.net- Anderson, Jared) >To: Updates <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Edwards attacks Mexican Footage Much snipped for brevity: > Now, here is how I >think the Mexico UFO video could have been produced: 1. Take the >video footage of Mexico City with the apartment buildings in the >foreground. 2. Place that footage into a high-powered state of the art >computer game graphics program. 3. Immerse/insert the ufo into the >Mexico City scene. 4. Code the graphics program to make the UFO >"move". 5. Directly from the computer, copy the now UFO animated scene >onto a videotape. 6. Take the tape and play it on a tv. 7. Use a >camcorder and record the footage directly off the screen of the tv >monitor. And, voila! You have a genuine "UFO video" which would show >NO electronic, technical, or graphics discrepancies under subsequent >analysis! That is why the Mexico City video has shown no >discrepancies!!!!! I don't know who Liz Edwards is or what her credentials are. She does not really say anywhere in this lengthy post just exactly what she did in analyzing the images. She used her own programs, and apparently some commercial ones, but does not identify which ones, or what she did with them. This makes me suspicious. A real researcher will identify which computer programs he/she used, and just what was done with them. This is all very vague. Now, as to how the video could have been made, I think she is on target except for the part about shooting with a video camera from a TV screen. Having tried shooting video off a TV screen, I have to say that this is no simple prospect. The cycling of the video camera and the TV set must be synchronized or you get banding. TV stations get around this when showing TV sets on camera with something called genlock, which synchronizes the two. But I know of no way to do this with an ordinary video camera. And I don't see why this extra step would be needed, anyway. Don't get me wrong. I think the Mexico City video is most likely a fake, but I see no proof of that in this post. Bob Shell
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 28 Re: Questions for Abductees From: Michael Wayne Malone <wayne@fly.HiWAAY.net> Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 07:05:03 -0600 (CST) Fwd Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 14:11:25 -0500 Subject: Re: Questions for Abductees > From: wlmss@peg.apc.org [Lawrie Williams] > Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 23:50:34 +1000 (GMT+1000) > To: updates@globalserve.net > Subject: Re: Questions for Abductees. > I see since this arrived several more accusatory rants have arrived. > Never before in the history of ufology have so many become so > excited about so little. So little? How can you call complete disregard for scientific integrity "so little?" Could you please take the time before you vanquish this List into the realm of lurkerdom that? > > But,...at some point in the game the peer review > This is not peer review. This is hounding since you reiterate points > I spent hours dealing with. You may agree with me or agree to disagree > with me, but either way do me a favour and make up your mind. What would have been peer review? Unconditional acceptance of your methodology? Since you posted what you've termed a scientific posting of a conversation no one has stepped forward to publicly support your methodology. Instead, at least 6 people of wildly differing views have condemned the method you employed in that "conversation." The most vocal skeptics and abduction researchers of this list have universally condemned your method. At least two occasional posters have questioned the validity of your method. And the most opened minded of the group balked at your method. Yet you and you alone are right and the rest of creation is barking up a tree. > > that you have recieved on this list (and such a unanimous one > > from so many people on both sides of the fence) that it has got > > to reach you. > I don't consider about six people out of hundreds to be unanimous. > One of the others at least cannot grasp the basic difference between > "could" (my term) and "would" (his interpolation). Again, I ask where your supporters are? And as to this hair splitting with the word "could." Giving your subject (via an intermediary) the worst possible scenario that is completely unsupported by anything other than anecdote is, by definition, reckless and foolhardy. Did you, in fairness, also tell your subject that there is no physical proof of the abduction experience nor physical proof of ET visitation? Did you tell your subject that the event "could" have been a common sleep paralysis vision that has been traced through history? These explanations are at least as possible as your "could" of phantom pregnancies and alien abductions. > I guess it is the same sort of statistics you apply to abductees. One > loses the plot so you determine in your wisdom that we all should be > told lies. i.e. guilty of insanity unless we can prove our sanity. Would you be so kind as to provide the source where any of your opponents have suggested that "abductees" are mentally insane? Or is that YOUR close minded interpretation of our concern for the mental health of your subject from the unreasoned and uncaring response you sent? > I assume you and your friends will continue to take turns posting > misinformation and false accusations until I either submit or leave > the list. Is that your goal? My goal is to improve the level of research that is leveled at ufos. For lack of a better term, to improve ufology. I will, to use your words, hound any quack or shyster who continues to pollute the waters of researchers seeking truth. And I use truth in the scientific meaning, not the subjective meaning you tend to banter about. > Since I intend to do neither, can we arrive at a compromise? I shall > promise to never make a posting to this list again but to join the > intelligent majority and lurk. And you and your kind can then tell > us all about how ufoes and people are allowed to interact. I'll even > admit to deep regret that I tried to offer the list a different view, > one based on experience, insight and strong moral values that have > proven, regrettably, to not be in alignment with their UFO dogma. Experience, insight and strong moral values have nothing to do with truth. That was one of the lessons of our recent parable. Cedric used his insight, experience and morals to arrive at entirely the wrong conclusion. UFO dogma has nothing to do with my position. Truth does. > Like your good intentions in making false accusations? I did not > mind replying the first time, but having to do it all over again is > absurd. Maybe I should put it all in a FAQ? Problem is, based on > your recent performance, you would not read it anyway! You've bandied about the term "false accusations" quite a bit, care to be more specific? > I did not intensively question them nor let others do so. I have seen > the way people pester abductees overseas. That was driven home only > today, seeing another taunting missive from Barbara Becker demanding > that Ed Walters be further harassed. My own experience on this list > is proof positive of how it happens. I just thank the gods I have > not tried to copyright any photographs. Not having "intensively question"ed your subject and not allowing others to do so smacks of something other than scientific conversations and seeking the truth. So how about we look at the "facts" of this case. 1) You've admitted to having never met the subject. 2) You've admitted to having not put the subjects anecdote to scrutiny. 3) You've admitted to having passed along information to the subject as to what "could" happen without regard to the likelihood of that same happening. 4) You've claimed this all in the name of science. 5) When challenged, you've accused others of closemindedness and dogma. 6) You've claimed to have "truth" but have not offered "proof." That doesn't look like scientific endeavor to me, doesn't look like open minded and thorough research, and it proves you correct in at least one point. I am not your peer, I could never stoop so low. > As for finding out what did occur, I am spending some of these nights > in a dark and windy situation, unarmed and alone, waiting to see for > myself. And there are no armchairs out there, just discomfort and some > risk. Another reason why I find your continuing comments so deeply > insulting. And its just great to know what is being said about me > while I am trying to find out what did occur in the most reliable > way conceivible. Exactly what is "the most reliable way conceivable?" > I'll say this now with complete confidence: paranormal effects > *do* follow ufo visitations! Your confidence is comforting, now would you care to offer you concrete proof as to this paranormal effects of UFO visitations? > An horrific way to twist a clinical report of a clinical incident, > a terrific example of assumption, bias and a stereotyped reaction. > That kind of innuendo should be strongly condemned. John supports it! First, if there was a bias, it was a bias for honesty and integrity in research. If there was a stereotyped reaction, it was the stereotypical reaction of learned men and women watching the uneducated act unscientific. And that kind of "innuendo" should be strongly supported. And a "clinical report" of a "clinical incident" is not the casually typed report of the experiences of a subject you have never met, never interviewed, and influenced with unneeded and dangerous theories. Perhaps if you had taken a "clinical approach" to this incident you wouldn't be in such hot water today. > The idea that abductees are not fit to be fully informed because > an opinion might set off a psychosis is an outright insult to all > abductees. So reporting an abduction is a possible sign of mental > illness? Wow! Abductees should steer well clear of mainstream > medicine if this value system is anything to go by. I have indeed > learnt something vital from this interaction. Before this incident > I thought some mainstream "professionals" had their heads screwed > on. John Velez has proved me completely wrong. But there is nothing to indicate that you did fully inform you abductee. Instead, the presented evidence is that you provided a heavily biased opinion based on anecdotal evidence without factual support to a person that you neither interviewed nor placed under any type of scrutiny. And there has never been a question of whether or not an abductee can accept any amount of information. Initially the concern was that your research methods, since you did post your original message as a "clinical report," were faulty. When you changed your story to a "conversation" between "abductees" the concern was the reaction of a young girl to the possibility that she would become pregnant without supporting physical proof. And when it became clear that you made all your assumptions without actually questioning the subject, any claim to "professional" you may have had wafted out the window. Now my complaint is completely centered on the fact that you are a man who acted unscientifically in the name of science. > Feel free to post some verifiable statistics to back this up. > In the meantime, ask yourself how professional you are when you > come out with rhetoric like that above. And at least you are > a cut about Peter B, with his reliance on personal attacks. As I have already suggested, read up on Medical Student Syndrome. > Of course your statistics still only represents a sample of cases > that come to the attention of professionals and will be only > tenuously connected with our situation over here. That is if you > even have any stats. So far all I have heard is opinions, the same > opinions with different personal innuendo each time. Latest out > of the email box: I am liable to be sued. How Pythonesque this is. This is a classic quack dodge. Provide me with statistics... but if you do they will not be applicable to my situation. > Actually it was me, Lawrie who said that. The one who seeks to focus > on the issues, not on ad hominim, corny games with surnames &tc. What issues? Every time an issue is raised you claim false allegations or change the basis of the conversation. Which was this report, a conversation among abductees or a clinical report? > Easy to explain. Therapists who make a living exploiting, er helping > abductees have been going on for years about the wicked amateurs > who mess with abductees heads and destroy vital data with unskilled > hypnotic sessions. This group has been reviled by skeptics and > by those who want scientific respectability. Abductees seem to have > been saying that there are not that many shysters out there and that > our real memories stay fresh even decades later. But that is ignored. > It is just too useful a myth for all concerned. The professionals > get to put the competition out of business. The skeptics have a > basis for discrediting abductees. Disturbed abductees have someone > else to blame for their confusion. It is known as a unifying > stereotype. Until I was recently mistaken for one of these > unauthorized therapists and subjected to these hysterical claims, > I believed the myth. Not any more! If you are not a therapist, then what were you doing giving a "clinical report?" You wrote as if you were a therapist, you claimed to have acted in a method consistent with a therapist... and you get upset when we notice you quack like a duck? Besides the only professional therapist that exploited abductees lost his license, I'll remind you. Otherwise, why don't you give your examples. *MASSIVE SNIPPAGE OF RANDOM INSULTS TO ALL OF SOCIETY* > Yes, that we here in North Queensland can share no more and instead > let "experts" like John & Peter (different sides, same coin) tell us > what we are allowed to tell our kids. Except, it wasn't your kid. It was a stranger you never met, remember? > This recent spate of postings and most especially Peter's sexual > innuendo has completely discredited whatever credibility he had. > How come the moralists on the list are not up in arms about this? You've continually referred to this sexual innuendo, but was it not you who suggested that your "subject" would be impregnated and then have the resultant fetus stolen? > Slander is never pleasant and can never be ignored, especially when > it is as intense as I have received. At least John has strived to > be reasonable. But I see Peter has turned his attack on the girls > themselves. Anything for a thrill and a giggle I suppose. What slander? Be specific please... > With the permission of the list I'd like to print out all the > discussion we have had and pass it on to the kids concerned. They > deserve a good laugh at the star-chamber farce that this has become. > And if anyone is to be sued for sexual innuendo or intemperate > personal comments, I wonder who it is likely to be? As always, my postings are in the public domain. > Forty-eight. Old enough to know in consierable detail what you > will never, ever, know. Intemperate indeed. Michael
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 28 Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculoso From: Ed Stewart <egs@netcom.com> Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 00:10:31 -0800 Fwd Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 10:02:07 -0500 Subject: Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculoso Jean van Gemert's ufological wisdom is subluminally intercepted: > Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 20:05:54 +0100 (MET) > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > From: Jean van Gemert <jeanvg@dds.nl> > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculoso > >Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 19:02:34 -0700 > >From: Ed Stewart <egs@netcom.com> > >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Zeta Notso Ridiculoso > >So, the same mathematics that predicts tachions, also predicts > >that information can't be sent faster than the speed of light. > No, at most (if the argument is compelling enough, which > I haven't looked at yet) it would exclude ONLY Tachyons > from being used for interstellar communication... Please accept my forgiveness for my rashness. I didn't realize that the arguments against information being able to be sent at superluminal speeds had yet to receive your blessings. Please let us all know what your position on the matter is after you have had an opportunity to explore the arguments and rebuttle of the last nine decades of the scientific foundation for Special Relativity and later Quantum Physics. > >I am surprised that the FTL proponents never have ran into that > >one show stopper regarding the transport of information at > >superluminal speeds > Because, Mr. Smarty Pants, there's a variety of ideas that > don't rely on tachyons. In fact, you couldn't use tachyons > for propulsion anyway! Well, let us not be shy on your way to winning a Nobel prize in physics. Please enlighten us of these variety of "ideas" that you make reference to. Henny, in another post, has bailed out claiming that his posts would only be debunked. May I suggest that only bunk gets debunked. I suspect your statement above is sheer posturing and nonsense. Hopefully, I am wrong. I would love to be the sparkplug that entices a future Nobel prize winner to brilliance. Please enlighten us all. For your information, the only entities that move faster than light that I am aware of are mathematical creations of our imagination, such as tachyons. These are not directly measurable physical objects and the math that prevents the carrying of information at superluminal speeds are not relegated to tachions only, but to all quantum wavefunctions that we have mathematically created so far. Quantum wavefunctions are not physical either. While we are on the subject of tachions, it should be noted that so far tachions are solely the product of mathematical creations that only exist in our imaginations and that the mathematics only applies to the quantum world and not the macro world which we all seem to be stuck in. To this date science has yet to be able to detect a tachyon, or better yet, the predicted byproducts, i.e. Cherenkov radiation, in all experiments. Hopefully some day, tachyons will be shown to really exist. Now, the University of Cologne group led by Nimtz has done a lot of recent work in quantum tunneling and they claim that their results show that information has passed at superluminal speeds. That is a claim yet to be proven. It is highly controversial. Most physicists cite the Heisenberg uncertainty principle to argue that what the Nimtz group claims are not an example of superluminal transmissions. Experiments should be able to settle the matter. That is the way that science works. It is slow, methodotical, critical and rigorous. Knowledge comes by slowly. But, regardless, it is simply too premature for those endowed with ufological wisdom to cite Nimtz, Heitmann, Enders, et al... as if there claims are scientifically proven and/or accepted. I wish them God Speed in that they may someday show that they are right. > I haven't seen any mathematics from you, so stating that > mathematics proves it "can't be done" while you wouldn't > be able to grasp that math yourself is rather ironic. Thank you for letting me know what my mental and academic limitations are. I keep forgetting how impressed you become with appeals to authority, especially if those authorities seem to support your position. It is so converting to know that there are those among us that have all the answers already and are in a position to enlighten us should we take one step astray. For your info, I do have a background in math as well as also understand the math. Also, if you need special considerations in that area, may I point out that the usenet physics and relativity FAQs I provided pointers to in my previous message, do contain just enough math so anyone (even without a math background) can follow the math concepts at a very easy level of understanding. You, or anyone else, should not have any problems. > I might also add that I've seen no more than a qualitative > objection why you can't use tachyons to tell your wife > you'll be late for dinner. Perhaps there's mathetical > basis for this, but I'd have to see it first. So tacky of me to fail to realize that perhaps you were left out of the debates and arguments over the last three decades that support Special Relativity and the significance of the causal implications in its predictions. Please let us know what you find out and what your position is when you catch up. > But what's most important here is your extrapolation from > tachyons to other possible methods to achieve FTL that's > not supported. Eliminating one possibility doesn't flush > 'em all down the toilet, Ed. My goodness, another transgression of mine. But first, let's be very clear. My statement was related to the transmission of information at superliminal speeds, not that non-physical entities such as tachyons or quantum wavefunctions cannot be mathematically shown to exist in an imaginal world at superluminal velocities. Forget for a moment that my statement applies to all, and I mean all, quantum wavefunctions. That was the extent of my "extrapolation. Are you implying that my statement does not apply to all quantum wavefunctions? Since you appear to suggest there exist other superluminal possibilities in our macroworld, away from the realm of quantum wavefunctions, that have a direct application to today's ufological wisdom, please enlighten us and lay on the table what that may be? Enquiring minds wish to know. > Science, Logic, and the UFO Debate: > http://www.primenet.com/~bdzeiler/index.html Science, logic and the UFO debate? That is fantastic. It's about time. Here is your oppotunity to show us all your stuff and hopefully put you on the path to the Nobel physics prize. Go For it. Many people here would like to see you succeed. Show us your stuff! Ed Stewart ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Ed Stewart egs@netcom.com | So Man, who here seems principal alone, There is Something | Perhaps acts second to some sphere unknown. Going On! ,>'?'<, | Touches some wheel, or verges to some goal, Salvador Freixedo ( O O ) | 'Tis but a part we see, and not a whole. --------------ooOO-(_)-OOoo------- Alexander Pope, Essay on Man -------
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 28 Re: Questions for Abductees From: wlmss@peg.apc.org Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 23:50:34 +1000 (GMT+1000) Fwd Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 10:01:30 -0500 Subject: Re: Questions for Abductees > Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 22:10:15 -0500 > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Questions for Abductees I see since this arrived several more accusatory rants have arrived. Never before in the history of ufology have so many become so excited about so little. > I know that you only tried to do your best and that no harm was > ever intended by you, to the contrary, it is clear that you were > trying to help. Condescension, soon to be followed by flames. > But,...at some point in the game the peer review This is not peer review. This is hounding since you reiterate points I spent hours dealing with. You may agree with me or agree to disagree with me, but either way do me a favour and make up your mind. > that you have recieved on this list (and such a unanimous one > from so many people on both sides of the fence) that it has got > to reach you. I don't consider about six people out of hundreds to be unanimous. One of the others at least cannot grasp the basic difference between "could" (my term) and "would" (his interpolation). I guess it is the same sort of statistics you apply to abductees. One loses the plot so you determine in your wisdom that we all should be told lies. i.e. guilty of insanity unless we can prove our sanity. > Judging from your defensive response to my post that hasn't happened yet Mud sticks if one does not reply. You rattle out a stream of falsehoods and accusations in ten minutes, but it takes all day for me to refute them rationally and now you have just rattled off the same stuff again! with 4 or 5 of you at it, it creates an impression of a furore. As if. I assume you and your friends will continue to take turns posting misinformation and false accusations until I either submit or leave the list. Is that your goal? Since I intend to do neither, can we arrive at a compromise? I shall promise to never make a posting to this list again but to join the intelligent majority and lurk. And you and your kind can then tell us all about how ufoes and people are allowed to interact. I'll even admit to deep regret that I tried to offer the list a different view, one based on experience, insight and strong moral values that have proven, regrettably, to not be in alignment with their UFO dogma. >...I'll just remind you that`the road to Hell is paved with good intentions!' Like your good intentions in making false accusations? I did not mind replying the first time, but having to do it all over again is absurd. Maybe I should put it all in a FAQ? Problem is, based on your recent performance, you would not read it anyway! pb>>Nobody knows (except, it seems, you) what happened to them. Instead of >>trying to find out what did occur, I did not intensively question them nor let others do so. I have seen the way people pester abductees overseas. That was driven home only today, seeing another taunting missive from Barbara Becker demanding that Ed Walters be further harassed. My own experience on this list is proof positive of how it happens. I just thank the gods I have not tried to copyright any photographs. As for finding out what did occur, I am spending some of these nights in a dark and windy situation, unarmed and alone, waiting to see for myself. And there are no armchairs out there, just discomfort and some risk. Another reason why I find your continuing comments so deeply insulting. And its just great to know what is being said about me while I am trying to find out what did occur in the most reliable way conceivible. And it has delivered results! But as I am still trying to extricate myself from the current iterative morass of innuendo, false assumptinos and moral judgements, don't anyone hold their breath waiting for any report. I take pride in my honesty and moral integrity and more importantly, I know too well how much time some people can waste. I'll say this now with complete confidence: paranormal effects *do* follow ufo visitations! >> you make one monstrous assumption and then tell this kid that >> she can expect to be rogered and made pregnant by an alien. >> Terrific. jv> Not terrific, horrific! An horrific way to twist a clinical report of a clinical incident, a terrific example of assumption, bias and a stereotyped reaction. That kind of innuendo should be strongly condemned. John supports it! pb>> So, never having met her, on what basis can you *possibly* judge >> her reaction to the alleged events or to your thoroughly stupid, >> unjustified and (let's think the best here) irresponsible prediction? >> How did you communicate? By phone? Fax? E-mail? Tell, please do. > Peter said it first and makes the point as clearly as anyone > could so I won't reiterate it Lawrie but I think the point is a > valid one. The idea that abductees are not fit to be fully informed because an opinion might set off a psychosis is an outright insult to all abductees. So reporting an abduction is a possible sign of mental illness? Wow! Abductees should steer well clear of mainstream medicine if this value system is anything to go by. I have indeed learnt something vital from this interaction. Before this incident I thought some mainstream "professionals" had their heads screwed on. John Velez has proved me completely wrong. pb>> The only connexion between you and Sir Cedric in this parable is >> your prattishness and your incapacity to judge a situation from >> anything but your own point of view. Do you get the point? jv> Do you Lawrie? I certainly do, John. The lesson is that I honestly reported a brief conversation, then chose to defend my action, and then spent days and days of my life crafting thoughtful responses to people like you who just return time and time again to make the same accusations. I am persistently asked this question. It was known to the inquisitors as "Putting the Question." It was put until the accused broke and said what they were required to say. Do *you* get the point? > The things we say to those who are in a vulnerable state (especially > in the case of inexperienced young ones) can have life altering > effects. What you did (with all the good intentions in the world) > was to hand that girl a lit stick of emotional and psychological > dynamite! The fuse could go at any time. Because she seems OK now > doesn't mean she won't be tomorrow when you have been long gone from > the scene. She may have an adverse reaction (at any time) Do you > understand the possible negative implications of your actions? Feel free to post some verifiable statistics to back this up. In the meantime, ask yourself how professional you are when you come out with rhetoric like that above. And at least you are a cut about Peter B, with his reliance on personal attacks. Of course your statistics still only represents a sample of cases that come to the attention of professionals and will be only tenuously connected with our situation over here. That is if you even have any stats. So far all I have heard is opinions, the same opinions with different personal innuendo each time. Latest out of the email box: I am liable to be sued. How Pythonesque this is. Take note also my son's comments, posted separately. >>Nobody can say I am not even-handed in the people I upset. JV> I'll give you that one Perigrine! <G> Actually it was me, Lawrie who said that. The one who seeks to focus on the issues, not on ad hominim, corny games with surnames &tc. PB >> ever think of that?). When a mob of such generally opposed persons >> jump on you with both feet, does it not cross your mind - never a >> long journey, it would seem - that you might be just a teensy, eensy, >> weeny bit mistaken? Apparently not. JV> Actually she's accomplished a bit of a minor miracle. She > actually has you, me, Roger, Jerry, (and countless others) to Use your fingers, you will find you have enough with plenty to spare. > agree on one thing unanimously! It's actually quite a novelty to > find us all wearing the same colors. But it's for a good cause > and I respect all of you for speaking out. I only hope that.... Easy to explain. Therapists who make a living exploiting, er helping abductees have been going on for years about the wicked amateurs who mess with abductees heads and destroy vital data with unskilled hypnotic sessions. This group has been reviled by skeptics and by those who want scientific respectability. Abductees seem to have been saying that there are not that many shysters out there and that our real memories stay fresh even decades later. But that is ignored. It is just too useful a myth for all concerned. The professionals get to put the competition out of business. The skeptics have a basis for discrediting abductees. Disturbed abductees have someone else to blame for their confusion. It is known as a unifying stereotype. Until I was recently mistaken for one of these unauthorized therapists and subjected to these hysterical claims, I believed the myth. Not any more! Oh, I am a male, by the way. > Lawrie listens for the sake of any future "conversations" she may > conduct with someone who suspects that they are being abducted. > Especially a minor! For legal reasons alone she should have > declined involvement. Hollywood causes the trauma John. On a big scale. They mess with people's heads by the BILLIONS. This stream of accusations and personal attacks on me is absolute hypocrisy. And I still can see no end in sight. Consider that maybe cultural values are different over here. We have a mix of anglo-celtic with a lot of austronesian and some southern european. We don't have fundementalists teaching our young ones lies about demons and hellfire. Only rarely are kids over here subjected to christian ritual abuse, a major problem in the USA. The Kelly case is the only abreaction I have heard of in Oz although I am sure there are more in the urban areas. She was more embarrassed afterwards than traumatized, and by her own admission she was a christian. Christian fundamentalism causes far more trauma John. They mess with people's heads by the TENS of MILLIONS. They get little children and *promise* them eternal torture if they fail to comply. Their icon is a man under extreme torture and it is displayed in public. They put programs on TV in which they portray mythology as if it is factual. They go hunting for people in deep emotional trouble and then they pressure them to join their cults. There is where the real damage is being done. Get real John. I am saying you have no idea of how other cultures deal with these kinds of incidents. Your ad hominim attacks represent the "Ugly American" and "Pommy dickhead" syndromes at their worst. You presume to tell a mature and trusted Australian (first abducted 44 years ago!) what he should or should not say to other Australians on the shallow pretext that you know better! pb>>Somewhere or the other Plato has Socrates say to an acolyte: >> "Go, tell no one, and drown thyself." jv> I don't know about hari-kari but I do hope that Lawrie learns > from all of this. Yes, that we here in North Queensland can share no more and instead let "experts" like John & Peter (different sides, same coin) tell us what we are allowed to tell our kids. pb> What you are up to now is potentially dangerous, deeply stupid, and > without an iota of concern for the consequences to the subject > in question. You show how truly half-witted your ideas are by the way > you *defend* them and dozy actions. jv> Blunt, but it's justified. Needs to be said in as perfunctory a > fashion as possible. Testify Mendoza! <G> The informal support system that exists in our liberal but stable community should excite envy in New York rather than condemnation. We listen to one another. We are honest with one another. This recent spate of postings and most especially Peter's sexual innuendo has completely discredited whatever credibility he had. How come the moralists on the list are not up in arms about this? Slander is never pleasant and can never be ignored, especially when it is as intense as I have received. At least John has strived to be reasonable. But I see Peter has turned his attack on the girls themselves. Anything for a thrill and a giggle I suppose. With the permission of the list I'd like to print out all the discussion we have had and pass it on to the kids concerned. They deserve a good laugh at the star-chamber farce that this has become. And if anyone is to be sued for sexual innuendo or intemperate personal comments, I wonder who it is likely to be? >>How old are you, by the way? Forty-eight. Old enough to know in consierable detail what you will never, ever, know. Lawrie Williams________________dusting off his trusty old printer
