UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun

                          UFO UpDates Mailing List
                                  Jun 1998

  Jun 1:

   Re: Trans-Lunar Phenomena - 98/05/26 - Jakes Louw [5]
   Re: Bruce Maccabee Again Confronted - Bob Shell [9]
   Chat with Mark Carlotto - "Yvonne Hedenland" [21]
   Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force - JBONJO@aol.com [James
   Bond Johnson] [206]
   Sarah McClendon - RAMBLD@worldnet.att.net [Diane Lovett] [20]
   Police Tapes from 1994 Ohio Incident Obtained - "K. Young" [103]
   Re: Alien Baloney - John Velez [6]
   Re: Alien Baloney - John Velez [23]
   Re: Skywatch: Area 51 Still Operational - Mark Cashman [39]
   Re: Alien Baloney - John Velez [28]
   Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force - Nick Balaskas [21]
   PHENOMENON # 9 - Part 1 - Bob Tidwell [189]
   PHENOMENON # 9 - Part 2 - Bob Tidwell [406]
   Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force - KRandle993@aol.com
   [Kevin Randle] [387]
   Re: Alien Baloney - Ufojoe1@aol.com [Joe Murgia] [11]
   Re: Alien Baloney - Nick Balaskas [41]
   Re: Any More News Regarding Roswell? - James Easton [151]

  Jun 2:

   Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force - John [7]
   Re: Alien Baloney - Dennis Stacy [15]
   Evidence Seen Of Non-Polar Mars Ice - Stig Agermose [52]
   Re: Sarah McClendon - John Velez [9]
   Re: A New Approach? - Terry Blanton [43]
   Re: Sarah McClendon - Dennis [18]
   Re: Alien Baloney - "Serge Salvaille" [7]
   Re: Any More News Regarding Roswell? - Neil Morris [46]
   Re: Sarah McClendon - Andy Denne [10]
   ORTK Contemplates Change Of 1999 Plans - Mike Jamieson [6]
   Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force - Bob Shell [11]
   Re: Sarah McClendon - Bob Shell [4]
   Re: A New Approach? - RAMBLD@worldnet.att.net [Diane Lovett] [32]
   Re: Sarah McClendon - RAMBLD@worldnet.att.net [Diane Lovett] [8]
   Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force -
   ufotruth@ix.netcom.com [William Hand] [13]
   Re: Sarah McClendon - KRandle993@aol.com [Kevin Randle] [5]
   Re: A New Approach? - ufotruth@ix.netcom.com [William Hand] [109]
   Re: Any More News Regarding Roswell? - KRandle993@aol.com [Kevin
   Randle] [108]
   UFOs: The Footage Files - Philip Mantle [20]
   Re: Alien Baloney - John Velez [7]
   Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force - "Stanton T.
   Friedman" [16]
   Re: Alien Baloney - John Velez [13]

  Jun 3:

   Formatting Posts to UpDates using CompuServe v2.x - UFO UpDates -
   Toronto [42]
   Official UFO Committee in Uruguay - "A. J. Gevaerd" [54]
   Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force - "Stanton T.
   Friedman" [5]
   Corso -- some background - Doc Barry in Phoenix [160]
   Re: A New Approach? - galevy [Gary Alevy] [24]
   Re: Sarah McClendon - Mike Jamieson [2]
   Mexican UFOs - a Canadian connection? - Nick Balaskas [24]
   Re: Alien Baloney - Nick Balaskas [78]
   Australian May Reports Listing - Robert Frola [387]
   Pilot Saw UFO 20 Years Ago - Stig Agermose [21]
   Re: UFO Burnout - bruce maccabee [24]
   Re: UFOs and Grassroot Action: What next? - RGates8254@aol.com [Robert
   Gates] [30]
   Re: A New Approach? - Terry Blanton [49]
   Re: Alien Baloney - bruce maccabee [6]
   Re: A New Approach? - Terry Blanton [17]
   Re: Sarah McClendon - John Velez [8]
   Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force - John Velez [30]
   In Memorium - Ralph Noyes - Graham William Birdsall [14]
   Alfred's Odd Ode #250 - Alfred Lehmberg [56]
   Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force - Bob Shell [11]
   Re: Sheffield Incident Debunking the Debunkers - AlienHype1@aol.com
   [Max Burns] [154]
   Re: Sarah McClendon - Mendoza [Peter Brookesmith] [18]
   UK.UFO.NW -IRC- guest Philippe Piet van Putten - United Kingdom UFO
   Network [71]
   Re: Sarah McClendon - Dennis [11]
   Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force - RGates8254@aol.com
   [Robert Gates] [46]
   Re: New 'MJ-12' Documents? - "Stanton T. Friedman" [8]
   UFO/9-1-1 Police Incident/pursuit: 12-14-94 - "Kenny Young" [112]
   Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force - Bob Shell [6]

  Jun 4:

   Re: Sarah McClendon - Dennis Stacy [23]
   Re: Sarah McClendon - Dennis Stacy [4]
   Jazz Singer's True Account Of Extraterrestrial - Stig Agermose [43]
   New Books On "Star Trek" Science - Stig Agermose [142]
   Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force - Dennis Stacy [50]
   Re: Stacy, Corso & Birnes [was: Sarah McClendon] - William Hand
   ufotruth@ix.netcom.com [28]
   Re: Stacy, Corso & Birnes [was: Sarah McClendon] - Dan Geib [22]
   Re: Stacy, Corso & Birnes [was: Sarah McClendon] - William Hand
   ufotruth@ix.netcom.com [21]
   Re: Mexican UFOs - a Canadian connection? - Steven Kaeser [23]
   UFO*BC Update - UFO*BC [David Pengilly] [6]
   Re: Stacy, Corso & Birnes [was: Sarah McClendon] - "Stanton T.
   Friedman" [15]
   Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force - "Steven Kaeser"
   [50]
   The 'Stacy Form' - "Serge Salvaille" [28]
   Green Light for Norio's Area 51 Rally - UFO UpDates - Toronto [218]
   Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force - JBONJO@aol.com [7]
   Re: Jazz Singer's True Account - John [72]
   Re: Stacy, Corso & Birnes [was: Sarah McClendon] - "Jerome Clark" [8]
   Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force - Kevin Randle [18]
   Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force - Kevin Randle [86]

  Jun 5:

   Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force - "Ben Field" [18]
   Re: Alien Baloney - Sean Jones [13]
   Re: Stacy, Corso & Birnes - Mendoza [Peter Brookesmith] [15]
   Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force - joel henry [45]
   Re: Area 51 Still Operational - John Rimmer [17]
   Re: Pres. Carter - RGates8254@aol.com [Robert Gates] [9]
   Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force - Bob Shell [8]
   Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force - RGates8254@aol.com
   [Robert Gates] [9]
   Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force - Dennis Stacy [21]
   Re: Stacy, Corso & Birnes - Dennis [32]
   The Sheffield Non-Incident - David Clarke [99]
   Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force -
   ufotruth@ix.netcom.com [William Hand] [94]
   Re: Stacy, Corso & Birnes - Mendoza [Peter Brookesmith] [37]
   C-E: Argentine Pilot Claims He Flew With Ufo 20 - John Stepkowski [25]
   Re: Nazi UFO Research - Andy Roberts [411]
   C-E: Old Mystery Ripples Through UFO Circles - - John Stepkowski [36]
   Occam's Razor and UFOs - "Greg Sandow" [70]
   Re: Stacy, Corso & Birnes - "Jerome Clark" [14]
   Re: Area 51 Still Operational - "Jerome Clark" [34]
   Re: Pres. Carter - Steven Kaeser [41]
   Re: Max Burns chat on #Visitations - Angela Shilling [117]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - RobIrving@aol.com [25]
   Re: Area 51 Still Operational - Steven Kaeser [32]
   Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force - "Greg Sandow" [15]
   Re: Area 51 Still Operational - KRandle993@aol.com [Kevin Randle] [14]
   Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force - RGates8254@aol.com
   [Robert Gates] [4]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - Bob Shell [6]
   Filer's Files #22-1998 - George Filer =20 [372]

  Jun 6:

   Re: Alfred's Odd Ode #251 - Alfred Lehmberg [74]
   eSufo - Neutrinos and Molecules of Creation - "David Watanabe" [41]
   Re: Area 51 Still Operational - "Steven Kaeser" [59]
   Re: Aliens In Advertising [was: Info request] - Sue Kovios [128]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - "Greg Sandow" [13]
   Re: Occam's Razor - Larry Hatch [25]
   Re: Area 51 Still Operational - John [22]
   Re: Area 51 Still Operational - "Jerome Clark" [9]
   Re: Nua Blather: Irish UFO Season Declared Open - Dave Walsh [210]
   Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General - Robert Todd [37]
   Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General - Robert Todd [167]
   There Is No ETH Only The UFO/ET Reality! - ufotruth@ix.netcom.com
   [William Hand] [77]
   Re: Stacy, Corso & Birnes - "Philippe Piet van Putten" [31]
   Re: Area 51 Still Operational - Gary Alevy [17]
   Re: Alfred's Odd Ode #251 - Larry Hatch [6]
   Re: Aliens In Advertising - Larry Hatch [15]
   Ancient Mysteries - Rob Meyer [172]
   Re: Area 51 Still Operational - Kevin Randle [52]
   Re: Area 51 Still Operational - John Rimmer [14]
   Re: Area 51 Still Operational - Mark Cashman [38]
   Re: John Ford [was: Alfred's Odd Ode #251] - John [33]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - RobIrving@aol.com [27]
   Re: Abduction Documents? - Andy Roberts [6]
   Re: John Ford [was: Alfred's Odd Ode #251] - Alfred Lehmberg [15]
   Re: Area 51 Still Operational - John Rimmer [30]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - RobIrving@aol.com [26]
   'Alien' Photo Request - "David Baker" [13]
   Re: New 'MJ-12' Documents? - Dave Rudiak [53]
   Re: Area 51 Still Operational - Kevin Randle [22]
   Re: Occam's Razor - "Greg Sandow" [7]
   Re: Alien Baloney - Sean Jones [12]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - "Jerome Clark" [22]
   Re: Area 51 Still Operational - "Greg Sandow" [5]
   Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General - Kevin Randle [23]
   Help Wanted - Ghost Fliers - David Clarke [14]
   Re: Area 51 Still Operational - John Rimmer [48]
   Vallee Hoaxed Corbin, UFO Sweden & 'Sightings' - "true.x-file. news"
   [290]
   Guilt By Association - "Greg Sandow" [140]

  Jun 7:

   X-Files Movie Preview - Sue Kovios [14]
   Re: UFO/9-1-1 Police Incident/pursuit: 12-14-94 - Susan Baldwin [4]
   BWW Media Alert 19980606 - [55]
   Re: Aliens In Advertising - Jean Hewson [7]
   Re: Nazi UFO Research - bruce maccabee [29]
   Re: Guilt By Association - "Jerome Clark" [23]
   Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General - "Steven Kaeser" [33]
   Re: John Ford - bruce maccabee [18]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - bruce maccabee [43]
   Re: John Ford - Sue Kovios [4]
   Re: John Ford - Larry Hatch [9]
   Re: John Ford - Scott R. Caput [11]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - Henny van der Pluijm [12]
   Re: John Ford - John Velez [40]
   Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General - Stanton T. Friedman [9]
   Re: - "Stanton T. Friedman" [9]
   David Clarke & Jonathan Dagenhart - AlienHype1@aol.com [289]
   Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General - RTodd12191@aol.com [25]
   Re: David Clarke & Jonathan Dagenhart - David Clarke [51]
   Corso Signs Affadavit - Peter Gersten [37]
   Re: New 'MJ-12' Documents? [Re-send] - "Stanton T. Friedman" [9]
   Re: John Ford - Nick Humphries [17]
   UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 3, Number 23 - Masinaigan@aol.com [485]
   Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General - Kevin Randle [12]
   Re: Alien Baloney - Nick Balaskas [19]
   911/UFO Pursuit - A Partial Tape Transcript - UFO UpDates - Toronto
   [401]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - Dennis Stacy [26]
   Re: John Ford - Michael Christol [14]
   Re: John Ford - Andy Denne [13]
   Re: Any More News Regarding Roswell? - James Easton [56]
   Re: David Clarke & Jonathan Dagenhart - Andy Denne [22]
   Re: John Ford - Alfred Lehmberg [57]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - "Greg Sandow" [58]
   May 20 1957: Two USAF Fighters Intercept UFO - Stig Agermose [271]

  Jun 8:

   Re: Guilt By Association - RobIrving@aol.com [21]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - RobIrving@aol.com [7]
   Roswell Photos Irrelevant? - SyntaX [William Sawyers] [45]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - RobIrving@aol.com [44]
   Press Report On The Area 51 Rally - Stig Agermose [127]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - Jerome Clar" [65]
   Re: Burns, Clarke & Dagenhart - RobIrving@aol.com [6]
   New York MUFON Web Site Up - Larry Clark [15]
   Re: Vallee Hoaxed Corbin, UFO Sweden & Sightings - 'Jack Hudson' [165]
   Re: Vallee Hoaxed Corbin, UFO Sweden & Sightings - UFO UpDates -
   Toronto [511]
   Martian Anomalies - Rick Goldsmith" [12]
   Re: ETH and Occam's Razor [was: Area 51 still - Mark Cashman [105]
   Re: John Ford - John Velez [46]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - Mendoza [Peter Brookesmith] [189]
   Ford Fund? - UFO UpDates - Toronto [195]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - John Rimmer [97]
   Re: The Ten Cases [was Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs] - Mark Cashman [30]
   Man-Made Flying Saucers - A Reply to Kevin McClure - Philip Mantle
   [177]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - Stanton T. Friedman [7]
   Abductee Conference In August In NY 08-08-98 - Steve Neeley
   <stneeley@mail.bright.net [36]
   Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General - Stanton T. Friedman [8]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - "Jerome Clark" [41]
   Re: Guilt By Association - Greg Sandow [11]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - Mark Cashman [19]
   Re: Roswell Photos Irrelevant? - "Greg Sandow" [14]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - Greg Sandow [20]
   Mini UFO flap in Quebec, Canada - Gilles Milot [42]
   Chat with Karl Pflock, UFO Researcher - Yvonne Hedenland [12]

  Jun 9:

   Re: Help Wanted - Ghost Fliers - Bruno Mancusi [4]
   Re: X-Files Movie Preview - Sue Kovios [6]

  Jun 8:

   Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General - Robert Todd [22]
   Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General - Robert Todd [98]

  Jun 9:

   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - Jean van Gemert [46]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - RobIrving@aol.com [69]
   Re: - Pamela Stonebrook [128]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - Jerome Clark [90]
   Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General - Karl T. Pflock [17]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - RobIrving@aol.com [14]
   Open Letter From Pamela Stonebrooke - Pamela Stonebrook [128]
   London [UK] UFO Conference - Graham William Birdsall [26]
   Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General - "Steven Kaeser" [14]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - John Rimmer [4]
   Astronauts & UFOs? - UFO UpDates - Toronto [77]
   Cosmonauts and UFOs? - UFO UpDates - Toronto [30]
   Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General - "Stanton T. Friedman"
   [23]
   Re: The Ten Cases - RobIrving@aol.com [40]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - "Jerome Clark" [14]
   Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General - Kevin Randle [32]
   Re: TV Show Looking For Your Input - Neil Morris [24]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - "Keith Woodard" [39]
   Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General - Bob Shell [3]
   UK TV Show Looking For Input - Philip Mantle [11]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - "Greg Sandow" [84]
   Florida Scoutmaster Case - Karl T. Pflock [111]
   Re: TV Show Looking For Your Input - Jon Dyton [6]
   Re: Chat with Karl Pflock, UFO Researcher - Sean Jones [7]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - Jeff King [18]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - Greg Sandow [260]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - "Stanton T. Friedman" [32]

  Jun 10:

   New Mars Face and Alien Beer Can - Bill Stanley [3]
   Barnes Answers Corbin's Charges With Challenge - Jack Hudson [222]
   Re: Florida Scoutmaster Case - Kevin Randle [33]
   Alien Encounters Magazine - Roy Hale [17]
   Re: The Ten Cases - Mark Cashman [52]
   UFO Exhibit At Syracuse's Museum Of Science And - Stig Agermose [89]
   Nazca's "Lady Of The Lines" Dead at 95 - Stig Agermose [78]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - RobIrving@aol.com [91]
   Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force Genera - "Steven Kaeser" [6]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - RobIrving@aol.com [26]

  Jun 11:

   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - Stanton T. Friedman [31]
   Re: The Ten Cases - Bruce Maccabee [27]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - Brian Straight [21]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - Mark Cashman [45]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - Greg Sandow [43]
   Writers For U.K. Magazine - Roy Hale [28]
   Re: Alien Encounters Magazine - Mel Donovan [13]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - Jean-Luc Rivera [35]
   Re: The Ten Cases - RobIrving@aol.com [21]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - "Greg Sandow" [45]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - Bruce Maccabee [1]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - Bruce Maccabee [10]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - "Jerome Clark" [85]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - Nick Balaskas [31]
   Who Is Jerome Clark? [was: Corso, Stacy & Birnes] - The Duke of Mendoza
   [Peter Brookesmith] [131]
   Re: No Luck Yet In Search For Extraterrestrial - Stig Agermose [71]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - Geoff Price [69]
   Pittsburgh Sighting - 08-06-98 - Steve Neeley [13]
   Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General - Robert Gates [12]
   East Kent MEP: Demands UFO Investigation - Roy Hale [16]
   More Ice On Mars? - Stig Agermose [70]
   OVNI Chapterhouse and STS-80 - JJ Mercieca [8]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - Geoff Price [29]
   UFO Sweden Disconnects Vallee'S "Anatomy"! - "true.x-file. news" [Jack
   Husdon] [58]
   Re: Alien Astronomer Website - "Mark LeCuyer" [12]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - Greg Sandow [74]
   More Than 100 ET Radio Signals Collected During - Stig Agermose [99]
   'Fortean Times' article on Mexican UFO flap/wave - Steve Woods [36]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - Sean Jones [16]
   Re: The Ten Cases - Mark Cashman [24]
   Re: Alien Encounters Magazine - Robert Irvine [35]
   Re: The Ten Cases - Dennis Stacy [41]
   Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General - DRudiak@aol.com [151]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - Jeff King [29]
   Moon Rock Most Expensive Jewellery Of The 21st - Stig Agermose [34]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - Mark Cashman [14]
   Re: The Ten Cases - Keith Woodard [13]
   More Elaborate SERENDIP III (SETI) Report - Stig Agermose [107]
   Re: Who Is Jerome Clark? - Jerome Clark [196]

  Jun 12:

   Re: Cape Coral, Fort Lauderdale Sightings - Stig Agermose [14]
   Report Of New Planet Needs More Scrutiny - Stig Agermose [64]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - RobIrving@aol.com [15]
   Re: The Ten Cases - Mark Cashman [38]
   Discovery Narrows Search For Precursor Of All Life - Stig Agermose
   [129]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - RobIrving@aol.com [42]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - RobIrving@aol.com [59]
   Re: The Ten Cases - Larry Hatch [11]
   Re: The Ten Cases - JJ Mercieca [10]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - RobIrving@aol.com [73]
   911/UFO Pursuit - Interview with WYTV 33 Reporter - Kenny Young [101]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - Jeff King [25]
   Re: Asking Pamela Stonebrooke - John Velez [36]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - RobIrving@aol.com [5]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - Greg Sandow [26]
   Re: The Ten Cases - "Steven Kaeser" [23]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - Greg Sandow [20]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - RobIrving@aol.com [16]
   Re: Asking Pamela Stonebrooke - Skye Turell [11]
   Re: Who Is Jerome Clark? - Greg Sandow [53]
   Re: The Ten Cases - RobIrving@aol.com [4]
   Re: The Ten Cases - RobIrving@aol.com [19]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - Greg Sandow [119]

  Jun 13:

   Re: East Kent MEP Demands UFO Investigation - Sean Jones [18]
   Translators Wanted - Dutch to English - ufonet - Jeroen Kumeling [19]
   Ufologists and Klass Conflict - "Jerome Clark" [8]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - Dennis [8]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - Mark Cashman [142]
   Nua Blather: A Mothman Retrospective - Dave Walsh [188]
   Re: The Ten Cases - Mark Cashman [13]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - Jerome Clark [85]
   Proposed UK Abduction Symposium - Andy Roberts [82]
   Re: Meteor Shower Sparks UFO Alert - Stig Agermose [30]
   FBI Secrets Going Online - Stig Agermose [123]
   Re: Chat with Michael Lindemann, CNI News - "Yvonne Hedenland" [12]
   Re: The Ten Cases - Mark Cashman [35]
   Filer's Files #23 - Majorstar@aol.com [286]
   Re: Who Is Jerome Clark? - RobIrving@aol.com [20]
   BBC On UK UFO Alert - Stig Agermose [54]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - bruce maccabee [5]
   Skywatching 1st week in July - Steve Neeley [19]
   Re: Ufologists and Klass Conflict - Doc Barry [3]
   Re: The Ten Cases - Perry Mick [13]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - bruce maccabee [42]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - RobIrving@aol.com [21]
   Re: Speeding Meteor Sparks UFO Alert - Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk=20
   [50]
   Re: Asking Pamela Stonebrooke - Cathy Johnson [22]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - bruce maccabee [22]
   Re: Ford Fund? - Elaine M Douglass [12]
   Re: Asking Pamela Stonebrooke - John Velez [39]
   Grand Jury for Chaves (Roswell) County NM? - Mike Jamieson [10]

  Jun 14:

   Re: Asking Pamela Stonebrooke - Skye Turell [12]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - "Greg Sandow" [10]
   Re: Ford Fund? - Michael Christol [19]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - Greg Sandow [44]
   John Fords Address - John Veelez [19]
   Re: Translators Wanted - Dutch to English - David Rudiak [8]
   Re: Grand Jury for Chaves (Roswell) County NM? - Mike Jamieson [3]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - bruce maccabee [44]
   Re: Translators Wanted - Dutch to English - Karel Bagchus [11]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - Sean Jones [11]
   Re: Are The X-Files More Fact Than Fiction? - Stig Agermose [77]
   Re: Ufologists and Klass Conflict - Perry van den Brink [8]
   Re: Writers For U.K. Magazine - Ian J. Darlington [39]
   Re: ORTK and CAUS endorse Bryant effort - Mike Jamieson [18]
   BWW Media Alert 19980614 - Bufo Calvin [52]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - Greg Sandow [46]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - Greg Sandow [62]
   Re: Who Is Jerome Clark? - "Jerome Clark" [15]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - Stanton T. Friedman [50]
   Re: New Russian UFO Crash - Nick Balaskas [53]
   Re: Ford Fund? - Alfred Lehmberg [14]
   Re: Asking Pamela Stonebrooke - Cathy Johnson [60]
   UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 3, Number 24 - Joseph Trainor [410]