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 28 Re: Millennium Raises Hopes, Fears From: Bob Shell <76750.2717@compuserve.com> Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 08:45:28 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 15:15:48 -0500 Subject: Re: Millennium Raises Hopes, Fears >From: RGates8254@aol.com [Robert Gates] >Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 17:45:53 -0500 (EST) >To: updates@globalserve.net >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Millennium Raises Hopes, Fears > My personal opinion is the 2nd coming will happen at some >point in the future BUT, I am probably more likely to meet >Christ, should I get killed in a automobile accident then I am >sitting around reading various books, by various experts all >fingering this or that date as being the one. >Cheers, >Robert Robert, Second coming????? Most of humanity is still awaiting the first coming. The year 2001 will be the first year of a new millennium only for a minority of humans who use the Christian calender. For the rest of the world, the second millennium is either long past, or has not come yet. Earlier this year I was in San Marino for the UFO conference there. In San Marino the year is 1696, so they have more than three-hundred years left before the millennium. Our dating of years is purely arbitrary. Even for Christians, the actual year of Christ's birth is unknown, but considered by the best scholars to be something like 30 BC. So the real Christian millennium has come and gone, and nothing much happened. The only thing likely to increase as we come near to the year 2001 is insanity on the part of "fundamentalist" Christians. Bob
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 28 Re: Witness Anonymity From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 20:55:21 +0000 Fwd Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 16:14:19 -0500 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity >From: "Clark Hathaway" <earthwrk@doitnow.com> >To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Paranormal flavor of abduction. >Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 20:22:22 -0700 Hi Clarke >Another point I would like to make is that I have been successful >at stopping an abduction event during it's beginning. It has >occurred on a number of occasions. Would you care to enlighten us as to how? >Clarke Hathaway Are you a man or a mouse, come on squeek up! Sean Jones reply to--sean@tedric.demon.co.uk Homepage--http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Zone/1745/index.htm Reasearch page --http://www.tedric.demon.co.uk/ Search for other documents from or mentioning: tedric | earthwrk |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 28 Re: 'The Gulf Breeze Paper' From: bruce maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com> Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 08:50:04 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 16:13:04 -0500 Subject: Re: 'The Gulf Breeze Paper' >Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 17:40:38 -0700 (PDT) >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Geoff Price <Geoff@CalibanMW.com> >Subject: Re: 'The Gulf Breeze Paper' >>Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 23:09:02 -0400 >>From: bruce maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com> >>Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: 'The Gulf Breeze Paper' >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >> [...] >>... As for the photos we have: Baker Watson >>(June, 1976, "I know the detail I saw is exactly what's in your >>book"; photo is very much like Ed-type); Harry Bordersfield (Jan >>1980, coming out of Carlsbad Caverns; photo looks like what Ed >>got July 10, 1991), Susan Keiley (Jan 1980,UFO over the Grande >>Canyon, somewhat resembles Ed-type), Gary Tomlinson( April 1986, >>Monterrey, Mexico), James Warnerfred (March, 1989,El Progresso, >>Guatemala, two photos, some resemblence to Ed-type), Ray Harcourt >>(Canaima, Venezuela, January, 1990, looks like Ed-type UFO >>hovering and sending down a beam), Bryan Hampton (July, 1990, Las >>Vegas, somewhat like Ed-type), Carlos Medoso (Campo Grande, >>Brazil, December, 1991, similar to ed-type), James Parker (Fiji >>Islands, March, 1992, similar to Ed-type). >Can I ask about the status of some of these other photos? Not a >critical request, I'm simply interested. The Harcourt (Canaima) >photo, for example, featured on the cover, is more detailed and >dramatic even than anything credited to Ed. Has anyone had >access to the original film, been able to interview the witness, >etc.? >Geoff These other photos have not been analyzed. The locations are too far away for my budget to travel to the sites listed. The witnesses have not been interviewed. Ed has written to each one for permission to use the story/photo as presented in each person's letter to Ed. And, yes, the Venezuela photo is "spectacular." Ed says of all the photos he has been sent he is "jealous" of that one.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 28 Re: Questions for Abductees From: clark@canby.mn.frontiercomm.net [Jerome Clark} Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 11:35:07 PST Fwd Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 16:42:02 -0500 Subject: Re: Questions for Abductees > From: "Clarke Hathaway" <earthwrk@doitnow.com> > To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net> > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Questions for Abductees > Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 18:19:24 -0700 > > From: clark@canby.mn.frontiercomm.net [Jerome Clark] > > Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 18:11:53 PST > > To: updates@globalserve.net > > Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Questions for Abductees > > I will say, however, that from just about any point of view, > > Keel and Vallee have shed far more darkness than light on > > ufology's many vexing questions. Demonologist Keel has a > > great 13th-century mind, and Vallee is incoherent when he > > isn't being paranoia-addled, and vice versa. I urge you to > > read my essay on "Paranormal and Occult Theories about > > UFOs" in my just-published (and available at your local > > bookstore) trade paperback The UFO Book, or the much- > > extended discussions to appear in the second edition of my > > UFO Encyclopedia (due out in January 1998). > I have a great amount of difficulty with the E.T. hypothesis. I > find that there is little if anything to support it. Appreciate > Vallee or not, he is correct when he infers that the UFO question > is not one which science is equipped to solve. Having a limited > military intelligence background, I can appreciate it when he > states that it is an Intelligence problem. Clarke, In fact, there is a great deal to support the ETH. So far it is the most reasonable -- or, as Michael Swords has it, "natural" -- provisional hypothesis which seeks to explain the hard-core evidence: i.e., the stuff that emerges from CE2s, independently and multiply witnessed cases, and so on. I urge you to read Swords' "Extraterrestrial Hypothesis and Science" which is included in my new book (pages 188-99). If you read the SETI literature, you'll be surprised at how much state-of-the-art thinking and speculation is consistent with what UFO witnesses report -- though nearly all SETI people want nothing to do with UFOs. (At least one -- John L. Casti -- has, however, sheepishly conceded the similarities.) Vallee is simply wrong when he suggests that the UFO question is beyond science. Here he betrays his occult -- even anti- rationalist -- sympathies. In any event, how would he know? For one thing, science has barely addressed the question. The best cases, however, are eminently investigatable by traditional scientific method; on those relatively rare instances where that has happened, the results have been productive, and suggestive not of paranormal phenomena but of hardware and technology. Next year, for example, will see the publication of an in-depth investigation of a seminal case where the operation of an extraordinary technology can be demonstrated in a way that's going to shock everybody who's paying attention. We are wrong, in my opinion, in making an automatic link between daylight discs and (say) men in black. We may be carelessly lumping a lot of things that really have nothing to do with the core UFO phenomenon under the general rubric of "UFO activity." As I have put it (see the intro to my 1993 book Unexplained!), we could usefully look at events as opposed to experiences. A radar/visual of a daylight disc is an event; an encounter with MIB, however anomalous, is only an experience which exists solely in memory and testimony (albeit highly anomalously in some instances). All best, Jerry Clark
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 28 Re: From: bruce maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com> Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 08:49:58 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 16:36:55 -0500 Subject: Re: >>From: c549597@showme.missouri.edu [Barbara Becker] >>Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 22:52:27 -0500 >>TO: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: 'The Gulf Breeze Paper' LATEST ON THE LEGAL CONTROVERSY!!! (are you still awake out there?) >(FROM BSM 10/18/97) To the 1 or 2 people following this discussion: >Here is my latest respose to Barbara's criticism of the Ed Walters case. <snip> > > HERE IS MY COMMENT ON HER PAPER: I am aware that the GB skeptics > > have tried, unsuccessfully, to discredit all the other witnesses. > > There are about a dozen Gulf Breeze witnesses who say explicitly > > that they saw what was in Ed's photos. > **** BB: There were NONE that came forward before Ed and only > ONE, a man named Thompson, who described and drew a picture > similar to Ed's. The fact is that over a dozen people came forward within the 8 months following Ed's initial report. Presumably no one twisted their arms or otherwise forced them to make their statements to the effect that they saw the same object. I realize this is a bitter pill for the skeptics to swallow, but if you took Ed completely out of the picture you would still have an amazing series of sightings. Quite likely they would have not been reported as early as November, 1987 if Ed hadn't published his pictures. However, by March, 1988 there had been so many sightings that it is quite likely that someone would have called the UFO hotline by that time, or otherwise alerted UFO investigators. In other words, in my opinion, even in the absence of Ed, the flap that took place in the spring of 1988 in Gulf Breeze would have been recognized as it was occurring. Presumably there would have been some publicity and then investigators would have learned about the sightings that took place in November, December 1987 and January and February, 1988. And many of the witnesses reported the basic key features: a round object with a bright ring on the bottom and a light on the top. Some reported other key features as well. >>>>>>BSM, 10/17/97: The following people stated they saw a UFO > like or the same as what appeared in Ed's photos (list taken > from GULF BREEZE WITHOUT ED, a paper presented at the 1991 MUON > Symposium): >*****BB I have many of these reports. Unfortunately, with the >exception of Thompson, the other sketches of witnesses in 1987, are NOT >identical to Walters UFo. ANd once again, most of the reports were >taken much later. Your requirement of "identicality" reminds me of similar fallacious reasoning by the writers of Project Blue Book Special Report #14. In that report there is the statistical analysis of 3201 reports, of which about 20% were left unexplained. That report also includes a list of "twelve good unknowns" which were sightings so well reported that they couldn't possibly be mistakes and yet the investigators did not think they were hoaxes. In other words, there was a good possibility that these were "the real thing." However, the writers of the report were able to dismiss even these twelve by pointing out that they weren't all identical and hence could not be used to create a consistent "model saucer." Your reasoning could be used to achieve the same result with the Gulf Breeze sightings. You could state that because the witnesses did not all report exactly the same thing they probably saw nothing at all... or at least no flying saucers. So, what is it, Barbara? Do you accept ANY of the sightings in the November 1987 - July 1988 time frame (when Ed was taking these pictures), or do you reject them all? And, if you accept any as true, which are they? > >In UFOS ARE REAL, HERE'S THE PROOF (Avon. 1997) there are photos from > > people around the world who have seen the same thing. > >**** BB: I have that book. Maybe we are having a problem of > >semantics. SAME means being exactly alike, identical. (SNIP) There you go again requiring "identicality" to prove reality. It's not enough to have an overall similar or even identical shape, plus a bright ring on the bottom? Just because the "windows" don't show in every photo by other people doesn't mean the objects aren't the same. Many of the photos in the new book were taken under brighter conditions. Also, people who give verbal reports may have seen things which they don't mention because they don't remember. Hence a verbal report which mentions the key details (overall shape, bright ring on bottom, light on top) should not be rejected simply because it doesn't include all the details shown in Ed's pictures Also, even many of Ed's recent pictures (since 1992) show objects which are not identical in shape to the ones he photographed in 1987-88. <snip> >. Persons > who wrote to Ed in response to the publication of his first book, > THE GULF BREEZE SIGHTINGS to say they saw the same or a similar > thing: > Clarence Barrons( "they are almost identical to the one I > saw on Nov. 14, 1971....in Mississippi), Cliff Baer ("I saw that > same object appear from behind some trees years ago...in the back > woods of Pennsylvania), Helen Brown (Crestview...30 miles from > gulf Breeze....in summer of 1954....there were three objects ust > like the one in your photo 19...) , John Duquette (I saw the > Gulf Breeze UFO back in 1976...felt I must have been hallucinating), > Randy Duke (...Nov. 1991....saw the UFO in photo 23...), Carol Parks > (..I've seen this thing too....craft seemed almost as wide as the road > and hovered two or three feet above it...), Robert Fuller (I have > seen the Gulf Breeze UFO...in 1980 ...near Ogden, Utah...), Michael > Storm (I was incredibly shocked when I saw the cover of your book > because that is almost exactly what I saw while in Zimbabwe), Daniel > Leshibis (Germany; ....The UFO looked exactly like the one you have > photographed...), Alex Stutzamen (Germany; ......I realized that the > object you photographed is exactly what I saw [in 1986]), Revis > Vannistish(Switzerland;...I saw the pictures about the UFO [in Ed's > book] and I know that's it...) > . There are dozen or so other sightings > reported in the book by people who DID NOT say they saw the same > thing, but they clearly saw SOMETHING wierd. As for the photos we > have: Baker Watson (June, 1976, "I know the detail I saw is exactly > what's in your book"; photo is very much like Ed-type); Harry > Bordersfield (Jan 1980, coming out of Carlsbad Caverns; photo looks > like what Ed got July 10, 1991), Susan Keiley (Jan 1980,UFO over the > Grande Canyon, somewhat resembles Ed-type), Gary Tomlinson( April > 1986, Monterrey, Mexico), James Warnerfred (March, 1989,El Progresso, > Guatemala, two photos, some resemblence to Ed-type), Ray Harcourt > (Canaima, Venezuela, January, 1990, looks like Ed-type UFO > hovering and sending down a beam), Bryan Hampton (July, 1990, Las > Vegas, somewhat like Ed-type), Carlos Medoso (Campo Grande, > Brazil, December, 1991, similar to ed-type), James Parker (Fiji > Islands, March, 1992, similar to Ed-type). > *****BB Bruce you can personally attest that you have seen each and >every one of these letters, and that they are written differently >different people? Afterall, you co-authored a book with this man, >surely you wanted to see for yourself what was being sent. I have not seen all these, but have seen many letters...all from different locations. Different writing. Ed saved the envelopes..all different addresses and postmarks. > Your comment that only three photos are similar is debatable (it > could be more, depending upon the degree of similarity). > Your comment, "Oddly enough, they are from around Costa Rica, > where Walters said he and his wife and children lived for a > while." is really a useless statement. Only two photos taken by > one man during one sighting are from the vicinity of Costa Rica, > and that sighting was in Guatemala. > ****BB Are you saying that this person's sighting was reported in a >newspaper, thus recorded and the time and place of the sighting is >recorded? Barbara, you can read as well as I. Look at page 149 of UFOS ARE REAL.. and read the press story of the sightings. However, so far as I know this witness never reported his particular sighting to the press. However, according to the witness it was the press stories which got his attention and he went to the sighting area to see if he would see anything. Not only did he see, he photographed. > Furthermore, Ed and family lived in Costa Rica in the 1970's and > the Guatemala photos were taken in 1989. Perhaps you are > suggesting that Ed created a hoax UFO in Costa Rica in the middle > 1970's and then it somehow got into Guatemala and fooled people > ten or more years later? >****BB I really dont know what you are saying here but...Has this >one been in the newspaper? Which of the South American reports >and sightings were recorded in a newspaper at the time of the >sighting? See my response above to the previous comment. <magnum sbnip> > >**** BB: Anyone with the slimmest doubt was kept away from this > > case. No skeptics allowed...only believers. > >>>>>BSM: 10/17/97 Skeptics including Willy SMith, Bob Boyd, Ray > Stanford had access to data and their reports prove that the did. > However, it is true that after they went public with their > positive claims of hoax before the investigation was completed, >****BB Before it was completed? MUFON went public BEFORE the >investigation was completed!!! Andrus even said he was breaking >precedent. Yes, MUFON did a stupid thing and went public saying that the case seemed to be real (as did Hopkins) in February and March, 1988. This was after numerous interviews of Ed and reports from many other witnesses. >> and even before the sightings were over, they began to lose >> contact with the main investigation. HOwever, that did not >> stop them from gathering their own data and loudly proclaiing >> their conclusions. >****BB According to you the sightings are still going on. Would >that mean that nothing should have been, nor should ever be, >written about GB until the last red light dies? Really, Barbara, this makes no sense. You know as well as I (or you should know) that the first period of sightings was clearly delineated by the history of events. The first period was from November 11, 1987 through July, 1988. After that the sighting rate dropped to near zero. The sightings in that time period form a "closed set" or a "macrocosm" of the events and can be analyzed independently of whatever came afterward. And, in fact, they have been treated that way. Hence July 1988 was a good time for a report on what had happened. Had the critics waited until I had presented by MUFON paper at the 1988 symposium they would have know what arguments they had to refute in order to prove a hoax. Instead they proceded on their own. Perhaps you don't recall (or never knew) abou Ray Stanford getting egg all over his face in April, 1988, This began when he sent a long report to the Mayor of Gulf Breeze and to the press in Pensacola. This long report presented Ray's firm conviction that the first photos were not taken on Nov 11...and he could prove it! He claimed that the clouds in the first thee photos were moving the wrong way to have been photographed on Nov 11 at 6 PM (or so). He suggested an alternate date and then presented a logical argument to justify why the pictures were taken on one date and then reported as having been taken on another. Of course he argued that the the photos ..and all of Ed's sightings, were a hoax. The other skeptics (CUFOS, Robert Boyd) had a field day on the evening of April 21, when Ray's report was publicized on TV, etc. Ray was quoted as saying "If I am wrong I will completely resign from the (UFO) field." The next day Ray had to eat crow. Why? Because he had proceeded on his own, apart from the main investigation he did not know the exact direction the camera was pointing. He used the wrong sighting direction and thereby got a wrong direction for cloud movement on Nov 11. The weather reports in the area provided information to which way the wind was blowing. When the MUFON investigators learned of Ray's report they discovered Ray had used the wrong sighting direction. When Ray was told the the correct sighting direction he realized he was wrong. On the evening of April 22 Ray stated publicly that he had gotten "bad information" and this led him to the wrong conclusion regarding when the photos were taken. <snip> > >**** BB: I have a copy of a statement taken by a certain memebr > >of CUFOS from a girl named "Carol" who was this "other" friends > >girlfriend and who attended Columbia College in Chicago with this > >"other" friend who claimed that this "other" friend had been > >offered money to help Ed in the hoax. This "other" friend was > >promised money for film making (like video?) and school etc. I > >trust this person in CUFOS I have no reason to doubt the > >statement since the CUFOS person thought it was truthful and > >sincere. AS with evryhting in this case, this "carol" was afraid > >to come forward. > >>>>BSM: 10/17/97 Tsk, tsk. People who are accusing Ed > areafraid to step forward....except Tommy Smith, of course, > So, we are to believe an anonymous ("Carol") teenage girlfriend > of Rob M. , the "other friend" of Tommy Smith (not a friend of > Ed), when she ostensibly (though an anonymous CUFOS investigator) > says Rob M. was also "bought off" by Ed? I begin to wonder just > how many people Ed has supposedly "bought off" in this "Grand > Conspiracy." All the dozens of other witnesses, too? >****BB Did I mention Rob M.? Guess you didn't do any follow up >at the time? I don't know what this means. I talked to Rob M. so I know first hand his story. But now you are suggesting that Ed "bought off" Rob M. to get him to help with the hoax. Tommy Smith says Ed paid Hank Boland to help. One begins to wonder ju st how many people Ed has been paying to keep silent about his hoax.!! FOR THOSE OF YOU OUT THERE STILL LISTENING.. may I suggest you go to www.skiesare.demon.co.uk and look up my article about T. Smith. Or, you can contact me for much more information than is on the web site. > > The person Tommy "came forward" to with his story was his > > father. According to his father, lawyer Thomas Smith, at a press > > conference in June, 1990, Tommy told him in late 1987 of a UFO > > sighting with pictures. According to Thomas Smith, a few days or > > weeks later Tommy told him the pictures had been faked by Ed. > > Neither Smith said anything in public about these allegations > > until June, 1990. At the press conference Mr. Smith was careful > > to avoid criticizing any of the other Gulf Breeze witnesses, > > including those who claimed to have seen exactly the same thing > > that Ed photographed. Tommy's photos were analyzed. Tommy > > had claimed that Ed had faked them by double exposure methods. > BSM: 10/17/97 Readers: note well the following paragraph: > > However, analysis revealed no evidence of double exposure and, > > in fact, the photos appeared to be just single exposures, not double > > exposures as Tommy had indicated. The shape and color of the > > depicted UFO was consistent with what Ed had photographed. >****BB It should be, Ed took the photograph. Evidently you don' understand. I'll try again, The proof that Ed faked the pictures that Tommy gave to the Sheriff was ***supposed to be** the evidence that it was a double exposure, according to T. Smith. But there is no evidence of a double exposure. Hence your claim "Ed took the photographs" is not proved by the photographs. The fact that the photos have images consistent with what Ed photographed would only mean that Ed photographed it IF you (o anyone) could prove that there were NO SUCH UFOS AROUND FOR OTHERS TO SEE AND TO PHOTOGRAPH. I should point out that Tommy's photos are NOT IDENTICAL to Ed's! By your logic (as indicated above) these photos should therefore be considered by themselves apart from Ed's because unless they are identical they don't support Ed's sightings. So, are Tommy's real? Or did he fake them? > > **** BB COMMENT: This is strictly disinformation damage control. > > In the first week of January 1988, Tommy Smith confessed his role in > > Walters hoax to his father, who then discussed it with his law > > partners, Mayor of Gulf Breeze, Ed Gray and Police Chief, Jerry > > Brown. So there is no lack of credible witnesses to what Tommy said > > and when. All of whom believed MUFON would discover the hoax and it > > would go away. It didn't. At this time Tommy cut his ties to > > Walters. This was when alters executed his own damage control. He > > told Ware et al., that he was definitely, "Mr. Ed." and showed the > > remaining 12 or so photographs he had taken. To my recollection it > > was Walters who came out with the preposterous story about Tommy > > Smith. > > My comment on her comment: > > I have never heard of any testimony that in January 1988 Tommy Smith > > told his father, who told his law partners, the Mayor of Gulf > > Breeze and the Police Chief. If it is true, that the Police Chief > > had a witness to a hoax as early as January 1988, then I guess he > > could be guilty of nonfeasance of duty to inform the public, > > inasmuch as there was a lot of interest in the sightings at the > > time. > >**** BB: I cant speak for any of these people but everyone makes > >a bad call once in while...even you Bruce. > >>>>>Yeah me.....and even You, Barbara. > ****BB Bruce. The above line is childish. Yeah, so is the above line. > > 4) Here is my comment on her paper: > > This discussion about the copyright does not prove Ed > > created the Bill and Jane photos. Hence Barbara's claim that <big snip> > > "this demonstrates his ability...." is also not proven. In > >>>>>BSM: 10/17/97 When it comes to deciding who's right, you > grasp for legalities is you wish; I'll stick to the physical > analysis. >****BB Your physical analysis can be wrong. Law, at least this >copyright law, is very specific. And it VERY specifically says >that if Ed Walters owns the copyright to the B&J photos, AND he >does not have a transfer agreement, which he doesnt, the he MUST >BE THE PHOTOGRAPHER. Physical analysis can be wrong.....and the law can't be wrong? Can lawyers repeal the "laws" of optics and photography? But we are talking about diverse things here. I claim that the photos which Ed claims to have taken were not hoaxed by Ed...and several of them contain images which could not have been hoaxed by Ed for reasons outlined in UFOS ARE REAL..... Also, I claim there were many other witnesses to the same type of UFO. Hence, I claim the photos and sightings are real You claim that Ed broke the law if he published the Bill and Jane photos without owning the rights to those photos. >But to arrive at your conclusion you must assume Ed (and his lawyers) >would be smart enough not to break the law. Therefore he would have transfer agreements with Bill and Jane to protect himself against a lawsuit... or else he took the photos himself. Since he has no transfer agreements you conclude that he must have taken the photos himself. (But then he would be a liar because he said someone else took them, and this lie then carries over into the other sightings... etc.)' BUT....WHAT IF ED DID BREAK THE LAW IN PUBLISHING BILL AND JANE'S PHOTOS? Ed doesn't think he broke the law. Ed's lawyer doesn't think he broke the law.Morrow's lawyer doesn't think he broke the law. But, according to you, if he is telling the truth HE BROKE THE LAW. SHAME ON ED!!!! Well, as I have suggested (challenged you) in the past, if you really think he broke the law in publishing the photos, the sue him on behalf of Bill and Jane! <snip> > >BB: ENDING COMMENT: Hey Bruce....Is Ed dead????? If nothow about > >calling him on the phone (surely you have his number) and ask him > >why he doesnt have a transfer agreement and why he owns the > >copyright to the B&J photos? Thats simple. And please no BS > >about Duane giving him the photos. > BSM: (10.17/97) (Ending Comment)^2: no transfer agreement > because Bill and Jane can't be contacted. >****BB Close but no cigar. All Walters needed to do, to protect himself >against a willfull infringment suit was to put an ad in the GB Sentinel >Newspaper, declaring his intention to publish a book, and asking the >rightful owners to please contact him privately. Their anonymity would >be respected. >> Had either one left a return address or a phone number Ed would have >> called. Bill and Jane have had nearly 10 years to make contact and >> assert their copyrights. Presumably they are aware of the > >publication of Ed's book in 1990. Look's like a hung jury as far as > >Bill and Jane are concerned. >****BB People who don't exist have a real hard time making >contact. <snip> >****BB I'll repeat the question. Maybe you overlooked it the >last time I asked. Hey Bruce....Is Ed dead????? If not how >about calling him on the phone (surely you have his number) and >ask him why he doesnt have a transfer agreement and why he owns >the copyright to the B&J photos? Thats simple. And please no BS >about Duane giving him the photos. The answer has alread been given. Looks as if we're right back where we started: Bill and Jane are NOT ED and therefore Ed is a CRIMINAL, A FELON, GUILTY OF IN FRINGING ON THE COPYRIGHTS OF BILL AND JANE.... *****if you are correct.****** So, why don't you sue Ed on behalf of Bill and Jane?
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 28 Re: NDEs? From: "Plowman Family" <plowman@ionia-mi.net> [Nancy] Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 12:29:20 -0800 Fwd Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 16:44:42 -0500 Subject: Re: NDEs? Could the person who mentioned having two Near death experiences after a heart blockage and a missing time episode at age 5 please contact me? I would like to ask a question. Nancy plowman@ionia-mi.net
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 28 Re: Questions for Abductees From: Peregrine Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith] Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 09:02:58 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 16:39:51 -0500 Subject: Re: Questions for Abductees The Duke of Mendoza presents his compliments. >From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net> >To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Questions for Abductees >Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 17:43:42 -0500 >And so here, Peter, there's a wonderful hidden assumption in your >argument. You talk about the hypotheses we'd have to accept to >make the ETH viable. One of them is an extremely basic point -- >that life exists elsewhere, something that, as yet, has not been >conclusively demonstrated. Thus, you argue, one makes an >intellectual leap in concluding that UFO sightings can be >attributed to vistitors from beyond. But, Peter, that's only true >if we tacitly assume that life should be presumed not to exist >until it's been found. Greg, you are awfully good at rootling under the elaborately (some might say extravagantly) patterned Persian carpet of my thoughts and finding little heaps of dust that you think I have swept there and that you label "hidden assumptions". There is, I assure you, no such tacit assumption in what I say or think, nor is it necessary. You may presume alien life to exist and still an ET origin for any given UFO sighting will remain a long way down the list of possible explanations to be eliminated before fastening on it. We *know* telephones, faulty electrical connexions, the CIA and phone tapping technology (and the will to use it) exist. When I speak to the Sasquatch of San Antone on the phone there are frequent crackles on the line and the sound breaks up from his end. What causes this? Do we immediately assume the CIA is listening in, or do we first investigate the possibility of a slight technical hitch with the Beast of the Olmos Basin's kit? How many hurdles does the CIA solution have to jump - including "Why the CIA and not the FBI?" and "Why are they bugging Dennis with old & noisy equipment?" - before we decide they're the culprits? Likewise with terrestrial vs ET explanations for UFOs - even if we *knew* ET was scuffling around out there. >Why should we assume that? As I said earlier, we can study >perception, and come up with at least rough estimates of how >often people misperceive things. So how can you come up with a >rough estimate of the likelihood of alien visits? You can't. No of course you can't, but then you'd be daft to try to conflate two different sets of reasoning & data like this. You're heading straight for a false syllogism - and a false *straw* syllogism to boot. What the data on misperceptions tells you is that about 95% of UFOs can be translated into IFOs or even NonFOs. That alone by the usual scientific rule of thumb (p=0.05) would be enough to say the remainder is acceptable noise. If you then proceed on the basis that the remaining 5% of perceived objects is not noise, you move away from the question of (mis)perception and into another realm of data and argument. For example you may want to point out that it doesn't automatically follow that a genuine UFO is ipso facto an ET UFO. [snip] >Somebody else >could just as reasonably -- or, really, just as unreasonably -- >assume that alien visits are extremely likely, and therefore >invoke Occam's Razor to suggest that UFO sightings are caused by >aliens. The reasoning is equally silly on both sides, and equally >prejudiced. This is crackers and confused, but it's possible that a lack of clarity on my part, in the first place, has contributed to that. Occam's razor is to do with the number of assumptions, hypotheses, entities, what you will, required to explain a given phenomenon. Whether *or not* ET is out there, you multiply hypotheses inevitably and inexorably if you want to argue that even one of all the teeming millions of genuinely UFOs reported is ET. The likelihood of there being any ETs at all is a separate discussion, but it is, of course, an arm of a pincer movement. This doesn't crack or annihilate the ETH, but it puts it under enormous pressure - pressure it does not even remotely receive from the average UFO buff or even some top-of-the-heap UFO buffs whom we all know and love. I have yet to perceive this circle you keep on about. But then you seem to think too that we are dealing with "a complete unknown" when we're not (see Mike Davies, PLEASE). >[more snip] >Davies' reply was amazing. He modestly >noted that future science will, of course, invalidate many >assumptions we now hold dear, but that, nevertheless, it would >not be "science" to abandon these assumptions in our present >thinking! What else could he possibly have said? All this means is that a scientist can work only with the materials to hand. Or: as far as we know, hyperspace drives (etc) are fantasy. Davies is merely stating the blindingly obvious. I might point out in passing that a wormhole, at least, doesn't violate what we understand to be the laws of nature, but are (for now) prohibitively expensive to create from scratch. And speaking for myself, should I have the misfortune to live a thousand years, I'd be no more surprised to find that c really is c at the end of that time than I would to find a teleportation booth on every street corner. Similarly, much as I should also like one day to exploit the erotic potential of a domestic anti-gravity machine, for the time being I'll just have to make do with the trusty herring barrel. I could be persuaded to swap it for a vat of live eels in molasses, though, if anyone's got one going. As ever, best wishes, Greg Polygamy D. Morepork Star Gazer
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 28 Re: Questions for Abductees From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net> Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 11:43:20 -0600 (CST) Fwd Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 16:54:46 -0500 Subject: Re: Questions for Abductees >Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 20:03:55 +0100 (MET) >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Jean van Gemert <jeanvg@dds.nl> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Questions for Abductees >>Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 13:38:50 -0600 (CST) >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >>From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net> >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Questions for Abductees > [Some snippage...] >>It appears you might also need a gravity well in the form of a >>giant gas planet, placed just so in terms of distance and >>location, the latter acting as a defense shield... > Am I getting this straight? The argument is that gas > giants were "placed just so in terms of distance and > location" because of sheer randomness? If that's the > idea you (and Davies?) intend to perpetuate, I think > you might want to iron out a few misunderstandings. By far the easist answer I can give you, Jean, is to say read Davis's article, "Cosmic Dancers on History's Stage? The Permanent Revolution in the Earth Sciences." It's all about the latest findings and thinking in planetary science. But to answer your question, randomness doesn't enter into it. For example, there is thought to be a "comfort zone" in relationship to our sun. Too far outside the zone, human life as we know it wouldn't exist because it's too cold, as in Mars; too far inside the zone, the temperatures would be too high, as in Mercury. The comfort zone is random in one sense and not in another. It's random in that it would vary from solar system to solar system depending on the size, age, etc. of the particular sun. The zone also changes dramatically over time. When our sun finally explodes, we'll be too close for comfort. Now the zone where the rocky planets form may well overlap the comfort zone, but it's not necessarily synonymous. In this regard, Earth was lucky, Mars not so lucky, yet both are rocky planets. So, the Earth was created randomly (as an ultimately habitable planet) within limits; it could have been a little farther out or a little closer in. And of course the same is true for Mars, etc. So, too, I'm sure there is a zone in relation to the sun in which the gas giants form, and in which each one can be said to be situated randomly in terms of all the available possibilities. What Davis does is to analyze the solar system as we presently find it in terms of the latest findings, and its history over time, and suggest that the history of our solar system may well be unique in terms of its present particulars. For example, the placement of our moon is not random when it comes to the forces of gravity: it's placed the only place it could be placed, in other words. But there is absolutely no guarantee whatsoever that a moon of the size of ours would necessarily form in relation to a planet of our size. In that sense, it is random. All we can say about the Earth-Moon relation is that's the way it is. Presumably, we could have had had no moon, two moons (like Mars) or three or four, or maybe two moons half the size of the present one. There is a whole host of random possibiities, in other words. The Earth's axis could be different as well. Davis simply takes everything we know about the solar system's present state, make up and the relationship among its many parts and concludes, when all factors are taken into consideration, they may not be as easy to replicate around other suns as we think, which would put a serious crimp in Drake's equation of the number of possible habitable solar systems. There is no rule of planetary formation, for example, from which you can declare that a planet the size of the earth _must_ form 93 million miles from a star the size of ours, along with a moon of just the right size, so that when it passes between the Earth and Sun it almost exactly covers the solar disk. All those factors are "random" in the sense that they have a wide range of latitude, but highly specific in the case of our solar system. Davis is saying that it may take all the specifics of our case to result in intelligent life. An ocean without tides, for example, might not give rise to the kind of life forms that eventually adapted to walk on land. What causes our tides? The moon being the size and place it is. A smaller moon further away might not generate tides at all. So you could still imaginable a theoretically habitable Earth, with plenty of water for all, but nothing really challenging for those early organisms to struggle against when the tides went out and they were left gasping on the beach. You might also theoretically get an Earth the same size and make up as ours around another sun like ours, but with little or no axial tilt. Why is the tilt of the axis so important? It creates seasons. Why are seasons important? Because they seriously challenged our ancestors to keep warm in the winter. If the Earth were a terrestrial paradise we might still be shaggy apes munching down ready-at-hand bananas morning, noon and night, but not getting around, at least anytime soon, to killing one another and building sspaceships. The gas giants have to be "just so," too, in terms of the Earth's specific location. According to Davis, they may be finely-tuned, too, just the right size to keep out, say, 99.9% of the incoming artillery, but also allow .01% in to the inner solar system, where it bombards the Earth on a largely random basis, wipes out the dinosaurs, and allows the mammals, including us, to evolve and take over. Let too much space junk by, however, and even the mammals might have had a hard time of it. Planetary catastrophes, in other words, may well be a "requirement" for any eventual form of intelligent life. All together, it may take a specific set of finely-tuned, interlocking relationships (in toto, the history of our specific solar system), out of all the random possibilities (or histories) available, to result in intelligent life. This starts to make the Drake equation (and any ET theory in geneal) look pretty shaky. If it takes a village to raise a planet, it may take a universe to raise a habitable planet on which intelligent life ultimately arises. But I really feel like I'm doing Davis a disservice by talking about his article when he deserves to be read in his own words. You can probably find a copy in your library, as it originally appeared in the "New Left Review" out of England, #217 or so, I believe. Or you can order a copy of The Anomalist 5 from me. Email me for details. > According to current research in planetary formation, > the size and composition of the planets is regulated > pretty much by distance from the central star. Rocky > planets like Mars of the Earth will, because of this, > appear in the inner regions of a star system and any > gaseous giants will condense in the outer regions. No > "randonmness" involved here, I'm afraid. The point is, it's a good thing they form where they do! What if they formed near the stars and the rocky planets with water all out around Pluto? Brrrr! Come to think of it, what's little bitty Pluto doing out there in Gas Giant Land, anyway? And howcome Saturn has rings and Jupiter doesn't? Dennis
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 28 Missouri Residents Proud of Spooklight From: Kenny Young <task@fuse.net> Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 17:10:57 -0800 Fwd Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 17:32:45 -0500 Subject: Missouri Residents Proud of Spooklight Mo. Residents Proud of Spooklight Associated Press October 28, 1997 By JOHN ROGERS Associated Press Writer HORNET, Mo. (AP) -- On those moonless Missouri nights when it gets darker than dark -- darker, some would say, than the inside of a cow -- things can get pretty spooky along a rugged stretch of road. That's when the Spooklight is likely to make its appearance. On some nights it might rise slowly out of nowhere to illuminate a broad swatch of farmland. On others it might simply waltz up East Highway 50 from Oklahoma, dancing across the gravel road that doubles as the state line. Or it could just run straight at you, vanishing at the last second, then reappearing a heartbeat later, as it sneaks up from behind to levitate around your shoulders. Whatever it is, just about everyone to be found along this stretch of rolling hills and farms, where the landmarks have names like Lost Creek and Teepee Reservation, has a Spooklight story to tell. ``It's kind of a legend around here, and it's been forever that people have gone out to look for it,'' says Suzanne J. Wilson, a local writer. ``I've only seen it in the distance ... but I've seen it.' Noel Grisham, who lives a mile or so off Spooklight Road, thinks maybe he's seen it, too. But he's more skeptical. ``It could be a flashlight for all I know,'' he says. ``But when the weather's nice and you're sitting out in the yard at night, you'll get five or 10 people a week pulling up hollering at you,'' Grisham says, ``They'll holler, `Is this where Spooklight is? We want to see Spooklight.''' So it doesn't really matter whether the folks around here believe. Whatever it is, it's their Spooklight, the one that entranced their grandparents, long before the tourists. And they're proud of it. ``I don't really know what it is and I hope they never find out. It would spoil the mystery,'' says Joe Smith, a gregarious man who is president of the Bank of Quapaw, just across the state line in Oklahoma. Having spent all of his 74 years here, Smith is a Spooklight authority of sorts. So he knows that each fall, when the Halloween jack-o-lanterns start adorning doorsteps, the Spooklight calls will roll in. ``One year we had a TV station come down, had one of those big trucks with lights and makeup in it,'' he recalls laughing. ``I felt like we really hit the big time.'' June Smith is the senior reference librarian at the Joplin Public Library, 20 miles to the northwest. Like so many others, she has her own Spooklight theory. ``I've always figured it was an accumulation of gases, and you saw it when the time was right,'' she said. ``Nobody has ever really figured out the reason for it. ... During World War II, the Army Corps of Engineers even had people down here looking.'' It was around that time that Mrs. Smith was transformed from Spooklight skeptic to Spooklight believer. She was getting ready to return home with her 2-year-old daughter and friends after a fruitless night of Spooklight watching. ``We had two carloads down there and we hadn't seen anything,'' she says now. ``And I thought, well, I don't believe it anyway. And then here it came down the road. ``It looked like the size of a basketball, and as it came toward you, it got larger. By the time it got to the second car it almost exploded. It was the size of the second car.'' Joe Smith's old friend, Lloyd ``Dutch'' Bielke, told him how he saw it one night, maybe 90 years ago, when he was out in his buggy with his wife-to-be. It came up so fast that it spooked the horses. Dutch is dead now and 14-year-old Shannon Townsend lives in the house where Dutch's grandson, Ralph Bielke, is said to have seen the Spooklight five times in 10 years. It was there that Shannon's brother recently photographed the Spooklight. The picture looks like ... well, it looks like a white light hovering just off the ground. Whether it's fog or a flash bouncing back at the camera is hard to say. Shannon didn't believe him, even after he showed her the picture. But then her father told her he saw it, too. She slept right through it. Does she believe it now? ``Yeah. A little bit.'' John W. Northrip, a professor of physics and astronomy at Southwest Missouri State University, doesn't believe it -- not at all. Over three years in the early 1970s, Northrip and some of his students employed lasers, walkie talkies and other gadgets to unravel the mystery. It was not long after the Apollo moon landing, Northrip recalls, and everyone's head seemed to be tilted toward the heavens in those days, looking for strange stuff. Where 50 people might show up on a given night to see Spooklight now, 400 would show up then. Northrip was among them. He says his investigators proved that rising heat from surrounding hills was carrying light from a nearby highway and giving it its Spooklight appearance, making it dance and hover. He simply discounts stories that Spooklight existed 100 years ago, ``I come from the Ozarks,'' Northrip says, ``so I'm used to the idea that where there is a phenomenon like this, that stories have a tendency to grow like this.'' Maybe it's the Ozark romantic in him, but Northrip doesn't denounce all of the Spooklight legend. ``For those who have had it come up and had it sit right on the fender of their car,'' he says, chuckling, ``I don't know. There is no scientific explanation for that kind of thing.'' -- UFO Research http://home.fuse.net/task/
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 28 Re: Confirmed Sighting Report From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 12:44:50 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 16:49:42 -0500 Subject: Re: Confirmed Sighting Report >Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 20:12:58 -0500 >To: updates@globalserve.net >From: Don Allen <dona@totcon.com> >Subject: Confirmed Sighting Report >** Originally posted in Fidonet's SKEPTIC conference by Kurt Foster >=========================================== > Incredible as it may seem, the following story is perfectly true! <snip> Hi Don, Thanx for the weather report dude! The white UFOs always come in winter have you noticed? And apparently rock salt can dissolve them so we have nothing to fear from these cold alien visitors. <G> Thanx for the chuckle, John Velez John Velez jvif@spacelab.net
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 28 Re: UFOs in Scotland From: Don Ledger <dledger@istar.ca> Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 14:59:31 +0100 Fwd Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 16:43:13 -0500 Subject: Re: UFOs in Scotland > Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 00:03:58 +0100 > From: Dave Ledger <dledger@cableinet.co.uk> > To: updates@globalserve.net > Subject: UFOs in Scotland > Hi group, > I am quite a new subscriber to the list and i find these > posts to be an incredible asset to any who may have an > interest in ufology. > I am writing to the group with a personal appeal for help with a > project that i have recently undertaken,following a life changing > experience myself and a few others had in August this year. > My appeal is for any imformation available (photo's,pics,press > cuttings,docs,sighting reports etc) concerning or related to, any > sightings from Scotland or the surrounding area. The ages of the > pieces are irrelevant as i'm interested in any Scottish > connection at all from the past and present. I am presently > constructing a web page relating to the ufo phenomena in and > around Scotland and would greatly appreciate any help my fellow > list members may be able to offer. Thankyou in advance. > Dave Ledger......E-MAIL>>dledger@cableinet.co.uk Hi Dave, I should think that for your area that BUFORA would be a good start, if you haven't checked them out already. Have you contacted James Easton or Graham Birdsall [UFO Magazine UK]. They should be able to put you on to someone with pics and files. Regards, Don Ledger < dledger@istar.ca >
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 28 Re: Questions for Abductees From: rfsignal@sprynet.com [Cathy Johnson] Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 09:36:12 -0800 Fwd Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 16:48:28 -0500 Subject: Re: Questions for Abductees >From: wlmss@peg.apc.org [Lawrie Williams] >Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 23:51:23 +1000 (GMT+1000) >To: updates@globalserve.net >Subject: Re: Questions for Abductees. >> Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 22:10:15 -0500 >> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >> From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> >> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Questions for Abductees >These comments were written by one of my sons. He is 15. >Unpromoted he sat down and keyed in the following. I >chose to change none of it. > Lawrie Williams. > >- - - - ->snip <- - - - - - Dear List, What has been going on here is a good example of the kinds of help or interference that an abductee faces. Do this! No! Do that! Well, in truth, there are no real standards. No one is the little miracle worker that we all need at the moment we perceive we need real help. Being on this list only serves to show to all the overall picture of what is going on. Who is expert? Who isn't? It does me no good to think about the ramifications of being at the hands of peaked and preened professionals. So, lets get to the bottom of all of this, is there something worth drawing attention to, or not? Because the result of all of the grandstand and theatrics has only caused me grief. I can stand up and say this and that happened to the best of my ability, with all honesty and sincerety. And I will know that truly no one could possibly believe what i have to say. Its not fact. Its not even good fiction. But the words that I happened to put together in my native language are what I believe with all of my heart to be true and valid. So what, you say. Then all f you turn like dogs on a bone and pick everything to pieces, denounce me as a liar and fraud. Then, I am supposed to say sorry for tryiing? Well, all I can say is F. O. (FIND OUT for yourself!) When it gets to be your turn, if there ever is one, just how will you react? I can bet you won't be as well to react as I have done. What do I care, anyways? I already have my tests behind me. And, you have yet to pass yours. I have seen snippets of pictures, of videos, of other people's own personal stories and can even relate to some of it as part of my own long and convoluted memories. A bit here, a bit there. Add it all up to one big picture before you begin detailed analysis of anything in perspective to the overall picture. Be careful to see that there is something going on. Surely you all can see that, can't you? Take care for now, Cathy Johnson
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 29 Re: Solved abduction cases? From: jared@valuserve.com (Andromeda.net- Anderson, Jared) Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 15:29:37 -0700 Fwd Date: Wed, 29 Oct 1997 23:16:47 -0500 Subject: Re: Solved abduction cases? > From: James Easton <pulsar@compuserve.com> > Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 20:54:11 -0400 > Fwd Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 19:49:44 -0400 > Subject: Re: Solved abduction cases? > Regarding... > >Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 01:22:34 -0500 > >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> > >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Solved abduction cases? > John wrote: > >Henny writes, > >>Not only is the ET hypothesis taken seriously outside the USA, > >>government officials of several countries, such as Chile, > >>Belgium, Mexico and Russia, have openly stated that their air > >>space has been violated by craft that do not originate on this > >>earth. > >Now this is one piece of reality that you'll never see debated! As far as I know the Mexican Government has not made any official statements regarding the ET hypothesis. Did I miss something? > John, > > The reality is, if I may paraphrase, that, with rare exceptions, there > is no indication the ET hypothesis is taken seriously by the vast > majority of government officials, either within the USA or elsewhere. > >Here we have "official" government releases of information, some of > >it formidable as in the case of the Belgium government, (military, > >radar data, reports from credible sources on the ground -Gendarme- > >etc.) and yet it is still not taken as an "official announcement" > >that something 'out of the ordinary,'...'possibly not of this earth' > >is -hoopty doin it- in our skies. > The Belgium reference is a good example of the questionable data which > some government officials base their beliefs on. It could be pointed > out that rather than an ET origin, the reports of triangular UFOs > which proliferated from December 1989, might have a connection with > the unidentified isosceles-triangle shaped aircraft which recognition > expert Chris Gibson witnessed flying with a KC-135 Stratotanker and > two F-111s only three months previous. The open representation of the events that occurred in Belgium as announced by the BAF were in response to a specific incident in which 2 BAF F-16's tracked an unknown triangular object which was simultaneously monitored by ground radar that achieved a 1000 mph velocity traveling several miles from a standstill to 200+ feet decent in less than one second. This event was confirmed visually by the fighter pilots and by ground radar. The public disclosure of the event by the BAF would probably never have occurred if the circumstances were not as odd as they were. The BAF made absolutely no reference to an ET hypothesis but made assertions that seem to substantiate UFO reality. ROC member Chris Gibson's sighting of the black triangle under escort was made from an oil tanker in the North Sea. There is no evidence that I'm aware of to connect Gibson's sighting with the Belgian activity other than that they occurred in successive years. > Or that the F-16 radar data from the Belgium flap was _officially_ > explained by the Belgian Air force as ground clutter and no pilot ever > witnessed an actual object. This official explanation appears to have been superceded as of several months ago as the Belgian media reported that it had solved the 1990 OVNI mystery blaming the NASA Loflyte plane for initiating unauthorized testing in Belgian airspace. NASA categorically denied the allegation. > >About a year ago I put this same piece of information on the > >table in another thread Henny, the silence was deafening. It must > >be a hard set of facts to rationalize/debunk I guess! > The facts are that a few such individuals believe the ET hypothesis > to be true. No government which, as an entity, refutes the question > of ET visitations, and last I heard that was all of them, seems > currently troubled by any suggestion to the contrary. > Or would appear to give the matter more than a passing thought. As far as I know no government has said anything about an ET hypothesis for UFOs but the evidence that has surfaced over the years quite strongly suggests that many governments harbor a great deal of concern about some UFO's despite what they say officially. It seems like a waste of time to attempt to influence governments to develop theories regarding the nature of something which they offically deny the existance of. Jared.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 29 Re: Solved abduction cases? From: Whitewolf <witewolf@neptune.on.ca> [Paul Whitewolf] Date: Tue, 28 Oct 97 19:31:15 -0000 Fwd Date: Wed, 29 Oct 1997 23:20:34 -0500 Subject: Re: Solved abduction cases? Se-ko (Hello) Errol and list; >From: "R.Bull" <RAB@cadcentre.co.uk> [Rob Bull] >To: "'UFO UpDates'" <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Re: Solved abduction cases? >Date: Mon, 27 Oct 97 17:54:00 GMT >I remember reading an account of an "abductee" who was cured of >being abducted by a course of pills prescribed to him by his shrink. >I thought the account was either in Jim Schnabel's "Dark White" >or John Rimmer's "The Evidence For - Alien Abductions" but I can't >find it in either. >Any thoughts on this? >Rob Bull Hi Rob, It strikes me that given the right medication, any of us could forget about, or not a care about anything. Speaking as an experiencer with conscious memory of some of those events, I can assure you, there is no pill that will stop what is happening to me, but perhaps it could affect my memory of it... Regards, Paul Whitewolf. "If you can't laugh at yourself, you might be missing the joke of the century." ...Dame Edna, 1997.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 29 Re: Solved Abduction Cases? From: DevereuxP@aol.com [Paul Devereux] Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 20:18:38 -0500 (EST) Fwd Date: Wed, 29 Oct 1997 23:25:37 -0500 Subject: Re: Solved Abduction Cases? Chris Penrose wrote: >Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 18:59:23 +0900 (GMT+0900) >From: Chris Penrose <penrose@cmlab.sfc.keio.ac.jp> >To: updates@globalserve.net >Subject: Solved abduction cases? >>From: DevereuxP@aol.com [Paul Devereux] >>Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 02:15:28 -0400 (EDT) >>To: updates@globalserve.net >>Subject: Solved abduction cases? >>As part of this research, we are doing a deep and wide >>literature search. This spans not only lucid dream material, >>but ranges though various other categories, contemporary and >>historical,even including certain archaeological and >>ethnological material.It is clear without any shade of doubt >>that THE UFO ABDUCTION REPORT MATERIAL IS ONLY A >>SUB-GROUP OF A MUCH WIDER LITERATURE. >I have had assorted lucid dreaming experiences throughout my >life,often during daytime napping, and when I was younger at the >end of sleep. I am convinced this phenomenae exists. >Furthermore, it is possible that it is a literal explanation >for some reputed abduction experiences; however, there are >documented abduction cases involving witnesses, where the >experience is shared to some degree by groups of people. Lucid >dreaming is a very tenuous explanation for mass or group >hallucination. In my understanding, mass hallucination as an >explanation is folklore on to itself. >Perhaps Paul has some insight into some experimentally >demonstratable mechanisms that could account for groups of >people enter lucid dreaming states simultaneously, while still >telepathically interacting together and sharing, in essence, the >same experience. Perhaps Paul's explanation will be "any group >abduction experience is a hoax". This isn't a "straw man" Paul, >I just want to save you the trouble of saying this if you intend >to. I am not being facetious, I am interested in any mechanisms >that could potentially explain group experiences. Christopher Penrose Dear Christpopher, Thanks for your enquiry. A lucid dream (or out-of-body experience or any of such closely-related categories of mental states)is not a mere dream, but a powerful ly distinct altered state of consciousness. It is a mental model (*everything* we experience, even "waking reality", is a me ntal model-- the sunset you saw last night was produced inside the darkness of y our skull). That makes it as "real" as waking reality from an experiential point of view. If you truly have had lucid dreams (as opposed to mere vivid dreams), Christopher, you will know this to be true. We ain't talking about dreams as we normally understand that term. So "tenuous" doesn't come into it. Also, it is not a matter of believing in lucid dreams or not: they are a measurable phenomenon and accepted by science. That being said, the short answers to your queries are no and yes. No, I wouldn't classify all "group abductions" as hoax. Indeed not. When you read UFOS & UFOLOGY, you will see that we describe the unravelling of a 2-witness abduction case, with 7 hours of "missing time". The experients were quite genuine, but it wasn't an alien abduction. However, I would question just what percentage of reported alien abductions are multi-witness/ experient in any case. Does anyone know? I suspect it is small. Then one *does* have to ask how many of them are genuine, ie. non-hoaxes. *Then* one has to ask how many of the genuine reports hold up as alien abductions after the sort of analysis and enquiry described in our forthcoming book. I'd be intrigued to see how many we were left with. But I think there would be handful, maybe. That brings me onto your next point. Yes. There are cases of shared altered states of consciousness. The anthropological literature is scattered with such accounts. A recently reported case involves an anthropologist who had a dream while on fieldwork in a native village in Papua New Guinea. Before she even went outside the following morning, the village headwoman's sons arrived at the anthropologist's hut and started discussing her dream. She was flabbergasted. In a further series of dreams, she interacted with the woman and the sons in her dreams, and they were open about their knowledge of the anthropologist's dreams in which they participated. Such dream interaction successfully led to the discovery of archaeological ruins the anthropologist was interested in, but it profoundly disturbed her ideas about reality. The villagers called this phenomenon of visiting people in their dreams *griman*, and it wasn't unusual for them. The anthropologist wrote her journal on these matters in code (in case she was killed during fieldwork, she didn't want her academic peers to be able to read the accounts). It was some 14 years later that she took courage and announced the case at an anthropological conference, and, later, in a paper. She was surprised at how many colleagues told her they had experienced similar happenings. Clearly, there is a hell of a lot we still have to understand about the phenomena of consciousness. That is one reason I counsel against the automatic adoption of the ET literalist position -- it is so intellectually poverty-stricken! I think we are dealing with much greater matters than merely ETs. Whole new cognitive models have yet to be forged. The so-called alien abduction is but a bit player in these type of experiences. That can be found out by anyone taking the time and trouble to research the matter outside of the tight, narrow, and self-serving ET ufological literature. You do not have to take my word for it. I will, of course,be publishing material on all this in due course, if you find it difficult to know where to get started. Forgive me for not expounding at length here - my writing is my income. Best wishes, Paul