  Jun 15:

   Corso Suffers Massive Heart Attack - Peter A. Gersten [22]
   Hot Gossip UK Magazine - June 1998 - Georgina Bruni [430]
   'Popular Mechanics' Accuses US Government Of UFO - Stig Agermose [323]
   U.F.O. Historical Revue - Jan Aldrich [22]
   Re: ORTK and CAUS endorse Bryant effort - Greg Sandow [8]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - RobIrving@aol.com [40]
   Jesse Jr., Again Sees Symbols From Roswell 'Crash' - Stig Agermose
   [112]
   Re: Popular Mechanics' Accuses US Government Of - Steven Kaeser [27]
   Re: Ford Fund? - Elaine M Douglass elaine26@juno.com [8]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - Bob Shell [11]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - bruce maccabee [13]
   Chat with Fate Magazine's Antonio Huneeus - "Yvonne Hedenland" [13]
   'Eliptical' Crop Circles - "Leanne Martin" [29]
   Re: ORTK and CAUS endorse Bryant effort - Mike Jamieson [27]
   Re: ORTK and CAUS endorse Bryant effort - Peter A. Gersten [10]
   Sheffield 'Incident' - New Evidence - David Clarke [139]
   Re: Corso Suffers Massive Heart Attack - John Velez [7]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - Dennis Stacy [29]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - RobIrving@aol.com [37]
   Re: Jesse Jr., Again Sees Symbols From Roswell - Scott K. Hale [5]
   Memory - John Velez [93]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - Mark Cashman [19]
   Re: Jesse Jr., Again Sees Symbols From Roswell - Stanton T. Friedman
   [8]
   Jesse Jr. Dissociates Himself From Johnson - Stig Agermose [22]
   Press Report From Fort Washington UFO Conference - Stig Agermose [90]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - John Rimmer [25]
   DISPATCH # 95 -- the weekly newsletter of ParaScope - ParaScope@AOL.COM
   [107]
   Re: Ford Fund? - Lehmberg@snowhill.com [15]
   Search For Life On Mars With Your Computer - Stig Agermose [61]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - John Rimmer [59]
   Re: Memory - Skye Turell [58]
   C-E: The Wit and Wisdom of J. Bond Johnson - Francis Ridge [167]
   Re: Memory - Cathy Johnson [35]
   Enhanced Roswell Images - Steven Kaeser [21]
   Re: Corso Suffers Massive Heart Attack - Michael Christol [7]
   Re: 'Popular Mechanics' Accuses US Government - James Easton [137]

  Jun 16:

   Re: Popular Mechanics' Accuses US Government - "Jerome Clark" [6]
   Re: Vallee Hoaxed Corbin, UFO Sweden & Sightings - Georgina Bruni [49]
   2 'Celestial' Objects Spotted During 'Star Wars' -
   Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk [16]
   Re: Memory - Skye Turell [13]
   Popular Mechanics/Popular Science & UFOs - Larry Hatch [16]
   Re: Ford Fund? - John Velez [18]
   Air Still Very Active Over North Sea - Joseph Trainor [32]
   Re: Search For Life On Mars With Your Computer - Stig Agermose [180]
   XPI Director Has Close Encounter - Stefan Duncan [45]
   Re: Jesse Jr., Again Sees Symbols - KRandle993@aol.com [14]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - Dennis Stacy [16]
   Air Still Very Active Over North Sea - Joseph Trainor [86]
   UK Research Request - Paul Hunter [8]
   Re: Memory - John Velez [56]
   Re: Popular Mechanics/Popular Science & UFOs - Al Baier [14]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - Greg Sandow [12]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - Jean-Luc Rivera [28]
   Re: Memory - John Velez [80]
   Re: Vallee Hoaxed Corbin, UFO Sweden & Sightings - Jack Hudson [99]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - Greg Sandow [19]

  Jun 17:

   SPIN-2 Satellite Imagery - Nick Balaskas [15]
   Re: Vallee Hoaxed Corbin, UFO Sweden & Sightings - Bruce Lanier Wright
   [4]
   VJ Enterprises - New URL - Dave Vetterick [13]
   Re: Popular Mechanics/Popular Science & UFOs - Steven Kaeser [19]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - Jerome Clark [12]
   Re: ORTK and CAUS endorse Bryant effort - Jeff King [64]
   CNI News: Report On Corso's Condition - UFO UpDates - Toronto [116]
   Re: FBI Puts UFO Files Online - Stig Agermose [80]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - The Duke of Mendoza [Peter Brookesmith]
   [102]
   Re: Popular Mechanics/Popular Science & UFOs - Larry Hatch [5]
   Science Line News [UK] - Philip Mantle [65]
   Arctic Crater Expedition to Seek Mars Science - NASANews@hq.nasa.gov
   [86]
   Sighting in Marion, Ohio - Steve Neeley [17]
   Re: Who Is Jerome Clark? - The Duke of Mendoza [Peter Brookesmith] [10]
   Re: Popular Mechanics/Popular Science & UFOs - Bob Shell [24]
   Re: Who is Jerome Clark? - The Duke of Mendoza [Peter Brookesmith] [97]
   Re: Popular Mechanics/Popular Science & UFOs - Al Baier [9]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - The Duke of Mendoza [Peter Brookesmith]
   [203]
   Re: Who Is Jerome Clark? - "Jerome Clark" [4]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - John Rimmer [59]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - Sean Jones [27]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - John Rimmer [31]
   Re: Who is Jerome Clark? - Dennis Stacy [9]
   Re: Who is Jerome Clark? - "Jerome Clark" [94]
   Re: Who is Jerome Clark? - Jerome Clark [43]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs - RobIrving@aol.com [8]
   Re: Who is Jerome Clark? - Jerome Clark [19]
   Re: Who Is Jerome Clark? - RobIrving@aol.com [12]
   Re: Arctic Crater Expedition to Seek Mars Science - Nick Balaskas [15]
   Re: The Ten Cases - RobIrving@aol.com [62]
   Re: Are Aliens Among Us? Go Beyond The Government - Rebecca Schatte
   <RSchatte@aol.com? [99]
   Re: Who is Jerome Clark? - Stanton T. Friedman [23]
   Re: Popular Mechanics/Popular Science & UFOs - Sue Kovios [39]

  Jun 18:

   Re: CSICOP condemns X-Files Movie - Jared Anderson [9]
   Re: CSICOP condemns X-Files Movie - UFO UpDates - Toronto [59]
   Re: The Ten Cases - Mark Cashman [73]
   Re: 911/UFO Pursuit - Interview with WYTV 33 - Serge Salvaille [5]
   Santilli Comments On 'Tent Footage' - Philip Mantle [56]
   Re: UK Research Request - Philip Mantle [8]
   Re: Popular Mechanics/Popular Science & UFOs - Larry Hatch [7]
   Santilli's 'Tent Footage' Thrown Into 'Doubt' - Philip Mantle [227]
   Re: The Ten Cases - Serge Salvaille [9]
   How It Works - Dennis Stacy [7]
   Re: CSICOP condemns X-Files Movie - Donald Ledger [37]
   A Grand Jury's Focus And Impact: More On The - Mike Jamieson
   <MDJ50@webtv.net [32]
   Re: CSICOP Condemns X-Files Movie - John Velez [42]
   Re: CSICOP Condemns X-Files Movie - Scott K. Hale [48]
   Re: CSICOP Condemns X-Files Movie - JJ Mercieca [10]
   Re: Who is Jerome Clark? - Jerome Clark [16]
   Re: CSICOP Condemns X-Files Movie - John Velez [12]
   Re: Who Is Jerome Clark? - Jerome Clark [5]
   Re: How It Works - Diane Lovett [12]
   Re: The Ten Cases - John Rimmer [16]
   Re: How It Works - Terry Blanton [2]
   Filer's Files #24 - George A. Filer [363]
   Re: Santilli Comments On 'Tent Footage' - Robert Gates [6]
   Re: The Ten Cases - RobIrving@aol.com [22]
   Re: How It Works - "Serge Salvaille" [20]
   Re: Who is Jerome Clark? - Dennis [70]
   Re: CSICOP condemns X-Files Movie - "Jerome Clark" [34]
   Re: 'Fortean Times' article on Mexican UFO - RobIrving@aol.com [22]

  Jun 19:

   A Reason For CSICOP Condemning The X-Files Movie? - William Hand [71]
   FBI Posts The Real 'X Files' - UFO UpDates - Toronto [81]
   Floating Frogs and UFOs - Rick Goldsmith [30]
   Re: The Ten Cases - RobIrving@aol.com [17]
   Re: Who Is Jerome Clark? - RobIrving@aol.com [4]
   Re: Fast Walker - Greg St. Pierre [48]
   Re: Who is Jerome Clark? - Jerome Clark [21]
   Re: Who Is Phil Klass? [was: ...Jerome Clark] - Greg Sandow [17]
   Revolutionize Space Travel? - Doc Barry [3]
   Britannica: Ockham's Razor Reference - Sherry Cardinal [32]
   Re: CSICOP condemns X-Files Movie - Bob Shell [4]
   Re: Secrets & Conspiracies [was: Who is Jermome - Kevin Randle [38]
   Re: Secrets & Conspiracies [was: Who is Jermome - "Stanton T. Friedman"
   [33]
   Re: A Reason For CSICOP Condemning The X-Files - Jerome Clark [62]
   Re: CSICOP Condemns X-Files Movie - The Duke of Mendoza [23]
   Re: The Ten Cases - Jan Aldrich [60]
   CNN Interactive QuickPoll - Laura Hutton [5]
   Re: Ockham's Razor Reference - Max Burns [3]
   Re: Who Is Phil Klass? - Steven Kaeser [13]
   Re: Fast Walker - bruce maccabee >brumac@compuserve.com> [33]
   Nua Blather: Prophecies Fulfilled - Dave Walsh [241]
   Re: Who Is Phil Klass? - John Velez [35]
   Re: Secrets & Conspiracies - Dennis Stacy [13]
   Re: A Reason For CSICOP Condemning The X-Files - Dennis Stacy [11]
   Re: The Ten Cases - Mark Cashman [18]

  Jun 20:

   Jerome Clark Wins 1998 Benjamin Franklin Award - Donald Ledger [3]
   Elaine Douglas on John Ford [was: Ford Fund?] - Elaine M Douglass [25]
   Re: Fast Walker - Mark Cashman [20]
   Re: A Reason For CSICOP Condemning The X-Files - Ron Decker [40]
   Re: The Ten Cases - Mark Cashman [43]
   New Jet or UFO? [was: Re: Fast Walker] - Sue Strickland [59]
   Re: Secrets & Conspiracies - Stanton T. Friedman [28]
   Re: Fast Walker - Stanton T. Friedman [11]
   Re: Ockham's Razor Reference - RobIrving@aol.com [4]
   'She Blinded Me with Science' - Sean Jones [16]
   Re: New Jet or UFO? - Donald Ledger [45]
   Re: Secrets & Conspiracies - Bob Shell [8]
   Re: Ockham's Razor Reference - Larry Hatch [24]
   UFOs are not BVM-acabras - Larry Hatch [42]
   Re: Secrets & Conspiracies - Doc Barry [7]
   Re: Who Is Phil Klass? - Larry Hatch [21]
   Re: Jerome Clark Wins 1998 Benjamin Franklin Award - bruce maccabee [5]
   Re: Sheffield 'Incident' - New Evidence - Max Burns [367]
   CSICOP X-File Movie Review Lacks 'Rationalism' - 'Jack Hudson' [178]
   CE: Trace Case Center - Francis Ridge [61]
   Recommendations Please!? - Peter Gersten [20]

  Jun 21:

   Re: A Reason For CSICOP Condemning The X-Files - UFO UpDates - Toronto
   [27]

  Jun 20:

   Re: Secrets & Conspiracies - Dennis [14]

  Jun 21:

   Re: The Ten Cases - John Rimmer [26]
   Re: UFOs are not BVM-acabras - Donald Ledger [13]
   Re: 'She Blinded Me with Science' - Donald Ledger [23]
   Re: UFOs are not BVM-acabras - Bob Shell [3]
   Re: CE: Trace Case Center - Bob Shell [7]
   Re: Jerome Clark Wins 1998 Benjamin Franklin Award - Jerome Clark [6]
   Re: CE: Trace Case Center - Larry Hatch [13]
   Re: Recommendations Please!? - Sue Kovios [10]
   Re: CSICOP X-File Movie Review Lacks 'Rationalism' - John Velez [21]
   Re: UFOs are not BVM-acabras - RobIrving@aol.com [6]
   Re: Recommendations Please!? - John Velez [22]
   Re: BWW Media Alert 19980620 - [50]
   Re: The Ten Cases - RobIrving@aol.com [146]
   Re: A Divided Community Can Never Get Anwsers - Roy Hale [34]
   Red Shining Object Over Charlotte - "Stefan Duncan" [10]
   P1947: The X-Files Movie - CISCOP Has Nothing To - Steven Kaeser [31]
   Re: More on Sheffield - Max Burn [201]
   P1947: Project Tattletale - Joel Carpenter [81]
   Re: UFOs are not BVM-acabras - JJ Mercieca [13]
   Re: Secrets & Conspiracies - Stanton T. Friedman [12]
   Re: Michigan's "Thumb Area" Currently Under A Flap? - Jeff Westover
   [69]
   Re: Recommendations Please!? - Rod Eastman [3]
   Trumbull County 911/UFO Website - Kenny Young [10]
   Re: UFOs are not BVM-acabras - Bob Shell [4]
   Re: New Jet or UFO? - Mark Cashman [21]
   Re: CSICOP's Religious War Against The Unholy - "John Ratcliff" [24]
   Second Annual Long Island UFO Conference - 11-08-98 - Joanne Steele
   [38]
   Re: Secrets & Conspiracies - Dennis Stacy [69]
   Re: A Divided Community Can Never Get Anwsers - Diane Lovett [23]
   Strieber's 'Confirmation' - Diane Lovett [29]
   Re: Recommendations Please!? - John Velez [26]
   Re: A Divided Community Can Never Get Anwsers - Ori Jackson [33]
   Re: The Ten Cases - Mark Cashman [69]
   Re: The Ten Cases - Mark Cashman [8]
   Working Together For An Ultimate Goal - Max Burns [62]
   Re: UFOs are not BVM-acabras - Mark Cashman [22]
   Chat with UFO Lawyer, Peter Gersten - Yvonne Hedenland [17]

  Jun 22:

   Re: Elaine Douglas on John Ford - Dennis Stacy [29]
   Re: A Divided Community Can Never Get Answers - Peter Brookesmith [123]
   Re: UFOs are not BVM-acabras - Greg St. Pierre trmNut@aol.com> [11]
   Re: Who Is Phil Klass? - Greg St. Pierre [20]
   Re: Working Together For An Ultimate Goal - Alfred Lehmberg [36]
   Re: Working Together For An Ultimate Goal - Erica Furgison [8]
   Re: The Ten Cases - Jerome Clark [22]
   Re: 'She Blinded Me with Science' - Sean Jones [10]

  Jun 23:

   Re: Working Together For An Ultimate Goal - Scott R. Caput [13]
   Re: UFOs are not BVM-acabras - Sue Strickland [30]
   Re: The Ten Cases - RobIrving@aol.com [4]
   Veteran Ufologist Becomes Successful Amateur - Stig Agermose [74]
   UFO News International 37 - Henny van der Pluijm [325]
   Re: Sheffield Incident - David Clarke [193]
   Foo-Fighters and Cloud Cutters - Jan Aldrich [34]
   Re: Elaine M Douglass on John Ford - Elaine M Douglass [16]
   Re: New Jet or UFO? - Sue Strickland [108]
   Re: Recommendations Please!? - Peter Gersten [5]
   Re: Working Together For An Ultimate Goal - John Velez [59]
   UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 3, Number 25 - Joseph Trainor [459]
   Re: A Divided Community Can Never Get Anwsers - Jim Deardorff [31]
   Re: Recommendations Please!? - John Velez [21]
   Re: UFOs are not BVM-acabras - John Velez [18]
   CE: 'Light Phenomenon' In June '98 N. Carolina - Kenny Young [125]
   Re: New Jet or UFO? - Mark Cashman [32]

  Jun 24:

   Re: A Divided Community Can Never Get Anwsers - bruce maccabee [55]
   Re: The Ten Cases - bruce maccabee [74]

  Jun 23:

   Mini UFO flap in Quebec - Gilles Milot [60]

  Jun 24:

   Re: Elaine Douglas on John Ford - Dennis Stacy [47]
   Re: A Divided Community Can Never Get Answers - bruce maccabee [36]
   Re: Secrets & Conspiracies - Stanton T. Friedman [13]
   Research Request - Tim Matthews [14]
   Re: A Divided Community Can Never Get Anwsers - Steven Kaeser [24]
   Re: Sheffield Incident - Max Burns [310]
   Research Question - Warragamba, NSW, Oz - Leanne Martin [13]
   DISPATCH # 96 -- the weekly newsletter of ParaScope - ParaScope@AOL.COM
   [90]
   Gersten For The Defence - John Velez [52]
   Radar Tapes Of Mass Sightings? - Steve Burrows [9]
   Re: Recommendations Please!? - John White [13]
   Seeking Info on Wurtsmith 1975 Sighting - Diana Botsford [12]
   Sheffield Incident - Exclusive New Evidence - David Clarke [195]
   Re: Sheffield Incident - Max Burns [69]
   Re: Secrets & Conspiracies - Dennis Stacy [69]
   Re: Research Request - Bruno Mancusi [15]
   Re: Holiday Reading - Sean Jones [11]

  Jun 25:

   Re: Seeking Info on Wurtsmith 1975 Sighting - Jeff Westover [19]
   Meteor impacts/UFO crashes and earthquake lights - Nick Balaskas [63]
   Posting Instructions - UFO UpDates - Toronto [53]
   Re: Recommendations Please!? - SKvs [14]
   Re: Seeking Info on Wurtsmith 1975 Sightin - UFOLAWYER1@aol.com [3]
   David Jacobs Warns: Truth Is Out There - Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk
   [173]
   Re: Radar Tapes Of Mass Sightings? - StrmNut@aol.com [23]
   NASA's Astrobiology Program - Stig Agermose [159]
   Strange Lights In The Red Rock Canyons Of Sedona - Rob Meyer [38]
   New Books On Space Eavesdropping - Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk [155]
   Re: Secrets & Conspiracies - Dennis Stacy [14]
   'Grand Father Of Mind Control' On Implants -
   Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk [385]
   Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers' - James Easton [170]
   Ray Stanford [was: Re: Veteran Ufologist - bruce maccabee [26]
   Ufomind "Aiding Foreign Terrorists" - UFO UpDates - Toronto [45]
   J. Bond Johnson's Fort Worth Pictures - Neil Morris [50]
   Re: New Jet or UFO - Sue Strickland [66]
   Re: Radar and civilians - Jakes Louw [27]
   Prior Restraint - Joseph Trainor [35]
   Re: Seeking Info on Wurtsmith 1975 Sighting - Larry Hatch [28]
   'On The Bus To Utica' - Jerome Clark [59]
   Re: Flaming - Max Burns [41]
   Re: J. Bond Johnson's Fort Worth Pictures - Neil Morris [52]
   Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers' - The Duke of Mendoza [137]
   Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers' - Serge Salvaille [22]
   Re: 'She Blinded Me with Science' - Sean Jones [35]
   Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers' - Stanton T. Friedman [26]
   Re: Prior Restraint - "Donnie W. Shevlin" [42]
   Re: 'On The Bus To Utica' - Pamela Stonebrooke [3]
   Filer's Files #25 - George A. Filer [305]
   Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers' - Jerome Clark [14]
   Re: Prior Restraint - Sue Kovios [3]
   Re: Occam's Razor and UFO - Melanie Mecca [26]

  Jun 26:

   P1947: UFO Book/award (publicity release) - Tom Tulien [71]
   Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers' - Stanton T. Friedman [15]
   Eagle-Net Websites Shut Down By Government - Joseph Trainor [28]
   Re: J. Bond Johnson's Fort Worth Pictures - Bob Shell [19]
   UK MOD on Sheffield to Politician Helen Jackson - Max Burns [41]
   Re: Sheffield Incident - Max Burns [23]

  Jun 27:

   Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers' - Tim Matthews [12]
   MOD Documents Prove UFO Cover Up In The UK - Max Burns [26]
   Re: J. Bond Johnson's Fort Worth Pictures - Neil Morris [52]
   Re: J. Bond Johnson's Fort Worth Pictures - Stanton T. Friedman [6]
   Video of 'UFOs' Around MIR - Susan Cerdan [29]
   Nua Blather: Below Scottish Lochs and Churches - Dave Walsh [228]
   [lunascan] Cross on the Moon? - Francis Ridge [10]
   Terraserver Shows Off Sensitive Sights - Mark LeCuyer [48]
   Re: Eagle-Net Websites Shut Down By Government - Steven Kaeser [17]
   Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers' - The Duke of Mendoza [Peter
   Brookesmith] [29]
   Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers' - The Duke of Mendoza [Peter
   Brookesmith] [7]
   Re: Eagle-Net Websites Shut Down By Government - Kerry Ferrand [7]
   Re: Any More News Regarding Roswell? - James Easton [62]
   MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4 - The Duke of Mendoza [Peter Brookesmith] [325]
   UFO Sightings In Russia (Gerasimov) - Stig Agermose [40]
   SOHONEWS 1998-06-26: SOHO Observations Interrupted - Scott Jordan [50]
   Chat with Astronomer Tom Van Flandern - Yvonne Hedenland [13]
   Re: Sheffield Incident - Andy Roberts [188]
   'Most Stunning Case Ever' - SoCal MUFON - UFO UpDates - Toronto [60]
   A Different Kind Of Abduction Report? - Lehmberg@snowhill.com [67]
   CE: U.F.O. Historical Revue is out!/CIA involvement - Jan Aldrich [48]
   Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers' - "Stanton T. Friedman" [6]
   Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers' - Larry Hatch [7]
   Rosie O'Donnell Discusses Abductions And ETs - Stig Agermose [71]