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 29 Re: Witness Anonymity From: "Clark Hathaway" <earthwrk@doitnow.com> Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 18:42:15 -0700 Fwd Date: Wed, 29 Oct 1997 23:31:10 -0500 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity > Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 20:55:21 +0000 > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk> > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Witness Anonymity > >From: "Clark Hathaway" <earthwrk@doitnow.com> > >To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net> > >Subject: Paranormal flavor of abduction. > >Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 20:22:22 -0700 > Hi Clarke Greetings Sean: > >Another point I would like to make is that I have been successful > >at stopping an abduction event during it's beginning. It has > >occurred on a number of occasions. > Would you care to enlighten us as to how? > >Clarke Hathaway Here is my squeak as it were. <chuckle> There are a number of ingredients to this ... more than a few that would seem to the uninformed to be absolutely New Age. None of us embody the exact same experiences so I believe that I would be engaging in guess work as to the actual components. Extremely important to these endeavors are heightened intuition with a bit of practical trust in it and an expanded sight or sense of awareness. Of paramount importance is the inner knowing that we each individually, create our own realities and thus are ultimately responsible for what happens to us. An understanding that collectively, it is all of us by general consensus, that create the overall general appearance of what surrounds us at any given time. Another part would be at least the beginning of ability to recognize when a belief system no longer serves and some control in changing it. A study of alternative history is also helpful. There exist many old metaphysical works that at least (if not point) hint at who and what these denizens (grays) are. They make for fascinating reading. It is my considered opinion based upon my own considerable personal experience, that the majority of these visitations are psychic in nature. That is, the are occurring on a level of reality other than experiential third dimensional reality. Further, I believe the majority of abduction experiencers to be people who may be a bit more expanded in awareness than can be counted as the norm. Since 1993 I have attended quite a few abduction experiencer support group meetings and have been afforded the opportunity of interviewing informally many more as I have made no secret publicly as to my experiences. Nearly each of these have shown a person that recognizes to varying degrees, an enhanced component of intuition within. Further, each one has developed a level of trust in this component. Almost to the person, they each have the inner knowing that they are alive for some reason that has not come to full blown realization yet, but is yet important. Sadly, these components lend the subject all too often into an over emphasized aura of self importance and ego. Thus, they become addicted to the attention that they receive from some quarters and are easily manipulated. On a more practical level, I would serve to remind that in the approaching forty (known and documented) years since this phenomena first came to light, there has not been a single incidence of one of these events being recorded by any media other than via hypnosis and after the fact. I feel that the same sort of equipment monitored/operated by a small dedicated crew from a remote location would yield some enlightening results. Those to man this endeavor would of course be parapsychologists using various equipment at their disposal already proven in cases of Ghosts and Poltergeists. I would challenge the Budd Hopkins, John Macks and others who are claimed to be such paragons of research ... to set up the conditions whereby these events could be recorded while they are unfolding. I would hasten to add that anything less from them is unacceptable. Many may consider my opinions of these pseudo researchers to be far too harsh. I stand my ground though when I state that it is my considered opinion that each of these appear to me to be more interested in their own notoriety, pumped up sense of self importance as well as any monetary gain that can be derived than they are in the overall welfare of their subjects. They are fools and they are dangerous. None of them realize the potential harm that could and does come to these folks. Each of these pseudo researchers serve to perpetuate the experiencer's role as that of a victim. Frankly, I find this sickening and deplorable. Kindest Regards, Clarke
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 29 Re: Questions for Abductees From: "Clark Hathaway" <earthwrk@doitnow.com> Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 19:23:43 -0700 Fwd Date: Wed, 29 Oct 1997 23:37:30 -0500 Subject: Re: Questions for Abductees > From: clark@canby.mn.frontiercomm.net [Jerome Clark} > Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 11:35:07 PST > To: updates@globalserve.net > Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Questions for Abductees > > > I will say, however, that from just about any point of view, > > > Keel and Vallee have shed far more darkness than light on > > > ufology's many vexing questions. Demonologist Keel has a > > > great 13th-century mind, and Vallee is incoherent when he > > > isn't being paranoia-addled, and vice versa. <snip> > > I have a great amount of difficulty with the E.T. hypothesis. I > > find that there is little if anything to support it. Appreciate > Clarke, Hello Jerome! > In fact, there is a great deal to support the ETH. So far it is > the most reasonable -- or, as Michael Swords has it, "natural" -- > provisional hypothesis which seeks to explain the hard-core > evidence: i.e., the stuff that emerges from CE2s, independently > and multiply witnessed cases, and so on. I urge you to read > Swords' "Extraterrestrial Hypothesis and Science" which is > included in my new book (pages 188-99). If you read the SETI > literature, you'll be surprised at how much state-of-the-art > thinking and speculation is consistent with what UFO witnesses > report -- though nearly all SETI people want nothing to do with > UFOs. (At least one -- John L. Casti -- has, however, sheepishly > conceded the similarities.) I appreciate the suggested bibliography, I'll look a bit further into it.:-) While I would agree the possibility of E.T. visitation being a portion of the equation, sources of information placed at my disposal would seem to indicate that this does not account for a majority of events. > Vallee is simply wrong when he suggests that the UFO question > is beyond science. Here he betrays his occult -- even anti- > rationalist -- sympathies. In any event, how would he know? <chuckle> Sheeeeesh, imagine. Myself and Vallee being lumped together. The esteemed Duke offers (mistakenly) that I AM an occultist. I suggest that he (Vallee) is a bit more broad minded and better read in some important avenues than are most "Nuts and Bolts" UFOlogists, Jerome. > For one thing, science has barely addressed the question. The > best cases, however, are eminently investigatable by traditional > scientific method; on those relatively rare instances where that > has happened, the results have been productive, and suggestive > not of paranormal phenomena but of hardware and technology. Would you agree that the video segments as recorded at Mexico City during the past five years constitute some of this evidence? I find them to be extremely interesting. From my point of view for instance, I find it extremely interesting that as seen from a distance the video tape would seem to show objects that are metallic and solid. Zooming in on them however, reveals something altogether different. They seeming solid object becomes hazy and indistinct. > Next year, for example, will see the publication of an in-depth > investigation of a seminal case where the operation of an > extraordinary technology can be demonstrated in a way that's > going to shock everybody who's paying attention. I will be looking forward to this. > We are wrong, in my opinion, in making an automatic link between > daylight discs and (say) men in black. We may be carelessly > lumping a lot of things that really have nothing to do with the > core UFO phenomenon under the general rubric of "UFO activity." I would be the first in line to agree with this. I would hasten to add moreover, that there exists NO evidence circumstantial or otherwise to tie labeled alien abductions and UFO sighting events together. > As I have put it (see the intro to my 1993 book Unexplained!), we > could usefully look at events as opposed to experiences. A > radar/visual of a daylight disc is an event; an encounter with > MIB, however anomalous, is only an experience which exists solely > in memory and testimony (albeit highly anomalously in some > instances). Yup, I have absolutely NO problem with that. Of note is the fact that at the young age of 9 while residing in the coastal hills community of San Miguel, California, I and my boyhood buddy Eddie witnessed not one, but two of these objects hovering at perhaps no more than 300' late one summer morning. This happened in 1952. As I much later discovered, my father (a career Army officer) worked for Army Intelligence. When we excitedly burst the news of the day's events to him, he admonished Eddie that he really hadn't seen anything of importance except perhaps a new aircraft under development. Eddie was advised to keep quiet about it. I was flat told to keep it to myself. As I recall, it was a few days later when an (convenient) Air Force Major friend showed at the door and introduced himself. I was given an over three hour grilling. The Major was a bit surprised that I could roughly gauge distance by estimation based upon known landmarks. The objects cast definite shadows onto the valley floor between two prominent hills. I estimated that they were located within a quarter mile of our position. The end result of this interview was that I was told that I hadn't observed anything and that were I foolish enough to relate these events that I didn't witness to anyone at anytime, not only would my hindend be in serious trouble, but my father's as well. I would be among the first to profess belief that these events (UFO sightings) occur within perceived third dimensional reality. How could I not given the above related experience as well as others in later years? What I take exception to though, is the notion that the majority of these constitute "Nuts and Bolts" craft. Kindest Regards... Clarke
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 29 Re: Millennium Raises Hopes, Fears From: Whitewolf <witewolf@neptune.on.ca> [Paul Whitewolf] Date: Tue, 28 Oct 97 21:54:45 -0000 Fwd Date: Wed, 29 Oct 1997 23:42:24 -0500 Subject: Re: Millennium Raises Hopes, Fears Se-ko (Hello) Errol and list; regarding: >Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 08:45:28 -0500 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Bob Shell <76750.2717@compuserve.com> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Millennium Raises Hopes, Fears >>From: RGates8254@aol.com [Robert Gates] >>Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 17:45:53 -0500 (EST) >>To: updates@globalserve.net >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Millennium Raises Hopes, Fears >> My personal opinion is the 2nd coming will happen at some >>point in the future BUT, I am probably more likely to meet >>Christ, should I get killed in a automobile accident then I am >>sitting around reading various books, by various experts all >>fingering this or that date as being the one. >>Cheers, >>Robert >Robert, >Second coming????? Most of humanity is still awaiting the first >coming. < unkind snip of good information> >The only thing likely to increase as we come near to the year >2001 is insanity on the part of "fundamentalist" Christians. >Bob Dear Bob, First of all, re: the fundamentalist Christians - I think you're right, they scare me personally and I do not feel brotherly love from them. Second, as an abductee I know that not only myself but other experiencers have either been shown - or as a result of their experiences - have been left with a deep overwhelming sense that great suffering may well befall humanity within our lifetimes. Dealing with issues like this are very difficult for abductee's. It can be a rather strong and profound part of the experience, and not one that anybody would like to bring up at the dinner table. Considering this recurring pattern of messages to abductee's, at a time in history (the end of millenium) where apocolyptic fever would naturally affect a segment of the population, would it be useful for us to look at the possibility of such things from a different perspective than a wholly Christian/Moslem/Buddhist/Taoist/(include religion of your choice) one? It is a scientific possibility that any of the above could occur. Regards, Paul Whitewolf. "If you can't laugh at yourself, you might be missing the joke of the century." ...Dame Edna, 1997. Search for other documents from or mentioning: witewolf | 76750.2717 |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 30 Re: Questions for Abductees From: Peregrine Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith] Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 22:10:18 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 00:07:20 -0500 Subject: Re: Questions for Abductees The Duke of Mendoza presents his compliments. > From: wlmss@peg.apc.org [Lawrie Williams] > Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 23:50:34 +1000 (GMT+1000) > To: updates@globalserve.net > Subject: Re: Questions for Abductees. Like others in this discussion I have this paranormal precognition that no one is going to make much of an impression on Lawrie Williams's sense of righteousness, but there are couple of exceptionally tasty bits in this one that I don't want to let pass without brief comment. I'm quoting them out of order for rhetorical emphasis. > be reasonable. But I see Peter has turned his attack on the girls > themselves. Anything for a thrill and a giggle I suppose. I was rather under the impression that I was trying to defend the girls from unnecessary upset, of course, but perhaps I was mistaken and was supporting Lawrie W. all the time without knowing it; being like Milton a true poet and unwittingly of the Devil's party... > [...] And at least you are > a cut about [sic] Peter B, with his reliance on personal attacks. [This was directed at Michael Malone, and let it be known I have no objection to being regarded by anyone as a cut below him.] But consider this: A gent of our acquaintance happens upon a scene of depravity and violence featuring a hapless lady and a member - it would seem - of the criminal classes. The gent dimly recognizes the lady. Duke: Dammit, sir, you are raping my wife. Duchess: Help! Help! Duke: One moment madam. And please adjust your dress. You will catch your death in this fog. Perp: And you get that swordstick out of my neck. Bleedin' toff. Duke: And you get that... Gad, this is heinous crime you are committing, sir. And there is no need to descend to abuse. Sow, and ye shall reap, and all that. Perp: Oh yeah? Listen mate. I'm just doin' my job. Are you tellin' me how to do my job? Duke: My dear fellow, far be it from me... Duchess: Help? Help? Perp: Tosser. I bet you never had a proper job in your life. Duke: True. But rape is rape, you know. And this is my wife. Perp: So what? You could cut my head off with that thing. Ouch. Duke: I've had a better idea. The Duke is, of course, entirely out of order, in concentrating his ire on a moral outrage and failing to understand that his intervention may cause pain to the perpetrator. One feels sure that a court would award the rapist damages for loss of dignity, at the very least. We live in interesting times. But I think my all-time favorite will be this: > Of course your statistics [...] will be only > tenuously connected with our situation over here. Mmm. So Oz abductions are different from those in the USA, the UK, the Seychelles? Egypt? Tierra del Fuego? Mongolia? Now here is something to stretch even the talents of Chief Eddie Hard Bull. If only one knew more... Yours &c Patience D. Monument "It all works out innuendo"
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 30 Re: Questions for Abductees From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net> Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 20:54:09 -0600 (CST) Fwd Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 00:01:09 -0500 Subject: Re: Questions for Abductees >Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 11:43:20 -0600 (CST) >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Questions for Abductees >If it takes a village to raise a planet, it may take a universe >to raise a habitable planet on which intelligent life ultimately >arises. This is what happens when you're trying to be clever. Of course I meant to say "If it takes a village to raise a _child_..." etc. >But I really feel like I'm doing Davis a disservice by talking >about his article when he deserves to be read in his own words. See above. Dennis
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 30 Crop Circle Connector #48 From: Mark Fussell <mjfussell@marque.demon.co.uk> Date: Wed, 29 Oct 1997 03:55:55 Fwd Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 00:14:04 -0500 Subject: Crop Circle Connector #48 Hi WHAT`S NEW on the Crop Circle Connector at:- http://alpha.mic.dundee.ac.uk/ft/crop_circles/anasazi/whatsnew.html Updated Monday 27th October 1997 (Members 2246) ******************************************************************* DELUXE, GLOSSY 1998 CROP CIRCLE CALENDAR *****BUY NOW BEFORE THE CHRISTMAS RUSH***** EMAIL TO RESERVE YOUR CALENDAR NOW Stunning 30x40 photographs of the 1997 formations with the Calender in four different languages for that International appeal! Special notice: The last air mail date for the calendar to be dispatched before Christmas is 6th of December, where else, this date will be the 13th of December, so please send your orders asap, so not to miss this deadline. email for details:- calendar@marque.demon.co.uk ***************************************** ilyes Presents Czech Witnesses Field Experience Supports Bol Generation of Formations A fascinating interview within the Koch 2 at Milk Hill with a party of Czech's who witnessed Balls of Lights on the night the Grand Finale of the season appeared. See ilyes Homepage ***************************************** New Canadian Crop Circle Photographs See link to MUFON UFO NETWORK **************************************** Utah Crop Circle Draws the Crowds This Crop Circle formation in this beautiful part of America is intriguing, as it incoporates a UFO sighting, and conspiracy thrown in as well. A must read! See International Crop Circles 1997 ************************************** All the best Stuart & Mark * The Koch Fractal, Silbury Hill, 1997 :/\: .-- --. . :\ /: . *__/\__/ \__/\__* :\ /: ./__ __\. Mark Fussell: ':\ /:' mailto:mjfussell@marque.demon.co.uk .'__/ \__'. \ / Subscribe: :/_ __ __ _\: news:alt.paranormal.crop-circles * :\/: \ / :\/: * . :/ \: . The Crop Circle Connector Web Site at: .-- --. http://www.marque.demon.co.uk/connector/connector.html :\/: *
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 30 Re: Questions for Abductees From: Penrose Christopher <penrose@sfc.keio.ac.jp> Date: Wed, 29 Oct 97 16:01:13 +0900 Fwd Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 08:02:28 -0500 Subject: Re: Questions for Abductees >Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 09:02:58 -0500 >From: Peregrine Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith] >Subject: Questions for Abductees >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >The Duke of Mendoza presents his compliments. >>From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net> >>To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net> >>Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Questions for Abductees >>Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 17:43:42 -0500 >>Somebody else >>could just as reasonably -- or, really, just as unreasonably -- >>assume that alien visits are extremely likely, and therefore >>invoke Occam's Razor to suggest that UFO sightings are caused by >>aliens. The reasoning is equally silly on both sides, and equally >>prejudiced. >This is crackers and confused, but it's possible that a lack of >clarity on my part, in the first place, has contributed to that. >Occam's razor is to do with the number of assumptions, >hypotheses, entities, what you will, required to explain a given >phenomenon. Whether *or not* ET is out there, you multiply >hypotheses inevitably and inexorably if you want to argue that >even one of all the teeming millions of genuinely UFOs reported >is ET. The likelihood of there being any ETs at all is a separate >discussion, but it is, of course, an arm of a pincer movement. >This doesn't crack or annihilate the ETH, but it puts it under >enormous pressure - pressure it does not even remotely receive >from the average UFO buff or even some top-of-the-heap UFO buffs >whom we all know and love. Ockham's Razor is a bogus tool virally perpetuated by self-deceived sophists. Sure we can count the assumptions that surround the ETH (Extra-terrestrial hypothesis), discarding them with some sort of voodoo probabilistic weighting, "this one has got to go!", but such activity is thoroughly unscientific. (However, such behavior is the epitome of "scientism"). If science acts as a rigid, self-preserving edifice, which is not conscious of its own dogmas and potential inadequacies, then science is lost. Somebody turn a light on; stop sitting in the dark slashing your wrists with Ockham's razor. "Likelihood" cannot be adequately measured. Anyone couching their argument in terms of the "likelihood" of the ETH is delusional. The ETH is not so much experiencing scientific pressure as it is revealing a huge vacuum in science. Mr. Hubble, orbitting above us, has caused many a scientist to redefine their perceived bounds of the universe; this was the simple result of catching light before it was mediated by Earth's atmosphere. Should we speculate upon other mediational forces that alter our understanding of the universe? We only have so much information describing our universe(s), and it should be obvious that the information regarding its nature and bounds is enormously incomplete and tainted by partially known and perhaps even unknown mediating phenomenae. To use this infinitesmal pool of information, which is quite questionable itself, to concoct a scientistic, "quantitative" probability that intelligent extraterrestial civilizations exist, is insanely speculative. I recommend that individuals so inclined to scientism read (or reread as you obviously missed the point) Charles Fort. There is little "pressure" upon the ETH here beyond the ego-maintenance concern of status-quo scientists. We simply do not know what the truth is regarding this phenomenae. Let's play with this so called pressure on the ETH a little bit more: If a hypothesis violates what science claims to understand, and it is said that this so-called understanding within science applies a negtaing pressure to this hypothesis, it can be said that an equal and opposite negating pressure is applied upon what science claims to understand. :) Peter gives a synopsis of Davies: > All this means is that a scientist can work only with the materials > to hand. And such a state of affairs is a grave limitation at scientific method that we all must endure. (I use 'at' as Peter stole my preposition :). Our blindness does not miraculously invalidate possibilities. >a wormhole, at least, doesn't violate what we understand to be >the laws of nature, but are (for now) prohibitively expensive to >create from scratch. Prohibitive for us, but not necessarily prohibitive for some other hypothetical alien intelligence. You seem to be blind yourself to the "blindingly obvious" -- being that we don't truly know what is possible or not. Our science has been principally developed from Terran observations. Many of us share the belief that the universe is a just a little bit bigger, and hence less understood, than our own playground. Most of us agree that the ETH is not truth. It is hypothesis. But it is the act of a closed-minded tunnel-reality fetishist to slam the door on the theory when there isn't incontrovertible evidence against it, given the infancy of our science, and a floodgate of folklore suggesting it. The folklore may suggest other explanations. What may be interesting is to actually explore some of these alternatives (earth lights for UFOs, lucid dreaming for abduction et al) extensively, rather than perpetually jabbing at ETH with trivial sophistry. The lack of a cogent presence of such alternate hypotheses helps resonate (for better or worse) ETH even more. Christopher Penrose penrose@sfc.keio.ac.jp Search for other documents from or mentioning: penrose | 101653.2205 |
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 30 Re: Questions for Abductees From: William.Hamilton@pcsmail.pcshs.com Date: 29 Oct 1997 15:03:08 UT Fwd Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 08:10:36 -0500 Subject: Re: Questions for Abductees >From: clark@canby.mn.frontiercomm.net [Jerome Clark} >Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 11:35:07 PST >To: updates@globalserve.net >Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Questions for Abductees >> From: "Clarke Hathaway" <earthwrk@doitnow.com> >> To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net> >> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Questions for Abductees >> Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 18:19:24 -0700 > > From: clark@canby.mn.frontiercomm.net [Jerome Clark] > > Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 18:11:53 PST > > To: updates@globalserve.net > > Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Questions for Abductees > > I will say, however, that from just about any point of view, > > Keel and Vallee have shed far more darkness than light on > > ufology's many vexing questions. Demonologist Keel has a > > great 13th-century mind, and Vallee is incoherent when he > > isn't being paranoia-addled, and vice versa. I urge you to > > read my essay on "Paranormal and Occult Theories about > > UFOs" in my just-published (and available at your local > > bookstore) trade paperback The UFO Book, or the much- > > extended discussions to appear in the second edition of my > > UFO Encyclopedia (due out in January 1998). > I have a great amount of difficulty with the E.T. hypothesis. I > find that there is little if anything to support it. Appreciate > Vallee or not, he is correct when he infers that the UFO question > is not one which science is equipped to solve. Having a limited > military intelligence background, I can appreciate it when he > states that it is an Intelligence problem. >In fact, there is a great deal to support the ETH. So far it is >the most reasonable -- or, as Michael Swords has it, "natural" -- >provisional hypothesis which seeks to explain the hard-core >evidence: i.e., the stuff that emerges from CE2s, independently >and multiply witnessed cases, and so on. I urge you to read >Swords' "Extraterrestrial Hypothesis and Science" which is >included in my new book (pages 188-99). If you read the SETI >literature, you'll be surprised at how much state-of-the-art >thinking and speculation is consistent with what UFO witnesses >report -- though nearly all SETI people want nothing to do with >UFOs. (At least one -- John L. Casti -- has, however, sheepishly conceded the similarities.) I have to agree with Jerry Clark here as far as hard core CE2 and some CE3 sightings. The strength of ETH is increasing with new discoveries. NASA has now instituted a search for earth-like planets orbiting other stars. NASA's breakthrough physics program is a creative attempt to find means of fast travel to the stars even entertaining speculative, but grounded hypothesis on FTL (faster- than-light) travel. Each new advance in science and technology gives credence to the idea that ETs can come here from out there. The UFO phenomena is not something beyond the reach of scientific study. There has been little scientific effort or commitment to such a study. I would also leave room for extraordinary vehicles and beings that could enter our familiar physical world from extradimensional worlds. The very idea of other-dimensional worlds and parallel universes has been the subject of much creative speculation among physicists as well as a recent spate of interest in time travel. Perhaps some of what is being labled as UFO phenomena has an extradimensional flavor to it. However, Vallee seems to want to lump all UFO phenomena into this category while others are willing to embrace both the ETH and extradimensional origin hypothesis as a possiblity. There are those, of course, who will believe these hypotheses to be far too exotic for their tastes and will continue to seek mundane solutions for extraordinary phenomena. Sincerely, Bill Hamilton Search for other documents from or mentioning: william.hamilton | clark
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 30 Re: Questions for Abductees From: Peregrine Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith] Date: Wed, 29 Oct 1997 09:01:35 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 08:14:13 -0500 Subject: Re: Questions for Abductees The Duke of Mendoza presents his compliments. >From: clark@canby.mn.frontiercomm.net [Jerome Clark} >Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 11:35:07 PST >To: updates@globalserve.net >Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Questions for Abductees I see Jerome, at least, has not lost his sense of humor on his way down Canby Mountain with his latest tablet of stone. Dear me, two immense occasions for guffaws in as many paragraphs. >In fact, there is a great deal to support the ETH. So far it is >the most reasonable -- or, as Michael Swords has it, "natural" -- >provisional hypothesis which seeks to explain the hard-core >evidence: i.e., the stuff that emerges from CE2s, independently >and multiply witnessed cases, and so on. "In fact". This enquiring mind would appreciate knowing of what such facts may consist. "Reasonable" in what form of logic? "Natural" in what sense? >Vallee is simply wrong when he suggests that the UFO question >is beyond science. Here he betrays his occult -- even anti- >rationalist -- sympathies. In any event, how would he know? I vaguely recall that the witch-doctor Jacques did his level best to apply some scientific principles in "Challenge to Science" and "Anatomy of a Phenomenon". Not much anti-rationalism there. Can it be that Magic Jacques reached his conclusion through frustrating experience? >For one thing, science has barely addressed the question. The >best cases, however, are eminently investigatable by traditional >scientific method; And *why*, do you suppose, has science barely addressed the question? And perhaps Jerome could demonstrate just which parts of the scientific method have been applied - scientifically - to which cases? Or even one? I am especially looking forward to reading about all those repeated and independently verified experiments that burden the pages of the scientific or even the ufological literature. I'm not, however, looking forward to reading the whole of this post over again when Jerome replies. Could you find out how to highlight and cut the superfluous bits first, please, Jerry? Nearly everyone else manages to abide by this simple requirement in this List's posting rules. Thanks. best wishes Parsimonious D. Mandrake Cheshire Cat
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 30 Re: Alfred's Odd Ode #194 From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com> Date: Wed, 29 Oct 1997 06:01:36 -0600 Fwd Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 08:15:48 -0500 Subject: Re: Alfred's Odd Ode #194 Apology to MW #194 (For October 29, 1997) ONE is a joke 'til you see its ID, Then it's truly _the_ number to set you so free. If the last number is 'even', then TWO will sure work; And keep going =91til 'odd' to do math like a clerk. When the sum in a number is divided by THREE? The whole number is THREE=92S, that=92s for free, can you see? And FOUR is too easy, take the last two alone. . . If divided by FOUR, then FOUR takes it home. If FIVE is the number -- look for five, or a zero. The last number I=92m meaning, then FIVE is the hero. SIX is a number you don=92t use for free =96 As divided by SIX -- works with two AND WITH three. SEVEN is weird, so divide long 'til later, Seven has its own song, but use a calculator. EIGHT is like four =96 but where four was "last two," EIGHT=92S is last three, and on that you must chew. And NINE is the easiest -- did it satisfy three? The rule is the same, that=92s for free, ask the "T". For TEN to work wonder, the last number is zero; But that=92s a no brainer, for this you=92re no hero! ELEVEN breaks the number into odd and even columns Add apart =96 but then subtract the small one from the big one If eleven divides this smaller number, the whole number is eleven=92s This is how you work your will as ELEVEN=92S number maven. Twelve and thirteen get pretty big, so use the calculator. Or long divide, it=92s up to you. Hang on, it's getting better! This is ALL your divided by's =96 with these you=92re making time! But go warp speed, and skip a step -- start using only *prime*!!! Don't get your chubby bunches in a flap of insurrection! They're two, and three and five and seven -- eleven, thirteen >>> Heaven! Lehmberg@snowhill.com You know=85I'll bet that infinity is a prime number=85 The poetic approach is always useful <g>. In it are found seeds of metaphor, and the warm water of necessity. They come from the heart, and even filtered through convention are more *real* than the hard prose =85 unless the prose was written with poetry in mind? What's the ufological reference! Where is the ubiquitous tie in? It's about getting as many over the hurdle as you can, and actively seeking ways to continue respect for those that will not make it over your hurdle. If there are too many people to give that consideration to then what is needed is less people. I wonder that the news _is all bad_ that human fertility rates have fallen off as high as 50%. When we cop to that -- the UFO's begin to get explained. We're not looking. If we really look, we find. We better start really looking. -- Explore the Alien View? http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/arecibo/46/ "I cleave the heavens, and soar to the infinite. What others see from afar, I leave far behind me." - Giordano Bruno, while burning at the fundamentalist's stake for wanting to do some actual looking. =B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1= =B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1= =B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1=B1 Government or Social Harassment REPORT - Presently, "ZERO" Personal HARASSMENT; however, the harassment index is infinite for each of us. Consider what is not considered.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 30 Re: 'The Gulf Breeze Paper' From: c549597@showme.missouri.edu [Barbara Becker] Date: Wed, 29 Oct 1997 12:57:54 -0600 Fwd Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 08:28:45 -0500 Subject: Re: 'The Gulf Breeze Paper' > Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 08:49:58 -0500 > From: bruce maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com> > Subject: UFO UpDate: 'The Gulf Breeze Paper' > Sender: bruce maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com> > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > >>From: c549597@showme.missouri.edu [Barbara Becker] > >>Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 22:52:27 -0500 > >>TO: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: 'The Gulf Breeze Paper' > >(FROM BSM 10/18/97) To the 1 or 2 people following this discussion: > >Here is my latest respose to Barbara's criticism of the Ed Walters case. > <snip> > > > HERE IS MY COMMENT ON HER PAPER: I am aware that the GB skeptics > > > have tried, unsuccessfully, to discredit all the other witnesses. > > > There are about a dozen Gulf Breeze witnesses who say explicitly > > > that they saw what was in Ed's photos. > > **** BB: There were NONE that came forward before Ed and only > > ONE, a man named Thompson, who described and drew a picture > > similar to Ed's. > The fact is that over a dozen people came forward within the 8 > months following Ed's initial report. Presumably no one twisted their > arms or otherwise forced them to make their statements to the effect > that they saw the same object. I realize this is a bitter pill for the > skeptics to swallow, but if you took Ed completely out of the picture > you would still have an amazing series of sightings. Quite likely > they would have not been reported as early as November, 1987 if > Ed hadn't published his pictures. However, by March, 1988 there > had been so many sightings that it is quite likely that someone > would have called the UFO hotline by that time, or otherwise > alerted UFO investigators. In other words, in my opinion, even in > the absence of Ed, the flap that took place in the spring of 1988 > in Gulf Breeze would have been recognized as it was occurring. > Presumably there would have been some publicity and then > investigators would have learned about the sightings that took > place in November, December 1987 and January and February, 1988. > And many of the witnesses reported the basic key features: a > round object with a bright ring on the bottom and a light on the > top. Some reported other key features as well. The problem with their reports is that there was too much time between Ed's photos hitting the newspaper and these people coming forward. In ANY OTHER case, these reports would be viewed skeptically. But, in the Ed Walters case, everything the investigators knew to do, doesnt seem like it was done. ( I don't care WHAT Don Ware's reason was for showing Ed Walters the Billy Meier video and other UFO books the first week in December, it was not correct procedure.) > >>>>>>BSM, 10/17/97: The following people stated they saw a UFO > > like or the same as what appeared in Ed's photos (list taken > > from GULF BREEZE WITHOUT ED, a paper presented at the 1991 MUON > > Symposium): > >*****BB I have many of these reports. Unfortunately, with the > >exception of Thompson, the other sketches of witnesses in 1987, are > >NOT identical to Walters UFo. ANd once again, most of the reports > >were taken much later. > Your requirement of "identicality" reminds me of similar > fallacious reasoning by the writers of Project Blue Book Special > Report #14. <snip> > Your reasoning could be used to achieve the same result with the > Gulf Breeze sightings. You could state that because the > witnesses did not all report exactly the same thing they probably > saw nothing at all... or at least no flying saucers. This has NOTHING to do with MY reasoning. Ive been in this long enough to know that no two reports of THE SAME OBJECT will be reported IDENTICALLY. When I hear people saying that they have seen the SAME object, I am suspicious. BTW: You apparently forget that even in your corresondence to me it is YOU who state that these other GB witnesses saw the SAME UFO as Ed. That seemed to be a way for you and they to validate what Walters claimed he saw. As far as I know, from the documentation I have, no one drew anything IDENTICAL to Walters, the pictures look more like a bastardized version of Walters. The reports were taken much too late not to rule out mis remembering what (if anything) these people DID see. Here are a few tidbits from your 1991 Symposium Paper. See, I HAVE read it. p.190/ "Mr. Art Hufford had stated publicly and unequivocally that what he saw was exactly the same thing as shown in the pictures." Bruce Maccabee. (The Huffords did not make their report until March 1988.) p.189/ In a letter to the GBS, Billie Zammit claimed she saw "this same object", as the photo in the newspaper. p.189 / Jeff Thompson, (whose report I find compelling but would like it better if he had not waited 6 months to make a formal report), said that what he saw was "similar". p. 189 / Doris and Charles Somerby, Duane Cooks' parents, and former editor of the GBS, said '"what I saw on Vaterans's Day night , (November 11) was exactly what was depicted in the pictures published in the GBS."' > So, what is it, Barbara? Do you accept ANY of the sightings in > the November 1987 - July 1988 time frame (when Ed was taking > these pictures), or do you reject them all? As I said previously, I find Thmopson's report compelling, but I would have liked it to have been taken when the event was fresher in his mind. <snip> > Its not enough to have an overall similar or even identical > shape, plus a bright ring on the bottom? Just because the "windows" > don't show in every photo by other people doesn't mean the objects > aren't the same. Thats the point. I WOULDNT EXPECT THEM TO. I agree. > Hence a verbal report which mentions the key details (overall shape, > bright ring on bottom, light on top) should not be rejected simply > because it doesn't include all the details shown in Ed's pictures > Also, even many of Ed's recent pictures (since 1992)show objects which > are not identical in shape to the ones he photographed in 1987-88. I dont reject them. I reject Ed Walters photos as published in GBS. They are just too damn perfect. > > snip> > > Persons who wrote to Ed in response to the publication of his first > > book, THE GULF BREEZE SIGHTINGS to say they saw the same or a > > similar thing: > > Clarence Barrons( "they are almost identical to the one I > > saw on Nov. 14, 1971....in Mississippi), Cliff Baer ("I saw that > > same object appear from behind some trees years ago...in the back > > woods of Pennsylvania), Helen Brown (Crestview...30 miles from > > gulf Breeze....in summer of 1954....there were three objects just > > like the one in your photo 19...) , John Duquette (I saw the > > Gulf Breeze UFO back in 1976...felt I must have been hallucinating), > > Randy Duke (...Nov. 1991....saw the UFO in photo 23...), Carol Parks > > (..I've seen this thing too....craft seemed almost as wide as the <snip> > > *****BB Bruce you can personally attest that you have seen each and > >every one of these letters, and that they are written differently > >different people? Afterall, you co-authored a book with this man, > >surely you wanted to see for yourself what was being sent. > I have not seen all these, but have seen many letters...all from > different locations. Different writing. Ed saved the > envelopes..all different addresses and postmarks. Which photos letter and envelopes have you personally seen? Do you have copies for your records? <snip> > > Your comment, "Oddly enough, they are from around Costa Rica, > > where Walters said he and his wife and children lived for a > > while." is really a useless statement. Only two photos taken by > > one man during one sighting are from the vicinity of Costa Rica, > > and that sighting was in Guatemala. > > ****BB Are you saying that this person's sighting was reported in a > >newspaper, thus recorded and the time and place of the sighting is > >recorded? > Barbara, you can read as well as I. Look at page 149 of UFOS ARE > REAL.. and read the press story of the sightings. However, so > far as I know this witness never reported his particular sighting > to the press. However, according to the witness it was the press > stories which got his attention and he went to the sighting area > to see if he would see anything. Not only did he see, he photographed. I realize that, but I would think more highly of that particular photograph if it were fixed in time by an independnet source. > > Furthermore, Ed and family lived in Costa Rica in the 1970's and > > the Guatemala photos were taken in 1989. Perhaps you are > > suggesting that Ed created a hoax UFO in Costa Rica in the middle > > 1970's and then it somehow got into Guatemala and fooled people > > ten or more years later? > >****BB I really dont know what you are saying here but...Has this > >one been in the newspaper? Which of the South American reports > >and sightings were recorded in a newspaper at the time of the > >sighting? > See my response above to the previous comment. Which of the South American reports/pictures used in the book are fixed in time by an independent source? > <magnum sbnip> > > >**** BB: Anyone with the slimmest doubt was kept away from this > > > case. No skeptics allowed...only believers. > > >>>>>BSM: 10/17/97 Skeptics including Willy SMith, Bob Boyd, Ray > > Stanford had access to data and their reports prove that the did. > > However, it is true that after they went public with their > > positive claims of hoax before the investigation was completed, > >****BB Before it was completed? MUFON went public BEFORE the > >investigation was completed!!! Andrus even said he was breaking > >precedent. > Yes, MUFON did a stupid thing and went public saying that the > case seemed to be real (as did Hopkins) in February and March, > 1988. This was after numerous interviews of Ed and reports from > many other witnesses. > >> and even before the sightings were over, they began to lose > >> contact with the main investigation. HOwever, that did not > >> stop them from gathering their own data and loudly proclaiing > >> their conclusions. > >****BB According to you the sightings are still going on. Would > >that mean that nothing should have been, nor should ever be, > >written about GB until the last red light dies? > Really, Barbara, this makes no sense. > BB Should I have said, till the last flare falls? > You know as well as I (or you should know) that the first period > of sightings was clearly delineated by the history of events. > The first period was from November 11, 1987 through July, 1988. > After that the sighting rate dropped to near zero. The > sightings in that time period form a "closed set" or a > "macrocosm" of the events and can be analyzed independently of > whatever came afterward. And, in fact, they have been treated > that way. Hence July 1988 was a good time for a report on what > had happened. Had the critics waited until I had presented by > MUFON paper at the 1988 symposium they would have know what > arguments they had to refute in order to prove a hoax. > Instead they proceded on their own. Perhaps you don't recall (or > never knew) abou Ray Stanford getting egg all over his face in > April, 1988, <snip> I know about Stanford...but I also know that it was Andrus who made a proclamation about rain in one of the photos, so anyone, with bad info can open mouth and insert foot. > <snip> The following was a paid political announcement. <snip> > > > The person Tommy "came forward" to with his story was his > > > father. According to his father, lawyer Thomas Smith, at a press > > > conference in June, 1990, Tommy told him in late 1987 of a UFO > > > sighting with pictures. According to Thomas Smith, a few days or > > > weeks later Tommy told him the pictures had been faked by Ed.snip > > >At the press conference Mr. Smith was careful to avoid criticizing > > >any of the other Gulf Breeze witnesses, including those who claimed > > >to have seen exactly the same thing have seen exactly the same > > >thing that Ed photographed. There you go with the "same thing Ed photographed"... > > > Tommy's photos were analyzed. Tommy had claimed that Ed had faked > > > them by double exposure methods. > > BSM: 10/17/97 Readers: note well the following paragraph: > > > However, analysis revealed no evidence of double exposure and, > > > in fact, the photos appeared to be just single exposures, not > > > double exposures as Tommy had indicated. The shape and color of > > > the depicted UFO was consistent with what Ed had photographed. > >****BB It should be, Ed took the photograph. > Evidently you don' understand. I'll try again, The proof that Ed > faked the pictures that Tommy gave to the Sheriff was ***supposed > to be** the evidence that it was a double exposure, according to > T. Smith. But there is no evidence of a double exposure. > Hence your claim "Ed took the photographs" is not proved by the > photographs. Who analyzed the photogrpahs? Please dont tell me you did. <snip> > > > could be guilty of nonfeasance of duty to inform the public, > > > inasmuch as there was a lot of interest in the sightings at the > > > time. > > >**** BB: I cant speak for any of these people but everyone makes > > >a bad call once in while...even you Bruce. > > >>>>>Yeah me.....and even You, Barbara. > > ****BB Bruce. The above line is childish. > Yeah, so is the above line. Ya! Well, mom always liked you better!!!!! > > > 4) Here is my comment on her paper: > > > This discussion about the copyright does not prove Ed > > > created the Bill and Jane photos. Hence Barbara's claim that > <big snip> > > > "this demonstrates his ability...." is also not proven. In > > >>>>>BSM: 10/17/97 When it comes to deciding who's right, you > > grasp for legalities is you wish; I'll stick to the physical > > analysis. > >****BB Your physical analysis can be wrong. Law, at least this > >copyright law, is very specific. And it VERY specifically says > >that if Ed Walters owns the copyright to the B&J photos, AND he > >does not have a transfer agreement, which he doesnt, the he MUST > >BE THE PHOTOGRAPHER. > Physical analysis can be wrong.....and the law can't be wrong? > Can lawyers repeal the "laws" of optics and photography? But we > are talking about diverse things here. I claim that the photos > which Ed claims to have taken were not hoaxed by Ed...and several > of them contain images which could not have been hoaxed by Ed for > reasons outlined in UFOS ARE REAL..... Also, I claim there were > many other witnesses to the same type of UFO. Hence, I claim the > photos and sightings are real > You claim that Ed broke the law if he published the Bill and Jane > photos without owning the rights to those photos. > >But to arrive at your conclusion you must assume Ed (and his lawyers) > >would be smart enough not to break the law. Oh, pullleeeese. Dont go through this "Ed's too stupid to..." routine. > Therefore he would have transfer agreements with Bill and Jane to > protect himself against a lawsuit... or else he took the photos > himself. "By Goerge, you've got it!" > Since he has no transfer agreements you conclude that he > must have taken the photos himself. (But then he would be a liar > because he said someone else took them, and this lie then carries > over into the other sightings... etc.)' You're smarter than I thought. > BUT....WHAT IF ED DID BREAK THE LAW IN PUBLISHING BILL AND JANE'S > PHOTOS? Ed doesn't think he broke the law. Ed's lawyer doesn't > think he broke the law.Morrow's lawyer doesn't think he broke the > law. But, according to you, if he is telling the truth HE BROKE > THE LAW. SHAME ON ED!!!! Well, as I have suggested (challenged > you) in the past, if you really think he broke the law in > publishing the photos, the sue him on behalf of Bill and Jane! But I dont think he broke the law. I think he owns the copyright (ie didnt break law) because he took the pictures. He is perfectly legal. There is nothing to sue. > <snip> > > >BB: ENDING COMMENT: Hey Bruce....Is Ed dead????? If nothow > > >about calling him on the phone (surely you have his number) and ask > > >him why he doesnt have a transfer agreement and why he owns the > > >copyright to the B&J photos? Thats simple. And please no BS > > >about Duane giving him the photos. > > BSM: (10.17/97) (Ending Comment)^2: no transfer agreement > > because Bill and Jane can't be contacted. > >****BB Close but no cigar. All Walters needed to do, to protect > > himself against a willfull infringment suit was to put an ad in the > >GB Sentinel Newspaper, declaring his intention to publish a book, and > >asking the rightful owners to please contact him privately. Their > >anonymity would be respected. > >> Had either one left a return address or a phone number Ed would > >> have called. Bill and Jane have had nearly 10 years to make > >> contact and assert their copyrights. Presumably they are aware of > >> the publication of Ed's book in 1990. Look's like a hung jury as > >> far as Bill and Jane are concerned. > >****BB People who don't exist have a real hard time making > >contact. > <snip> > >****BB I'll repeat the question. Maybe you overlooked it the > >last time I asked. Hey Bruce....Is Ed dead????? If not how > >about calling him on the phone (surely you have his number) and > >ask him why he doesnt have a transfer agreement and why he owns > >the copyright to the B&J photos? Thats simple. And please no BS > >about Duane giving him the photos. > The answer has alread been given. NO IT HASNT. Why wont you just get on the phone,or send him a letter and ask him point blank about the Bill and Jane photos? ANd if you refuse to do that, how about telling me and the rest of the people on this list exactly why you wont do it. > Looks as if we're right back where we started: Bill and Jane are NOT > ED and therefore Ed is a CRIMINAL, A FELON, GUILTY OF I THE COPYRIGHTS > OF BILL AND JANE.... *****if you are correct.****** > So, why don't you sue Ed on behalf of Bill and Jane? Because there is nothing to sue. Walters owns the copyright because HE took the pictures. That is what his LOC Copyright registration says. If its good enough for them, (and Morrow and Ed's lawyer) then its good enough for me. Barbara
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 30 Re: Bruce Maccabees photo 19 calculations From: c549597@showme.missouri.edu [Barbara Becker] Date: Wed, 29 Oct 1997 13:01:08 -0600 Fwd Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 08:43:45 -0500 Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabees photo 19 calculations Bruce: Our discussion has prompted me to review your calculations on photo 19. I would like your permission to have the document scanned to be uploaded here or at another (UFO dedicatd) site for review. I think there are a number of intelligent people out there who will find your work...intruiging. How about it? BB
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 30 Re: Mexico UFO Video - 284kb file - UK.UFO.NW From: United Kingdom UFO Network <ufo@holodeck.demon.co.uk> Date: Wed, 29 Oct 1997 19:51:25 +0000 Fwd Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 10:22:00 -0500 Subject: Re: Mexico UFO Video - 284kb file - UK.UFO.NW UNITED KINGDOM UFO NETWORK Readers may like to know that the amazing Mexico City UFO Video taken on 6th August 1997 is now available as a small Real Audio/Video file from: http://www.holodeck.demon.co.uk/ Size - 284kb Running time - 50 seconds The file loses some clarity due to the encoding/compression system - however the 284kb file size makes up for that. The original file was 4.5mb is size! -------------------------- ufo@holodeck.demon.co.uk United Kingdom UFO Network http://www.holodeck.demon.co.uk --------------------------
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 30 Unofficial FBI Files Website From: Steven Feldman <AR402004@BROWNVM.BROWN.EDU> Date: Wed, 29 Oct 97 17:28:32 EST Fwd Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 10:23:45 -0500 Subject: Unofficial FBI Files Website I figured the following might prove useful here. Enjoy. -- Steven Feldman <ar402004@brownvm.brown.edu> + + + + + + + Date: Wed, 29 Oct 97 08:40:27 -0600 Subject: FBI Files Web Site Sender: mikerav@ix.netcom.com From: mikerav@ix.netcom.com To: lawlibref-l@lawlib.wuacc.edu Reply-To: lawlibref-l@lawlib.wuacc.edu I have compiled an FBI Files Website which identifies thousands of legally significant FBI Files and File Citations. This site is the result of several years of research, and this information is unavailable anywhere else. If your patrons are interested in more information on FBI Files, they can go to: http://www.crunch.com/01secret/01secret.htm Michael Ravnitzky MikeRav@ix.netcom.com William Mitchell College of Law (2-L) St. Paul, MN ------------------------------------------------------------- Private reply: Michael Ravnitzky <mikerav@ix.netcom.com> Public replies: LAWLIBREF-L@lawlib.wuacc.edu Message Archives: http://ftplaw.wuacc.edu/listproc List owners: Lloyd Herrera, zzherr@acc.wuacc.edu Join another Law Related Discussion Group? http://lawlib.wuacc.edu/washlaw/listserv.html To signoff, send message to: listserv@lawlib.wuacc.edu message merely says: unsubscribe lawlibref-l Washburn's WashLawWEB, a comprehensive legal research site: http://lawlib.wuacc.edu/washlaw/washlaw.html
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 30 Re: New UFO Catalogues On Line From: jan@cyberzone.net (Jan Aldrich) Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 10:23:07 -0800 Fwd Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 10:37:49 -0500 Subject: Re: New UFO Catalogues On Line THREE AUSTRALIAN CATALOGUES HOSTED ON THE PROJECT 1947 WEBSITE We're pleased to announce that two newly-revised catalogues compiled by Keith Basterfield are now online at the IUFOG/PROJECT 1947 website: "A Catalogue of Australian and New Zealand Abduction and Potential Abduction Cases" and, "A Catalogue of Australian Vehicle Interference Cases." Also, Bill Chalker has kindly provided PROJECT 1947 with a collection of "Australian Historical UFO/Entity Encounters." These can be accessed by clicking on the "What's New" link on the PROJECT 1947 main page at http://www.iufog.org/project1947/ Other links on the page include Mark Cashman's ongoing EM Effects Catalog, and a pointer to Eric Herr's work on "UFOs and Possible Electro-magnetic Effects on Compasses." -- Jan Aldrich PROJECT 1947 http://www.iufog.org/project1947/ -------------------- Index: Project 1947
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 30 LoFlyte hypothesis for Belgian cases [was: Solved From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com> Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 11:03:50 -0800 Fwd Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 11:26:04 -0500 Subject: LoFlyte hypothesis for Belgian cases [was: Solved > From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>, on 10/29/97 11:16 PM: > Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 15:29:37 -0700 > From: jared@valuserve.com (Andromeda.net- Anderson, Jared) > To: Updates@globalserve.net > Subject: Re: Solved abduction cases? > > Or that the F-16 radar data from the Belgium flap was _officially_ > > explained by the Belgian Air force as ground clutter and no pilot ever > > witnessed an actual object. > This official explanation appears to have been superceded as of > several months ago as the Belgian media reported that it had > solved the 1990 OVNI mystery blaming the NASA Loflyte plane for > initiating unauthorized testing in Belgian airspace. NASA > categorically denied the allegation. Actually, so did LoFlyte, who pointed out that they did not have a prototype flying at the time, and even if they had, it bore no resemblance to what was reported. The following letter from the website http://www.chez.com/ufocomqg/english/loflyt.html says... First, I've read the Sunday Times article and the NASA press release. With the Internet, it's so easy to informate yourself! I learn that the LoFly is drived by a neural computer network and its project is realised by the Accurate Automation Corporation in Chattanooga, Tennessee, USA. I learn, by the Langley Research Center (NASA) that the LoFlyte was, not so long ago, a 100 inches model tested in their wind-tunnel. After that, I've written to Accurate Automation to ask what they think about the paper in the Sunday Times. The answer came few days later : October 25, 1996 Mr. Wathelet, Thank you for the interest in Accurate Automation Corporation's LoFlyte program. As you aware, The Sunday Times of London reported that "A prototype model (of LoFLYTE) was unveiled last week and has led to speculation that a secret full-size version may already have been built and be responsible for countless UFO sightings." I have since learned from you and other sources on the Internet that this story was subsequently aired on belgian television as an explanation for several UFO sightings over Belgium since 1990. LoFLYTE has never been outside of the United Staes of America. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Sincerly, Topher Kersting, marketing coordinator. ------ Mark Cashman, creator of The Temporal Doorway at http://www.geocities.com/~mcashman - Original digital art, writing, and UFO research - Author of SF novels available at... http://www.infohaus.com/access/by-seller/The_Temporal_Doorway_Storefront ------
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 30 Re: Questions for Abductees From: clark@canby.mn.frontiercomm.net [Jerome Clark] Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 11:35:04 PST Fwd Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 13:19:45 -0500 Subject: Re: Questions for Abductees > Date: Wed, 29 Oct 1997 09:01:35 -0500 > From: Peregrine Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith] > Subject: Questions for Abductees > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > The Duke of Mendoza presents his compliments. > >From: clark@canby.mn.frontiercomm.net [Jerome Clark} > >Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 11:35:07 PST > >To: updates@globalserve.net > >Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Questions for Abductees > >In fact, there is a great deal to support the ETH. So far it is > >the most reasonable -- or, as Michael Swords has it, "natural" -- > >provisional hypothesis which seeks to explain the hard-core > >evidence: i.e., the stuff that emerges from CE2s, independently > >and multiply witnessed cases, and so on. > "In fact". This enquiring mind would appreciate knowing of what > such facts may consist. "Reasonable" in what form of logic? > "Natural" in what sense? C'mon, Duke, stop the complacent smirking. It's a tired act by now. The amount of solid writing on the ETH, unfortunately, is fairly slight, but an excellent literature exists and is growing. (In my new book there's a history of the ETH in ufology. There I show that most mainstream writing on the subject in the literature is not crazy, simply naive, though perhaps not notably more so than that of many astronomers of the 1950s [when the ETH was in full flower]; as late as the 1950s, for example, scientists such as Donald Menzel still thought it possible that Venus harbors intelligent life.) Mike Swords has written eloquently on the subject in a series of essays which critics of the ETH like to pretend don't exist. Right now I'm reading Edward Ashpole's very interesting The UFO Phenomena. Like Swords, like in fact anybody who bothers to read SETI literature, Ashpole observes that the UFO data are perfectly consistent with what we could reasonably expect from spacefaring aliens. In other words, the ETH cannot be rejected a priori, even before the evidence is examined. (Ashpole thinks the evidence is intriguing.) He says astutely that "most rational people who think UFOs are a lot of nonsense are unaware of the scientific rationale for SETI." In any event, most of what could be said critical of the ETH could be said of SETI theory, except that (as historian of science Michael J. Crowe once observed) ufologists, unlike their SETI counterparts, are dealing with actual evidence. The ETH may be right, or it may be wrong, but to pretend that it is outrageous and absurd is simply to engage in the stalest of rhetorical tricks. That sort of posturing doesn't get any of us anywhere, and it certainly makes me disinclined to listen to whatever genuine insights Duke and his cohorts may have to offer. Or maybe they are more interesting in feeling superior to us benighted souls than in persuading us. > >Vallee is simply wrong when he suggests that the UFO question > >is beyond science. Here he betrays his occult -- even anti- > >rationalist -- sympathies. In any event, how would he know? > I vaguely recall that the witch-doctor Jacques did his level > best to apply some scientific principles in "Challenge to Science" > and "Anatomy of a Phenomenon". Not much anti-rationalism there. > Can it be that Magic Jacques reached his conclusion through > frustrating experience? More likely through the influences of the '60s counterculture and his longtime fascination with occultism. > >For one thing, science has barely addressed the question. The > >best cases, however, are eminently investigatable by traditional > >scientific method; > And *why*, do you suppose, has science barely addressed the > question? Good question, and the product of a considerable literature by sociologists of scientists and scientists themselves. I urge you to read it. As Allen Hynek succinctly observed, science is not always what scientists do. Scientists have always had a hard time dealing with anomalies, especially extraordinary anomalies, and that fact alone has generated a bunch of interesting writing by a range of interesting writers: Hufford, Bauer, Westrum, Truzzi, Mauskopf, McClenon, Hess, Sturrock, Rodeghier et al. -- not to mention, of course, Kuhn and, more radically, Paul Feyerabend. > And perhaps Jerome could demonstrate just which parts of > the scientific method have been applied - scientifically - to > which cases? Or even one? I am especially looking forward to > reading about all those repeated and independently verified > experiments that burden the pages of the scientific or even > the ufological literature. Read the literature, Duke. And in this specific regard, let me here put in a plug for the forthcoming second edition of The UFO Encyclopedia and a particular entry of particular importance. Cheers, Jerry Clark
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 30 Re: Bruce Maccabee's photo 19 calculations From: bruce maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com> Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 12:23:57 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 13:22:55 -0500 Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee's photo 19 calculations >From: c549597@showme.missouri.edu [Barbara Becker] >Date: Wed, 29 Oct 1997 13:01:08 -0600 >To: ufo updates <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Bruce Maccabee's photo 19 calculations >Bruce: >Our discussion has prompted me to review your calculations on >photo 19. I would like your permission to have the document >scanned to be uploaded here or at another (UFO dedicatd) site for >review. >I think there are a number of intelligent people out there who >will find your work...intruiging. >How about it? I'm not a sure what you are referring to. Were these calculations in a personal letter to you? I can, of course, upload the short papers I wrote back then detailing the analysis of the hood reflection and the study of the road reflection. One of these was published by MUFON. And, incidently, whil you're beating on Photo 19, I wonder if you have any comments on a similarly important photo, #1, or on photo 11 (blue beam photo).