  Jun 28:

   Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers' - The Duke of Mendoza [Peter
   Brookesmith] [18]
   Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers' - Jerome Clark [22]
   BWW Media Alert 19980627 - [62]
   Re: 'She Blinded Me with Science' - RobIrving@aol.com [156]
   Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers' - Donald Ledger [8]
   Re: Video of 'UFOs' Around MIR - Sue Kovios [16]
   Re: Video of 'UFOs' Around MIR - Susan Cerdan [23]
   Re: MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4 - Jean van Gemert [26]
   Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers' - John Rimmer [6]
   Re: 'She Blinded Me with Science' - Jerome Clark [177]
   Re: MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4 - "Jerome Clark" [112]

  Jun 29:

   Re: 'Eliptical' Crop Circles - Leanne Martin [30]
   Re: 'She Blinded Me with Science' - Mark Cashman [34]
   Re: MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4 - Dennis Stacy [25]
   Science Panel Urges Study Of UFO Reports - UFO UpDates - Toronto [122]
   Re: Video of 'UFOs' Around MIR - John Velez [39]
   UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 3, Number 26 - Joseph Trainor [517]
   Scientists: UFOs Warrant Study - Terry Blanton [114]
   Re: MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4 - The Duke of Mendoza [Peter Brookesmith]
   [22]
   Re: Two 'New' UFO Crashes - Nick Balaskas [40]
   Re: Video of 'UFOs' Around MIR - Rod Eastman [5]
   Re: MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4 - "Jerome Clark" [77]
   'Scientific Panel' - Good News - Brian Straight [6]
   Re: MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4 - Jerome Clark [17]
   Re: Scientists: UFOs Warrant Study - Keith Wyatt [3]
   Re: Scientists: UFOs Warrant Study - Geoff Price [13]
   Re: 'She Blinded Me with Science' - RobIrving@aol.com [23]
   Re: MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4 - John Rimmer [35]
   CNN Interviews Peter Sturrock - Jared Anderson [9]
   Re: Scientists: UFOs Warrant Study - Jim Deardorff [14]
   Furor Over False Memories Puts Hynpotherapist In - Bicycle Bob
   Soetebier [40]
   Scientists: UFOs Warrant Study - Jean van Gemert [4]
   'Victor' - Andy Denne - A.U.R.A. [11]
   Re: Video of 'UFOs' Around MIR - Sue Kovios [13]
   CNN Interactive/AP - UFO Panel Report - UFO UpDates - Toronto [56]
   Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers' - Stanton T. Friedman [31]
   Re: Video of 'UFOs' Around MIR - Susan Cerdan [39]
   Re: MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4 - The Duke of Mendoza [72]
   Contributors Comment On 'Sturrock' Review - Stig Agermose [119]
   The 'Sturrock Report' On-Line @ SSE Site - UFO UpDates - Toronto [149]

  Jun 30:

   Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers' - James Easton [37]
   Detailed images of Mars? - Mark LeCuyer [55]
   Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers' - James Easton [297]
   Re: MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4 - Dennis Stacy [87]
   Re: 'Eliptical' Crop Circles - Jakes Louw [7]
   Michigan Sightings Data Sought - Jeff Westover [22]
   BAR 199807 - [241]
   Re: Scientists: UFOs Warrant Study - John Velez [33]
   Mission To Collect Samples Of Comet Dust - Mark LeCuyer [89]
   Re: Scientists: UFOs Warrant Study - Larry Hatch [23]
   Re: Scientists: UFOs Warrant Study - Nick Humphries [16]
   Re: Scientists: UFOs Warrant Study - Nick Humphries [16]
   Re: Scientists: UFOs Warrant Study - Bob Shell [7]
   Re: Scientists: UFOs Warrant Study - Nick Humphries [16]
   Meteorite in Russia - Masinaigan@aol.com [46]
   Re: MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4 - Jerome Clark [50]
   Re: MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4 - Jerome Clark [26]
   Re: MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4 - Jerome Clark [22]
   Re: Video of 'UFOs' Around MIR - Carlos Barboza [15]

   The number enclosed in brackets is the number of lines of new text in





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 1

                    Re: Trans-Lunar Phenomena - 98/05/26

From: Jakes Louw <louwje@telkom.co.za>
Date: Mon, 01 Jun 1998 08:56:10 +0200
Fwd Date: Mon, 01 Jun 1998 09:55:23 -0400
Subject: Re: Trans-Lunar Phenomena - 98/05/26

All of you can relax: as I suspected, the villainous DJ has
acknowledged that the sighting was in fact a hoax.

regards

Jakes E. Louw
louwje@telkom.co.za






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 1

                     Re: Bruce Maccabee Again Confronted

From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 08:44:00 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 01 Jun 1998 09:56:35 -0400
Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee Again Confronted

>From: "Steven Kaeser" <steve@konsulting.com>
>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Bruce Maccabee Again Confronted
>Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 07:19:43 -0400


>>Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 04:25:28 -0700
>>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Bruce Maccabee Again Confronted

>>>Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 21:23:04 -0700
>>>From: Perry Mick <perrym@teleport.com>
>>>To: updates@globalserve.net, brumac@compuserve.com
>>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Bruce Maccabee Again Confronted

><snip>

>>> I'm surprised that Dr. Macabee even takes the time to dignify
>>> this stuff with a response.

>>Yeah! There are more important issues .. like how to spell
>>Bruce's last name.

><snip>

>>Bruce Maccabbee was not the author of this ugliness.

>>What would any of us do in a similar situation?
>>I don't see any quick easy answer.

>A solution to one segment of the problem would be to write
>"Maccabee" out about a dozen times until one becomes
>accustomed to spelling it correctly. . . . . . <g>

>Steve

>PS-  I would suggest to Bruce that a "real" Internet Service
>Provider would be cheaper than CompuServe and he could then use
>"real" email software that would correct the problem with his
>line length.

Actually, Bruce need not leave CompuServe, which is the absolute
best in my opinion.  You can use internet browsers via your
compuserve account, as I do with Netscape, and can use standard
e-mail software as well.  I use Eudora via CompuServe, and it is
trouble free.  I've tried many servers, and the amount of down
time and screwups always sends me back to CompuServe, where
problems are very RARE.  And no, I am not in any way affiliated
with CompuServe.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 1

                           Chat with Mark Carlotto

From: "Yvonne Hedenland" <vonni_h@email.msn.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 08:03:21 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 01 Jun 1998 10:00:02 -0400
Subject: Chat with Mark Carlotto

The Need for More Photos of Cydonia

Carlotto joins the UFO Forum in an exclusive interview just days
after  SPSR delivering papers to the American Geological Society
on the validity of artificiality at Cydonia, Carlotto joins the
UFO Forum to discuss his scientific team's findings to date.

According to his recent audio interview with the UFO Forum, the
data to date clearly indicates a bisymmetrical structure at the
face of Cydonia.

But science requires redundancy and SPSR is eager to do just
that.  With MGS recently out of conjunction, the opportunity is
there for NASA to take more photos of the region within the next
few months. Come August, however that chance will disappear until
Spring of 1999.

Join Dr. Mark Carlotto and the UFO Forum for a live chat on
Tuesday, June 2nd at 6pm, PT where will discuss the processing
techniques used by Carlotto as well as what lies ahead.  This
chat is available at
http://forums.msn.com/UFO

The Briefing Room chat can 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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 1

               Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force

From: JBONJO@aol.com [James Bond Johnson]
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 00:38:19 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 01 Jun 1998 09:53:29 -0400
Subject: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force


This Press Release from Orange County MUFON has been released
today to the wire services.  I have been contacted by numerous
media requesting radio, TV and press interviews and for me to be
photographed with the new super enlargements which show the
various "writings" and anomalous materials in the old Roswell UFO
photos.  I have resisted all such interviews since I do not claim
to be an "expert" and have not posed for any photos.  I have been
urged to write "my story" and have done so briefly.  I am sending
it to you as background for use in any coverage that you might
want to give to this breaking story.  Ron Regehr, who is so much
more qualified to discuss the technical aspects of these new
developments, has kindly volunteered to handle media requests for
interviews.  Thank you.

James Bond Johnson
http://www.ufomind.com/people/j/johnsonj/

Subj:    press release
Date:   5/31/98 2:28:55 PM Pacific Daylight Time
From:   regehrrs@exo.com (Ron Regehr)
To:     jbonjo@aol.com

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

31 MAY 1998

CONTACT:        RONALD S. REGEHR,
DIRECTOR, RESEARCH/INVESTIGATIONS,
MUFON ORANGE COUNTY CALIFORNIA
(714)  536-7335




AIR FORCE GENERAL ABSOLVED OF 50-YEAR ROSWELL UFO HOAX
CLAIM DUE TO EFFORTS OF TWO RETIRED MILITARY OFFICERS

Two "old warriors" through the application of modern technology
techniques have uncovered new details in half-century old
photographs that vindicate a former fellow retired officer
long-accused of hiding evidence of a crashed UFO.

George Filer (Maj. USAF, Ret.), an officer of the Air Force
Association of New Jersey, recently became aware that the late
Lt. Gen. Roger M.
Ramey=92s widow who resides in Denton, Texas, continues to suffer
from long- standing hoax allegations against her late husband.

For 20 years, many have accused General Ramey of single-handedly
deceiving fellow officers, the press, and the American public,
when he allegedly took action to swap the real Roswell crash
wreckage with a carefully destroyed weather balloon decoy.

Proponents have argued that Gen. Ramey put the weather balloon
debris on display in his office on July 8, 1947, and even posed
for photographs with the "decoy" while the "real" crashed flying
saucer was on an aircraft bound either for Wright Field, Ohio, or
Washington, DC=97depending upon the story.

Filer then contacted James Bond Johnson (Col. USA, Ret.), the man
who actually photographed the debris more than 50 years ago.
Bond (as he prefers to be called) related from his home in Long
Beach, CA, how he not only photographed the debris, but that he
unwrapped the burned "junk" as he called it, arranged it, and
posed the subjects, Gen. Ramey, Col. Dubose, and Maj. Marcel, in
GEN Ramey=92s office, HQ 8th AF, Fort Worth, TX.

Details revealed in Bond=92s photographs are the heart of recent
revelations that absolve Gen. Ramey of any wrongdoing.  A recent
USAF report does not match the detailed examination of the
digitally enlarged photographs which reveal I-beams, foil, a pile
of burnt material, a "plastic" strip, and strange markings=97all
characteristics detailed by the only other living witness of the
debris, Dr. Jesse Marcel, Jr., son of the late Maj. Jesse Marcel,
Sr., the former intelligence officer at Roswell Army Air Field.

"This dramatic revelation of bas-relief markings on one of the
=91beams=92 exonerates GEN Ramey, whose widow and children have
suffered the indignities of defending the honor of their late
husband and father long enough", Bond states.
        =09
-30-

Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 14:31:46 -0700
From: Ron Regehr <regehrrs@exo.com>
To: jbonjo@aol.com
Subject: press release


Reflections on the Roswell UFO Crash --
"The Story of the Century"

By James Bond Johnson

I am sitting here staring in utter amazement at what well may be
the very first pictures available of 3-D symbols and "writings"
by extraterrestrial beings.

With the aid of a digital super-enlargement of sections of a
photograph I took of pieces of the Roswell UFO crash in the
office of General Roger M.
Ramey, 8th Air Force Commander, more than a half century ago --
late in the afternoon of July 8, 1947, to be exact -- heretofore
concealed details of the wreckage seriously question terrestrial
origin.

This digital enlargement was provided by Ronald S. Regehr,
associate director, MUFON of Orange County, longtime UFO serious
investigator and researcher and a space and satellite engineer.
He had made the digital enlargement using latest technology
directly from new enlargements obtained from the original
negatives of the photos, now housed in the Special Collections
Section of the Main Library at the University of Texas at
Arlington.

Nothing has prepared me to begin to try to read these strange
symbols that are displayed prominently all along some of the
beams in my photos of General Ramey, his chief of staff, Colonel
Thomas J. Dubose, and an intelligence officer, Major Jesse
Marcel, Sr. -- all photographed examining pieces of the wreckage
of the officially announced flying saucer "captured" near
Roswell, New Mexico.

It is most impressive that aided by this advanced digital
technology we finally have the capacity to enlarge details of the
wreckage to see clearly what is indeed some kind of "writings"
that do not appear to be any known writings by any earth
residents.  What is even more impressive is that the symbols are
displayed in bas-relief and certainly do not appear to be any
kind of known printing.

And as has been pointed out, the new enlargements also seem to
identify several kinds of anomalous materials which were not even
available on earth in 1947.

But, then I reach a sobering thought: did I in fact miss out on
the most dramatic and sensational story of my early career as a
newspaper reporter?
Could the pressure of the moment to get quickly posed pictures of
the debris taken, processed and distributed to a waiting world
have caused me to not fully examine the pieces of anomalous
debris that I held in my hand?  Did I overlook that here, indeed,
was conclusive evidence of an extraterrestrial spacecraft that
had arrived on earth from somewhere beyond the stars.

The Roswell Incident often has been dubbed "the story of the
century!"  And these new dramatic revelations certainly have
raised many more questions than they have answered.

The sudden announcement a short time after the photo session by
General Ramey -- upon orders from his bosses in Washington, DC --
that this debris was but a "weather balloon and radar target"
certainly makes good sense.

And the fact that no other member of the media or public ever has
been permitted to examine or even view the debris also is
understandable.  It undoubtedly was only through a fluke that I
got to see, arrange and photograph the wreckage -- and pose the
military brass while examining it.

It was sheer luck that as military reporter for the Fort Worth
Star-Telegram, then the South's largest newspaper, and a veteran
of the Army Air Corps in World War II, I was available and in
close proximity to Fort Worth Army Air Base on the afternoon of
July 8, 1947.

For weeks the whole world had been watching for flying saucers as
reports of sightings were being received daily from many parts of
the country.  And now, finally, the Air Corps announced that it
had "captured" one of the objects and was flying it to Fort Worth
for personal examination by General Ramey.

I was given the wire service "flash" announcement of this rapidly
developing story by my city editor and I headed for the air
base.

Upon arrival at Ramey's office, I learned that the general was
out but expected to return momentarily.  The debris, transported
from Roswell in a series of "meat wrapper" paper covered
packages, had been deposited on the carpet in the general's
office.  Just one package was opened partially.  Some packages,
still sealed, were scattered around the office.

While Colonel Dubose went out to look for the general, I was left
alone in the general's rather spacious office.  This gave me an
opportunity to further unpack and to "pose" some of the pieces of
wreckage.  I well recall how frustrated I was at the burned and
smelly debris and how little opportunity this would permit for a
good news photograph.
=09
When the General entered the room I handed him the "flash"
announcement printed from the news wires.  He read it with
interest.  I then took a couple of shots him, still wearing his
hat in his office, examining the debris with the "flash"
announcement held in his hand.  Then I asked his chief of staff,
Colonel Dubose, to join him for a couple of more poses.  I was
desperate to get that "good shot" that every photographer dreams
of but could think of no very dramatic way to portray a crashed
"flying saucer."  I remember wondering if my single peanut flash
would even show sufficient detail in shooting the darkened
material.  But there was no time to set up a "slave" flash, which
would have enhanced the lighting.

While shooting the general I asked him what all this material
was. He shrugged and answered something like: "Damned if I know."
 But there was no effort by anyone to avoid posing with the
debris.

Then I grabbed a couple of shots of Major Marcel, who had
gathered up the UFO wreckage pieces at the crash site near
Roswell and then had first brought them to his commanding officer
at the Roswell air base and then on direct orders of the general
couriered them on to Fort Worth.

I was off to the Star-Telegram to develop and print the shots.
But before time permitted transmitting the photos by wirephoto to
the waiting world, General Ramey went on the radio to announce
that the earlier official announcement was in error and that this
was only a "weather balloon and target device."
=09
It is suddenly no longer a mystery why Ramey would have issued
the so-called "cover up" announcement soon after I left his
office.  If at the time of the photo shoot it already had been
determined that this was for certain a "far out" craft, the
general would dared not have tried to pass off such a ruse since
I could well have noticed the strange "writings" and anomalous
materials and confronted him with them.

So, only after my departure and after the debris was now safely
hidden from all the world could such an announcement have been
made with safety.

With a half century of speculation and folklore preceding this
stunning revelation, I now believe that I was just lucky.  I was
ahead of the story.
The general and his staff simply had not had sufficient time to
examine and evaluate the wreckage.  As Dubose later told a
reporter, at that time "we just didn't know what we had."

Perhaps these most unlikely events that permitted a 21-year-old
news reporter to take a few pictures with his brand-new Speed
Graphic camera in 1947 may finally help to unlock the secrets of
the Roswell UFO mystery.

New super enlargements will be available for viewing at the Main
Library of the University of Texas at Arlington beginning this
week.

-30-








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 1

                               Sarah McClendon

From: RAMBLD@worldnet.att.net [Diane Lovett]
Date: Mon, 01 Jun 1998 12:00:36 +0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 01 Jun 1998 17:08:38 -0400
Subject: Sarah McClendon

Just wanted to pass on that I sat in on a chat last night on MSN
with Sarah McClendon, White House correspondent, and it was
really interesting.

Ms. McClendon is clearly someone that ufology could use in
it's corner, and it seems she is there!

She believes Corso's claims, and believes in the multi-layered
"cover up". I asked her if her acceptance of Corso's story also
meant she believed the "alien scenario", and she answered a
definite yes, saying that all the evidence indicates that the
"alien scenaro" is the only thing that makes sense.

The MSN site doesn't have a transcript up yet, so I am only
paraphrasing from memory, but she clearly promised to delve
deeper into the whole subject.

Kal Korff was a visitor to the chat as well, and she promised to
look into material he was going to send her regarding various
agencies involved in covering up.

This lady has clout, in the media and politically, and I for one
am very glad to see her taking such a positive interest in
getting this information out into the open.

Diane





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 1

                Police Tapes from 1994 Ohio Incident Obtained

From: "K. Young" <task@fuse.net>
Date: Mon, 01 Jun 1998 12:07:00 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 01 Jun 1998 17:02:55 -0400
Subject: Police Tapes from 1994 Ohio Incident Obtained

SPECIAL ANNOUNCEMENT: Breaking News Story

Through the assistance of two telecommunicators with the Trumbull
County 9-1-1 dispatch center, 911 Howland Rd. NE, Warren, Ohio,
information was made available concerning a stunning UFO incident
happening in December of 1994.

The information relevant to this case, which I had previously
requested from former Operations Manager Rober J. Caffro, who is
no longer employed at the center, has been researched by two
telecommunicators with the Trumbull County 9-1-1 dispatch center
after acquiring the date of the incident from an unnamed officer
with the Liberty Township Police department. Their research
efforts were conducted strictly as private citizens.

I spoke with one officer at the 9-1-1 center who contacted me to
advise that the specific date of the occurrence was now known.
The date of this unbelievable UFO pursuit by numerous police
agencies in northeastern Ohio was on December 14, 1994.

For a nearly three week period I corresponded with two
telecommunicators at the 9-1-1 center relevant to this incredible
case, and the audio tape copies are now in my possession as of
Monday, June 1, 1998.

A sober, scientific analysis of this case is now pending.

The officers stressed that they requested the information about
the UFO disturbance as a public citizen, and not acting on behalf
of the 9-1-1 Center in any official capacity.

He began an investigation into this event after reading my report
on the internet. I initially acquired the first public details of
this incident by accident during a phone call to the wrong
telephone number in early 1996.

The telecommunicator who assisted in retrieving this information
personally spoke with several officers regarding the date of the
event. The original report appearing on the internet was created
without a specific date of the event, and subsequently contains a
number of errors due to this lack of specific data. In due time,
this report will be revised to reflect these new findings.

The telecommunicator who conducted the investigation was not
fully aware of the UFO incident and was not 'on-duty' the night
of the occurrence, but had heard of the sighting through others
at the 9-1-1 center. Being highly intruiged by what had happened,
he was left totally baffled after review of the dispatch tapes,
saying: "This all seems so unreal."

"One of the officers who was working that night had remembered
the date because several people who work at the police department
pull gags on each other by taking local newspapers and cutting
them up and rearranging them to make funny headlines," he said.

One of these friendly 'gags' referenced the UFO seen by an
officer, so it was from the date of that newspaper that a date of
the incident was acquired.

The telecommunicator, acting unofficially, has made the effort to
transfer all of the calls and radio traffic regarding the UFO
incident onto an audio tape. He said that several 'Saturday
afternoons' have been spent retrieving the information. Some of
the police dispatches and radio traffic are unrelated to the UFO
disturbance, and the irrelevant dispatches are being left out.

"This is real interesting looking into what happened that night,"
said the officer. "It's UNREAL."

The UFO was seen by officers from many different departments for
several hours, according to the officer.  The log tapes reflect
massive radio and telephone correspondence between midnight and
6:00 a.m.

"We suspect that whatever was there was seen both north and south
in the county," the officer stated, "in two separate areas at the
same time."

In review of the tape, the telecommunicator learned that there
were many calls made by the 9-1-1 dispatch office to the
Youngstown FAA control tower. The audio tapes will reflect that
at the same time 9-1-1 dispatch officer Ms. Rudolph was viewing
the UFO from her vantage point at the 9-1-1 center, FAA tower
operators 4-miles away denied viewing the same object, even with
binoculars.

Earlier, this reporter confirmed that all FAA tower operators
were fired after the incident. This finding was made during a
phone call to the Youngstown FAA tower in June of 1996, later
referenced in my report on the incident titled: "The Trumbull
County Disturbance."

At present, an FOIA request has been sent to the FAA control
tower requesting complete details on this event. The receipt of
this FOIA request to tower officials has been confirmed.

I have independently interviewed Officer Toby Melero, who stated
that the electrical instrumentation of his patrol cruiser was
'shut down' by the disc-shaped, rotating light that hovered over
a residential neighborhood. I have spoken with others, including
Dispatcher Rudolph, who have conveyed to me their knowledge of
this strange and mystifying account. To this point, all my
inquiries reached a dead-end, being without the one key element
most needful to confirm the account: a date.