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 30 Mars Global Surveyor to Resume Aerobraking From: NASANews@hq.nasa.gov Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 15:59:13 -0500 (EST) Fwd Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 17:36:36 -0500 Subject: Mars Global Surveyor to Resume Aerobraking Don Savage Headquarters, Washington, DC October 30, 1997 (Phone: 202/358-1547) Diane Ainsworth Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, CA (Phone: 818/354-5011) RELEASE: 97-249 MARS GLOBAL SURVEYOR TO RESUME AEROBRAKING After a two-week hiatus, NASA's Mars Global Surveyor (MGS) flight team will resume lowering the spacecraft's orbit around Mars beginning Nov. 7. The effort will proceed at a more gradual pace than before, which will extend the mission's aerobraking phase by several months, and will change Global Surveyor's final science mapping orbit. The decision to resume aerobraking came after intensive engineering analysis, computer simulations and tests with representative hardware to characterize the current condition of one of the spacecraft's two solar panels, which began to flex more than expected during the spacecraft's lowest dip into the Martian atmosphere on Oct. 6. Under normal circumstances, the spacecraft's two 11-foot- long (3.5-meter) solar panels should remain fixed and nearly motionless during each aerobraking pass through the upper atmosphere of Mars. One of the panels, which did not fully deploy and latch after launch, moved past its latched position and has shown slight movement during the spacecraft's last three closest approaches to the Martian surface. "After sufficient time to study the observed motion, we concluded that it is possible to perform additional aerobraking at a slower rate, without putting undue stress on the solar panel in question," said Glenn E. Cunningham, Mars Global Surveyor mission manager at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), Pasadena, CA. "This changes Mars Global Surveyor's final mapping orbit, but it should not have a significant impact on the ability of Global Surveyor to accomplish the mission science objectives." The spacecraft's scientific instruments have performed flawlessly and continue to return new information about Martian magnetic properties, its atmosphere, surface features, temperatures and mineralogy since Mars Global Surveyor entered orbit around the red planet on Sept. 11. The spacecraft is currently in a 35-hour elliptical orbit which brings it 107 miles (172 kilometers) above the surface of Mars at its closest approach to the planet. The operations team at JPL and Lockheed Martin Astronautics, Denver, CO, will begin to reduce that orbit using a more moderate level of aerobraking that will slowly bring the spacecraft into the desired nearly circular mapping orbit. Aerobraking, a technique first demonstrated in the summer of 1993 during the final months of the Magellan mission to Venus, allows a spacecraft to lower its orbit without relying on propellant, by using the drag produced by a planet's atmosphere. "There are several types of desirable orbits for us to consider in the next several weeks that will give us global coverage of the planet and yield all of the science data we expected to return," Cunningham said. "In the meantime, the instruments are performing marvelously, and we will continue gathering new science data as we begin to reduce the spacecraft's altitude and bring it down into the upper Martian atmosphere. Even if we wind up in an elliptical orbit, we will have an opportunity to study Mars at closer range than we originally planned because the spacecraft's periapsis -- or closest passage over Mars -- will be closer than the 234-mile (378-kilometer) circular orbit that was to be its original mapping distance." The spacecraft's current orbit was raised Oct. 12 after the flight operations team observed that the unlatched solar panel had moved more than 20 degrees and beyond what should have been its fully deployed and latched position. Significant movement was observed on periapsis 15 -- or the 15th closest pass over Mars, which occurred on Oct. 6 -- when the Martian atmosphere had become twice as dense as it had been during previous passes. The thickness of the atmosphere amounted to a 50 percent increase in pressure over what was expected on the spacecraft's solar array. Although atmospheric variations like these were anticipated as the seasons change on Mars, the spacecraft's orbit was raised by about seven miles (11 kilometers) to adjust the pressure level. Subsequent motion of the panel at periapsis 16 through 18 caused the flight team to raise the orbit further on Oct. 12, taking the spacecraft out of the atmosphere altogether. "The investigation of the unexpected motion of the unlatched panel led us to identify a secondary source of damage in the yoke, a piece of structure that connects the solar panel to the spacecraft," Cunningham said. "This secondary source of damage was a result of the failure of the damper arm that jammed in the panel's hinge joint shortly after launch, when the solar panels were initially deployed." Mechanical stress analysis tests suggest that the yoke -- a triangular, aluminum honeycomb material sandwiched between two sheets of graphite epoxy -- probably fractured on one surface. The analysis further suggests that the fractured surface, with increased pressure on the panel during aerobraking, began to pull away from the aluminum honeycomb beneath it. "Aerobraking will be reinitiated at 0.2 newtons per square meter (0.00003 pounds per square inch), which is about one- third of the original aerobraking level," Cunningham said. "This is a pressure that we currently believe is safe but we will continue to work with ground tests, analysis and close monitoring of in-flight spacecraft data to assure that it is safe." "Aerobraking will take much longer, perhaps eight to 12 months, at this more gradual rate. In the meantime, we will continue collecting science data and work in the next several weeks toward selection of the best possible orbit to fulfill the science objectives of the mapping mission," Cunningham said. A new color image from the MGS Mars Orbiter Camera of the giant volcano Olympus Mons is available on the Internet at the following URL: http://barsoom.msss.com/mars/global_surveyor/camera/images/index.html Additional information about the Mars Global Surveyor mission is available on the World Wide Web by accessing JPL's Mars news site at URL: http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/marsnews or the Global Surveyor project home page at URL: http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov. Mars Global Surveyor is part of a sustained program of Mars exploration, known as the Mars Surveyor Program. The mission is managed by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory for NASA's Office of Space Science, Washington, DC. JPL's industrial partner is Lockheed Martin Astronautics, Denver, CO, which developed and operates the spacecraft. JPL is a division of the California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA. - end -
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 30 Re: Alfred's Odd Ode #194 From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net> Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 14:35:11 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 17:35:33 -0500 Subject: Re: Alfred's Odd Ode #194 >Date: Wed, 29 Oct 1997 06:01:36 -0600 >From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Alfred's Odd Ode #194 >Apology to MW #194 (For October 29, 1997) >ONE is a joke 'til you see its ID, >Then it's truly _the_ number to set you so free. <mathematical snip> Hi Al, You wrote, >You know=85I'll bet that infinity is a prime number=85 According to 'Deep-Thought' the answer to Life, the Universe, and everything, is 42! ;) Zaphod Velez John Velez jvif@spacelab.net
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 31 ET Hypothesis: Government Concern? [was: Solved From: James Easton <pulsar@compuserve.com> Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 21:13:27 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 05:57:46 -0500 Subject: ET Hypothesis: Government Concern? [was: Solved Regarding... >Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 04:44:37 +0100 (MET) >From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Solved abduction cases? >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> Henny wrote: >>The reality is, if I may paraphrase, that, with rare exceptions, >>there is no indication the ET hypothesis is taken seriously by the >>vast majority of government officials, either within the USA or >>elsewhere. >James, >You missed the point. The reality of this discussion is that we were >pointing out that the ET hypothesis was taken seriously outside the >United States to demonstrate ET is not just popular in the USA. Henny, You wrote to John Velez: "Not only is the ET hypothesis taken seriously outside the USA, government officials of several countries, such as Chile, Belgium, Mexico and Russia, have openly stated that their air space has been violated by craft that do not originate on this earth". A claim to which John expounded: "Now this is one piece of reality that you'll never see debated!" It's a reality which is debatable, I suggested to John. The ET hypotheses is of course taken seriously by many people in most countries, but that wasn't the only claim being made. The point being addressed was whether it is a recognised concern at government level. In context, it's not, and the government officials who do sometimes express that concern, often do so based on evidence which in fact has a proven, or probable, explanation. [On Chris Gibson's reported sighting] >The aircraft you refer to is the Aurora spy plane which falls in the >category of human made craft. The aircraft reported by Chris remains unidentified. "Aurora" remains absolute speculation and from knowledgable discussions I've witnessed within the military aviation community, is long accepted as a likely myth. >One of the clues that this plane was flying were the results of >measurements by the US Geological Survey. The USGS is the outfit that >monitors earthquakes and they tracked Aurora when it went through the >sound barrier. Does that sound like a plane that makes no sound? Around June 1981, seismological sensors operated by the USGS first recorded anomalous sonic booms. It was estimated that these originated from an object travelling at Mach 3 or 4 and all of the tracks pointed north and east over LA, heading towards southern Nevada. So far as I know, this also remains unexplained, but there's no evidence linking these events with "Aurora". You might find the following article informative: Plane Mystery Gains Speed, Hits 5,500 Miles an Hour By John Mintz Washington Post Staff Writer [...] Jane's said it believes the spy plane has been flying tests since about 1985 and has been operational since 1989. Air Force officials have denied such reports for years, with more pointedness than the "I-have-nothing-for-you-on-that" nondenial denials used in reply to queries about other classified subjects. "The Air Force has no such program, period," said Capt. Monica Aloisio, an Air Force spokeswoman. Yesterday she also denied a suggestion in Jane's that the Air Force would lie to cover up the secret plane. "Air Force public affairs doesn't knowingly participate in any disinformation programs," she said. But Sen. John Glenn (D-Ohio), a member of the Armed Services Committee who led congressional opposition to retiring the SR-71, said this week that the Pentagon's trickiness in denying secret programs over the years gives people pause. So with each flurry of reports like the one in Jane's, he calls the CIA and senior Defense Department officials "to make sure I wasn't being hung out to dry." "They answer me from all quarters there is no such program," Glenn said. "Everybody in CIA swears up and down there's no such program. I think they're telling me the truth." He said he used to wonder about those denials, because the Air Force's 1990 retirement of the SR-71 did not make sense. Air Force officials said satellites are more cost-effective for reconnaissance, but Glenn said planes such as the SR-71 are far superior. Spy planes, he said, are more maneuverable and can get to a target more quickly than satellites. Further, an adversary can often calculate when a satellite is making its once-every-few-hours sweeps and hide secrets on the ground. "The only way doing away with the '71 made sense," Glenn said in an interview this week, "was if you had a (spy plane) follow-on," which the Air Force has always denied. Glenn said he was also intrigued by the suggestion in the Jane's article that the supposed new plane is so secret that Defense Secretary Richard B. Cheney has designated it a "waived program," meaning only the chairmen and the ranking minority members of the House and Senate military committees would have been told of its existence. If true, Glenn is being kept in the dark by his own committee chairman, Sen. Sam Nunn (D-Ga.). Glenn said he called Nunn's staff this week and was told Nunn has not misled him on the subject. Glenn said that under the Senate's "rules of engagement," a direct question to a colleague must be answered straight. There are other indications suggesting there is no new spy plane. In the 1991 Persian Gulf War, for instance, field commanders were distressed at what they believed was inadequate photo reconnaissance by U.S. satellites and the some subsonic spy aircraft. The Pentagon considered reactivating the SR-71, but rejected it, government officials said. "If they'd had this (new spy plane) operational," said William E. Burrows, author of a 1987 book entitled "Deep Black: Space Espionage & National Security" about space-based military projects, "they would have used it" in the Gulf. Ernest Blazar, who is writing a book on the SR-71, said industry sources told him the Pentagon planned a second-generation Blackbird that died in 1990 when the SR-71 was withdrawn from service. John Pike, director of a space policy project for the Federation of American Scientists, a nonprofit research group that favors disarmament and opposes government secrecy, contends as do other nongovernment experts that secret airplanes may exist but may have multiple missions operating as, say, spy planes and spacelaunch vehicles. Speculation about a possible successor to the SR-71 heated up in 1984, when an entry in the defense budget mentioned a $2 billion, two-year "Aurora" project. Pentagon officials said it was not a spy plane, but journalists became suspicious when, a year later, "the Aurora line item vanished as mysteriously as it had first appeared," said a report by the Federation of American Scientists. Jane's still uses that name for the supposed project, but Blazar said if a new spy plane exists, it would be code-named "Senior Citizen." [...] "The number of reports (of mystery aircraft) and their consistency suggest that there may be some basis for these sightings other than hallucinogenic drugs," the report said. But it warned: "There is no exit from this wilderness of mirrors." [End] Incidentally, Paul McGinnis, a researcher from the US, later confirmed on the skunk-works mailing list: "SENIOR CITIZEN was one of the first "black" programs I located in the Fiscal Year 1993 budget, among a group of highly classified Air Force tactical programs, whose individual cost was classified, but as a group cost more than 800 million dollars for FY 1993. (Other programs included the aircraft program code-named OMEGA (PE 0207591F), COPPER COAST (PE 0207424F), the HAVE FLAG missile (PE 0208042F), and "special tactical unit detachments" (PE 0207248F), the funding for the flying of covertly obtained Russian aircraft.) A number of people, myself included, had assumed that the code-name SENIOR CITIZEN referred to a high speed spy plane, sometimes called "Aurora". Hot on the trail of this aircraft, in August 1994, I located an obscure DoD budget document the size of 2 telephone books ("FYDP Program Structure") that clearly indicated that, surprise!, SENIOR CITIZEN was a transport aircraft". >>The Belgium reference is a good example of the questionable data >>which some government officials base their beliefs on. >>... the F-16 radar data from the Belgium flap was _officially_ >>explained by the Belgian Air force as ground clutter and no pilot >>ever witnessed an actual object. >Hogwash again. I should simply say do some elementary research on >this one, James. The people who were involved in this investigation >would either have been insulted or would have rolled over the floor >over this explanation. Ground clutter! The official explanation was >'unknown craft'. You appear to be unaware of any developments which succeeded the initial conclusions. I've checked my elementary research and although it's almost three years old now, it still notes that on the skunk-works list, the learned Jean-Pierre Pharabod, who does know a thing or two about the Belgian incidents, advised me: [Defence Department report, Belgium: "On some occasions they described the phenomena as a triangle-shaped platform up to 200 feet wide with 3 downward beaming projectors, hovering at +-100m above the ground and making only a very light humming noise...On two occasions the BAF scrambled 2 F-16's during the evening hours...On the second occasion, pilots could identify a laser-beam projector on the ground...A total of 9 interception attempts have been made. On 6 occasions the pilots could establish a lock-on with their air interception radar. Lock-on distances varied between 5 and 8 NM. On all occasions targets varied speed and altitude very quickly and break-locks occurred after 10 to 60 seconds. Speeds varied between 150 and 1010 kts. At 3 occasions both F16's registered simultaneous lock-ons with the same parameters]. "The above are excerpts from an old "SUMMARY REPORT ON OBSERVATIONS 30-31 MARCH 1990", written by Col. (now General) De Brouwer. Further studies have been made, and the conclusions are different. The first "two occasions" were before the night 30-31 March 1990, and the "laser-beam projector on ground" was used by a night-club (this was well known, and was what De Brouwer meant in his summary). During the night 30-31 March, the pilot of the second F-16 video recorded his radar echoes. It appears now (Gilmard & Lt. Col. Salmon's study) that the first lock-ons, with speed and altitude varying very quickly, could be "ground clutter", while the one which lasted for 60 seconds, with nearly constant altitude and speed, was the first F-16. Now the Belgian military say "though this is not excluded, there is no proof that we got echoes from a real object with unusual abilities". And later added: "Now the Air Force has an explanation: ground clutter. I know of only 4 radars involved (2 on ground, 2 airborne), not 5. There were not hundreds of eye witnesses (this night), only a few gendarmes. Now it is said that what they saw could be stars through unusual atmospheric refraction phenomena. Only one thing remains unexplained. The F-16's took off at 0h 05 local time (= GMT + 2). At 0 h 28, the Semmerzake radar detected an object 2500 ft over the western part of the Brussels agglomeration, moving towards Liege (roughly speaking, towards east) at 450 knots. At 0 h 29, the Glons radar detected it also. From 0 h 29 to 0 h 33, both radars followed the craft, which was going in straight line towards Liege, increasing its speed and its altitude. The Semmerzake radar spotted it again 6000 ft over Liege at 0 h 35, speed 650 knots. The last point was some 12 miles east of Liege, altitude 12000 ft, at 0 h 36. (This craft was not one of the two F-16's, which were flying in complicated loops, followed by the radars on ground). The Semmerzake radar is an array type radar. It is used for military air safety. Semmerzake is about 30 miles west of Brussels. Glons CRC is a part of NADGE (NATO Air Defense Ground Environment). There are about 80 NADGE CRC in Europe (including Turkey). Its missions are: 1. detect and follow every flight in the Belgian air space, 2. identify friend or foe, 3. if foe, intercept and/or destroy according to the alert status. The Glons radar is a multipurpose impulsion type radar. Glons is about 6 miles north of Liege. The distance Brussels-Liege is about 60 miles. There is another radar at Bertem, for civilian traffic. The craft passed 5 miles south of Bertem at 0 h 30. The Bertem radar did not see anything (maybe because it looked only for transponders ?). As far as I know, the craft has not yet been identified. Maybe illegal flight of a private jet?" >You are partially right that the F16 pilots chasing the UFO did not >witness the object, but then we are talking about visual contact. >There was radar contact, however, and the position and manoeuvres >recorded on radar tape matched the observations of multiple witnesses >on the ground. See above. >The facts are that a few individuals have a reluctance to do even the >most basic research, which is very apparent from the fact that they >are not even aware of the most popular debunkers 'explanation' of >this case. Perhaps you will now reconsider your comments and understand the points I highlighted. The "Belgian flap" remains an interesting series of events, but maybe doesn't have the substance we thought it had. James. E-mail: pulsar@compuserve.com
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 31 ETH &c [was: Questions for Abductees] From: Peregrine Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith] Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 21:29:27 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 06:05:45 -0500 Subject: ETH &c [was: Questions for Abductees] The Duke of Mendoza presents his compliments. >From: Penrose Christopher <penrose@sfc.keio.ac.jp> >Date: Wed, 29 Oct 97 16:01:13 +0900 >To: updates@globalserve.net >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Questions for Abductees >Ockham's Razor is a bogus tool virally perpetuated by >self-deceived sophists. Nicely put :-). But it is a veritable mysterious coincidence then that all the bona-fide paid-up scientists of my acquaintance, among whom only chemists are under-represented these days, are self-deceived sophists, for they do wag it under my nose along with their fingers whenever we discuss the more outr=E9 aspects of my interests. >If a hypothesis violates what science claims to understand, and >it is said that this so-called understanding within science >applies a negating pressure to this hypothesis, it can be said >that an equal and opposite negating pressure is applied upon what >science claims to understand. :) Common sense & everyday observation tells us the Sun revolves around the Earth. That is an hypothesis that "violates what science claims to understand". Are you seriously suggesting that it exerts any "negating" pressure on science? (I am not suggesting the ETH is an hypothesis of this order, btw - I'm just suggesting that Penrose's Law will make for hard cases and may be in danger of rubbing shoulders with Williams's Four Insupportable Axioms of Ufology.) >Prohibitive for us, but not necessarily prohibitive for some >other hypothetical alien intelligence. You seem to be blind >yourself to the "blindingly obvious" -- being that we don't truly >know what is possible or not. Our science has been principally >developed from Terran observations. Many of us share the belief >that the universe is a just a little bit bigger, and hence less >understood, than our own playground. I *said* "(for now) prohibitively expensive", which is hardly dogmatic concerning either us or some conjectural them. One thing that gives scientists some hope that their "laws", albeit provisional, are grounded in reality is their observation that they hold true everywhere in the Universe. Terran observation seems not to be compromised by locality. Meanwhile, the essential point made by Paul Davies seems to me to be unexceptional and unexceptionable. You use the tools you can rely on, not ones you don't even know exist yet, until something better comes along. The conservatism of science may be very cautious, but it is not closed. Of course we don't know what is possible or not. That's exactly what drives and excites real scientists. I never saw anyone more delighted than the chemistry teacher whose fifth form girls made a genuinely new discovery about the reaction between sodium and water and boggled the establishment of the day. >Most of us agree that the ETH is not truth. It is hypothesis. >But it is the act of a closed-minded tunnel-reality fetishist to >slam the door on the theory when there isn't incontrovertible >evidence against it, given the infancy of our science, and a >floodgate of folklore suggesting it. It is hypothesis indeed - *not* theory. My position is that it's employed prematurely to account for UFO encounters (of any kind) both by the ill-educated and some who ought to know better, and that the evidence *for* it doesn't amount to much. The general rule, irritatingly conservative as it is, remains in place: if you want to argue that UFOs are ET, it's up to you to prove it, not for the doubters to disprove it. The door is wide open here. >What may be interesting is to actually explore some of these >alternatives (earth lights for UFOs, lucid dreaming for abduction >et al) extensively [...] I agree. Part of my grump is that so many of Les Grands Fromages du Champ so often leap over even the attempt to do any such thing - i.e. they don't perform a necessary process of elimination before pronouncing on the unearthly origins of this or that. In that respect the abduction literalists are one of the shining intellectual disgraces of the age. Which in turn makes them one of the moral disgraces of the age (ref: 4 Oct 1997 et seq.). >The lack of a cogent presence of such alternate hypotheses >helps resonate (for better or worse) ETH even more. Even according to your logic, it shouldn't. How do you know there isn't some as yet undreamt-of terrestrial cause? Both simple caution and the Occam's razor you despise (tho' I do have to admire a man who sets his sword & buckler against six centuries of philosophical history) would suggest one cleans out one's own back yard first. The most grandiose ETHers haven't even tried. >From: clark@canby.mn.frontiercomm.net [Jerome Clark] >Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 11:35:04 PST >To: updates@globalserve.net >Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Questions for Abductees >>"In fact". This enquiring mind would appreciate knowing of what >>such facts may consist. "Reasonable" in what form of logic? >>"Natural" in what sense? >C'mon, Duke, stop the complacent smirking. It's a tired act by >now. Here we go again. Before you judge the expression on my face that you cannot even see, please answer the question. And (hard tho' it is to break the habit of a lifetime) with specific answers and attendant arguments, not a biblography or a list of authorities, unsubstantiated appeals to which do not impress. In unkind moments I think of it as a form of the higher hand-waving. >The ETH may be right, or it may be wrong, but to pretend that it >is outrageous and absurd is simply to engage in the stalest of >rhetorical tricks. Is this a rhetorical trick, or just stale? Is it a rhetorical trick to describe the ETH as "reasonable" (etc) without giving reasons and then declining to do so when asked? Is it what Ed Stewart would call "ufological wisdom"? Is this a put on? Is it one of the boys in the office again? Or is it just bluster and pomposity and finger-wagging? In other words: Please cite where I say or even pretend to say that the ETH is outrageous or absurd. (And you needn't get oversophisticated about the guffaws, btw.) >That sort of posturing doesn't get any of us >anywhere, and it certainly makes me disinclined to listen to >whatever genuine insights Duke and his cohorts may have to offer. If they *are* genuine insights, you'd be pretty stupid to ignore them, wouldn't you? At very least, it would be an odd posture to adopt, and could end in discomfort and tears. >>And perhaps Jerome could demonstrate just which parts of >>the scientific method have been applied - scientifically - to >>which cases? Or even one? I am especially looking forward to >>reading about all those repeated and independently verified >>experiments that burden the pages of the scientific or even >>the ufological literature. >Read the literature, Duke. You please answer the question, Jerry. The reasons I asked it were twofold: to see if you *could* answer it, and because this is a public forum. Strange whisperings that I cannot explain give me a powerful impression that I'm not the only one in the world or even on this List who'd like to know the answer. Which is not to say I won't read your book when it hits these shores (an ISBN would help with our enquiries, BTW) and will very likely enjoy it. best wishes to all & sundry Pratincole D. Mockingbird Air Drummer
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 31 Re: UFOs in Scotland From: Dave Ledger <dledger@cableinet.co.uk> Date: Wed, 29 Oct 1997 03:01:38 +0000 Fwd Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 06:32:39 -0500 Subject: Re: UFOs in Scotland Hi Errol and group, I have been getting so much mail asking for a re-post of our sighting from August 16th. I have decided to re-post the report with a small update for anyone that is interested. I hope that this is ok as the original post was shown on this List in August. >No probs. I'd be happy to share it with you. Here is a copy of >the original two reports that were sent out to the net. The first >report is a little confused as it was literally written an hour >or so after the sighting itself. The second report was written a >short time later with a much more collective attitude and a >little more thought, as opposed to pure excitement. >>Sighting in Fife! August sat 16th 12:45-1:30 am GMT. On this morning of August 16 1997 at approximately 12:45 am, my girlfriend and I decided to go out to our back yard to look at a bright light, we have been seeing for the past three weeks. The light in question had been seen on numerous occasions before, and I had personally thought it to be a bright planet, as it always seems to be in the same vicinity. As we were looking at the bright light, I happened to glance to my left just above the roof of the flats, to see a small star like object clearly gliding across the night sky. It seemed to be moving quite fast as we compared it to the edge of our block of flats and also with the real stars in the sky. In the space of about 30 seconds we witnessed the object traverse from our left, above our heads, to the middle of the sky where the object suddenly came to a standstill. At that point my girlfriend ran to get some witnesses while I stayed to view the now stationary object. Whilst my girlfriend was away I witnessed a shooting star-like discharge racing across the sky in the vicinity of the stationary object. Frightened that I would witness all this phenomena alone, I knocked on my neighbour's door and he and his son then came outside and started looking at the object I had been observing. By this time there seemed to be an awful lot of activity, and my girlfriend returned with another three witnesses, whom I can honestly say were a little more than sceptical, however, after witnessing what appeared to be multiple objects or one object moving extremely fast, the scepticism disappeared. By now there were seven people present and all witnessing the same phenomena, there appeared to be many shooting star like objects traversing in the direction of the moving UFOs, almost like they were being fired upon, this seemed to strike up a feeling of excitement and an intense dis-belief amoungst our group of spectators. Our emotions by this time ran so high we awoke two of our neighbours who suddenly appeared on their balcony enquiring as to what all the commotion was about. They soon saw what had us all riveted and perhaps a little frightened. The sky tonight, was very clear and the visibilty was very good apart from a very thin broken cloud away to the south West of where we were looking. At times the star like objects seemed to be almost popping in and out from behind the thin cloud. But the objects were most clearly seen against the clear black starry sky. The UFOs viewed, showed no signs of any exterior lights whatsoever,however during the sighting a plane had taken off from Edinburgh airport and could be seen above the River Forth with its red and green flashing lights clearly visible. The obvious difference in altitude between the plane and the UFOs was more than apparent, the UFOs seemed the size of a pearl compared to the aircrafts size which suggests perhaps the UFOs were either just outside or perhaps inside the Earth's atmosphere. This event lasted for approximateley 45 minutes. There were nine witnesses who saw all we have stated, we do not have the means of finding out if anything was reported to or seen by the military or the Airforce, who have a base nearby, but we would love to hear from anyone who has or knows of anyone with information on this sighting. Any info on this subject is greatly appreciated. (E-Mail me on DLedger@cableinet.co.uk) note: this is a new e-mail address since the original post. >>UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS SIGHTED OVER KIRKCALDY, FIFE IN SCOTLAND! We recently submitted a brief report of a UFO sighting, but now we have had a chance to come to terms with what we saw that night, here is a more detailed account of events. Firstly we would like to admit first hand, that we are classed as working class people, and to certain individual opinions this may discredit our statements right away, but we hope there are people out there who will believe us, and understand we are perfectly intelligent and sane people. On the morning of Saturday 16th August at around 12:45am, myself and my partner decided to let the dogs out onto the back garden, and also to observe an object in the sky, that we have continuously encountered over the last three week period, my partner believes it to be a planet (perhaps Venus), and appears like a very large bright star,that seems to disappear before dawn. However on this particular night,we noticed that the sky was dense and extremely clear, with only thin hazy patches of cloud here and there. Just as my parner looked up at the sky to our left over our shoulders, we spotted what appeared to be just another star in the sky, until it began to move. We live in a three storey block of flats, and we could see this starlike object move away from the rooftops of the flats towards the south and most probably over the River Forth somewhere, it seemed to cut through the sky with great ease, almost like it was gliding, but was actually going exceptionally fast, it must have been to cover the ground it covered in such a short space of time, it travelled three quarters of the sky in approximately 30 seconds, when it came to a sudden halt and just remained there stationary. At this point I decided to go for more people to witness what we were experiencing. On my return with three other witnesses, I discovered my partner had gone to our next door neighbour, so he and his teenage son had come to investigate, swearing my partner was mad. Just as the group of seven at this point, congregated in one huddle, what appeared to be at first, a shooting star, projecting rapidly, towards the stationary object in a vertical/diagonal fashion from left to right, at a great speed, then the stationary object took off from a standstill, in the opposite direction from its oncoming threat, and just seemed to disappear, as did the other object,it just seemed to go up and up until it was gone, but only this object manouvered in a continuous line, never leaving its course, unlike the stationary object. We saw the same phenomenon at least five times more,only they were not all heading south, some were heading north east and another passed over our heads towards the west. All looked identical, but then they were incredibly high in the sky. These events were also observed by two new members of the group, whom we had all awakened, due to our over excitement and disbelief of what we were encountering. During these proceedings, an aeroplane took off from Edinburgh Airport, heading South West of where we stood. Even once it was in the sky we were able to compare the sizes of the object and the plane,he best description we can muster, is the plane was sized like a pea, in comparison to the object which was the equivelant of a needle prick, which suggested to us, the object was flying at an exceedingly high altitude. (We are no experts, and do not claim to be, but it is our own beliefs, they were just inside or outside the Earth's atmosphere). This whole experience lasted around 45 minutes (01:30 am) and was witnessed by nine people in total, although some members came a little later,but none of us can even begin to comprehend what we saw, but we know we did see it. It has been suggested that perhaps this could have been satellites, however, how can there possibly be several satellites, in the same part of the sky, going in different directions,at the same time, it seems very unlikely, and what were the projectile shooting objects which seemed to always be on the other objects pathway, on what seemed a collision course. We did report this incident to two newspapers,one local and the other in a major city, but not to have our story published, merely to try and find out if this was witnessed by anyone else, but we were unsuccessful here, however, one reporter did telephone us back and went out of his way to inform us, "no meteor showers or air activity, had been reported in this area" We then called a local radio station, after hearing on the grapevine that somone else had called the station to report the same incident we witnessed, but because there had been only one caller, I think it was dismissed as a joke, that is until we called. Then there seemed a bit of interest, he obviously could not tell us who the other caller was, but he did provide us with a description, of the objects witnessed by the anonymous caller, and to our relief it was exactly the same. On reflection, it seems that these objects, at a quick glance up at the sky, could and probably would, be mistaken for stars, and the flashes just shooting stars, because this was our thoughts too, until it became a periodic occurence, hence, only occuring when a moving object was in the vicinity. All we ask of anyone reading this is keep an open mind, and do not prejudge us as insane. We would really like to know if anyone else has had similar sightings, to help us to share what we encountered and help us come to terms with it. E-mail us at DLedger@cableinet.co.uk Well, that is what started it all off. We have had a few really perculiar experiences since then which I will share with you in a future message if you wish. The most perculiar aspect of all this, is that since then we have had some feedback from Malcolm Robinson of SPI Scotland, and he informed us that Edinburgh airport had reported "absolutely no air traffic in that vicinity, in that particular time frame, on that particular date. This was initially great news to us, but it quickly served to deepen the mystery. As you will have noticed in our report. We specifically mentioned in our report that during the 45 minute sighting, we had encountered what we thought to be an aircraft in the vicinity of the airport at quite a low altitude with its nav. lights clearly visible. What do you make of it?. It's left me wondering if someones maybe telling lies. But why? Could i also take this opportunity to say thank you to all the List members, who have come forward with information since my appeal for info on Scottish UFO sightings. Good luck to the group........Dave Ledger.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 31 Re: Mexican UFO Video Tape From: Graham William Birdsall <106151.1150@compuserve.com> Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 06:00:42 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 07:02:38 -0500 Subject: Re: Mexican UFO Video Tape >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >From: xalium@netwrx.net (Tom King) >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Mexican UFO Video Tape >Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 19:26:38 EST Dear Tom, Clearly it is impossible to state definitely whether the 6 August 1997 Mexican video tape footage is genuine or not without having access to the original footage - a point I emphasised at the outset when making reference to the observations made by those of us here who received one of those "poor copies" referred to by Mexican UFO researcher Santiago Garza. The observations can be attributed to analyst Russel Callagahan, someone who has spent the last 20 years quiety examining photographs and footage - his efforts are voluntary. A British Channel 4 television crew researching for material in Mexico a few weeks ago saw the same material and described it as "laughable". Santiago Garza's comments provided an important insight into the origination of the footage. If leading Mexican mainstream UFO researchers are casting doubt on its authenticity, that is something we all need to be aware of. Thanks to him, we are now all familiar with the fact that by a curious coincidence, sophisticated computer software was found in offices at the precise location from whence the footage was allegedly shot. That being said, individuals were interviewed which seem to suggest independent corroboration of observing said object was attained. Nonetheless, as I mentioned in my posting, comprehensive analysis of the original footage by those who now have it should determine the facts. Mentioning my appearance at Oxford was designed purely to alert interested parties to the fact that they could see the images for themselves, if they so chose to do. This was not an event organised by us, but by Contact International (UK), one of Britain's most reputable and long-standing UFO organisations. I was one of several speakers invited - if my mentioning the footage only days in advance helped to generate added interest, then all well and good. My motives were entirely honorouble - I never ask for a fee at any of my appearances, either in the UK or overseas. The "treatment" is a term used by some here in the UK for those video taped sequences which are deemed to have undergone computer-induced effects, such as that seen of purported UFOs creating a crop circle formation (which leading crop circle researcher 'Busty' Taylor is 100% convinced is a hoax and provided the meteorological data - not computer analysis data - to support the fact). I believe it is prudent from time to time to inject a degree of caution into any on-going debate which has the potential for bringing folk down to earth with an almighty bump. The scepticisism displayed by some Mexican UFO researchers is something to be admired, especially coming from someone who not a recognised critic or debunker. Santiago's assertion that he, and other Mexican UFO researchers, are currently on the receiving end of alleged hoax 'UFO' tapes, should raise considerable cause for concern to all those who have been impressed (like myself) with many of the outstanding video tape sequencies to have come out of Mexico in recent years. If purported Mexican UFO footage, claimed by some to be the "best evidence", is subsequently proven to be a hoax, where does that leave the rest in the minds of sceptics and debunkers who could reap havoc? With the best intentions, Graham W. Birdsall (Edtor) UFO Magazine [UK]
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 31 Belgian UFOs and Other military 'Tests' From: "Jason B. Unwin" <jbu@ris.net> Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 15:54:52 -0800 Fwd Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 07:17:14 -0500 Subject: Belgian UFOs and Other military 'Tests' The whole problem with military testing "theories" explaining UFOs in Belgium, Mexico City, or Phoenix, is that when you want to keep a test secret, you don't due it in front of millions of potential witnesses. I spent 9 1/2 years in the army, and even unclassified tests are held on military bases so that the testing can be controlled. If something goes wrong, the public won't generally know about it. At Ft Sill Oklahoma the army was testing a new experimental RPV (Remote Piloted Vehicle) named Aquila. During one test the RPV disappeared. Two days or so later it was found in "farmer Brown's" pasture (Lawton OK or FT Sill post newspaper April-December 1986 time frame as a source). Tests go wrong and when they do in full sight of the public, it causes embarassment. Could you imagine the political and military fallout of something like this (LoFlyte, Aurora,etc) crashing into someone's backyard? Also, europe, Mexico City, and Phoenix are densely populated areas which increases the chance of being seen to unacceptable levels if it is supposed to be a secret. There are plenty of wide open government owned spaces in the American west (I know because I live there) to operate in complete secrecy.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 31 Re: Belgian UFOs and Other Military 'Tests' From: William.Hamilton@pcsmail.pcshs.com Date: 31 Oct 1997 14:54:54 UT Fwd Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 20:58:55 -0500 Subject: Re: Belgian UFOs and Other Military 'Tests' >From: "Jason B. Unwin" <jbu@ris.net> >To: <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: Belgian UFOs and other military "tests". >Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 15:54:52 -0800 >The whole problem with military testing "theories" explaining >UFOs in Belgium, Mexico City, or Phoenix, is that when you want >to keep a test secret, you don't due it in front of millions of >potential witnesses. <snip> >Tests go wrong and when they do in full sight of the public, it >causes embarassment. Could you imagine the political and military >fallout of something like this (LoFlyte, Aurora,etc) crashing >into someone's backyard? Also, europe, Mexico City, and Phoenix >are densely populated areas which increases the chance of being >seen to unacceptable levels if it is supposed to be a secret. >There are plenty of wide open government owned spaces in the >American west (I know because I live there) to operate in >complete secrecy. If the one Big Black Triangle that flew over the west valley near Phoenix on March 13th had crashed, it would have taken out at least two square miles of suburban neighborhood. Bill Hamilton
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 31 Discovery Channel Specials From: William.Hamilton@pcsmail.pcshs.com Date: 31 Oct 1997 16:52:58 UT Fwd Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 21:18:44 -0500 Subject: Discovery Channel Specials My fears are realized. The Discovery channel special on the Phoenix UFOs this Sunday night following a special on Area 51 is going to downplay the mysterious lights of March 13th. They have opted to go with the very lame "flare" theory saying, "People don't like to find out there may be an answer that is not all that interesting. It sort of spoils the fun". I have this reply to producer Brockhoff, "People don't like being fed bogus answers by their government or by the media either". You will all have to wait a bit longer to see the real story on the mysterious sightings over Arizona on March 13th. Sincerely, Bill Hamilton Exec Dir Skywatch International
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 31 UFO UpDates Posting Instructions From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 21:03:16 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 21:03:16 -0500 Subject: UFO UpDates Posting Instructions To make List Life as painless as possible for you and the List moderator, please read the following FAQ (Frequently Asked Questions) carefully. If you have any questions please send the moderator E-Mail. _______________________________________________________________ Posting Instructions To help current and future readers of UFO UpDates' posts and the UFO UpDates Instant Archive software at: http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates please observe the following rules when posting to the List. 1. Line-length Please make your lines no more than 70 characters long ------------------------This line is 70 characters--------------------- Longer lines are wrapped by various pieces of software along the Net and leave awkward and eye-jarring line lengths. 2. Attribution When responding to a message from the List, _always_ include the four line 'header' from the body of that message at the start of _your_ message - eg.: >Date: 01 Jan 97 00:00:01 EST >From: Genghis@mukluk.com <Bob Bobberts> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: UFO UpDate: Grays are Grey Area Again - it's at the beginning of the 'body' of the message you are responding to. 3. Quoting _Always_ quote from the message to which you are responding. Start each quoted line with a 'greater-than' sign (>) as the first character. It should look like this: >Start each quoted line with a 'greater-than' sign (>) as the >first character. It should look like this: The Archive software will automatically italicize these lines. Visit the Archive page and take a look. Keep quoted material from previous messages to a minimum: Just quote enough text to let people know what you are referring to. Quotes should come _before_ you key your response. Messages that do not utilize the required quoting protocol or contain excessive quoting will not be posted to UpDates. Most modern E-Mail software will allow the user to click a 'Reply' button and automatically open a new window, with the message being responded to inserted with universal quote-mark (>) at the beginning of each line. When 'Reply' is clicked, some E-Mail software will insert a line which states: On 01 Jan 97 at 00:00:01 EST, UFO UpDates wrote: If your program does this, please remove it - UFO UpDates did not _write_ the message - it merely posted it to the List. 5. Don't send 'personal' responses to the list that should be sent directly to the original author. Send a message to the list only if it contains new information that you want _everyone_ to see. Messages that contain what the List Administrator considers to be personal attacks or 'flames' will not be posted to the List. Those messages will be forwarded to the person they refer to for their information. 6. URLs (Web Site addresses) _must_ include 'http://' and be on one line. The Archive software will make the URL a 'click-able' link to that address in your archived message. ------------------------------------
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 31 Re: Questions for Abductees From: wlmss@peg.apc.org Date: Sat, 1 Nov 1997 07:44:25 +1000 (GMT+1000) Fwd Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 21:56:13 -0500 Subject: Re: Questions for Abductees > from updates@globalserve.net Wed Oct 29 02:20:24 1997 > Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 09:53:19 -0500 > To: updates@globalserve.net > Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Questions for Abductees > The following two messages from Lawrie Williams will probably be > the last posted from him on this thread. > Errol Bruce-Knapp, > Moderator, UFO UpDates - Toronto Early last year I went to visit a friend who lived nearby. I found all her belongings had been piled in a giant pyramid in the middle of her living room floor. Open jars of jam on top of clothes and crumpled photographs, a saucepan of cooked food dribbling down through curtains and legal papers, smashed paintings and casettes and cutlery. It was quite a sight. The young lass herself was somewhere off wandering the countryside. She had already lost her dog and thrown away all her jewellry and bank book and suchlike. She'd been hospitalized but had upped and walked out. She turned up at last but could not settle down. I ended up taking her home. The local nursing sister asked me to let her stay. I said no way, but I did anyway. The young lady identified me with her big brother. We all agreed that "professional care" in a psych ward was a poor option. The quacks would probably have started her off on serapax or valium, and that's the end of the road. Don't try to tell me about "professionals". She had been working on the latest remake of "Island of Dr Moreau" and had been injured on the set. (She is one of the cavorting monkeys in the background.) She'd taken up with a dark guy and drunk too much, and I heard later she had been seen with an incredible black eye. Some friends tried to cure her "stress" by feeding her massive doses of bundy rum. That was when she *really* flipped out. She was a mess. She tried to clean up her house to vacate it, but kept tuning out. I ended up doing most of it. She was more or less continually assailed by voices in her mind screaming abuse at her. It was weird but as long as I was able to be nearby and reassure her about every ten minutes through the day, she was able to cope, even if this only meant not wandering off again. Her parents were contacted. They were far away. I was told they could not get her on the plane for another week. Great. I was asked to keep her in my care. Her parents rang me and thanked me profusely. I had no choice but to be mister nice guy. It says something for this part of the world that she'd been wandering helplessly and no harm had come to her. In fact someone found her valuables and handed them in. Someone else answered an ad about her missing dog. So I drove her down to Cairns and we went to the police and got her stuff back, and then her dog. I gladly paid the young guys a reward, it was so good to see her happy. She thought she'd lost her pet forever. I looked into the abduction side of it. Maybe she had gone into a psychotic state because someone told her she might have been abducted. Maybe pigs can fly too. Actually I have proved they can, but that is a different story entirely. True, her place was a few hundred meters from a UFO flight path. She had seen small things running around. And she had really gone round the twist while sitting under a tree in her back yard. I felt that these were tenuous connections. The voices she described were not like the clear and meaningul voices that some non-psychotic abductees hear. And the alcohol and probable concussion suggested a more down-to-earth cause for her problem. There was nothing magical going on here. She was about as psychic as a plate of bacon and matzo balls. I told her that in my opinion she needed to rest and avoid alcohol and that in a week or maybe a month the voices would probably fade. I said sometimes they never did, and cautioned her to avoid drinking to excess ever again. Because next time she might flip out and stay flipped out. And I said if she wanted a better idea about what was going on, she should talk to a specialist. She steadily got better on good food in a secure environment. At last she got her plane home. Last I heard she was doing well. Its strange, the way waifs and strays end up in my care. It first happened when I was 17, a mate's girlfriend turned out to be a runaway minor from NZ. The police got involved. You guessed it, they asked me to care for her until a flight home could be arranged. That was the first, and the poor frightened girl above was the most recent. And there have been more between, males and females. It just happens. I have never sought to have this sort of thing happen. I never gain from it, nor look for any advantage or credit for it. In fact I don't think I have ever talked about it before. Never has there been any suggestion of impropritety or possible harm &tc &tc. Not once. Now there is. From several individuals via the internet. The contrast between how things happen and the picture they present could not be more clear-cut. I guess this means either I am a liar or they are fools. It seems like there is no middle ground. I will let you, the reader, judge the truth of this. Lawrie Williams_____________
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 31 Re: Mexican UFO Video Tape From: Penrose Christopher <penrose@sfc.keio.ac.jp> Date: Fri, 31 Oct 97 21:52:29 +0900 Fwd Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 20:58:37 -0500 Subject: Re: Mexican UFO Video Tape >Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 06:00:42 -0500 >From: Graham William Birdsall <106151.1150@compuserve.com> >Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Mexican UFO Video Tape >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >If leading Mexican mainstream UFO researchers are casting doubt >on its authenticity, that is something we all need to be aware >of. Thanks to him, we are now all familiar with the fact that by >a curious coincidence, sophisticated computer software was found >in offices at the precise location from whence the footage was >allegedly shot. We also need a little more than a simple adjective ("sophisticated") describing the software. There is a big difference between discovering a single 386 PC with a copy of Corel Draw, or instead discovering 8 Silicon Graphics Onyx reality engines with Amazon rendering software. Please be specific. (I understand that Graham is simply reiterating this rumor, and he may not have the information himself). If they have an SGI in the building, I would be very suspicious. If they have a Power Mac and Avid Video Shop, I would be considerably less suspicious, as it would be herculean effort to hoax such a quality product with such limited tools. But if Corel Draw was indeed the discovered "sophisticated graphics software", then I ask you to revisit the dictionary and ponder the meaning of the word "sophisticated". What computers were discovered (in number, make, model, cpu)? And precisely what software was used (company, name of product)? If this information cannot be specified, then the concerns about software hoax are weakened to the point of being baseless rumor. We cannot even begin to talk about what is possible with this discovered software until we have a precise description of it. Christopher Penrose penrose@sfc.keio.ac.jp
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 31 Re: ET Hypothesis: Government Concern? From: Peregrine Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith] Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 11:39:31 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 21:31:46 -0500 Subject: Re: ET Hypothesis: Government Concern? The Duke of Mendoza presents his compliments to the List. >Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 21:13:27 -0500 >From: James Easton <pulsar@compuserve.com> >Subject: ET Hypothesis: Government Concern? >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> The following is an expanded version of my treatment of the so- called Belgian Triangles in "UFO: The Government Files" (ISBN 0-7607-0218-7). Case #32 FALCONS HUNT TRIANGLES Brussels--Tienen--Li=E8ge--Eupen Axis, Belgium 30-31 March, 1990 The Belgian UFO flap opened on 29 November 1989, when hundreds of people in and around Eupen, near the German border, saw a huge triangular UFO, showing bright spotlights, pass over the town. The prime witesses were two gendarmes. In the following months, similar craft were reported from around the country. Many skywatches were organized, and many photographs and some 30 videotapes were taken of the UFOs. By March 1990 the Belgian authorities had received over 2500 reports of triangular UFOs, mostly around Eupen and Li=E8ge, since November 1989. The Royal Belgian Air Force (RBAF) agreed that if a Brussels-based UFO research group, SOBEPS, would co-ordinate reports at ground level, the RBAF would handle tracking and interception. On the night of 30/31 March, police patrols and civilian witnesses linked to SOBEPS reported from 11:00pm that a UFO - the first report, from a gendarme at Ramillies, mentioned three, showing red, green and yellow lights - appeared to be flying on a consistent course across Belgium. RBAF radars at Glons and Semmerzake confirmed the sightings and, at 00:05am, two F-16 Fighting Falcons were scrambled to intercept. The UFO had been flying slowly at 150kt/280kmh at 9000ft/2750m until the F-16s' radar locked on to it, when it accelerated at an extraordinary rate to 970kt/1800kmh and dived to below 5000ft/1500m. Next it flashed up to 11,000ft/3350m and then suddenly dived, and in a few seconds was lost to radar amid 'ground clutter'. The chase continued, with several brief lock-ons, until 1:02am, when the F-16s headed for their base, landing a few minutes later. Ground observers reported that around 1:30am four UFOs 'lost their luminosity' and 'seemed to disappear in four different directions'. Video tapes of the airborne radar read-outs were later released to the press. The RBAF at first suspected that the USAF was testing the effectiveness of their 'stealth' aircraft - the F117A fighter in particular, which has an unusual triangular configuration. The USAF denied the charge twice, in December 1989 and again in June 1990, saying the plane had 'never flown in the European theater'. This may have been disingenuous: there were persistent rumors in aviation circles in the late 1980s that the F117A was occasionally operating at night from USAF bases in eastern England, while the equally unorthodox-looking B-2 stealth bomber openly visited the UK not long after its unveiling in November 1988. It also became known in 1992 that, despite previous denials, US stealth aircraft had secretly photographed a French uranium- enrichment plant at Pierrelatte. However, the F-16 can fly twice as fast as either the B-2 or F-117A: so how would they have outpaced the Belgian jets? Belgian skeptic Wim van Utrecht demolished many of the claims surrounding the events of 30/31 March 1990 (see text) but conceded that 'some kind of unusual flying machine did manifest itself over our country on two or three occasions' in November and December 1989. The object 'may have been an experimental, self-propelled balloon of triangular configuration. This would explain not only the slow and almost silent overflight... but also its reason to carry [lights] attuned to standard safety regulations. ...[B]limps and new generation airships are now advertised in military circles as the best possible solution for covert reconnaissance duties.' THE TRIANGLES OF BELGIUM Beginning on 29 November 1989, one of the largest flaps of recent years overtook Belgium (see Case #32) and reached its peak in April 1990. Professor of physics Auguste Meessen managed to secure the radar tapes of several of these incidents. His analysis revealed a previously unrecognized atmospheric phenomenon that he called 'flying angels', but much data remained unexplained. While Meessen found that none of the radar traces corresponded to any of the visual reports, his report of November 1990 [*1] spent many words satirizing the [skeptical] press treatment of the wave, wondered 'if UFOs are extraterrestrial, why are their shapes now different from previously reported objects?' and asserted that the collective unconscious 'does not, for the most part, desire extraterrestrials'. In October 1991, SOBEPS, the main UFO group involved in the flap, published a 500-page dossier on the events ['Vague d'OVNI sur la Belgique - Un dossier exceptionel']. It had an introduction by Dr J.-P. Petit of the French National Centre of Scientific Research (CNRS) and included papers by Meessen advocating the ETH as the best explanation for the sightings. The book sold out rapidly, but was not universally admired. Ten Belgian scientists denounced Petit and Meessen for their 'rash statements and pseudo- scientific approach'. Meessen had already speculated about UFO propulsion systems on the basis of a tape-recording that turned out to be of radio interference from an over-the-horizon radar, while Petit was soon to publish a book in which he revealed that his research at CNRS had been dictated to him by aliens from Ummo! (The Ummo affair was an elaborate hoax that started in Spain in 1965 and continued for years.) In a long analysis in 1992 [*2] Belgian skeptic Wim van Utrecht disposed of several items of would-be photographic evidence, including one whose lights, he drily remarked, showed that Belgian UFOs 'strictly abide by European safety regulations for air traffic'. As Meessen had found but ignored, van Utrecht noted a complete lack of correlation between ground reports and radar traces from the 30/31 March sightings; sky maps showed many visual reports were probably bright stars and planets. [*3] In addition, the SOBEPS book showed that witnesses reported not just triangles that night, but 'rectangle, trapezoid, diamond and boomerang shapes', while 'protrusions, windows, domes and hatches always appear to be positioned at different sides of the objects'. 'In short,' wrote van Utrecht, witnesses reported 'exactly those shapes that match designers' views on what airplanes and spacecraft of the future should look like.... Apparently, the old flying saucer myth has put on a new face, perfectly in line with modern trends in design.' And the internal inconsistencies in the SOBEPS dossier scarcely make sense if the same group of identical triangular UFOs was traversing eastern Belgium, as claimed. [*4] On that point, van Utrecht observed that almost all the reports came from south of the language border between northern, Flemish- speaking Belgium and the French-speaking south. He suggested this could be explained 'either by postulating that the intelligences behind the UFOs adapt their flight-paths to culturally-defined borders, or by accepting that culural factors had a strong influence on the reporting process'. In 1993, a confidential study by a civilian engineer from the Belgian Electronic War Center and a major of sappers 'revealed that the unidentified F-16 radar returns captured on video on March 30-31, 1990, were partly due to unusul atmospheric conditions of that night and partly to the fact that the F-16 radar in question had mistakenly locked onto the second F-16 that was taking part in the UFO chase!' Van Utrecht speculated that, among other reasons, the report may not have been released to the public because 'the military wanted to conceal a malfunction of newly acquired expensive radar equipment'.[*5] ------------------------- NOTES & REFERENCES *1: Auguste Meessen, 'The Belgian Sightings', International UFO Reporter, Vol 16 No 3 (1991) *2: Wim van Utrecht, Triangles Over Belgium: A case of Uforia?, Caelestia 1992 *3: '...the recorded [radar] images acted so spooky (sudden changes in altitude and incredible accelerations with no reports of sonic booms) that they remind of false radar returns (due to meteorological conditions or to instrument malfunction) or of distorted echoes from real targets (such as ground-based objects or aircraft equipped with stealth technology. However, to Meessen, "the only reasonable hypothesis" is that we are dealing with "UFOs, of which the performances clearly indicate a non- terrestrial origin". Surely this is an anti-scientific way of rounding off an investigation. Why not simply conclude that a satisfactory explanation has not yet been found!' - van Utrecht, op. cit., pp13-14. *4: Van Utrecht continues [pp16-17] with a timely reminder of the fragility of the Myth of the Trained Observer: '...that many cases are unique because they were reported by people with occupations or educations that indicate "trained observers" is another often heard argument from the believers' camp. Hendry's much-praised analysis of explained and unexplained UFO reports [The UFO Handbook, Sphere 1980, pp101-102] gives a sobering view on this. Comparing 1,158 IFO cases (explained reports) with 113 UFO cases (unexplained reports) for any one occupation, Hendry created a misperception "failure rate" for the different occupations. The ratio of IFOs reported [as UFOs] to all occupations yielded unexpected results: police officers (the number one witnesses in almost every major event of the Belgian flap) ranked on top with the highest number of identified UFO reports, meaning that, for one reason or another, policemen are the first ones to report natural phenomena and man-made objects as UFOs. Hendry found that all other occupations did better, including students, housewives and people with no job.' *5: Wim van Utrecht, personal communication, January 1996. What I have yet to see is some documentation of Col [later Maj-Gen] de Brouwer's personal views on UFOs and the ETH before he instigated the SOBEPS skywatch of 30-31 March 1990. It would seem that he has stuck with the SOBEPS line since, as he appears from time to time at ufological conferences, and repeat invitations to these gatherings of the faithful tend not to be extended to skeptics and curmudgeons. But it is clear that the Belgian government view of UFOs is not identical with de Brouwer's. ------------------------------- Comments, corrections, updates and additional details (preferably facts) welcomed. Yours &c Parallelogram D. Mensuration Square Peg
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 31 Re: ETH &c From: clark@canby.mn.frontiercomm.net [Jerome Clark] Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 13:18:44 PST Fwd Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 21:41:43 -0500 Subject: Re: ETH &c > Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 21:29:27 -0500 > From: Peregrine Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith] > Subject: ETH [Extra Terrestrial Hypothesis] &c > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > >From: clark@canby.mn.frontiercomm.net [Jerome Clark] > >Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 11:35:04 PST > >To: updates@globalserve.net > >Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Questions for Abductees > Here we go again. Before you judge the expression on my face that > you cannot even see, please answer the question. And (hard tho' it > is to break the habit of a lifetime) with specific answers and > attendant arguments, not a biblography or a list of authorities, > unsubstantiated appeals to which do not impress. In unkind > moments I think of it as a form of the higher hand-waving. Hard as it may be for you to believe, Duke, I have a life to lead and, what's more, paying work to attend to. If you think I am going to write journal- or even book-length responses to you, you're off in dreamland, and I don't mean the one in Area 51. And, actually, I don't think you think that, either. I think you're just posturing -- and being unamusingly disingenuous. I will continue to refer readers to treatments of the ETH in which the subject is treated with diligence and care, and at the length this complex question deserves. Again, I refer interested and open-minded readers to Mike Swords' writings, appended to which is a bibliography of journal papers to which the inquiring mind can go for further information. I refer also to my essay on "Extraterrestrial Hypothesis and Ufology," which also has a bibliography, and also to Edward Ashpole's The UFO Phenomena (1995). > >The ETH may be right, or it may be wrong, but to pretend that it > >is outrageous and absurd is simply to engage in the stalest of > >rhetorical tricks. > Is this a rhetorical trick, or just stale? Is it a rhetorical > trick to describe the ETH as "reasonable" (etc) without giving > reasons and then declining to do so when asked? Is it what Ed > Stewart would call "ufological wisdom"? Is this a put on? Is it > one of the boys in the office again? Or is it just bluster and > pomposity and finger-wagging? In other words: Is this what they call "anti-ufological wisdom"? Sound, fury, nothing signified. Again, read the literature. And see below. > Please cite where I say or even pretend to say that the ETH is > outrageous or absurd. (And you needn't get oversophisticated > about the guffaws, btw.) Please cite where you have said that the ETH, though you reject it, is a reasonable hypothesis which a reasonable person, even if ultimately mistaken, can hold. I've always heard you treat it, with the Ameriphobia that always seems to permeate such discourse, as some sort of American disease (e.g., your colorful unConvention lecture in 1995; see also David Sivier's interesting discussion of your views in the current Magonia). You're not being helpful here, Duke, though I hope all this venting makes you feel better.. > >>And perhaps Jerome could demonstrate just which parts of > >>the scientific method have been applied - scientifically - to > >>which cases? Or even one? I am especially looking forward to > >>reading about all those repeated and independently verified > >>experiments that burden the pages of the scientific or even > >>the ufological literature. > >Read the literature, Duke. > You please answer the question, Jerry. The reasons I asked it > were twofold: to see if you *could* answer it, and because this > is a public forum. Strange whisperings that I cannot explain give > me a powerful impression that I'm not the only one in the world > or even on this List who'd like to know the answer. It's hard to imagine any response that doesn't involve some variant of the adjective "disingenuous" here. If Duke is the naif he's pretending to be here, one can only ask how he came to write books on UFOs and to hold such strong opinions on the subject. Moreover, if he reallly does believe the ETH not to be outrageous and absurd, why is he even arguing with me? I wasn't even making the claim that the ETH is correct (though of course I think it could be), simply that it is a reasonable reading of the UFO evidence, for reasons outlined at length in papers and books he apparently doesn't want to confuse himself with by reading. What is Duke alleging here? That there is no scientific writing on UFO cases, statistics, landing traces, radar/ visuals, photographs, the abduction phenomenon? Does this sort of cuteness -- or rhetorical desperation -- merit a response? Is there anybody out there who thinks there is not a body of scientific literature of UFO study? Raise your hands. No, you've already voted, Duke. And without yours, I suspect that leaves us with no votes. > Which is not to say I won't read your book when it hits these > shores (an ISBN would help with our enquiries, BTW) and will very > likely enjoy it. I enjoy your books, too, though I confess that sometimes it's hard to believe they were written by the individual who signs himself > Pratincole D. Mockingbird > Air Drummer. Cheers, Jerry Clark