It may now be possible to conduct further scrutiny of this
happening on the basis of the newly discovered 'date of event.'
The present acquisition of audio tapes relevant to the UFO
situation in the Trumbull County, Ohio area, will enable us to
conduct a detailed analysis of this incident, utilizing sober
scientific methods and critical scrutiny with the hope of
advancing a solid, credible explanation to this otherwise
terribly interesting mystery.

An attempt will be made to convert this incredible event onto a
RAM file that internet patrons may access through REAL AUDIO.
This effort may take some time and through coordination with
others who have such means. This file will be accessed through
the web-site listed below upon its completion.

Filed:
June 1, 1998
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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 1

                              Re: Alien Baloney

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 12:25:36 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 01 Jun 1998 17:18:24 -0400
Subject: Re: Alien Baloney

>From: Ufojoe1@aol.com [Joe Murgia]
>Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 15:43:11 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Alien Baloney

>To all that have problems with Sims and Leir:

>Your raise very good arguments. If you think you can do better
>than Sims and Leir then do it.

<snip>

>John Velez seems upset that they say the tests so far are
>inconclusive.

Never said _anything_ of the kind Joe. Please, read my e-mails
before you respond to them. Save everyone alot of misunderstanding
and unecessary explaining.

Peace,

John 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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 1

                              Re: Alien Baloney

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 12:22:32 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 01 Jun 1998 17:17:31 -0400
Subject: Re: Alien Baloney

>Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 14:40:35 -0500 (CDT)
>From: Brian Cuthbertson <brianc@freeside.fc.net>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: Alien Baloney

>> Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 05:17:10 -0500
>> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>> From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
>> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Alien Baloney

>> >From: RSchatte@aol.com [Rebecca]
>> >Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 04:37:22 EDT
>> >To: updates@globalserve.net
>> >Subject: Alien Baloney

>> > http://www.newtimesla.com/1998/052898/faultlines1.html
>> >Saturday, May 30, 1998

>> >Browse recent Faultlines columns.
>> >Or search News archives:

>> >Alien Baloney

>> >A local podiatrist says he's been surgically removing strange
>> >objects from people who think they were implanted by space
>> >aliens. But there are a few holes in his story

>> <snip>

>> >Leir claims the mystery implants have undergone complicated tests
>> >at a variety of laboratories, including those at Stanford, the
>> >University of San Diego, the New Mexico Institute of Mining and
>> >Technology, the Los Alamos National Laboratory, and most
>> >recently, a private lab in Dallas. So far, he says, the mountain
>> >of data derived from the tests is inconclusive about whether the
>> >objects are truly extraterrestrial in nature, although Leir
>> >clearly thinks there's a good chance they are. But, he says, "We
>> >won't know until we get the last piece of data."

>> The same old rap we've been hearing from these two for three
>> years!

>Phrases like "the mountain of data derived ... is inconclusive"
>and "we won't know until ..."  could apply equally well to the
>results of ANY UFO-related investigation I'm aware of during the
>past 50 years. Or have I missed one someplace?  But I guess these
>guys are held to higher standards for whatever reasons John may
>have.

>-Brian Cuthbertson

Hiya Brian, hi All,

>for whatever reasons John may have.

Only one Brian, _I_am_an_abductee_! Anyone that makes the job of
getting us some "serious attention" is going to get _my_ serious
attention. This is too urgent and monumental to take it all so
lightly.  If Sims & Leir were on the up and up I would back their
efforts with the same intensity and energy level that I use to
expose them. They are doing _all_abductees_ and everyone in
general a great dis-service. If this thing (object retrieval and
analysis) had been handled more responsibly we _might_be_ a
little further down the road to understanding. There is alot at
stake for all mankind, not just the experiencers.

My self, my wife, my children, and many others worldwide have had
otherwise 'normal' lives turned inside out by this phenomenon.
This is deadly serious to me (and to them.) I (we) will
not/cannot tolerate or accept anything less than the "best" in
terms of those who claim to represent us. The
-_majority_of_times_ that you see me posting to this list is when
it involves abductions or abduction researchers.

I'm looking out for my own (and others) best interests. I'm not
holding anyone to "higher standards" just _high_standards_!

Understand where I cometh from now Mr C? <G>

Peace,

John 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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 1

                   Re: Skywatch: Area 51 Still Operational

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 12:10:24 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 01 Jun 1998 17:12:30 -0400
Subject: Re: Skywatch: Area 51 Still Operational

> Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 14:23:10 +0100
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> From: "John Cussen (CMG UK Limited)" <john.cussen@cmgplc.com>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Skywatch: Area 51 Still Operational

> Do any of you feel the same frustration that I feel?  Is there
> anything to point me, guide me, that will lift my spirits up and
> give me reasons or encouragement to get interested in this area
> again?  I need it, I really do.  I respect the right to opinions
> and beliefs, and I need mine strengthened again, soon."

John -

The reason for your dissolusionment is that you listed to the
wrong people.

The UFO phenomenon is not supported by Lazar, or crop circles, or
any of the promiscuously promised "great revelations" that are
"just around the corner". It is supported by over 50 years of
well documented sightings and trace evidence.

I suggest that you remember that confidence needs to be based in
reason, and that it stands to reason that the numerous police
officials, scientists, professionals and business people who have
been accosted by these objects and their occupants while in their
normal environments are the ones who are giving us the clues we
need.

While the Lazars, Corsos, and Santilli's of the world endlessly
promise and never deliver substantial proof of their wild claims,
the real sightings are going on, and the data potential they
represent is largely untapped.

How many good distance estimates have slipped through the cracks,
to take just one key measurement? With good distance
measurements, we can do altitude, speed, luminous energy output.
Yet few investigators make an effort to obtain triangulation,
they simply rely on wild guesses by witnesses.

How many areas exist for some good experimental science to be
done on UFOs? Many. If nothing else, work on free-air ionization,
electrostatic and electrodynamic effects on lighting and power
systems, energy required to produce burn traces and ground
impressions in various sorts of soil...

Science on UFOs is moved forward by incremental basic work,
founded on good field investigation, not by revelation. And if
half the effort spent on the tricksters was spent on real science
done on real cases, we'd be getting somewhere.

So don't lose hope, but shift focus to where the real work can be
done. And remember: If it sounds like a con, it probably is a
con. Don't waste time on tricks.

------
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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 1

                              Re: Alien Baloney

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 17:50:00 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 01 Jun 1998 18:34:12 -0400
Subject: Re: Alien Baloney

>Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 05:17:10 -0500
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Alien Baloney

>>From: RSchatte@aol.com [Rebecca]
>>Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 04:37:22 EDT
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Alien Baloney


>>Naturally, hooray for Hollywood! This is a joke right? What
>>'gnome' are they going to hire to play Lier? They can probably
>>get Don Eckersley (sp?) the Boston Red Socks starting pitcher to
>>play Sims. He ain't much of an actor but he's a dead ringer for
>>Sims! "Casting" will have to search under every toadstool in
>>Ireland to find a lookalike for Lier though! <EG> (Sorry,
>>couldn't resist!)

Hi All,

I'd like to publicly appologise for this paragraph in my post.
It was a low blow and unfair of me to make fun of Leirs'
appearance. The rest of what I said remains though.

I realize that to an outsider my comments may sound like
sour grapes but it's not. If Sims & Leir had been responsible
and enlisted (in advance of the surgeries) the participation of
a major medical institutionor a recognized/reputable independant
laboratory they could then have made an appeal to the public
to solicit donations to have the work done.

Simple things like accountability -where the money goes-
publication -public disemenation of findings- follow-ups
on the subjects of the surgeries, the chain of custody of the
"objects" following surgery, are all vitally important components.
They haven't done anything from the above list. And even if
what they have is genuine, it has been so poorly handled that
they may as well dump em and start over with a new sense of
what they are doing because the scientists and skeptics are
going to shred it as it stands.

It's a waste and a damned shame that the folks that allowed
themselves to be cut in the name of getting at the truth, will
never have the definitive answers they deserve for their
sacrifice and courage. Yeah I'm pissed. If this thing had been
handled properly we'd be closer to some important answers.

Again, I appologize for ragging Dr. Leir's appearance. It wasn't
fair or right.

Sincerely,

John 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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 1

             Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force

From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 15:40:34 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time)
Fwd Date: Mon, 01 Jun 1998 18:23:05 -0400
Subject: Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force

> From: JBONJO@aol.com [James Bond Johnson]
> To: updates@globalserve.net
> Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 00:38:19 EDT
> Subject: New High Tech Examination of Old Roswell Photos
>          Clears Air Force General of Hoax

<snip>

> It is most impressive that aided by this advanced digital
> technology we finally have the capacity to enlarge details of the
> wreckage to see clearly what is indeed some kind of "writings"
> that do not appear to be any known writings by any earth
> residents.  What is even more impressive is that the symbols are
> displayed in bas-relief and certainly do not appear to be any
> kind of known printing.

If the "writings" are indeed 3-D and not flat symbols on adhesive
tape that look 3-D, this would rule out that the debris was the
remains of New York University balloon experiment(s).

<snip>

> The sudden announcement a short time after the photo session by
> General Ramey -- upon orders from his bosses in Washington, DC --
> that this debris was but a "weather balloon and radar target"
> certainly makes good sense.

If this particular unpacked material was a weather balloon radar
target or the remains of a Japanese balloon, one would still have
to account for these very unusual 3-D "writings".

At our monthly MUFON Ontario meeting last week I suggested that
in light of this news, maybe the video of the 1992 Long Island
New York UFO crash, which shows similar aluminium foil type
wreckage, should be re-examined.  Since Bill Moore and Jamie
Shandera had articles printed in FOCUS and MUFON UFO Journal
(just before the alleged Long Island UFO crash) promoting the
view that this aluminium foil type wreckage in General Ramey's
office was actual UFO crash debris, this may explain why the Long
Island UFO crash debris in the video looks much like aluminum
foil too.

Are there any pre-1990's UFO crash accounts that describe any
of the crash debris as looking similar to metal foil?

Nick Balaskas








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 1

                           PHENOMENON # 9 - Part 1

From: Bob Tidwell <bob.t@mindspring.com>
Date: Mon, 01 Jun 1998 12:40:58 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 01 Jun 1998 18:19:37 -0400
Subject: PHENOMENON # 9 - Part 1

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>

     PHENOMENON
     E-Mail Newsletter             A Forum for the
     Issue # 9 - Part 1         Strangeness Around us
     June 1, 1998

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>

         In This Issue

                   Part 1

               *** Editor's Notes
               *** Articles from Back Issues
               *** FOIA and the Internet
               *** Newsletter Guidelines

                   Part 2

               *** The Rest of the Story

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>

                    -------------------
                     Quote of the Week
                    -------------------

Once I was sure what life was about.....now I listen to Art
Bell and wonder....is paranoia an occupation or a hobby?

                                 MoonsBloom

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>

                 ----------------
                  Editor's Notes
                 ----------------

Welcome to issue number 9.

Trying to unravel the mysteries around us can get to be very
frustrating at times. So much so, that we tend to turn against
each other in order to vent that frustration. For over 50 years
now we have tried to understand those strange lights in the sky,
but with very little success. They are very much like the carrot
dangling at the end of the stick, and just out of our reach,
which sometimes makes us feel like the jackass tied to the other
end.

Maybe it's time for us to forget about the carrot, and instead go
after those responsible for tying the stick on us in the first
place. They seem to have control of the best carrots, and need to
be persuaded to share theirs with us.

This issue's article, "The Rest of the Story", is about the
information game, and how it, the lack of it, or the misuse of
it, has been used to turn us away from our goals and against each
other. You may, or may not, agree with this article, but it will
have served it's purpose if it only makes you stop and think
about what's being done to us.

On another note, starting very soon I will be taking on an extra
workload in preparation for my retirement, and will have less
time to devote to this newsletter, which I very much enjoy
working on. This means that after this issue it will be sent on a
when-I-get-it-ready type of schedule. I still welcome all of your
comments, and will continue to present articles that hopefully
will give you something to think about.

Thanks again, and save me a carrot if you get there first.

      ~~~ Bob ~~~

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>

        *****************************
          Articles from Back Issues
        *****************************

The following articles from back issues of PHENOMENON are
available to anyone that wishes to requests them:

     The Big Bang -- (issue # 1)
     The Roswell Transistor -- (issue # 2)
     50 Years of UFO Investigation:
        What Have we Learned? -- (issue # 3)
     Back to the Moon Again? -- (issue # 4)
     The Nature of our Souls -- (issue # 4)
     The True Nature of UFO Radar Reports -- (issue # 5)
     Archeological Coverups? ~~
     Editor's Notes for Part 2 ~~
     The PHOENIX GAZETTE Article -- (issue # 6)
     Coverups and Conspiracies -- (issue # 7)
     Technology and UFO Investigations -- (issue # 7)
     A Secret Holographic Project? -- (issue # 7)
     The Grays - and their Long Journey Home   (issue # 8)

Send your request to:

       Bob.t@mindspring.com

Thanks,       ~~~ Bob ~~~

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>

           ************************
             FOIA and the Internet
           ************************

If you've ever thought of trying your hand at submitting a
Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA) request, the Internet is the
best place to start. For those of you that have never submitted a
request, and would like to know more about FOIA, I recommend that
you first check out the American Civil Liberties Union web page
at:

        http://www.aclu.org/library/foia.html

This site contains a step-by-step guide that should answer most
of your questions. After you've read this guide and feel
comfortable with the way FOIA works, and the steps needed to
submit such a request, it would be wise to then first search the
net for records of similar search requests. The information that
you want could have already been requested by someone else, and
is posted somewhere on the net.

Internet sites change frequently, so run a search often, using
several different search engines. This may turn out to be a
tedious task, but it depends on how bad you want the information.
You might even find that searching the net is your niche in
helping to solve some of our mysteries. I have several friends
that are very good at this, and are always ready and willing to
search for something unusual.

As you run more and more searches, you will start to develop your
own style. The trick is to have an idea of which keywords to
include, or ask to ignore. Most search engines will allow you to
include a multi-word name or phrase within quotation marks (such
as "Air Force" or "sometime in the morning"). Putting a + before
a word or phrase will force the search engine to only show you
those sites that contain the words that you are searching for. If
you leave off the +, then you'll also get close matches, which
you may or may not want. Putting a - before the word or phrase
will cause the search to ignore those items.

You might be surprised if the search results indicates several
hundred, or thousands, of possible matches. You then begin to
narrow the search by adding more key words and phrases. This
really is an art, as you will soon discover. The search engine
sites usually have further instructions that will enable you to
become an expert at search/surfing the net to find just that bit
of information that you're looking for.

Ok, so you're ready to start looking for FOIA information. You
enter +FOIA as the keyword to search for, and you see that your
request indicates that 38,840 web pages have that word included
somewhere in the body of their text. You could then add a
particular agency, such as +"Air Force", and you now have 2083
matching pages. Adding +UFO brings that down to 735. Including
further details, such as dates, names or locations, brings that
number down even further. After accessing a particular web page,
try using the "find" feature of the program that you are using
(Netscape, Explorer, etc...). When you are finished, use the
<back> button to return to the search engine to access the next
site.

You will start to find the posted results of other persons, and
hopefully the information that you are looking for. If not, try
searching for a particular agency's FOIA web site. Some of these
agencies, such as the Air Force, have started publishing the
responses to frequently asked requests, through links at their
FOIA sites. If you decide to go ahead and submit a request of
your own, these sites will usually furnish you with the address
to send the request to, and some even allow you to do this
online.

Some of the more popular search engines include:

Yahoo -------- http://www.yahoo.com
Hot Bot ------ http://www.hotbot.com
AltaVista ---- http://www.altavista.digital.com

These are by no means the only search engines available, and you
will find the ones that suite your needs the best. You might even
try searching for search engines.

Good luck and happy searching.

      ~~~ Bob ~~~

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>

                   -----------------------
                    Newsletter Guidelines
                   -----------------------


                 PHENOMENON is a FREE newsletter

To add or remove yourself from our mailing list, please send an
E-Mail to:

               bob.t@mindspring.com.

The purpose of this free newsletter is to provide a forum for
information and discussion concerning the strangeness that
surrounds us in our daily lives. Articles, comments and/or
suggestions are welcome.

Articles may include, but are not limited to:
          ... UFOs & Ghost Lights
          ... The Paranormal
          ... New World Order
          ... Conspiracies
          ... Time Travel
          ... Hidden History
          ... etc...

We welcome:
          ... Feature Articles
          ... Analysis, Commentary or Updates
          ... Your Own Report of Strange Phenomena

All contributions to PHENOMENON E-Mail Newsletter must be in
English. We reserved the right to edit for language, grammar and
space.

            Anonymity will be provided if requested.

Segments or single quotes from articles may be reprinted in other
newsletters, bulletin boards or web sites, with permission from
the Editor, as long as credit is given to PHENOMENON E-Mail
Newsletter and, if applies, to the original source.

Thanks
       ~~~ Bob ~~~

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
                  (C) Bob Tidwell, 1998
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
                  ~~~ End of Part 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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 1

                           PHENOMENON # 9 - Part 2

From: Bob Tidwell <bob.t@mindspring.com>
Date: Mon, 01 Jun 1998 12:43:37 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 01 Jun 1998 18:20:52 -0400
Subject: PHENOMENON # 9 - Part 2

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>

     PHENOMENON
     E-Mail Newsletter             A Forum for the
     Issue # 9 - Part 2         Strangeness Around us
     June 1, 1998

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>

                       Part 2

               *** The Rest of the Story

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>

           *************************
             The Rest of the Story
           *************************

Imagine that you are standing before two great doors, one of
which leads to the answers concerning a great mystery that could
change the world. The other door leads to lies and deceptions
that would take you further away from this mystery. These doors
are watched over by two guides, one of which always tells the
truth, and the other always lies. You don't know which guide
always tells the truth or which one always lies, but you can only
ask one question of either guide, and then open only one door.
What question would you ask?

Most people try to solve this riddle by thinking of a question
pertaining to the guides honesty or to the door itself. It is
solved though by asking either guide which door the other guide
would say held the correct answers, and then choosing the
opposite door.

Finding the answers to the UFO enigma is much like this riddle.
We are often faced with information that could be either fact or
fiction, or a combination of both, and we're not sure which
questions to ask in order to discover the correct answers, or who
to believe.

We were unable to solve the UFO mystery in the 1960s and 70s, so
we instead opened both doors and combined all of the answers,
true and false, into organized databases, from which we had hoped
that the mystery would unfold for us. So far no one has come up
with any definitive answers, only more information and more
questions. We still don't have any more answers than we had back
then, but our databases are sure getting bigger.

Maybe what we need is a new method of looking at this mystery.
After many years of my own personal research, I started to notice
that most of the time the small things that were happening
around the events that I was observing often were more important
that the actual event itself. Sort of like "watching the right
hand instead of the left." I've always enjoyed listening to Paul
Harvey's "The Rest of The Story" and decided to apply that
technique to my studies.  I went through my research data again,
this time avoiding the lure of the major event details, and
focused on what was unfolding on the sidelines.  It soon became
rather apparent that maybe we have been asking the wrong
questions and looking in the wrong directions.

In any proper research we should always keep an open mind, even
when the data at hand points us in a new direction that we don't
necessarily want to follow. A true researcher will allow the
facts to speak for themselves and be patient enough to add his or
her own interpretations much later.

We are also hampered by the possibility that we are being misled
by masters of disinformation and misinformation, which not only
results in us opening the wrong door, but also serves to hide
the correct door from our view altogether.

Disinformation is easier to prove as false because it contains
only information that is not true. It is sometimes spread by
including it with several pieces of true information, which
serves to give the impression that the disinformation is also
true, because of association.

Misinformation can be very tricky though, because it contains a
small amount of truth, allowing it to stand on it's own without
being tied to other truthful information. The problem arises in
trying to discover that small amount of truth, and to separate it
from the other misleading information.

Much of our present technological advancement is due to
discoveries that were made during WW II. War can be a great
motivator, and resulted in a great number of various technologies
that we commonly use today. There was another field though that
would prove to be more important than any other. This involved
the handling, transfer and storage of information.

Governments had to devise methods of safely getting correct
information to their various military units, while "allowing"
false information to fall into the hands of the enemy. Spies and
double agents were everywhere, so methods were developed that
would allow valuable information to be exchanged between leaders
on a "need to know only" basis and would be encoded so as to be,
or appear to be, worthless if intercepted by unfriendly forces.
The information would usually be destroyed, or further encrypted
upon receipt, while special safeguards would be used to safely
store this information at the originating end. This would insure
that certain high level information would only be accessible to
those that actually needed access to it.

At the same time, a misleading alternate form of the same
information would be sent and stored by other supposedly secure
means. This would help to keep attention away from the actual
information, which would have been indicated by a lack of it
indicated otherwise. At the same time, specially trained
personnel would be spreading various forms of the misinformation
in a manner that would allow it to fall into enemy hands, thus
creating confusion to anyone, including members of even our own
government.

But what do these war-time information games have to do with the
modern day mystery of UFOs? While ufology dates from Kenneth
Arnold's sightings forward, for the military it started during
WW II. Military commanders were getting highly classified reports
of strange aircraft that were out-maneuvering anything we had in
the air at that time. At first they were suspected of being
secret German aircraft, but intelligence reports were unable to
verify this. These craft were the most highly sought after secret
of the war, and any information about them would have been
treated with the utmost secrecy.

When the war ended, Operation Paperclip, along with other
projects, was activated in order to attempt to track down these
mysterious craft. We got a major share of the technology and
personnel from Germany, and discovered that they also were
investigating these unknown aircraft, and were even trying to
duplicate them with a certain degree of success.

But after the war was over and the dust had settled, the
"unknowns" were still being reported. I personally talked to a
relative of General Jimmy Doolittle, and was told that one of his
major assignments after the war was to attempt to investigate and
track down these unknowns in the Pacific area. Whether he had any
luck or not, I don't know, but the U.S. government and the
military soon had a bigger problem. These strange aircraft were
now overflying the western portion of the United States at will.
The majority of the world was breathing a great sigh of relief,
but Washington and the military were still operating in a
war-time mode, and had no idea who the enemy was. While the rest
of the country was getting used to peace again, the military
was making an all-out effort to regain control of our skies and
borders.

This is why they have been able to continue to hide the more
important records of UFOs from the public. They were, and still
are, a part of the war-time information controls, thus enabling
these reports and records to remain hidden from public records,
and most FOIA requests.

Another "slight-of-hand" trick that was used, concerns which
branch of the military was given the primary assignment of
solving the mystery of the unknowns. The most advanced branch of
the military in the 1940s was the Navy. They controlled the
largest war machines, ships, which required more technology, and
the information specialists needed to safeguard this technology.
They were also more easily dispatched around the globe without
attracting the attention that an army unit would. They were also
becoming better equipped with a very important tool - radar.

When the Air Force was created in 1947, the Navy continued to
track and investigate the unknowns, while giving the appearance
to the public that this was being done by the Air Force. Projects
like Blue Book, Sign and Grudge were created to further divert
our attention from the Navy. As UFO reports would come in, the
more sensitive ones would go to the Navy, with the less sensitive
ones going to Blue Book. Most of the Air Force personnel,
including Blue Book members themselves, probably did think that
they actually had been assigned the real task of investigating
UFOs.

In 1947 though, something of great importance happened that would
change the Navy's game plan drastically. This would later be
known to future ufologists as the Roswell Incident. But before we
get into what may have happened at Roswell, let's look at another
problem that serves to further confuse a civilian study of UFOs.

We as individuals, tend to be very divided in the manner in which
we approach the study of UFOs, or anything else. We are very much
like the Indian legend of the six blind men and the elephant. In
this story, six blind friends hear the roar of an elephant in the
street. Having never experienced this creature, they all rush
outside to touch it.

The first man touches an ear, and proclaims that an elephant is a
wide rough thing, like a rug. The second man touches the trunk,
and proclaims it to be like a snake. The third man touches one of
the legs, and proclaims that an elephant is tall and firm, like a
tree. The fourth man touches the elephant's side, and proclaims
it to be wide and smooth, like a wall. The fifth man puts his
hands on one of the tusks, and proclaims it to be hard and sharp,
like a spear. The sixth man then grabs hold of the tail, and
proclaims that an elephant is like a long thin rope.

Afterwards the six blind friends get into a heated argument as to
what an elephant is really like. Each man insists that he is
right, as he has touched it with his very own hands. The owner of
the elephant hears all the shouting and comes over to see what
all the fuss is about. "Each of you is right, and each of you is
wrong,"  he tells them. "One man may not be able to find the
whole truth by himself, just a small part of it. But if we work
together, each adding our own piece to the whole, we can find
wisdom."

Modern ufology has become very much like this story, with various
ufologists each clinging to their very own piece of the UFO
mystery, and choosing to be blind to anyone else's piece that
may also fit, regardless of how different or contradictory it may
appear to be on the outside.

This is where "The Rest of the Story" might be able to help.
Let's stop arguing about terminology, and each other, and put all
of our various pieces together to perhaps enable us to see the
whole picture. The dis/mis-information specialist are probably
laughing their rear ends off right now, as we are making their
jobs so easy for them. Let's also take off the blinders and see
what happening on the sidelines, instead of concentrating on
where the information specialist are directing us to look.

With this in mind, let's take another look at a couple of events
that happened in 1947, and perhaps the sideline details can allow
us to look at the left hand instead of the right.

First, there is the incident that started all of this, the
Kenneth Arnold sighting. Once the term "flying saucer" was etched
into the public's mind, along with thoughts of visitors from
other worlds, the information specialists had a ready-made means
of controlling our perception of these unknowns. It made no
matter that this could actually be true. They would focus our
attention on "aliens" and "little green men", thus blinding us to
only this one aspect of the mystery. The Navy would now have
scores of new sky watchers searching the heavens, enabling them
to have more information to add to their investigation of the
unknowns. If it they did actually turn out to be beings from
another world, then it would also serve to acclimate the general
public, which would be better than having it disclosed all at
once and having widespread panic. In order to keep the public
from getting too serious about flying saucers, a fringe element
would also be introduced through movies and certain selected
individuals. The information specialists would be both promoting
and ridiculing this subject, in order to maintain just the right
controls.

Getting back to Kenneth Arnold, this incident served to indicate
a very important fact as to what was really happening in 1947.
Other persons, also pilots, had also observed and reported these
same unknown craft, but Arnold would be the perfect All-American
witness to be used to launch a massive misinformation program
that is still in effect today. The Navy could not allow their
investigators to be seen in Naval uniforms, so these agents would
probably have been in Army, Army Air Corp, and later in Air Force
uniforms. This was, and still is, a common intelligence trick
that is used by the military to divert attention in other
directions.

This brings us to the two A-2 Military Intelligence officers that
investigated Arnold's sightings. Where these officers
investigating other sightings before Arnold's? If so, then this
would indicate that the military already had an organized unit in
place that was investigating what would later be referred to as
UFOs. In fact, the term "UFO" was originated by the military, and
was not created by a civilian source.

Arnold was also asked by Ray Palmer to investigate a strange
incident near Tacoma, Washington, which ended with the death of
the two A-2 Military Intelligence investigators. This episode is
so full of strangeness that an entire article would be required
in order to adequately cover all the aspects that were involved.
The only thing that I would like to mention about it is that one
of the key witness, Fred Crisman, was later discovered to have
also been an intelligence agent. The information specialists were
in full control.

The Navy was making progress in their investigations into the
possible sources of these UFOs, but what they needed was more
tangible evidence, so a special project was started in an attempt
to bring down one of these unknowns. They had gotten word that
radar tests that were being conducted in the 4-corners region of
the Southwest, were possibly interfering with these unknown
craft. After determining that certain radar patterns actually did
appear to have an effect on these craft, it was decided that a
high power "sweep" of the area using these patterns might be
enough to bring down one or more of the unknowns.

The problem was that, if it worked, special military teams would
have to be standing by, in order to collect the wreckage and
bodies before anyone knew what had happened. If they were unable
to contain the situation, then a cover story would be required.

Sometime during the first week of July, one or more of these
"radar sweeps" succeeded in bringing down several of the unknown
aircraft. In most cases there were so few witnesses as to be
easily controlled, but at least one of these UFOs had crashed near
 the town of Roswell, New Mexico. Police and firefighters
from the town managed to get fairly close to the crash site, but
the information specialists decided that they would still be able
to control the situation.

A new problem arose though when a rancher turned up in town a few
days later with actual pieces of the wreckage. It was then
decided by the information specialists that the control story
would be required. The Roswell base commander was instructed to
have the base information officer deliver a carefully prepared
statement to the local press, stating that the Army had recovered
one of the "flying disks." This would focus attention to just the
Roswell area, and away from the other crash sites, some of which
were still being cleared of wreckage.

This would also give the higher-ups a chance to see what kind of
panic might develop if the public ever had to be told that flying
saucers actually were a reality.

The Roswell crash was then quickly controlled by having a high
ranking officer, along with someone from Roswell that was
connected to the incident, pose with a sample of the crash
material for a photographer, and claim that it was pieces of a
weather balloon.. If anyone were to look further into the Roswell
crash, they would automatically be associated with flying saucers
and weather balloons, and well within the limits of their
information controls. It worked for a good many years.

[I wonder what was found at the crash sites that frightened the
government and the military so much that this incident must
remain hidden even today?]

The Roswell incident has been covered more than any other event
in the history of ufology. But, let's take a look at the sideline
events and see if anything further comes to light with "the rest
of the story."

The first thing that should be plainly evident is that no base
commander in his right mind would tell his information officer to
proclaim that they had a "flying saucer" unless they actually did
have one or was instructed to do so by a higher authority. If
this was not so, then what possible motive did he have in doing
this? Walter Haut, the information officer, has admitted that he
did not write the press release himself, but had received the
information directly from Colonel Blanchard, and that the press
release might even have already been prepared and written,
possibly even from a source higher than Blanchard.

Then there's the military soldiers at the crash site near
Roswell. There were trucks, tents, special equipment, and lots of
soldiers guarding the perimeter of the crash area. It's possible
that the local army base had some of these supplies, but this was
a major operation, requiring lots of equipment. And where did all
of the soldiers come from? Roswell had an Army Air Corp base,
where pilots, mechanics, technicians, office personnel, etc...
would be stationed. Yes, this was the only "atomic air base" in
the world, but would they have had that many security personnel
that they could spare? If so, then what type of incident would
require that they all be sent to this one area, leaving the base
relatively unguarded? It would be safer to assume that these
military personnel were a part of some other group, one that was
prepared for just such an event. This might also be the reason
that former personnel from Roswell don't remember anything like
this happening. Maybe they weren't there.

If Mac Brazel, the rancher who brought the pieces of wreckage
into town, had only found parts of a weather balloon, why was he
detained at the Army base for several days. Even his statement
to reporter Frank Joyce; "You know how they talk about little
green men? Well,  they weren't green", sounds like a conditioned
response that he was supposed to repeat. And don't forget the new
truck that he was soon driving around town.

Then there's the use of weather balloons as the answer to this
riddle. I can't imagine Major Marcel bringing home pieces of a
weather balloon for his family to look at, and thinking that it
was something else. He had seen weather balloons before, and
should have been able to recognize one. The Air Force now claims
that this whole incident involved a secret Mogul balloon, but it
so happened that another family had actually found a Mogul
balloon on their property, and the military had politely asked
that they not tell anyone, because of national security reasons.
They weren't told that someone would find their bones in the
desert if they talked. There's also the fact that the balloon
story and pieces were presented at the Army base in Ft. Worth,
instead of at Roswell. The information specialists were playing
the old shell game very well.

A final curiosity arose a few weeks ago while I was going thru
Government sites on the Internet. Several Roswell citizens have
talked about a red-haired Army Captain that had rudely threatened
them concerning the pieces of strange metal that they had
handled. This person could possibly have been a Naval
intelligence office wearing an Army uniform. I humorously asked
Kevin Randle a few years ago how many red-headed intelligence
officers the military had in 1947, and where was L. Ron Hubbard
at that time. (He actually added the possibilities up in his head
and politely gave me an answer.) The strange thing is, a fire at
the National Archives and Records Administration Center in St.
Louis destroyed a large number of Air Force personnel records in
1973, and the records that were lost were from September 25,1947
to January 1,1964; starting with Hubbard. ??? Army records from
1912 to 1960 were also lost.

Ok, so much for the sidelines. Let's get back to the rest of the
story again. Some very excellent researchers have managed to
bring Roswell back to our attention after all these years, but,
like the blind men and the elephant, are only "touching" one part
of the whole story. It reminds me of the lyrics from a Buffalo
Springfield song, "nobody's right if everybody's wrong." Wouldn't
it be nice if all of the Roswell researchers stopped arguing as
to whether or not their locations, dates and accounts were true,
and simply considered the possibility that they all had some
correct pieces to this puzzle?. Maybe a different situation would
then become apparent.

I would now like to present yet another analogy to our problems
with present day ufology. Imagine, if you will, a sealed box
lying on a table in a room. A group of ufologist experts are then
brought into the room and told that this box contains a great
secret concerning the UFO mystery, and that the box will
automatically open in one hour to disclose this secret. The
experts are then left to themselves to discuss this disclosure.

Some of the ufologist state that "it's about time we were told
the truth" or "I knew that the time was near." Others give their
opinion as to the contents of the box. Some feel that it will
prove that UFOs are from other worlds, while others proclaim this
to be nonsense, and that UFOs are of Earthly manufacture. Before
the hour is up, these experts are in total disagreement, and
aren't talking to each other.

At the end of the hour the box opens to revel nothing but an
empty box. The ufologists then begin to argue with each other
again over this new discovery, and angrily walk out of the room,
uttering a few four letter words under their breath.

Isn't this the way ufology has become lately? Wouldn't it have
been more productive if the ufologists had simply waited for the
box to open, and upon discovering that it was empty, have decided
to go find out who was responsible for the box in the first place?

We are sometimes presented with all sorts of boxes, belonging to
events such as Adamski, the Alien Autopsy, Billy Meiers, etc...
Wouldn't it be more productive to stop arguing about the event,
and instead attempt to find the cause of the event?

I personally admit that I don't know the answer to the UFO
mystery. I can only investigate what my mind allows me to
"touch", but at the same time I realize that this mystery is also
touching the minds of others. Hopefully we can somehow put all of
our minds together, and take away our blindness so that we can
see the elephant for what it really is! Then maybe we can also
see the guides for what they truly are, and ask the right
question that will allow us to open the correct door.