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 31 Interview with Eve Frances Lorgen From: Patricia Mason <pmason@ee.net> Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 17:35:35 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 21:54:34 -0500 Subject: Interview with Eve Frances Lorgen Hello All, I just finished doing an interview with Eve Frances Lorgen. I thought I'd pass it along. You can also find it on my web site at: http://users1.ee.net/pmason/Eve.html Best wishes, Pat Mason --------------------------------------------------------------------------- INTERVIEW WITH EVE FRANCES LORGEN UR By way of introduction, why don't you tell everyone a little about yourself? You have been involved in experiencer support and related research for a number of years, however your name may not be well known on the Internet at this point. EFL My name is Eve Frances Lorgen, and I have been running an abductee support group in San Diego County for several years (since 1991). I have a master's degree in Counseling Psychology, experience in hypnosis, and have been an abductee since childhood. I have a bachelor's degree in Biochemistry and I worked in the biotech field for seven years before receiving my master's in Psychology. My other areas of study are alien abduction phenomena and experienced anomalous trauma, paranormal and the occult, dreamwork, oriental medicine, music, and the Bible. UR What prompted you to start the abductee support group and how did you find abductees? Are you the facilitator? EFL I was motivated by seeing that there was a need within the community that I lived that wasn't being filled. I had attended lectures by the San Diego UFO Society on various UFO topics and met other abductees who were also interested. At the time (1987-1991) I was going through some alien encounters and trying to process the issues associated with anomalous trauma in therapy. I completed a master's degree in Counseling Psychology in 1991 and began counseling clients with various issues, including abductions, and anomalous trauma cases. That included satanic ritual abuse cases, sexual molestation cases and unusual cases where occult and poltergeist activity was apparent. I started the group around 1991 and facilitated it myself until two years ago, I have a colleague who is going for his doctorate in Counseling Psychology who now facilitates the group with me. I have become involved as a friend with so many of the abductees in my group that it was best for someone else who didn't have what we call "dual relationships" with the abductees in the group. This is a professional ethic used with the counseling profession that states that it is best to maintain a therapeutic relationship without having so many emotional ties to the clients. It would be like me trying to be the family therapist= with my own family, and that would not be as effective as an outside observer who is not emotionally connected to the family. I saw that many abductees had a need, and that was for genuine friendship. Many are isolated in unhappy relationships, and really are looking for a friend who understands and accepts them as they are. I thought it was more important for these people to have a friend rather than an aloof therapist who only talks to them in group meetings. I have learned more from being a friend to other experiencers than from being a therapist to them. I am amazed at how much information is missed by many researchers and investigators in the UFO field, because their goal was to get information, rather than being a friend in need. As a friend and counselor of many experiencers I can see the larger picture of what is happening and follow through with the people after working with them. UR How often does the support group meet? EFL The group meets every other month or so at a private residence. We meet for several hours from 1pm until 7pm. I also try to do what I call "core group" meetings with the abductees who are at a more involved level with their abductions, or who cannot come to group due to distance. Because of the nature of the alien abduction phenomena, it takes an extraordinary amount of effort to follow through with the experiencers to keep them involved. What I mean by this is that there is an external source (directly or indirectly mediated by= alien presence) acting within these people's lives that exerts pressure not to attend groups, get information, hypnotic regressions, or meet with people who have gotten to the core of their alien abduction issues. This is part of what I refer to as "the spiritual warfare" tactics of the alien presence, or who or whatever intelligence is acting behind it. These activities I call the "detracting efforts of the aliens" to keep experiencers away from support groups where people may get to their core memories and issues. The whole idea is to prevent the abductee from getting the information that may be not only within them, but with others who have discovered the alien activities by their own memories. The detracting efforts increase when the reptile type of alien being is discovered in the experiencers abductions and also any military involvement. Many of these detracting efforts go well beyond spiritual warfare and are outright obvious if you just observe enough cases over a period of time. Then you will see a pattern emerging, things like phone tapping, clicks and loud static during phone conversations relating to the subject matter, black helicopter activity directly over the abductee's or researchers' home (especially when on phone discussing sensitive information), odd illnesses, uncoincidental auto accidents, and the outright threats given by intelligence operatives. As said most of the time it is more insidious and the form of threatening dream intrusion scenarios or what I call "stage managed virtual reality" dreams where it can be like an abduction and someone tells the experiencer not to go to the group, or therapist, or investigator. Then sometimes after the dream the abductee awakens with a terrible illness that physically prevents them from going to meetings, or getting on the information trail with key individuals. It is imperative to talk with other experiencers both positive and negative to get the full panorama of what the aliens or whoever is abducting people is up to. Some experiencers claim to only have positive experiences and avoid any abductees or investigators like the plague if their research or experiences doesn't match what they want to believe. This is just a form of denial, and not true spiritual wisdom, or skepticism for that matter. I am not trying to incorporate victim mentality either, but to have the ability to acknowledge the shadow not only in one's own experiences, but how it operates in others as a detracting tactic to keep people "uninformed". It is quite effective, as you can see in the UFO community. Spiritual warfare tactics are evident when the "can of worms" gets opened by someone who discovers that their experiences are not what they thought them to be, or experiences that do not match any of the available literature on the subject matter. This may include some pretty scary and apparently "negative" stuff. Researchers like the late Dr. Karla Turner addressed some of these more unusual experiences in her books, "Taken" and " Masquerade of Angels". Her mentor was Barbara Bartholic, a hypnotherapist and abduction researcher for over 25 years. Barbara has worked with over 600 cases, and really knows the patterns of abduction activity that occur in families and especially in the abductees interpersonal relationships. If it hadn't been for this saintly woman, Barbara Bartholic, I may still be floundering from crises to crises in my own alien manipulated dramas that I only learned in hindsight what the aliens were trying to do. This subject matter involving the detracting efforts, relationship manipulations and orchestrations and basic spiritual warfare tactics will be the focus of my next book. Currently I am writing a book on lucid dream experiments and my life experiences relating to mystical, visionary and some alien abduction encounters. It is in the format of the revelation of a personal myth, and inspires hope for the truth seeker. UR How can abductees tell if they are being deceived and mislead? EFL If the deception and manipulation or programming is effective on the individual, then they start promoting the alien agenda and its correlate spiritual ideologies, which in most cases denounce Christianity. Instead they may promote the Ashtar Command or other channeled material which appears to be spiritually empowering, but is really a delusion. In most cases, these individuals only want to promote the "positive" experiences and avoid anyone or information that is other than what they want to believe. But the truth of the matter is, if these people were so spiritually evolved as they claim to be, then they would have the capacity to acknowledge their own shadow, and how it operates in themselves and others. This self-knowledge takes much effort, therapy, meditation and prayer to get to the true core issues. One must be strong enough to face the truth of their experiences without holding on to any beliefs at all. If their love for approval or their own reputation among peers is stronger than their love for the truth, then they inevitably will be distorted in their perceptions. As some say, you must check the fruit on the tree. By their deeds, and relationships, ye shall know them. Sometimes the experiencer will get messages from their "guidance" that tell them to stay away from certain researchers or people who especially know about the "negative" alien abduction stuff. In one instance an abductee was led to do certain psychic and healing exercises in a particular energy grid zone area of her home. The alignment of this energy zone in conjunction with the psychic healing exercises opened up her psychic energy centers and it acted as an energy drain. Then unusual paranormal events occurred in her home and with her daughter, who began having reptilian abductions. An interdimensional portal or doorway was created from these "healing psychic exercises" in the grid zone, which actually increased the alien reptilian contact. The whole effect was that the abductees and their family members became psychically drained and woke up with "claw- marks" and were attacked during the night. UR Let's hope that at least some of the positive encounters are indeed as positive as they seem! EFL I have had abductees report experiences where it seemed some type of benevolent angelic contact was protecting the individual from negative aliens. Some have prayed to Jesus Christ and Archangel Michael and have been protected from spiritual warfare attacks in interdimensional altered states and dreams. Not all alien encounters are frightening or negative, either in my life or= other experiencers' lives. I hope there are good aliens out there who are balancing things out for us "pawns" down here, but at this point I am skeptical due to the detracting efforts that are directed at the ones researching this topic. So a good question arises: How do you keep out the detracting efforts and spiritual warfare tactics? 1. Continual prayer. 2. Align oneself with the God of Love (Jesus Christ's methods work well for me). 3. Do good and help one another. 4. Practice healthy relationships. Get out of addictions and behaviors of denial. 5. Be a good observer. 6. Acknowledge the shadow, and work out your own unresolved issues and abduction traumas. 7. Share your insights with other experiencers. 8. Processing enough of your own pain and memories to have the capacity for empathy and compassion. Staying in denial, avoidance of "negative or unpleasant" emotions or alien encounters actually encourages an indifferent and arrogant attitude. 9. Keep a dream journal. Learn and practice lucid dreaming. Do awareness enhancing meditative exercises. Much of my forthcoming book about dreams focuses on a benevolent "beloved father figure" that emerges as a result of intense prayer and lucid dream experiments. UR What have you found to be the most therapeutic method for dealing with anomalous trauma? EFL Dreamwork has been an incredible ally for me and the people I work with. By the practice of recording your dreams, you enhance your own capacity for dream recall and altered state alien encounters as well. By practicing lucid dreaming, you gain a better degree of critical thinking in your dreams and abductions. By knowing your own dream process that is unique to you, you will develop the ability to discern what dreams are your own and what are stage managed alien orchestrated dreams. Only then will you know how the aliens or intelligence behind their activities are really trying to influence you. In= my own experience, I have been able to discern the difference and even catch them the act of giving me post hypnotic suggestions that would be detrimental to me. This is only the tip of the iceberg. How can you really know what the aliens are about if you don't remember your own experiences, let alone your own dreams? Awareness is the number one tool for information acquisition. It is apparent to me we live in a world of imposed ignorance that often forces us to make choices that we inevitably suffer from. It is important to share your experiences and talk, talk, talk, and listen, listen, to others. Just thinking "positive" about the aliens isn't going to make them go away, save you, or increase your level of spiritual evolution. It may only encourage delusion and a false coping method of security. It is the truth that sets us free, and that means accepting the whole ball of wax, both positive and negative. UR So much has been said about the greys. Do the people in your support group report seeing other types of aliens? EFL I work with several abductees who have had the reptile type of alien encounter. The most common reptile encountered is very tall, 6- 10 feet tall, has somewhat of a snout face, red or yellow slit eyes (they also have been observed to have green and yellow eyes, usually snake- like in appearance), clawed hands, sometimes a tail, and are often wearing black robes. Sometimes they wear a type of militaristic garb or breastplate. They are frightening, and often do the sexual assault type of behavior. They are possessive of their abductees. The interesting thing about reptilians is their ability of mastering illusion and shape shifting. A female abductee had an encounter where a tall being came through an interdimensional doorway or portal right in her bedroom at night. She became paralyzed and the being sexually assaulted her, all the while putting in her mind that she is having sex with her favorite sexual fantasy man. When she looked in its eyes, she realized it was a reptilian with the slit eyes. Some abductees are better than others in breaking through the illusions. Reptilians can shape shift and have been reported to be seen as tall greys, Nordic types and military men. Some abductees believe the reptile type of alien is the head honcho on the totem pole and really run the show. These are the types of beings that are sometimes reported in the underground base abductions alongside military and lab-coated personnel. These reptile type or alligator beings have been noted throughout history in occult and black magic practices. Other beings reported other than greys are the tall insectoid beings. UR Earlier we talked about abductees being misled by the aliens. What about military, or seemingly military, involvement in their lives? EFL Many abductees report military personnel in some abduction scenarios, but this can be really a shape shifting cover for alien activity= in some cases. Those with military involvement are often children of parents who were in the armed forces or intelligence community or in the aerospace community with top secret projects. Many report threats by military intelligence operatives and the aliens themselves if they divulge information or go to see a researcher or therapist. Most of the time though, the detracting efforts are more insidious, such as intense feelings of anxiety, stage-managed threatening dreams, and uncoincidental accidents and odd illnesses. Or a series of crises after crises, which keeps the abductee too distracted to= be able to get to the facts. As a researcher, or abductee, you know you have hit the hot buttons when your phone is being tapped, your computer jams and crashes, black helicopters hover over your home, and you are visited by intelligence operatives. If abductions increase as a result of going to a support group or after seeing a therapist, be on the alert that someone doesn't want you to know something about your own experiences, or those of others. But be careful not to become too paranoid. Balance out your life with spiritually inspiring work, and try not to focus solely on the "enemy" or you will have problems. True wisdom comes by being able to acknowledge and discern the enemy and how it operates. Nip it in the bud before it becomes a problem. But it must be done tactfully, and with compassion for others. These hot buttons seem to be pushed when trying to get information on the reptile type of encounters and military encounters where aliens and military personnel are working in apparent unison. Reptilians, sometimes referred to as alligator men, are described as being negative, hateful, militaristic, and very sexual. They are often reported making sexual assaults on both males and females. Some abductees or reptilian contacts have reported that the reptiles, in black hooded robes and capes are higher on the hierarchy, and control the greys and even the Nordic types. It is interesting that throughout history some occultists have been in contact with the "Alligator Gods" by means of rituals and some black magic practices. What is also interesting, is that when one does a study of the types of abductees that are under surveillance, or have military types of abductions, you will find that the reptiles are involved. They are very telepathic and can communicate through mental third eye imagery. These beings are interdimensional. UR What is mental third eye imagery? EFL The third eye or the chakra energy center located between the eyes, forehead area also correlates with the pineal gland in the brain. This gland is responsible for internal mental imagery that we see in our mind's eye, rather than optical perception. The aliens can activate these centers in our minds and cause us to have visions and communicate through pictorial imagery as well. UR There's a couple more things I'd like to go into before I let you get away! You have got to tell people about the alien matchmaking thing! I've heard Budd Hopkins talk a little about it. What's going on here? EFL What I have observed is very extreme. Some refer this as more of a love obsession. Others have used the term "Alien Love Bite." One researcher I would like to credit for this information is Barbara Bartholic, who, as I mentioned before, is a hypnotherapist and researcher with over 25 years experience in working with abductees. The "love bite" can be described whereby two individuals, usually abductees or at least one abductee is magnetically drawn to a targeted partner who the abductee has previously been set up with via the aliens in some type of bonding process in previous abductions or perhaps interdimensionally. They may not recall the bonding, yet feel psychically and empathetically connected. They may have memories or body memories of having had intimate sexual contact and an instant chemistry arises between them. Often the abductee is drawn to a partner who is not the usual type of partner they would naturally be attracted to, even homosexual in some extreme cases. The common thing that sadly occurs is that one partner is left unrequited, and the relationship is cut off after the targeted partner is sometimes very suddenly "switched off" often after an alien encounter, of which they are not aware. This topic will be discussed in full in my next book. These are not normal relationships, and many abductees can tell the difference. Some believe the alien motive behind this is for harvesting of emotional sexual energy, or for the purpose of reproductive pursuits between the two partners. It becomes apparent after the mother has the child, that the relationship disintegrates and then the child starts getting= abducted. It is sad and devastating for relationships and families, because it often breaks them up when a love affair arises as a result of alien manipulation. Again, these are not like normal affairs or relationships and one must look at the "whole clinical picture" before jumping to the conclusion that all abductee relationships are "manipulated and controlled". UR As a biochemist you have worked with fluorescence. Some people are reporting that they have found portions of their skin glow under a black light after an alien encounter. You are currently working with Derrel Sims on his research into this. Please tell us about it and how we can find out more. EFL After some alien encounters abductees will have a residual luminescent glow on their bodies that can be visualized with a black light. The markings are usually subdermal, meaning it can't be washed off. The colors vary from green, white, lavender, blue, orange, red and pink. Some mutilated cattle have been observed to also have a type of fluorescence. There are probably many different etiologies for the fluorescence and the different colors. Contaminating fluorophores must be ruled out, of course. We are in the process of having several fluorescent skin samples tested. This information is classified at this point until all testing is completed. For an overview of these fluorescent= findings please see the October issue of Alien Encounters magazine from the UK. My article is entitled "Beneath the Skin". --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ms. Lorgen is in the process of writing an article on the spiritual warfare and the psychological issues of abductees. Also, books on her personal experiences that include the above-mentioned topics in greater detail are in the works. You can write to her on the Internet at: <LORGEN@aol.com>. =A91997 Unusual Research =09 [[[[[[[[[[[[ UNUSUAL RESEARCH ]]]]]]]]]]]]] http://users1.ee.net/pmason/index.html [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 31 Current Encounters: Filer's Files #43 From: Majorstar <Majorstar@AOL.COM> Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 11:13:48 EST Fwd Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 23:43:37 -0500 Subject: Current Encounters: Filer's Files #43 Filer's Files #43 MUFON Skywatch Investigations From George A. Filer: MUFON Eastern Director, Oct. 30, 1997 Majorstar@aol.com (609) 654-0020 Some UFOs such as Silverbug may belong to various world governments. GEORGIA Ken Aspinwall, an independent ufologist in LaGrange, has informed Georgia of MUFON that a group of witnesses saw a cone-shaped or capsule shaped UFO. It looked much like the infamous 9/16/96 Valley, Alabama UFO photos. A UFO was hovering and moving at great speed on two occasions near Cannonville, Troup County, in western Georgia. One of the witnesses told Georgia MUFON that they saw a cone-shaped UFO over Murphy Road on Tuesday, October 21st at around 11:00 p.m. The couple said, "The UFO had a round bottom with a sometimes flashing circle of red lights. On top of the cone was an intense and large non-blinking white light." The next night at approximately 7:30 to 8:00 p.m., one of the witnesses along with her 18 year old younger sister saw the same UFO. It was hovering over the Cannonville road between the church and the I-85 overpass to the east. The UFO was seen hovering just above the treeline and moving up and down slowly at times. Pulling their car over and shutting the car's engine off they watched the Valley type UFO flit around in the general area for over five minutes. The UFO at its closest point was about 3/4's of a mile away and made no sound. At that distance the UFO had an apparent size of a full-moon. One witness estimated the UFO was about the size of a twin-engine prop-plane. Georgia MUFON/ISUR has communicated with witnesses near LaGrange, in Colorado and Indiana that have seen the Valley type UFOs. They all agree the UFO is the size of small plane. Troup County "911"personnel are currently checking for any calls that may have been made to them concerning UFOs. They tentatively do not remember any calls. An unrelated witness, a roofer, said that he and his wife had seen stationary or slow-moving strange blue flashing lights hovering in the Cannonville area just before midnight on 18 October. While a new tower has recently been erected in Cannonville for cellular phones, the tower has steady flashing red lights. According to the roofer, blue lights' lit-up a sizeable portion of the sky for 20 minutes and did not flash with any pattern. The Oct. 22nd, sighting in Cannoville ended when the cone-shaped UFO shot off to the east over Hutchinson Mill Road at a speed "greater than a commercial airliner." At all times the UFO was seen at only slightly above tree-top level with largely only its large white light on. When its ring of red lights sporadically came on, the witnesses could clearly see the round bottom of the UFO. Further investigation will continue. Thanks to State Director, John Thompson: gin@wp-lag.mindspring.com LOUISANA Mike Painter, a former Air Force Security Specialist was on guard duty at Barksdale Air Force Base in Shreveport, Louisiana in September of 1975 at nearly midnight. Mike reports, "I was walking my post that evening when we heard over our radios that a civilian had called the base, reporting a UFO sighting. Initially we laughed it off, when a few moments later the guard at the West entrance to the base reported to Command the an object was hovering at a height of about 50 to-60 feet. It remained stationary for about 15 minutes. The object then left to the South. Just a few moments later, the guards at the Nuclear Weapons Storage Area (Barksdale was a SAC base) reported that the object was hovering over their post. It stayed there for another 15-20 minutes and then left. I had joined another of the guard at a point where our posts intersected and were listening to the radio traffic. The object passed over us as it left the weapons area. The object was triangular in shape and about 40 feet across. It had dim lights and made no sound as it passed overhead." Mike now lives in Crystal Lake, Illinois in (Thanks to John Thompson and ISUR for this sighting report.) CALIFORNIA Tom Nguyen reports on a sighting that occurred on Sunday afternoon, October 12, 1997, over Orange County, CA. The primary witness' name is Sean Tyrone, who related the story to me. He's a coworker here at my office. Here is a brief account of what he related to me: At about 1:00 p.m., he stepped out on the balcony of his 2nd floor apartment located in Fountain Valley. While looking up into the clear blue sky, he observed numerous luminous objects traveling at a high rate of speed in the upper atmosphere. The Santa Ana winds that night kept skies unusually clear and there were no clouds. At first, he thought they were meteorites. However, he observed two objects rapidly descend in a falling-leaf type of motion and suddenly zoom away in a straight trajectory at a high rate of speed. He called his wife out to the balcony to also observe the objects. He phoned his brother and father living in Westminster, a nearby city, as well as another friend in nearby Huntington Beach All of them observed the objects in the air. As I understand, this was observable for a couple of hours. Sean tried to photograph some of the objects with a camera and is waiting for them to be developed. I immediately called Orange County MUFON and left a brief account on their answering machine as instructed. Mike Tyrone, Sean's brother, also contacted OC MUFON. Let me know if you would like to get in touch with any of these people to discuss what they saw. Thanks to Tom Nguyen: TOM@bpm.stjoe.org POSSIBLE IMPLANTS US investigations have now revealed evidence of alien technology implanted in humans. California surgeon Dr Roger Leir has removed three "highly anomalous implants" from a couple who claimed to have had UFO encounters. Two were removed from the woman's toes. The third was in the man's hand. All were attached to nerves. Dr Leir, working with Houston-based alien investigator Derrel Sims, said the implants were ultra-hard magnetic cores surrounded by a dense gray membrane, which could not be cut. The membranes, made of tough proteins formed from skin and blood, prevented signs of inflammation or rejection. No one knows how the objects entered the body because no scar tissue or entry point was found. Dr Leir said "If these can teach us how to prevent tissue rejection, we could revolutionize surgery." From the U.K. UFO Network 9/8/97 Issue 82: CHILEAN JETS PURSUE UFO A Punta Arenas man claims to have witnessed two jet interceptors of the Fuerzas Aereas de Chile (FACh) in pursuit of a UFO over Punta Arenas, the southernmost city in Chile. According to a report by Dr. Carlos Munoz, an investigator for Agrupacion de Investigaciones Ovniologicas (AION), Chile's UFO study group, the night of September 15, 1997, Jesus Montalvo "was on a road outside Punta Arenas when he heard this 'BOOM' like sound coming from behind his car. As he stopped to see what it was, a huge disc-shaped UFO flying very low came from behind and passed right over his car. The UFO was being followed by two Chilean jet fighters flying in combat mode without lights. He watched the pursuit until the UFO made a fast acceleration, disappearing instantly from the sky, leaving behind the two jets." According to AION president Rodrigo Fuenzalida, the Chilean Air Force has been "on alert" since UFO videos shot in Punta Arenas and Iquique in northern Chile were aired on Channel 7, Television Nacional de Chile in Santiago. On Tuesday, October 14, 1997, at 8:30 a.m., a UFO hovered near a school located in Santiago de Chile, the nation's capital. Several dozen students and a professor spotted the daylight disc, which was arrayed with "many bright lights" as it "hovered for about 15 minutes and then did all sorts of maneuvers over Santiago." The UFO was also seen in the suburbs of Cerrillos and Quilpe, near Vina del Mar. The following day, Wednesday, October 15, two men fishing in Vina del Mar at approximately 8:00 a.m., "saw a UFO come out of the sea and head towards Santiago." (Thanks to Luis Sanchez Perry and Joe Trainor editor Masinaigan@aol.com 26 Oct 1997UFO ROUNDUP, #41 Editors Note: UFOs are frequently observed entering and exiting the water. ION PROPULSION ENGINE ABC News.com: A futuristic form of spacecraft propulsion called ion engine propulsion is one step closer to becoming a reality. The ionic thruster (NASA) Deep Space 1 (DS1), the first launch of NASA's New Millennium program, will use ion propulsion (also known as solar electric propulsion) to power the craft on a deep-space mission next summer. This will mark the first time in the history of space exploration that ion propulsion, rather than chemical propulsion, is being used as the primary means of propelling a spacecraft. On Sept. 25, Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif., completed the most extensive test of an ion engine ever performed. Begun on June 17, 1996, the 8,000-hour endurance test of a prototype xenon ion engine verified that the engine has what it takes for long missions. DS1 is now set to launch on July 1, 1998. During its two-year test mission, the spacecraft will fly by Mars, an asteroid, and a comet, serving as a spaceborne test bed to validate new technologies. DS1's xenon ion engine, which fires electrically charged atoms from its thrusters, is just 11.8 inches in diameter and is powered by more than 2,000 watts from large solar arrays, which focus, collect and store solar energy. Using xenon, a heavy inert gas, for fuel, the engine ionizes (gives an electrical charge to) the gas and electrically accelerates it to a speed of about 18.6 miles per second (about 70,000 miles per hour). When the xenon ions are emitted at such a high speed, they then push the spacecraft in the opposite direction. The converted xenon appears as a ghostly blue haze that trails from the back of the spacecraft as it catapults through space. Perhaps the strangest thing about ion propulsion is that it provides about the same amount of thrust as the pressure of a single sheet of paper held in the palm of the hand. So how does that power a spacecraft? As more and more ions are emitted, this low thrust gradually changes the craft's velocity from low to high speed. From:d005734c@dc.seflin.org (Francisco Lopez) Copyright 1997 ABCNews and Starwave Corporation. All rights reserved. UNITED KINGDOM FLYING TRIANGLES Large massive Flying Triangles (FT) are being observed over nuclear power plants in Southern England on a regular basis. Reports are mounting into the hundreds. Witnesses also report lights leaving a "massive" flying object and returning. Victor Kean from Project FT has eight reports from 1995 in which the FT was seen "discharging spheres" and, to date, two similar reports from 1996. He states: "We are recording reports of these independent 'spheres' (usually red, orange or white) and find that in many instances a FT is also reported within 30 minutes and 50 miles. The 'spheres' have been reported as 'buzzing' or 'pacing' lone vehicles, usually late at night on remote roads. Thanks to Victor J. Kean and Project FT The last month has seen unprecedented UFO activity with "unbelievable" video footage being filmed in East Anglia on the North Sea. Sightings were also reported in Southern England. There were numerous phone calls relating to anomalous lights and "spinning discs" in the Blackpool, Bamber Bridge, Burnley, Southport and Crosby areas of the North West. It should be remembered that another one of our cases from November 1996 related to a cargo aircraft (call sign "Gemstone 904") flying from Belfast Aldergrove Airport to Coventry that encountered a UFO over the Lancashire Coast. This meant that the plane had to change course to avoid a possible collision. The conversation between the aircraft and Manchester ATC was recorded by a amateur radio ham. One thing we know for sure is that advanced prototype aircraft are being tested off the Lancashire Coast of the Eastern UK. Covert military activity is undoubtedly responsible for many reports, but not all. Thanks to: Tim Matthews, stealthchaser@hotmail.com, British UFO Studies Centre and Northern Federation of Independent Ufologists SILVERBUG DISC JET AIRCRAFT: The CIA and the Air Force are starting to release information on experimental disc aircraft apparently built for the government. The recent CIA claims that many UFO sightings were CIA or Air Force reconnaissance craft is probably true. They refer to these aircraft as U-2 or SR-71 or Oxcart aircraft. Recent declassified data infers that at least some of the UFOs sighted were Silverbug, X or Y-2 type disc shaped craft apparently built by the US, Canada and the UK. These craft look like a typical flying saucers. The Silverbug aircraft was designed to fly at 2300 MPH and reach an altitude of 80,600 feet as early as 1955. Additionally. These disc craft can hover and take off vertically like a helicopter. We are attempting to contact former air and ground crews, factory workers and designers now that these aircraft have been officially declassified. You can review some of the formerly classified Silverbug file on http://www 207.41.8.7/Silverbug or order a copy for a small fee. If you actually participated in these previous top secret projects now declassified you may contact me, or send your information to the Director, American Heritage Center, University of Wyoming, P.O. Box 3924 Laramie, WY 82071-3924 If you have a UFO news or comments, please, e-mail it to Majorstar@aol.com.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1997 > Oct > Oct 31 Re: Mexican UFO Video Tape From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com> Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 10:06:19 -0800 Fwd Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 21:10:34 -0500 Subject: Re: Mexican UFO Video Tape > From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>, on 10/31/97 7:02 AM: > Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 06:00:42 -0500 > From: Graham William Birdsall <106151.1150@compuserve.com> > Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Mexican UFO Video Tape > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> > Santiago's assertion that he, and other Mexican UFO researchers, > are currently on the receiving end of alleged hoax 'UFO' tapes, > should raise considerable cause for concern to all those who have > been impressed (like myself) with many of the outstanding video > tape sequencies to have come out of Mexico in recent years. > If purported Mexican UFO footage, claimed by some to be the "best > evidence", is subsequently proven to be a hoax, where does that > leave the rest in the minds of sceptics and debunkers who could > reap havoc? It is certainly unsafe to base the case for UFO reality on any one or combination of photos or (nowadays) videotapes, especially given the ease with high quality fakes can be produced with affordable computer equipment (video is especially suspect, since artificial pixellation can be completely disguised, even on consumer level computer/video systems). And given the much higher incidence of hoaxes in photos and videos, it is, again, unsafe, particularly if the photographer remains anonymous and the camera remains unavailable for testing, to give more than a low level of probability to any single set of photos or videos. The best case for UFO reality remains that produced through study of CE-II cases with physical and medical effects, as well as multiple independent witness NL, DD, RV and CE-I and III cases. Night time photo cases with landmarks AND discernable luminous effects remain the best photo cases, since they are much more difficult to fake. ------ Mark Cashman, creator of The Temporal Doorway at http://www.geocities.com/~mcashman - Original digital art, writing, and UFO research - Author of SF novels available at... http://www.infohaus.com/access/by-seller/The_Temporal_Doorway_Storefront ------