   ~~~ Bob Tidwell ~~~

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
                  (C) Bob Tidwell, 1998
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
                       ~~~ 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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 1

             Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force

From: KRandle993@aol.com [Kevin Randle]
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 12:58:31 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 01 Jun 1998 17:54:58 -0400
Subject: Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force

Hi Errol and all -

I thought since this stuff keeps appearing, that an opposing
point of view might be amusing.


>From: JBONJO@aol.com [James Bond Johnson]
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 00:38:19 EDT
>Subject: New High Tech Examination of Old Roswell Photos
          Clears Air Force General of Hoax


>This Press Release from Orange County MUFON has been released
>today to the wire services.  I have been contacted by numerous
>media requesting radio, TV and press interviews and for me to be
>photographed with the new super enlargements which show the
>various "writings" and anomalous materials in the old Roswell UFO
>photos.  I have resisted all such interviews since I do not claim
>to be an "expert" and have not posed for any photos.  I have been
>urged to write "my story" and have done so briefly.  I am sending
>it to you as background for use in any coverage that you might
>want to give to this breaking story.  Ron Regehr, who is so much
>more qualified to discuss the technical aspects of these new
>developments, has kindly volunteered to handle media requests for
>interviews.  Thank you.

>James Bond Johnson
>http://www.ufomind.com/people/j/johnsonj/

<snip>

Once again I find myself having to defend my reporting of the
events that took place outside of Roswell, New Mexico in 1947.

Once again, I'm being accused of misquoting a source now that the
source has changed his story significantly, with the obvious
intent of moving himself from obscurity into the spotlight.

And, once again, I have the audio tape back-up to show that my
quotes were not wrong, but that the source has made the mistakes
as he has altered his story so that he can become more important
to the Roswell case.

I first learned about J. Bond Johnson in 1989 as I began to
actively investigate the Roswell UFO crash case. Photographs of
material claimed to be debris from the crash site had been taken
in the office of Brigadier General Roger M. Ramey on July 8,
1947. It was clear from the captions that the photographs were in
the possession of the  Fort Worth Star-Telegram because they had
been taken by one of their photographers. I called them only to
learn that many of their photographs had been donated to the
Special Collections being housed at the University of Texas  at
Arlington library.

So I called there and spoke to Betsy Hudon who was in charge of
that collection. I told her what I wanted and she told me that
they had four photographs taken of Roger Ramey with a rawin
target device on July 8. I asked for copies, and they were sent.
I probably should note here, for clarification, that the labeling
at the library said they had four pictures of Ramey but in
reality two of them were of Major Jesse A. Marcel, Sr.

While talking to her, she mentioned that another fellow had
recently called about those same pictures and said that he was
the man who had taken them. If that was true, here was a witness
who had been in General Ramey's office at the critical time on
July 8. He might be able to provide some valuable insight into
those events that transpired in there. Here was a man to whom I
had to speak.

But Hudon didn't think it was right to give me his name. I asked
her if she would forward a letter to him, from me, and that way
he could contact me, if he wanted. She said that would be fine. I
wrote the letter, sent it, and she forward it on to, at that
point, the unidentified photographer.

Within days I heard from J. Bond Johnson. He wanted to talk about
the events in Ramey's office. I called him back on February 27,
1989 and we spoke for about forty minutes. I recorded the
conversation so that a record of it exists. A record that Johnson
now denies, by the way.

This was the first big break in my Roswell investigation. A few
days before, I had interviewed Bill Brazel in Carizozo, New
Mexico, and he had confirmed his handling of the strange metallic
debris, his father's discovery of the field of metallic debris,
and the suggestions by military officials that neither Brazel nor
his son talk of what they had seen. But Brazel had spoken to
others, telling them much the same thing that he told me. Johnson
was a new witness, one who had not been identified by others and
who had not been interviewed by others. Here was the first,
critical discovery.

Looking at the transcripts of that interview  now, I see where my
enthusiasm has overwhelmed me. Listening to the tapes, I can hear
where I should have spent more time listening and a little less
time talking about the case. From some of my comments I can see
where the criticism that I was coaching the witness might
originate. Well, not really, but then, a sharing of information
before I have fully questioned the witness is not the best
interrogation technique. I should have been quiet.

For example, Johnson said, "I took the picture of General Ramey
and the wreckage. General Ramey was the commander of the
Twentieth Air Force at that time. Or maybe not the Twentieth,
maybe the  Fifteenth." I said that I thought it was the Eighth
Air Force, but Johnson said, "I think that's not right." Of
course it was right, but it could be suggested that I was
coaching the witness when all I was doing was correcting a minor,
factual error that means nothing in the overall picture.

After that, Johnson said, in a fairly disjointed way, "The
Star-Telegram. The interesting things that you get into, that you
may know about... oh, those pictures have been used on a couple
of TV shows. One was Star Trek. No, Star... In Search OF which
Leonard Nimoy was the host of. And I was sitting watching the TV
and it popped up and showed this picture and oh, there's my
picture. That kind of thing..."

Johnson then brought Marcel into the story, saying that Alan
Lansbury, the producer of In Search Of had hosted a party to
which Johnson was invited. He said, "This Major was going to be
there, the one from Roswell." I asked, naturally, "Marcel?" Again
it might be seen as coaching the witness, though Johnson already
knew the name. He just couldn't think of it at that moment.

"Is he the one that got the..." I interrupted to say, "He was the
one that went out and picked up the material."

"From the rancher, yes. He heard about it in a bar and the guy
says, 'Oh, I got one of those out at the place.'"

I said, again, filling in detail, "Wait a minute. The problem is
that Mac Brazel found the thing on his ranch and he contacted the
folks at Roswell. There was a subsequent story. His son, Bill
Brazel came down to take care of the ranch because his dad was
being held at Roswell and undergoing tests or something like
that. Bill Brazel picked up some of the material. He found some
scrape of it and he was in the bar talking about it and the Air
Force came out the next day and picked it up. The fellow who came
out was a fellow named Armstrong."

"That wasn't the Major there?"

"No."

"The Major was the intelligence officer or something like that."
I said, "Okay. Marcel was the Intelligence Officer. He was the
one who went back to the ranch and picked it all up. So you met
Major Marcel." "Marcel, yes. He has a son. I saw the son
interviewed on TV recently." "Yeah," I said. "That is exactly
right. I was hoping that you have found Armstrong by mistake."

"The son said interesting things. That the father came home and
told us about the bodies and so forth. And then said that we
can't talk about it or don't tell anybody and so forth."

This confused me because to this point in my investigation, I
hadn't heard anything about Marcel and bodies. I asked, "Marcel
mentioned bodies?"

"No, the son."

My question was, quite naturally, "Marcel says that his father
mentioned bodies."

Johnson replied, "Came home and told us about it."

But the truth is, Jesse Marcel, Jr. has claimed all along that
his father never mentioned bodies at all. In fact, this has
become one of the stumbling points of the Roswell case. If there
had been a crash, the intelligence officer should have been
brought in to all aspects of it. That would mean he knew about
the bodies, yet he never mentioned a word about them, contrary to
what Johnson believed.

Having finished with that, Johnson finally said, "My interesting
part of this, having taken the picture and now going back and
looking at the picture because I didn't have a copy of it
(meaning, I suppose that he didn't have an original print but did
have the photograph as it had appeared in the newspaper in
1947)... is that I don't know whether the Air Force was pulling a
hoax or not. It looks like a kite..."

We discuss the sequence of events, and how Johnson ended up in
Ramey's office. Johnson then said, "Right. That was a hoax, I
think. That's when they called and what I saw. I think I was
duped." Note that I haven't said a thing about this aspect of the
case. Johnson himself had come to the conclusion that he had been
duped.

I agreed with his assessment. I said, "Yes. You and all the rest
of the reporters were duped."

"That we saw... that they came up with this weather balloon thing
as an added... that's my feeling. I never saw the real stuff
(emphasis added)." Again this was a spontaneous comment by
Johnson. I was trying to figure out how everything had happened
and Johnson was throwing in comments about it with no help or
coaching from me.

He continued, "Then they came out with that story almost
simultaneously afterward that the weather balloon thing..."

At this point in my investigation, having just started, I made a
basic assumption. I was aware of a quote attributed to Marcel (by
William Moore in The Roswell Incident) that suggested that if he
was in the photograph, it showed the real debris, but if it was
anyone else, then it was not the real thing. Since Marcel had
talked of reporters being present, and since Colonel Thomas
DuBose, Ramey's chief of staff in 1947, had mentioned three or
four reporters present, and, since Johnson was saying that there
had been no other reporters in Ramey's office when he was there,
I concluded that Ramey had met with the press twice. Johnson
noted that he did not attend a press conference, but had just met
Ramey in his office to take his photographs.

Johnson said that he took two pictures. One of Ramey, and one of
Ramey and DuBose. He didn't know who had taken the pictures of
Marcel and seemed to be surprised that there were pictures of him
in the file at the University of Texas. It was clear from all the
pictures that Marcel was near the same debris that Johnson had
photographed with Ramey and DuBose. In other words, and contrary
to the suggestions by William Moore, there were no photographs of
the real debris with Marcel in them, only the weather balloon
spread out on the floor in General Ramey's office.

Johnson told me, "I took two pictures and then they said, but
that time they said, 'Oh, we've found out what it is and you
know, it's a weather balloon and so forth.' No big deal. I didn't
press it. I accepted that. I was rather naive. I accepted that."

After we discussed the mechanics of transmitting stories over the
AP wire, I said, "You went back to..." Johnson interrupted to
say, "The Star-Telegram and gave them the wet prints of the
thing. They wanted them right out. I went in and developed them
and gave them wet prints. And I wrote..."

Here is an example of where it would have been better to listen.
Johnson said, "I wrote..." The implication is that he wrote the
story that he now denies he wrote. In another interview, and even
later in this first one, he would confirm this. He said, "Seven
nine [July 9] is my story on the front page that was earlier in
the day. That's when they debunked it."

And in a later interview, commenting on the article in the
newspaper, he said, "Okay, this is the article I wrote that was
on the front page on seven nine." And later still, he said, "I
went ahead and got the facts and came back and there wasn't any
other reporter who wrote it for the Star Telegram. I wrote it
that night."

So what we see is that Johnson was told that the debris on
Ramey's floor was a weather balloon and that he wrote an article
about it. That article appeared in the July 9 edition of the
Star-Telegram. These are two of the things that he claimed I got
wrong and that I refuse to change. Of course, I do have the
quotes on tape.

About a month later, I talked to Johnson again. I had had the
chance to digest the materials that had flooded in and had a
better feeling for what the situation was in Fort Worth in July
1947. I had been able to eliminate some of the material that was
obviously in error. To get a better picture, I asked, Johnson,
simply, "Could you just sort of tell me what you did... What
transpired when your editor gave you the assignment to go out to
the base."

The story he told was essentially the same as it had been during
our first conversation. He told me how the assignment had been
made, and how he had gotten out to the base. Then he said, "I
posed General Ramey with this debris piled in the middle of his
rather large and plush office. It seemed incongruous to have this
smelly garbage piled up on the floor..."

Next Johnson made the statement that he claims he never made and
that I have somehow misquoted, even when the quotes are on tape.
He said, "I posed General Ramey with this debris. At that time I
was briefed on the idea that it was not a flying disk as first
reported but in fact was a weather balloon that had crashed."

There is it, from Johnson himself, once again. Ramey told him,
there in the office, that it was nothing more than a weather
balloon. He suggests that the context of the quote is such that I
have somehow asked a question that he didn't understand. But the
quote comes about in a long narration as Johnson is telling me
what happened. I hadn't asked a question.

There are other facts that Johnson has challenged about my
stories, some of which are ridiculous. He now seems to feel that
he must discredit me because his own stories have put him into
conflict with himself. I am somehow responsible for the earlier
quotes that he doesn't believe reflect reality. Or rather, don't
reflect reality as he now misremembers it.

Johnson, for example, claims today that I called him cold. That I
did not provide him with any copies of photos or other materials
to refresh his memory. That, because of this, he was confused
when he spoke to me. Of course, had I given him the materials he
suggests that I should have, that would be coaching the witness.

But the point is irrelevant. I found Johnson because I was
attempting to locate copies of the pictures that were taken in
General Ramey's office. I found Johnson because he had done the
same thing and had already received those pictures. And, in our
very first interview, he was talking about the article that
appeared in the Star-Telegram that he said, at that time, he had
written. In other words, he already had copies of everything that
I could have sent him, had I been inclined to do so. He already
had the material to refresh his memory.

And, I couldn't have called him cold as he claims because I
didn't know who he was. Betsy Hudon sent my letter on to him to
allow him to initiate the contact, which he did. Without a first
call from him to me, there would have been no contact. When he
did call, he was already well aware of the subject. He now says,
in direct conflict with what he said a number of times in
different interviews, that he insisted there was no balloon in
General Ramey's office when we talked. He claims that I insisted
there was, arguing with him. His own photographs, however, prove
him wrong because the balloon is visible in the photographs.

He now claims that he didn't write the article that appeared in
the newspaper the next day, but only after claiming to me, on
tape that he did. The problem he has with it today is what it
says. If General Ramey didn't know what the debris was, it would
have been reflected in the article. It is not. The last paragraph
of the article is the deadly one. It said, "After his first look,
Ramey declared all it was was a weather balloon. The weather
officer verified his view." This is, of course, in direct
conflict with what Johnson claims today, but more importantly, if
he wrote the story, it verifies my version of the first
interviews.

Johnson has also claimed that he had tried, without success, to
get me to correct some of the inaccurate quotations I have
attributed to him. But the problem is not me. I did talk to him
about this after he changed his story. I read his quotes to him
from my transcripts. He denied that he would say anything like
that because it wasn't true. He couldn't remember what he had
said, just that it couldn't be true.

I sent him a tape so he could hear what he said. I sent him a
tape so that he would understand that he would say those sorts of
things because he had said those sorts of things. He provided no
answer to me except to suggest that, if he had said some of the
things, he had spoken in error when we talked.

The truth is I wrote letters to him on February 14, 1991,
February 16, 1991 and August 4, 1991, asking him specific
questions about his allegations. On the fourteenth, for example,
I wrote, "In reviewing my tapes, I learned a couple of other
things that are at odds with what you are now saying. On the
tape, you said, "...See, I went there not as a reporter but there
was not anybody else there. I went ahead and got the facts and
came back and there wasn't any other reporter who wrote it for
the Star-Telegram on that night. I wrote that that night.'" Those
are his words, not mine.

I also noted in that letter, "You might well ask how we know
which article you wrote. On the tape you say, 'Okay, this is the
article that I wrote that was on the front page on seven nine
(July 9, 1947) and says, 'Disc-overy Near Roswell Identified As
Weather Balloon by FWAAF Officer,' and it's quite a long
article.'" That is the article that ends with the quote that
Ramey identified it immediately.

On the sixteenth, I sent him copies of the tapes. I pointed out
that Johnson would now be able to hear himself say the things
that I had quoted him as saying. Johnson now claims that he
listened to the tapes but could never hear himself saying the
things that I claimed he said. But the tapes do verify what I
have claimed.

The August 4 letter pointed out that I had sent him the material
proving I was right. I had suggested that I was sorry if the
events as they were being played out embarrassed him, but it was
a situation that I hadn't created. And as I have noted I heard
nothing from him in response to my letters. In other words, I
called the man, I wrote the man, and I supplied copies of the
various materials he asked me to supply, and he didn't write
back. Instead, he suggests that he had tried to get me to correct
the statements without ever proving that my statements were in
error. He believes them to be in error and apparently does not
believe himself because he has heard himself make the statements
I said he made.

Johnson claims that he has been quoted by other investigators as
saying that I put words in his mouth. I challenge him to come up
with a quote that is not reflected in the tapes. I have put no
words in his mouth, but quoted his own words to him. He just
doesn't like the sound of them now as he tries to convince people
that he was the Roswell photographer.

What we have here is a man who claims to have never written
speculative articles about Roswell. Who claims he has nothing to
sell to a public eager to buy almost anything Roswell related.
Yet he bills himself as the 'Roswell Photographer' as he attempts
to pull the spotlight in his direction. He is, in reality, the
Fort Worth photographer who took several pictures of a weather
balloon in General Ramey's office.

The sad thing here is that if he had left well enough alone, if
he had just told his tale consistently through the years, he
would have something valuable to contribute to the Roswell case.
It would be valuable to hear about his interaction with General
Ramey, even if, during that interaction, he learned that the
material was a balloon. But for Johnson, that isn't good enough.
Now, he must claim that I misquoted him so that he can boost his
importance. Unfortunately for him, the tapes exist. Even sadder,
he has copies of them but he apparently won't listen to what he
has to say.

Some of the important quotes:

Johnson alleged that he had never suggested that it was a weather
balloon or that he learned that in General Ramey's office. But
here is what he said: Johnson (February 27, 1989): "So they came
up with this weather balloon thing as an 'added'... that's my
feeling and that I never saw the real stuff. So that would be my
feeling now... Then they came out with that story almost
simultaneously afterwards... the weather balloon thing."

Johnson (February 27, 1989): "That's all that I think was there.
I took the two pictures and then they said, by that time they
said, 'Oh we've figured it out now what it is... it's a weather
balloon and so forth and no big deal so I didn't press it. I
accepted it. I was rather naive and accepted it."

Johnson now claims that I called him cold, but the truth is, he
knew about me and what I was researching. Listen carefully, as I
explain it to him, and he says that it was what he had been told
as well: Randle and Johnson (February 27, 1989:

KDR: Interesting you should ask because some other guy had called
     to ask about those and he said he was the photographer. I
     said, "Oh, I need his name." She said, "Well I really don't
     feel right about giving it to you.

JBJ: Yeah, that's what she told me.

KDR: I said, "Call I send you a letter and you can mail it to him
     and that way if he wants to contact me, it's his option."
     She said that she would be happy to do that. So, I've been
     waiting to hear from you and get that list from her. This
     was in January that I was doing this.

Johnson claims that he didn't write a story about the events, but
here is what he said about that:

Johnson: (February 27, 1989): "Seven nine [July 9] is my story on
         the front page that was in earlier that day. That's when
         they debunked it." [He then reads from his story].

And again, so there can be no confusion, here is what Johnson
said about the timing of the announcement that they had a weather
balloon: Johnson (March 24, 1989): "It seemed incongruous to have
this smelly garbage piled up on the floor... spread out on the
floor of this rather plush, big office that was probably, oh, 16
by 20. I posed General Ramey with this debris. At that time I was
briefed on the idea that it was not a flying disk as first
reported but in fact was a weather balloon that had crashed."

In case it wasn't clear that he wrote the story, that his wording
was vague, here is what he said about it later:

Johnson: (March 24, 1989): "Do you have the articles from the
         Fort Worth Star-Telegram dated seven nine?" [July 9].

KDR: "No, I have nothing from the Fort Worth Star-Telegram.

JBJ: This is the article that I wrote. It was on the front page
     on seven nine and it says "Disc-overy Near Roswell
     Identified As Weather Balloon by FWAAF Officer." And it's
     quite a long article and that was my story...

And where did Johnson get the facts for the article? He tells
us:

Johnson (March 24, 1989): It's entirely possible that I was
        briefed by the PIO. Probably was. Because those facts
        track with my story.


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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 1

                              Re: Alien Baloney

From: Ufojoe1@aol.com [Joe Murgia]
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 19:56:58 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 01 Jun 1998 22:28:48 -0400
Subject: Re: Alien Baloney

>Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 05:17:10 -0500
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Alien Baloney

>They can probably get Don Eckersley (sp?) the Boston Red
>Socks starting pitcher to play Sims. He ain't much of an actor
>but he's a dead ringer for Sims!

Actually, when I saw Sims speak in Tampa, he took all the
implants out of their containers and started throughing nasty
sliders all around the room. Maybe he is The Eck.

John,

If I misunderstood what you said about Sims and Leir, then I
apologize for misrepresenting what you said on the list. I tried
to look at the archives to see exactly what you said but the
archive cut off a lot of your original post so I can't see what
you wrote in it's entirety. So I'll take your word that
I was wrong.

Joe






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 1

                              Re: Alien Baloney

From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 19:18:15 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time)
Fwd Date: Mon, 01 Jun 1998 19:49:48 -0400
Subject: Re: Alien Baloney

> From: Ufojoe1@aol.com [Joe Murgia]
> Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 15:43:11 EDT
> To: updates@globalserve.net
> Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Alien Baloney

> To all that have problems with Sims and Leir:

> Your raise very good arguments. If you think you can do better
> than Sims and Leir then do it. Get some funding and help these
> people find out what is inside of their bodies. I don't see
> anybody else doing that. All I see is people running their mouths
> off. From what I understand,  it's very expensive to have these
> objects analyzed.

Hi Joe,

I was happy to read your positive e-mail.

One may not fully agree with Derrel Sims' or Roger Leir's views
or methods regarding UFO physical evidence but at least they are
doing something with the help of many experts and scientists to
get to the truth, whatever it may be.

Yes, it is very expensive to have any test done, especially at
private labs.  Fortunately, I have been surprised at the large
number of scientists at universities and other research
institutions in Canada who were willing to donate their time and
the free use of their research equipment to do tests on one or
more of the dozen alleged alien implants and UFO artifacts that
were forwarded to me by Derrel and Roger earlier this year.

As any active UFO researcher can tell you, it still costs a lot
of money to try and further our understanding of UFOs.  It is sad
when armchair ufologists or professionals such as journalists who
get to share in these latest discoveries and insights not only do
not appreciate the important work others have made, but attack
them too.

> John Velez seems upset that they say the tests so far are
> inconclusive. Would you rather them make up some b.s. and say
> that they're definitely alien or what? Science takes time. If the
> tests turn out to be inconclusive in the end, then so be it.
> Maybe we will never know.

Even with some of the more unusual specimens (from Derrel and
Roger and other sources) we have had the opportunity to examine,
we may never be able to says for sure that this object or that
implant is artificial and from out of this world.  As long as
there are at least two explanations which can account for all the
observed facts, one cannot accept the more exotic one as the
correct one, even if a few of the observed facts have improbable
Earthly explanations (eg. the un-Earthly isotope ratios) since
they could still have been made here.

Later this year I hope to have tests done on additional alleged
UFO crash wreckage from several new sources.  If, for example, it
is discovered that one or more of these UFO artifacts from very
different geographic locations have identical un-Earthly isoptope
ratios as in previously tested UFO artifacts, then I think we can
safely say that we are being visited by extraterrestrials from a
single extrasolar planet - whose drivers are also worse than
ours.

Should you or a friend have a UFO artifact which you would like
to have tested by appropriately qualified scientists, please
contact me at the e-mail address above and I will try to be of
help.

Nick Balaskas







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 1

                    Re: Any More News Regarding Roswell?

From: James Easton <pulsar@compuserve.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 21:59:32 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 01 Jun 1998 22:46:12 -0400
Subject: Re: Any More News Regarding Roswell?

Regarding...

>Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 22:29:55 -0400
>From: James Easton <pulsar@compuserve.com>
>Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Any More News Regarding Roswell?
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

In discussions with Kevin Randle I had written:

"Isn't this all academic anyway as critical documents obtained
under the FOIA confirm, as arguably does the absence of any
heightened military alert at the time, that 'Roswell' had no
bearing whatsoever on the perceived enigma of what 'flying
saucers' truly were?"

"It's understood that recently unearthed 'Top Secret' documents,
subsequent to 'Roswell', reiterate this".


To which Kevin had asked "What recent documents?".

I said to Kevin that I would get back to him on this and can
confirm the documents I was alluding to are referenced in the
following:

From: Jan Aldrich <jan@CYBERZONE.NET>
Subject: New Top Secret Document Revealed
To: PROJECT-1947@LISTSERV.AOL.COM

Greetings List,

   Candy Peterson and Steve Russell assisted me in get this
material ready for publication on the Internet.  John Stepkowski,
the Project 1947 Webmaster, has now linked most of the documents
related the newly discovered April 1949 Top Secret "Unidentified
Aerial Objects," a USAF Directorator of Intelligence's briefing
for the Joint Intelligence Committee (JIC).  The Top Secret
document was discovered last year at the National Archives.  It
throws new light on the release of the "Project Saucer" report,
Sydney Shallet's Saturday Evening Post article, the printing and
distribution of the Top Secret "Analysis of Flying Object
Incidents in the United States," and the internal briefing of the
USAF Operations Staff by Directorate of Intelligence personnel in
the last few days of April and the beginning of May 1949.

The Top Secret JIC briefing and related documents are linked in
the footnotes of a general commentary recently published in The
International UFO Reporter (Published by CUFOS, 2457 West
Peterson Avenue, Chicago, IL 60659, $25/year in the USA):

http://www.iufog.org/project1947/fig/49docdex.htm

[End]


I had also asked of Kevin:

"Is it fair to say that following the exposure of fundamental
flaws in previously accepted and crucial witness testimony from
such as Gerald Anderson, Jim Ragsdale and Glenn Dennis, that you
would now consider Frank Kaufmann as a central 'Roswell'
witness?".

To which Kevin had responded, "No".


My follow-up query, "Do you currently consider him to be a
credible witness?", I didn't detect a reply to, however, I
noticed that in the United Kingdom UFO Network's 11th April 1998
IRC chat, Kevin stated, "I find Frank Kaufmann to be credible
because, to this point no one has demonstrated that he has lied
about anything".

Which answers the question.


Remaining unanswered are the following:

There were two points about Kaufmann's claimed copy of his
original 'Top Secret' report.

The first was why he had a copy at all, did he routinely make
duplicates of 'secret' documents for his own files?

Secondly, how was he was able to make what seems allegedly to be
an exact copy, complete with letter-heading bearing the name and
address of 'Headquarters, Roswell Army Air Field', a typed
reference [S1CP/JAM/sfm] and partly typed, partly hand-written
date [only the typed '1947' is clear].

Although there were no photocopiers available in 1947 (the
electro-photographic process wasn't publicly demonstrated until
22 October 1948), he could indeed have photographed the
document.

What did he do then though, send the film to Kodak for
processing?


I had mentioned Kaufmann's report previously and remained unsure
if these questions had ever been asked of him and answered.

Also unclear was whether the 'report' had ever been published.
The only time I've seen the document, which seems to consist of
only this one page containing sketches of the 'craft' and
'aliens', is in the UK Channel 4 'Incident at Roswell'
documentary.

What about the possibility of clarifying these issues with Frank
Kaufmann and also querying why, if the copy letter-heading
relates to a document he sent (rather then a letter he might have
received), the reference doesn't contain FK's initials?
[End]


During the 50th anniversary 'celebrations', the 'Albuquerque
Journal' published the following article:

Kaufmann, a native of New York, was a noncommissioned officer in
charge at the Roswell Air Field until Oct. 31, 1945, when he
separated from the Army Air Forces. He resumed the same duties as
a civilian the next day, and served for three more years.
Kaufmann was assigned to an intelligence unit, S1.

In early July, he was called to the White Sands Proving Ground
(now the White Sands Missile Range) to monitor unusual activity
being picked up by radar.

"They were getting these blips and  they didn't think too much
about it. There was no such thing as UFOs, it didn't exist. But
what brought it to their attention was these erratic movements
and the repeated rapid movements. That's when they alerted us to
find out what the hell was going on.

"The first or second of July, the radar screen lit up. Then the
radar started to act normal again. We had trained radar people
that were assigned to our group that told us that something went
down east, where we didn't know. What drew our attention to the
site was that people driving on 285 ... saw this flame UFO Crash
going down, they saw this glow. And it was common at that time to
call the base and say, 'We saw something.' That's how we knew how
to locate it.'"

The base called Kaufmann and his colleagues back to Roswell, they
met with base intelligence officer Jesse Marcel and base
commander Col.
William Blanchard, and a search crew was dispatched.

"It was pitch black. It was a thunderstorm, by the way. Off the
highway we could see this kind of glow. The terrain was very
rough and it was very wet. It was full of caliche out there. It
was like driving on ice. We had to cut the wire fence and I think
maybe we got 200 to 300 yards from it and it looked like it
wasn't a plane or a missile or anything like that. So we radioed
in for a special group, the chemical boys, to inspect  the area.
When they told us it was all right to go in is when we saw the
debris field".

"We were there just dumbfounded. We didn't know what to think.
And we didn't know how anybody else would react if we told them
what we saw.
They would probably wonder what we had been drinking".

The aliens "didn't have any of these big eyes or horns or
anything else or spiny fingers. They were very good-looking
people, ash-colored faces and skin. About 5 feet 4, 5 feet 5.
Eyes a little more pronounced, a little bit larger. Small ears,
small nose. Fine features. Hairless. There were five. They had a
very tight, almost a wetsuit, silver colored. I just saw two of
them. One was thrown out of the craft itself. And one was half in
and half out. They were all dead".

"I didn't go near the craft itself. I just took a quick look
because we were too busy trying to get a flatbed out there and
trucks to get rid of everything before daylight set in. The craft
itself, I'd say it must have been 20, 22 feet long and maybe 10,
12 feet in width. It wasn't too big. It was split in two. The
Stealth bomber is the spitting image of what the craft looked
like. There was no dome. The interesting thing is, the craft
carried no fuel. Underneath the craft was a series of cells,
octagon-shaped cells".

"One of our boys noticed that deterioration was setting in on the
skin. So we radioed in to have some body bags. They were put in
body bags. They took them on the jeep to the highway because we
couldn't get too many trucks in there. The bodies were the first
to go, then the craft next."

Kaufmann does not remember the date of the operation, but he
believes it was the early morning of July 5. Once back on the
base, he did not have any further contact with the craft or the
bodies. He and the other members of the team were told to never
talk about the crash. He began to tell his story in the 1990s
after other witnesses began releasing information".


Perhaps more than anyone, Kevin is capable of playing "spot the
glaring 'Roswell' anomaly" and might offer an explanation for all
of the ones patently evident here.



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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 2

             Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force

From: John <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 01:15:44 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 07:21:53 -0400
Subject: Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force

>From: JBONJO@aol.com [James Bond Johnson]
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 00:38:19 EDT
>Subject: New High Tech Examination of Old Roswell Photos
>         Clears Air Force General of Hoax

>This Press Release from Orange County MUFON has been released
>today to the wire services.

<snip>

Hi All,

Stan, Kevin (or anyone else on the list who has researched the
Roswell case) is this new photo enlargement development
anything that we can/should get excited about?

Wadda you tink? Inquiring minds want to know! <G>

John 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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 2

                              Re: Alien Baloney

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 00:24:29 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 07:24:47 -0400
Subject: Re: Alien Baloney

>Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 19:18:15 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time)
>From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: Alien Baloney

>One may not fully agree with Derrel Sims' or Roger Leir's views
>or methods regarding UFO physical evidence but at least they are
>doing something with the help of many experts and scientists to
>get to the truth, whatever it may be.


Wrong! We disagree precisely because they *aren't* following
existing scientific protocols. As for the "help of many experts
and scientists," I'm afraid you've been reading too many Leir
press releases.

>Yes, it is very expensive to have any test done, especially at
>private labs.  Fortunately, I have been surprised at the large
>number of scientists at universities and other research
>institutions in Canada who were willing to donate their time and
>the free use of their research equipment to do tests on one or
>more of the dozen alleged alien implants and UFO artifacts that
>were forwarded to me by Derrel and Roger earlier this year.

Whoa! Derrell & Roger forwarded you a dozen or more examples of
alien implants within the last year, which you had subjected to
tests? Grateful, indeed, I would say! When I wasn't saying bull
shit.

<snip>

> It is sad
>when armchair ufologists or professionals such as journalists who
>get to share in these latest discoveries and insights not only do
>not appreciate the important work others have made, but attack
>them too.

What the hell is that paragraph supposed to mean?

>> John Velez seems upset that they say the tests so far are
>> inconclusive. Would you rather them make up some b.s. and say
>> that they're definitely alien or what? Science takes time. If the
>> tests turn out to be inconclusive in the end, then so be it.
>> Maybe we will never know.

Ah, Jesus!

>Even with some of the more unusual specimens (from Derrel and
>Roger and other sources) we have had the opportunity to examine,
>we may never be able to says for sure that this object or that
>implant is artificial and from out of this world.  As long as
>there are at least two explanations which can account for all the
>observed facts, one cannot accept the more exotic one as the
>correct one, even if a few of the observed facts have improbable
>Earthly explanations (eg. the un-Earthly isotope ratios) since
>they could still have been made here.

Yadda, yadda! Excuse my Anglo assholeness, because you won't get
it, nor should you.

>Later this year I hope to have tests done on additional alleged
>UFO crash wreckage from several new sources.  If, for example, it
>is discovered that one or more of these UFO artifacts from very
>different geographic locations have identical un-Earthly isoptope
>ratios as in previously tested UFO artifacts, then I think we can
>safely say that we are being visited by extraterrestrials from a
>single extrasolar planet - whose drivers are also worse than
>ours.

And you won't get this, either, but what? Are UFOs suddenly
falling out of the skies left and right?






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 2

                     Evidence Seen Of Non-Polar Mars Ice

From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose)
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 12:27:30 +0200
Fwd Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 07:28:01 -0400
Subject: Evidence Seen Of Non-Polar Mars Ice

AP May 28 via Newsday. URL:

http://www.newsday.com/ap/rnmphs0t.htm

Stig

*******


Evidence Seen of Non-Polar Mars Ice


By SHARON L. LYNCH Associated Press Writer


BOSTON (AP) -- Profiles of Mars' landscape etched with striking canyons
and spiraling troughs have revealed what scientists believe may be the
first evidence of ice outside the planet's polar ice caps.

Pictures released Wednesday at the American Geophysical Union's meeting
show a crater some 30 miles across with a darker area 12 to 18 miles
wide at the bottom.

The discoloration indicates a deposit of some sort -- maybe frozen mud
or sand, which could indicate ice is present or water once was, said
Mike Malin, a consultant who helped design cameras for the Mars Global
Surveyor.

"If you're going to find life anywhere, that's where you're going to
find it. Water is essential for life," Malin said.

But he and other scientists also cautioned that there may be other
explanations for what they think they see in the crater, such as
volcanic activity.

Cracks at the crater's rim, about 2,400 miles south of Mars' equator,
are consistent with something seeping into the giant pit from its edge,
Malin said. That could have been water, ice or lava.

The latest photos are from the Surveyor, a spacecraft orbiting the
planet 108 miles above its surface.

The images have 10 to 12 times better resolution than any previously
taken of the crater scientists are interested in, in part because the
Surveyor is closer to Mars than any orbiting spacecraft has been before.

Surveyor has orbited Mars since last fall, collecting data on 59
separate passes. An altimeter on board is measuring 12,000-foot bulges
in the polar ice cap and channels carved 3,600 feet into its surface.

Also Wednesday, Arizona State University researchers using Surveyor
data said a concentration of a rust-colored mineral along the Mars
equator indicates it once had boiling hydrothermal vents and perhaps
huge lakes.

Geologist Philip Christensen said the hematite, an iron oxide, is the
first clear evidence of widespread thermal activity on Mars.

"The existence and location of these deposits will provide a positive
indication that hot water once existed near the Martian surface,"
Christensen said.

Christensen also said it makes a region of about 300 square miles one
of the best places to look for evidence of life on Mars.

NASA officials said the finding implies water was once stable at or
near the surface and that Mars had a thicker atmosphere in its early
history, probably 4 billion to 6 billion years ago.

Water cannot exist on the Martian surface now because the atmosphere is
too thin, and it would immediately evaporate.


=03AP-NY-05-28-98 0156EDT

Copyright =A9Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not
be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Home | Top of Page

05/28







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 2

                             Re: Sarah McClendon

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 01:07:29 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 07:20:38 -0400
Subject: Re: Sarah McClendon

>From: RAMBLD@worldnet.att.net [Diane Lovett]
>Date: Mon, 01 Jun 1998 12:00:36 +0000
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Sarah McClendon

>This lady has clout, in the media and politically, and I for one
>am very glad to see her taking such a positive interest in
>getting this information out into the open.
>
>Diane

Hi Diane,

If you have access to her you might want to point her at
Jan and Project 1947! They have government documents
galore and I'm sure she'd be interested in knowing about
their contents. Project 1947 is one of the few ongoing
research endeavors that -should be- better known and
supported by all.

Peace,

John 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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 2

                             Re: A New Approach?

From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net>
Date: Mon, 01 Jun 1998 22:55:11 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 07:05:55 -0400
Subject: Re: A New Approach?

Dear List:

I see that ORTK is planning a new hundred person march on
Washington to demand release of UFO information.

CSETI and Dr. Greer continue to petition the Lord (gov't) with
Prayer (demands for congressional hearings).

The UFO Lawyer has filed a suit, with an octagenerian colonel's
(forthcoming) notarized statement, demanding disclosure of ET
evidence.

And many think the Paradigm Clock is soon to strike the witching
hour.

Personally, I think we are pissing up the wrong tree.

How can we demand that the powers that be disclose that which
they have eternally claimed does not exist?  We must provide a
path which saves face.  We should cease demanding an illumination
of the past and require the military establishment and our
government begin to do their jobs.

Instead of asking for that which can never be disclosed, why not
ask that these people who are *presently* in power do that with
which they are presently tasked?  We should be asking the
military and government fulfill their obligation of protecting
the populace.

When inquired about UFO's, the military always falls back on
Bluebook saying that UFO's offer no threat to the country.  Well,
it's time this stasis ended!!  We tell them, "Okay, in 1952, they
posed no threat, but how the hell do you know that what we are
seeing today poses no threat???"

The argument is a simple one.  Given that there are other planets
in the galaxy (proved) and that it is likely that intelligent
life exists elsewhere; eventually, they could show up on our
doorstep.  And their intentions are just as likely to be bad as
benign.

We need to stop accepting the "Bluebook Explanation" and insist
that our government do their job.  The past few years have
resulted in some of the most phenomenal sightings.  When our Air
Force says, "We no longer investigate UFO's," we should respond
with, "Then what the hell are we paying you for???"

If it's a UFO, they damned well better investigate it; because,
it's *unidentified*.  And it's up to us to demand that they do so
and report to the Boss.  And if this is still a government
of/for/by the people, we have the right to know (as the Boss)
whether this new UFO just happens to be the one from
"Independence Day."

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 2

                             Re: Sarah McClendon

From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 23:41:14 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 08:26:55 -0400
Subject: Re: Sarah McClendon

>From: RAMBLD@worldnet.att.net [Diane Lovett]
>Date: Mon, 01 Jun 1998 12:00:36 +0000
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Sarah McClendon

>Just wanted to pass on that I sat in on a chat last night on MSN
>with Sarah McClendon, White House correspondent, and it was
>really interesting.

<snip>

>She believes Corso's claims, and believes in the multi-layered
>"cover up".

<subsequent snip>

If she believes Cor$o's claims, then God help us all. Begging Jim
Deardorff's pardon, but there hasn't been a bigger liar in the
field since the days of Billy Meier.

Let's cut the crap. Philip Cor$o is a goddam liar, pure and
simple. (And so is his co-confabulator, William Birnes.)

You can send him my e-mail address, and you can send his attorney
my e-mail address.

I repeat: Philip Cor$so is a goddam liar.

And anyone who believes him for more than a minute is a goddam
fool.

Have I made myself clear?

Philip Cor$so is a goddam liar, and a disgrace to his uniform to
boot. William Birnes is merely a man after a buck.

Any questions?

Dennis

PS: Cor$so is a goddam liar.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 2

                              Re: Alien Baloney

From: "Serge Salvaille" <sergesa@connectmmic.net>
Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 08:07:49 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 08:25:04 -0400
Subject: Re: Alien Baloney

>Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 19:18:15 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time)
>From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: Alien Baloney


>Even with some of the more unusual specimens (from Derrel and
>Roger and other sources) we have had the opportunity to examine,
>we may never be able to says for sure that this object or that
>implant is artificial and from out of this world.  As long as
>there are at least two explanations which can account for all the
>observed facts, one cannot accept the more exotic one as the
>correct one, even if a few of the observed facts have improbable
>Earthly explanations (eg. the un-Earthly isotope ratios) since
>they could still have been made here.

Nick,

Now this is something.  I hope you can be more explicit about
this "we had the opportunity to examine".

What kind of tests did you perform?  With what equipment? What
were the results? Were they published? Are they available?

This is very important matter.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 2

                    Re: Any More News Regarding Roswell?

From: Neil Morris <Neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 12:54:37 +0100
Fwd Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 08:23:36 -0400
Subject: Re: Any More News Regarding Roswell?


> Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 21:59:32 -0400
> From: James Easton <pulsar@compuserve.com>
> Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Any More News Regarding Roswell?
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>


James wrote:

> Remaining unanswered are the following:

> There were two points about Kaufmann's claimed copy of his
> original 'Top Secret' report.

> The first was why he had a copy at all, did he routinely make
> duplicates of 'secret' documents for his own files?

> Secondly, how was he was able to make what seems allegedly to be
> an exact copy, complete with letter-heading bearing the name and
> address of 'Headquarters, Roswell Army Air Field', a typed
> reference [S1CP/JAM/sfm] and partly typed, partly hand-written
> date [only the typed '1947' is clear].

> Although there were no photocopiers available in 1947 (the
> electro-photographic process wasn't publicly demonstrated until
> 22 October 1948), he could indeed have photographed the
> document.

> What did he do then though, send the film to Kodak for
> processing?

> I had mentioned Kaufmann's report previously and remained unsure
> if these questions had ever been asked of him and answered.

> Also unclear was whether the 'report' had ever been published.
> The only time I've seen the document, which seems to consist of
> only this one page containing sketches of the 'craft' and
> 'aliens', is in the UK Channel 4 'Incident at Roswell'
> documentary.

> What about the possibility of clarifying these issues with Frank
> Kaufmann and also querying why, if the copy letter-heading
> relates to a document he sent (rather then a letter he might have
> received), the reference doesn't contain FK's initials?
> [End]

<snip>

The date on the documents shown in the CH4 Doc "Incident at Roswell
was July 26th 1947 and from the date I observed it was fully typed.

> "The first or second of July, the radar screen lit up. Then the
> radar started to act normal again. We had trained radar people
> that were assigned to our group that told us that something went
> down east, where we didn't know. What drew our attention to the
> site was that people driving on 285 ... saw this flame UFO Crash
> going down, they saw this glow. And it was common at that time to
> call the base and say, 'We saw something.' That's how we knew how
> to locate it.'"
>

<snip>

I keep on asking myself why was there a 3 week+ gap between the
event and Frank writing up his report, it seems an over long
period of time, I would expect a report to be written while
events were still fresh in the memory. I would also expect "the
brass" upstairs would have wanted a report with some urgency
too!.

Has Frank got his "remembered" dates wrong?.

A few thoughts: (if the reports are the real thing)

The reports date is typed as July 26th 1947.

If Franks report WAS typed up "shortly" after the events they
refered to, which to me, would seem the most probable course of
events rather than waiting about 2-3 weeks before forwarding it,
it would shift Frank's event a couple of weeks later than the
"classic" Roswell event!

It would seem that,if you take this timeline on board, not to
mention the alledged AA/Soccoro crash attributed to May/June,
unidentified craft were dropping on NM with some regularity.

So.....

Was the tiny amount of news to "leak"? out from Roswell, and I
feel it was an accidental leak, just one tiny aspect of a
"greater game" being played out that summer.

It might be interesting to have some comments from people who
might know of the "normal" US military procedure of the time in
respect of filing reports.

Has anyone ever asked Frank what was the delay?

Any takers?

Best Regards
Neil.

--
*        *         *         *         *         *         *         *
Neil Morris.       /101101101 Virtual Bumper Stickers Inc 10110101010\
Dept of Physics.   1                                                 1
Univ of Manchester 0                                                 0
Schuster Labs.     1  Computer Programmers DO IT with BITS of BYTES  1
Brunswick St.      0                                                 0
Manchester.        1                                                 1
UK.                \0101010110010110110010110101101011011110101011010/
G8KOQ


             E-mail: neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk

Roswell and Alien Autopsy Archive->   http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/
Dave Willetts Home Page->     http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/dave_willetts/
Mike Sterling Home Page->     http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/mike-s/
Tim Morgan Home Page   ->     http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/tim-m/

*        *         *         *         *         *         *         *






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 2

                             Re: Sarah McClendon

From: Andy Denne <aura.aa@wxs.nl>
Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 14:40:43 +0200
Fwd Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 15:46:59 -0400
Subject: Re: Sarah McClendon


> Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 23:41:14 -0500 (CDT)
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Sarah McClendon

> >From: RAMBLD@worldnet.att.net [Diane Lovett]
> >Date: Mon, 01 Jun 1998 12:00:36 +0000
> >To: updates@globalserve.net
> >Subject: Sarah McClendon

> >Just wanted to pass on that I sat in on a chat last night on MSN
> >with Sarah McClendon, White House correspondent, and it was
> >really interesting.

> <snip>

> >She believes Corso's claims, and believes in the multi-layered
> >"cover up".

> <subsequent snip>

> If she believes Cor$o's claims, then God help us all. Begging Jim
> Deardorff's pardon, but there hasn't been a bigger liar in the
> field since the days of Billy Meier.

> Let's cut the crap. Philip Cor$o is a goddam liar, pure and
> simple. (And so is his co-confabulator, William Birnes.)

> You can send him my e-mail address, and you can send his attorney
> my e-mail address.

> I repeat: Philip Cor$so is a goddam liar.

> And anyone who believes him for more than a minute is a goddam
> fool.

> Have I made myself clear?

> Philip Cor$so is a goddam liar, and a disgrace to his uniform to
> boot. William Birnes is merely a man after a buck.

> Any questions?

> Dennis

> PS: Cor$so is a goddam liar.


I must say I was quiet impressed by the intellegent way you try
to bring your message across. But a disgrace for his uniform?
Don't think so. He's behaving in the manner the militairy want
their people to behave: Spreading disinformation, doin'
everything for money, self-love, etc. I mean, just speaking for
myself, I believe the man's a fraud too, butI guess greater
crimes towards mankind have been commited by people wearing
uniform than writing a bad sf-book?

Greetz,

Andy





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 2

                   ORTK Contemplates Change Of 1999 Plans

From: MDJ50@webtv.net (Mike Jamieson)
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 07:51:14 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 15:59:04 -0400
Subject: ORTK Contemplates Change Of 1999 Plans

ORTK organizers are now re-examining their plans for a
demonstration at the White House in July 1999.  Alternative forms
of action (public education events), and settings (Capitol Hill,
CIA headquarters) are being contemplated.  The purpose of our
actions would be to promote the idea of a serious public study of
UFOs and related issues.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 2

             Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force

From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 08:52:21 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 15:49:43 -0400
Subject: Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force

>Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 15:40:34 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time)
>From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General

>> From: JBONJO@aol.com [James Bond Johnson]
>> To: updates@globalserve.net
>> Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 00:38:19 EDT
>> Subject: New High Tech Examination of Old Roswell Photos
>>          Clears Air Force General of Hoax
>
><snip>
>
>> It is most impressive that aided by this advanced digital
>> technology we finally have the capacity to enlarge details of the
>> wreckage to see clearly what is indeed some kind of "writings"
>> that do not appear to be any known writings by any earth
>> residents.  What is even more impressive is that the symbols are
>> displayed in bas-relief and certainly do not appear to be any
>> kind of known printing.
>
>If the "writings" are indeed 3-D and not flat symbols on adhesive
>tape that look 3-D, this would rule out that the debris was the
>remains of New York University balloon experiment(s).
>
><snip>
>
>> The sudden announcement a short time after the photo session by
>> General Ramey -- upon orders from his bosses in Washington, DC --
>> that this debris was but a "weather balloon and radar target"
>> certainly makes good sense.
>
>If this particular unpacked material was a weather balloon radar
>target or the remains of a Japanese balloon, one would still have
>to account for these very unusual 3-D "writings".
>
>At our monthly MUFON Ontario meeting last week I suggested that
>in light of this news, maybe the video of the 1992 Long Island
>New York UFO crash, which shows similar aluminium foil type
>wreckage, should be re-examined.  Since Bill Moore and Jamie
>Shandera had articles printed in FOCUS and MUFON UFO Journal
>(just before the alleged Long Island UFO crash) promoting the
>view that this aluminium foil type wreckage in General Ramey's
>office was actual UFO crash debris, this may explain why the Long
>Island UFO crash debris in the video looks much like aluminum
>foil too.
>
>Are there any pre-1990's UFO crash accounts that describe any
>of the crash debris as looking similar to metal foil?
>
>Nick Balaskas


Mark Center phoned yesterday and during our conversation told me
that the University of Texas had refused his request to post
copies of the photos on his web site.  Now, just as in the Santilli
case, we are stuck on a question of copyright.  The U of T is
claiming copyright to the photos because they have the negatives.
If James Bond Johnson was in the military when he took the photos,
then the U of T does not own copyright to the images themselves.
They are free to copyright any book, video, etc., in which they
make use of them, but the unaltered images should be in public
domain.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 2

                             Re: Sarah McClendon

From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 11:31:17 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 16:00:05 -0400
Subject: Re: Sarah McClendon

>Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 23:41:14 -0500 (CDT)
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Sarah McClendon

>>From: RAMBLD@worldnet.att.net [Diane Lovett]
>>Date: Mon, 01 Jun 1998 12:00:36 +0000
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Sarah McClendon

>>Just wanted to pass on that I sat in on a chat last night on MSN
>>with Sarah McClendon, White House correspondent, and it was
>>really interesting.

><snip>

>>She believes Corso's claims, and believes in the multi-layered
>>"cover up".

><subsequent snip>

>If she believes Cor$o's claims, then God help us all. Begging Jim
>Deardorff's pardon, but there hasn't been a bigger liar in the
>field since the days of Billy Meier.

>Let's cut the crap. Philip Cor$o is a goddam liar, pure and
>simple. (And so is his co-confabulator, William Birnes.)

>You can send him my e-mail address, and you can send his attorney
>my e-mail address.

>I repeat: Philip Cor$so is a goddam liar.

>And anyone who believes him for more than a minute is a goddam
>fool.

>Have I made myself clear?

>Philip Cor$so is a goddam liar, and a disgrace to his uniform to
>boot. William Birnes is merely a man after a buck.

>Any questions?

>Dennis
>
>PS: Cor$so is a goddam liar.


Hey Dennis,

So you think Corso might not be telling the unvarnished truth,
eh?

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 2

                             Re: A New Approach?

From: RAMBLD@worldnet.att.net [Diane Lovett]
Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 10:27:01 +0000
Fwd Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 15:55:29 -0400
Subject: Re: A New Approach?

> Date: Mon, 01 Jun 1998 22:55:11 -0700
> From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net>
> To: updates@globalserve.net
> Subject: A New Approach?

<snip>

Dear Terry and list,

Amen to everything you said Terry! I too find it very unlikely
that the whole truth will ever come out about what has happened
in the past, but we certainly have a right to demand that our
elected and paid officials put some effort into helping us find
out what is happening in the here and now! Who are these guys
showing up in our bedrooms in the middle of the night?! Why can't
we call the police or other authorities to report these
abductions and have it investigated just as seriously as if a
human did the same thing to us?! What are these craft being
witnessed and photographed around the world, and what are our
"leaders" doing about it?! I personally think there is a lot of
different stuff going on, and the problem in the end is that our
powers to be are not able to protect us or stop this activity. I
was having a conversation last night with someone who was playing
devil's advocate, and for the first time I was able to see the
situation from the point of view of those in power who may know a
lot about the subject. The whole "the public would panic if the
truth came out" kind of thinking that I never had any respect for
before. Suddenly, I got a clear image that was quite frightening
of how the public would react if Bill Clinton came on TV and
annouced that we are being visited by lifeforms not from Earth,
the populace is even being abducted and experimented on, and our
military and political structures are powerless to do anything
about it! Strange feeling to be able to view the situation from
that perspective. Chances are that won't ever happen-not unless
they land at the White House for all to see, so the truth still
needs to be dug out a little at the time. We just might have a
bit more success if we focus on the present rather than the
past.

Diane





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 2

                             Re: Sarah McClendon

From: RAMBLD@worldnet.att.net [Diane Lovett]
Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 10:47:51 +0000
Fwd Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 15:58:05 -0400
Subject: Re: Sarah McClendon


> Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 01:07:29 -0500
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Sarah McClendon

> Hi Diane,

> If you have access to her you might want to point her at
> Jan and Project 1947! They have government documents
> galore and I'm sure she'd be interested in knowing about
> their contents. Project 1947 is one of the few ongoing
> research endeavors that -should be- better known and
> supported by all.


Hi John,

I don't have any special access to Sarah, but she is very
accessible and serious about looking into things. I am compiling
a list of folks that I personally would like her to talk to or
update herself on, and will include Project 1947 as well. I would
love to see her get agressive with Clinton at the next press
conference, armed with the things she has learned now!

Diane





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 2

             Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force

From: ufotruth@ix.netcom.com [William Hand]
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 07:48:14 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 15:49:03 -0400
Subject: Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force

>Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 01:15:44 -0500
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: John <jvif@spacelab.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force
> General


>Hi All,

>Stan, Kevin (or anyone else on the list who has researched the
>Roswell case) is this new photo enlargement development
>anything that we can/should get excited about?

It is just more bull. They are trying to claim that the weather
balloon Junk that Ramey showed in his office to the press was the
real debris found days earlier that was mistaken as debris from a
flying disk. Well, there is NO WAY that any military officer, or
even a child, could mistake the burnt weather balloon JUNK in
Ramey's office as debris from a crashed flying disk. It is just
IMPOSSIBLE.

It does not matter how much they zoom the images it will
only show more details of the fake weather balloon junk
that let the press photograph after he had the REAL
ET debris taken out.

Best Regards,
William








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 2

                             Re: Sarah McClendon

From: KRandle993@aol.com [Kevin Randle]
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 11:47:40 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 16:02:50 -0400
Subject: Re: Sarah McClendon


>Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 23:41:14 -0500 (CDT)
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Sarah McClendon

<snip>

>If she believes Cor$o's claims, then God help us all. Begging Jim
>Deardorff's pardon, but there hasn't been a bigger liar in the
>field since the days of Billy Meier.

>Let's cut the crap. Philip Cor$o is a goddam liar, pure and
>simple. (And so is his co-confabulator, William Birnes.)

>You can send him my e-mail address, and you can send his attorney
>my e-mail address.

>I repeat: Philip Cor$so is a goddam liar.

>And anyone who believes him for more than a minute is a goddam
>fool.

>Have I made myself clear?

>Philip Cor$so is a goddam liar, and a disgrace to his uniform to
>boot. William Birnes is merely a man after a buck.

> Any questions?

>Dennis

>PS: Cor$so is a goddam liar.

Hi Dennis and all -

I'm not quite clear on your position on Cor$o.  Could you
clarify?

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 2

                             Re: A New Approach?

From: ufotruth@ix.netcom.com [William Hand]
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 07:43:38 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 15:53:21 -0400
Subject: Re: A New Approach?


>Date: Mon, 01 Jun 1998 22:55:11 -0700
>From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: A New Approach?

>Dear List:

>I see that ORTK is planning a new hundred person march on
>Washington to demand release of UFO information.

Which I fully support and think is a good idea.

>CSETI and Dr. Greer continue to petition the Lord (gov't) with
>Prayer (demands for congressional hearings).

Which I fully support and think is a good idea. But he is
petitioning anyone with "prayer" at all. CSETI has simply
presented evidence and data about UFOs/ETs to various
government representitives, many of which are in the congress
or senate, and asked them to have hearings. It might work
or it might not. But at least they are trying to do something
to get the FULL TRUTH about UFOs/ETs disclosed.

I am sure they do not appreciate your rude comment after
all of the hard work they have done.

>The UFO Lawyer has filed a suit, with an octagenerian colonel's
>(forthcoming) notarized statement, demanding disclosure of ET
>evidence.

Which I fully support and think was a good idea. He might win
the case and UFO information about Roswell might be released or
it is possible that the case will be dismissed and no information
will be released. But at least he is trying to get the FULL TRUTH
exposed!

>And many think the Paradigm Clock is soon to strike the witching
>hour.

Some think that. Personally, I hope that the Paradigm Clock is
going to strike soon but I really think it is going to take a
lot more effort to force the government/military to disclose
the FULL TRUTH about UFOs/ETs.

>Personally, I think we are pissing up the wrong tree.

No. We are not. Many of us in the UFO/ET community are trying
to get disclosure in different ways. Someways might be better
than others but at least ufologists are TRYING to force the
government/military to disclose the truth and maybe if enough
people try in different ways to disclose the truth someone
might eventually get lucky! Remember all we need is ONE tiny
admission about one UFO crash, mass sighting, UFO landing,
or something similar to get a crack in the coverup that we
can force open.

>How can we demand that the powers that be disclose that which
>they have eternally claimed does not exist?  We must provide a

We can demand it very easily. Be trying to get congressional
hearings, by protesting outside of the White House, by taking
government/military agencies to court, and by other methods. If
we keep on demanding for long enough then the truth will come
out sooner or later and hopefully it will be sooner.

>path which saves face.  We should cease demanding an illumination
>of the past and require the military establishment and our
>government begin to do their jobs.

That is a bunch of BULL. First of all we should DEMAND that we
are told the FULL TRUTH about what has happened in the past when
it comes to the government and military's interaction with UFOs
and/or ETs. We are the people that PAY for and are supposed to
BE the government so we have a RIGHT to know the truth, the full
truth, and nothing but the truth!

We should all keep on demanding the FULL TRUTH about ALL events
relating to UFOs/ETs whether they be PAST, PRESENT, or in the
FUTURE. We should NOT give up our RIGHTS and let the FREAKS
that keep the coverup going get away with their crimes and go
unpunished.

>Instead of asking for that which can never be disclosed, why not

Again that is BULLCRUD. Any information can be disclosed. It just
takes enough PRESURE on certain government/military agencies to
get it disclosed. Those in charge of the coverup might try their
hardest to prevent information from being disclosed but the info
SURE CAN be disclosed if we work hard enough and apply enough
pressure!

Whether they want to disclose the info or not we have a RIGHT
to any and all UFO/ET information that our government and/or
military has. PERIOD. The public has a RIGHT to it and we
should keep on DEMANDING it.

Once the public knows the FULL TRUTH about our government and
military's interaction with UFOs/ETs in the past then trust me
the public will MAKE SURE that the government/military starts
doing its job and telling us the FULL TRUTH about every single
new UFO/ET incident, sighting, video, etc.

>ask that these people who are *presently* in power do that with
>which they are presently tasked?  We should be asking the

Yes. Those that are presently in power should do their job and
pull up the archived files about UFOs/ETs that have been covered
up for so long and put them right on the web for EVERYONE to see.
They should also put the Roswell UFO and any other UFO/ET photos,
debris, videos, films, or wreckage on PUBLIC DISPLAY.

Those in power should do their jobs and make sure that the public
who pays for their meals, food, cars, cloths, and homes knows the
FULL TRUTH about UFOs/ETs and every other important issue facing
this nation!

>military and government fulfill their obligation of protecting
>the populace.

Well, if the government/military wants to protect us that is fine
but at the same time they still do not have a right to LIE to us.
We have a right to know the truth the full truth and nothing but
the truth from our government. So the FIRST thing that needs to
be done is they need to tell us the TRUTH.

>When inquired about UFO's, the military always falls back on
>Bluebook saying that UFO's offer no threat to the country.  Well,
>it's time this stasis ended!!  We tell them, "Okay, in 1952, they
>posed no threat, but how the hell do you know that what we are
>seeing today poses no threat???"

That is BULL. If UFOs were no threat whatsoever there would not
be a UFO/ET coverup! The UFOs/ETs or at least some of the
different species visiting this planet must be at least a
possible threat or there would have been no reason for
the coverup to ever exist. But we must remember that even
if the UFOs/ETs wanted to CONQUER the earth we the public
STILL have a right to know whether the aliens are fluffy
little bundles of joy or hateful and ruthless borg like
monsters.

>The argument is a simple one.  Given that there are other planets
>in the galaxy (proved) and that it is likely that intelligent
>life exists elsewhere; eventually, they could show up on our
>doorstep.  And their intentions are just as likely to be bad as
>benign.

But either way the government has a DUTY to tell us the full
truth whether the aliens are evil, horrible, bad, family
oriented, Christian, Nazi, nice, kind, or benign.

>We need to stop accepting the "Bluebook Explanation" and insist
>that our government do their job.  The past few years have

Of course. We need the government to tell us the truth about
Bluebook and how it was really just a cover to hide the truth
that UFOs/ETs exist and are visiting earth from the public.

>resulted in some of the most phenomenal sightings.  When our Air
>Force says, "We no longer investigate UFO's," we should respond
>with, "Then what the hell are we paying you for???"

The problem is that the Air Force DOES investigate UFOs/ETs. They
just do not want to ADMIT IT. That is why we need to force them
to tell us the TRUTH, the FULL TRUTH, and NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH
about ALL important issues INCLUDING UFOs/ETs!

>If it's a UFO, they damned well better investigate it; because,
>it's *unidentified*.  And it's up to us to demand that they do so
>and report to the Boss.  And if this is still a government
>of/for/by the people, we have the right to know (as the Boss)
>whether this new UFO just happens to be the one from
>"Independence Day."

Well, I am glad that you realize that we have a right to know
the full truth about UFOs/ETs. The thing is if we can get the
truth out of them about even ONE UFO INCIDENT then that will
be the "crack in the door" we need to push the door wide open
and expose the FULL TRUTH.

Do you realize that if the government just admitted the truth
that an unknown and possibly ET craft crashed at Roswell what
would occur? The media would be all over it! The public would
be FACINATED! Once they realized that the government/military
lied to us about Roswell about a few hundred times to hide the
truth about ET life then they would REALLY start hounding the
government for ALL the information they have.

But really I just think we need to keep on pressuing for ALL
info from the government/military. Past, Present, and any
info they get in the future.

Best Regards,
william






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 2

                    Re: Any More News Regarding Roswell?

From: KRandle993@aol.com [Kevin Randle]
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 11:44:55 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 16:13:48 -0400
Subject: Re: Any More News Regarding Roswell?


>Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 21:59:32 -0400
>From: James Easton <pulsar@compuserve.com>
>Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Any More News Regarding Roswell?
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

> Regarding...

>>Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 22:29:55 -0400
>>From: James Easton <pulsar@compuserve.com>
>>Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Any More News Regarding Roswell?
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>In discussions with Kevin Randle I had written:

>"Isn't this all academic anyway as critical documents obtained
>under the FOIA confirm, as arguably does the absence of any
>heightened military alert at the time, that 'Roswell' had no
>bearing whatsoever on the perceived enigma of what 'flying
>saucers' truly were?"

>"It's understood that recently unearthed 'Top Secret' documents,
>subsequent to 'Roswell', reiterate this".


>To which Kevin had asked "What recent documents?".

>I said to Kevin that I would get back to him on this and can
>confirm the documents I was alluding to are referenced in the
>following:

>From: Jan Aldrich <jan@CYBERZONE.NET>
>Subject: New Top Secret Document Revealed
>To: PROJECT-1947@LISTSERV.AOL.COM

>Greetings List,

>  Candy Peterson and Steve Russell assisted me in get this
>material ready for publication on the Internet.  John Stepkowski,
>the Project 1947 Webmaster, has now linked most of the documents
>related the newly discovered April 1949 Top Secret "Unidentified
>Aerial Objects," a USAF Directorator of Intelligence's briefing
>for the Joint Intelligence Committee (JIC).  The Top Secret
>document was discovered last year at the National Archives.  It
>throws new light on the release of the "Project Saucer" report,
>Sydney Shallet's Saturday Evening Post article, the printing and
>distribution of the Top Secret "Analysis of Flying Object
>Incidents in the United States," and the internal briefing of the
>USAF Operations Staff by Directorate of Intelligence personnel in
>the last few days of April and the beginning of May 1949.

>The Top Secret JIC briefing and related documents are linked in
>the footnotes of a general commentary recently published in The
>International UFO Reporter (Published by CUFOS, 2457 West
>Peterson Avenue, Chicago, IL 60659, $25/year in the USA):

>http://www.iufog.org/project1947/fig/49docdex.htm

>[End]

In response to this, I have said, repeatedly, that a top secret
clearance does not automatically grant clearance to all
documents considered top secret.

For instance:

The top secret document, dated 10 December 1948, Air Intelligence
Report No. 100-203-79, entitled "Analysis of Flying Object
Incidents in the U.S.," was a joint effort between the
Directorate of Intelligence of the Air Force and the Office of
Naval Intelligence. It is so sensitive that it contains a warning
that states, "This document contains information affecting the
national defense of the United States within the meaning of the
Espionage Act, 50 U.S.C., 31 and 32, as amended. Its transmission
or the revelation of its contents in any manner to an
unauthorized person is prohibited by law. Reproduction of the
intelligence in this publication, under the provisions of Army
Regulation 380-5, is authorized for United States military
agencies provided the source is indicated."

The document, then, was highly classified. It was a report
created to brief high-ranking officers on the unidentified flying
object situation. It would seem that the officers creating the
document would have access to all the classified information
needed to accurately assess the situation. The officers writing
the report would not lie about the state of the situation to
their superiors. They would tell their superiors everything they
knew. And, if Roswell was the crash of an alien spacecraft, it
should be mentioned in this report.

Or should it?

The report included an interesting paragraph about the origins of
the objects. To understand the situation, that paragraph is
important. It said, "THE ORIGIN of the devices is not
ascertainable. There are two reasonable possibilities: (1) The
objects are domestic devices, and if so, their identification or
origin can be established by a survey of the launchings of
airborne devices... (2) Objects are foreign, and if so, it would
seem most logical to consider that they are from a Soviet
source..."

The conclusions, at the bottom of page two, and marked top
secret, were, "SINCE the Air Force is responsible for control of
the air in the defense of the U.S., it is imperative that all
other agencies cooperate in confirming or denying the possibility
that these objects are of domestic origin. Otherwise, if it is
firmly indicated that there is no domestic explanation, the
objects are a threat and warrant more active efforts of
identification and interception."

What we observe in this document, however, is not the
all-knowing, access to every classified report. Instead, we find
the authors speculating that the flying objects might be a
domestic project and their suggestion that any such project be
revealed to the Air Force because of its responsibility for air
defense. In other words, the authors of the top-secret report did
NOT have complete access to everything. They admitted that there
were areas they were not allowed to examine.

The fact that these events are left out of the Air Intelligence
Report, then, are not significant. The authors admitted, subtly,
that they did not have all privileged information. The report,
then, does not prove that Roswell didn't happen, or that these
officers were lying to their superiors if it did. They didn't
know about Roswell, didn't have access to that highly restricted
information and therefore, couldn't include it because they
didn't know about it.

The point is that no mention of the Roswell case, and a high
classification does not lead to the conclusion that nothing
happened. SCI rears its ugly head here and we must make
allowances for it.

>I had also asked of Kevin:

>"Is it fair to say that following the exposure of fundamental
>flaws in previously accepted and crucial witness testimony from
>such as Gerald Anderson, Jim Ragsdale and Glenn Dennis, that you
>would now consider Frank Kaufmann as a central 'Roswell'
>witness?".

>To which Kevin had responded, "No".


>My follow-up query, "Do you currently consider him to be a
>credible witness?", I didn't detect a reply to, however, I
>noticed that in the United Kingdom UFO Network's 11th April 1998
>IRC chat, Kevin stated, "I find Frank Kaufmann to be credible
>because, to this point no one has demonstrated that he has lied
>about anything".

>Which answers the question.


>Remaining unanswered are the following:

>There were two points about Kaufmann's claimed copy of his
>original 'Top Secret' report.

>The first was why he had a copy at all, did he routinely make
>duplicates of 'secret' documents for his own files?

A very good question and I have suggested that it be asked of
Frank Kaufmann. I intend to ask it on the first opportunity I
have to speak to Frank in person.

>Secondly, how was he was able to make what seems allegedly to be
>an exact copy, complete with letter-heading bearing the name and
>address of 'Headquarters, Roswell Army Air Field', a typed
>reference [S1CP/JAM/sfm] and partly typed, partly hand-written
>date [only the typed '1947' is clear].

>Although there were no photocopiers available in 1947 (the
>electro-photographic process wasn't publicly demonstrated until
>22 October 1948), he could indeed have photographed the
>document.

>What did he do then though, send the film to Kodak for
>processing?

I notice in reading about spying in the Civil War that messages
to be taken to Richmond were routinely taken to Washington for
copying by the Union before they were taken on to the
'Confederate capital. I mention this only to suggest that copying
of documents was accomplished long before 1947.

>I had mentioned Kaufmann's report previously and remained unsure
>if these questions had ever been asked of him and answered.

>Also unclear was whether the 'report' had ever been published.
>The only time I've seen the document, which seems to consist of
>only this one page containing sketches of the 'craft' and
>'aliens', is in the UK Channel 4 'Incident at Roswell'
>documentary.

>What about the possibility of clarifying these issues with Frank
>Kaufmann and also querying why, if the copy letter-heading
>relates to a document he sent (rather then a letter he might have
>received), the reference doesn't contain FK's initials?

I have suggested that these questions would be more appropriately
addressed to Frank Kaufmann. He will have the answers for them.

>During the 50th anniversary 'celebrations', the 'Albuquerque
>Journal' published the following article:

>Kaufmann, a native of New York, was a noncommissioned officer in
>charge at the Roswell Air Field until Oct. 31, 1945, when he
>separated from the Army Air Forces. He resumed the same duties as
>a civilian the next day, and served for three more years.
>Kaufmann was assigned to an intelligence unit, S1.

All verified through documentation available except for the
assignment to intelligence. If it was as he claimed, there would
be no documentation easily available to confirm it. When looking
at Frank's testimony, that fact should be kept in mind.

>In early July, he was called to the White Sands Proving Ground
>(now the White Sands Missile Range) to monitor unusual activity
>being picked up by radar.

>"They were getting these blips and  they didn't think too much
>about it. There was no such thing as UFOs, it didn't exist. But
>what brought it to their attention was these erratic movements
>and the repeated rapid movements. That's when they alerted us to
>find out what the hell was going on.

>"The first or second of July, the radar screen lit up. Then the
>radar started to act normal again. We had trained radar people
>that were assigned to our group that told us that something went
>down east, where we didn't know. What drew our attention to the
>site was that people driving on 285 ... saw this flame UFO Crash
>going down, they saw this glow. And it was common at that time to
>call the base and say, 'We saw something.' That's how we knew how
>to locate it.'"

Which is consistent with what he had told me about that aspect of
the case. There are other who have suggested that the site of the
crash was in the location identified by Frank.

>The base called Kaufmann and his colleagues back to Roswell, they
>met with base intelligence officer Jesse Marcel and base
>commander Col.
>William Blanchard, and a search crew was dispatched.

>"It was pitch black. It was a thunderstorm, by the way. Off the
>highway we could see this kind of glow. The terrain was very
>rough and it was very wet. It was full of caliche out there. It
>was like driving on ice. We had to cut the wire fence and I think
>maybe we got 200 to 300 yards from it and it looked like it
>wasn't a plane or a missile or anything like that. So we radioed
>in for a special group, the chemical boys, to inspect  the area.
>When they told us it was all right to go in is when we saw the
>debris field".

>"We were there just dumbfounded. We didn't know what to think.
>And we didn't know how anybody else would react if we told them
>what we saw.
>They would probably wonder what we had been drinking".

>The aliens "didn't have any of these big eyes or horns or
>anything else or spiny fingers. They were very good-looking
>people, ash-colored faces and skin. About 5 feet 4, 5 feet 5.
>Eyes a little more pronounced, a little bit larger. Small ears,
>small nose. Fine features. Hairless. There were five. They had a
>very tight, almost a wetsuit, silver colored. I just saw two of
>them. One was thrown out of the craft itself. And one was half in
>and half out. They were all dead".

The creatures described by Frank have grown a little bit over the
years, but when we remember that we're talking about events that
are over 50 years old, a few minors changes should be expected,
especially when we remember all the reporting that was done last
year. For clarification, I might suggest a look at the work done
by Elizabeth Loftus and Richard Ofshe.

>"I didn't go near the craft itself. I just took a quick look
>because we were too busy trying to get a flatbed out there and
>trucks to get rid of everything before daylight set in. The craft
>itself, I'd say it must have been 20, 22 feet long and maybe 10,
>12 feet in width. It wasn't too big. It was split in two. The
>Stealth bomber is the spitting image of what the craft looked
>like. There was no dome. The interesting thing is, the craft
>carried no fuel. Underneath the craft was a series of cells,
>octagon-shaped cells".

>"One of our boys noticed that deterioration was setting in on the
>skin. So we radioed in to have some body bags. They were put in
>body bags. They took them on the jeep to the highway because we
>couldn't get too many trucks in there. The bodies were the first
>to go, then the craft next."

>Kaufmann does not remember the date of the operation, but he
>believes it was the early morning of July 5. Once back on the
>base, he did not have any further contact with the craft or the
>bodies. He and the other members of the team were told to never
>talk about the crash. He began to tell his story in the 1990s
>after other witnesses began releasing information".


>Perhaps more than anyone, Kevin is capable of playing "spot the
>glaring 'Roswell' anomaly" and might offer an explanation for all
>of the ones patently evident here.

What we must remember is that there has been a lot of material
published about the Roswell case that is inaccurate. I think of
the stories told by Gerald Anderson and even J. Bond Johnson.
Johnson, who told me originally that General Ramey had told him
it was a weather balloon now claims that Ramey didn't tell him
that.

The point is that we are left with a mass of mud that must be
searched to find the truth. We must weed out that which is
uncorroborated or horribly altered and eliminate it. The
conclusion comes when we try to force everything to fit into a
single mold.

We must realize that, given the fact we are relying on memory
that is 50 years old, we are going to get discrepancies. When we
begin to deal with a situation that has produced a number of
claims that are false, the issue is going to be confused.

When we begin to deal with a situation that has a huge monetary
stake, such as that that now surrounds Roswell, the situation is
going to become even more confused. All we can do is attempt to
wade through this, expose the hoaxes as we find them, and
continue to work.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 2

                           UFOs: The Footage Files

From: Philip Mantle <el51@dial.pipex.com>
Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 08:40:29 +0000
Fwd Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 17:11:44 -0400
Subject: UFOs: The Footage Files


To whom it may concern.

Press Release:

UFOs: The Footage Files.
The 250 Best Original UFO Clips Ever From 27 Countries Of All Five
Continents: 1950 - L998.

FILM 2000 is proud to inform you that it now has available for license
250 original UFO film clips from 1950 to l998.

These clips come from over 27 different countries of all five continents.
They are quite literally the most comprehensive list of UFO clips
available to broadcasters anywhere in the world.

For a copy of our 6 page listing of all 250 UFO clips please contact:

Philip Mantle,
1 Woodhall Drive,
Batley,
West Yorkshire,
England,
WF17 7SW.

Tele: 01924 444049.
Fax: 01924 444049.
E-mail: el51@dial.pipex.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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 2

                              Re: Alien Baloney

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 14:02:53 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 17:07:37 -0400
Subject: Re: Alien Baloney

>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: "Serge Salvaille" <sergesa@connectmmic.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Alien Baloney
>Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 08:07:49 -0400

>>Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 19:18:15 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time)
>>From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: Alien Baloney

>>Even with some of the more unusual specimens (from Derrel and
>>Roger and other sources) we have had the opportunity to examine,
>>we may never be able to says for sure that this object or that
>>implant is artificial and from out of this world.  As long as
>>there are at least two explanations which can account for all the
>>observed facts, one cannot accept the more exotic one as the
>>correct one, even if a few of the observed facts have improbable
>>Earthly explanations (eg. the un-Earthly isotope ratios) since
>>they could still have been made here.

>Nick,

>Now this is something.  I hope you can be more explicit about
>this "we had the opportunity to examine".

>What kind of tests did you perform?  With what equipment? What
>were the results? Were they published? Are they available?

>This is very important matter.

>Serge Salvaille


Hello Serge, Nick, All,

Serge wrote:

>Now this is something.  I hope you can be more explicit about
>this "we had the opportunity to examine".

>What kind of tests did you perform?  With what equipment? What
>were the results? Were they published? Are they available?

Now were cooking with gas! I want to reiterate (back) Serge's
questions to Nick. They _are_ vitally important answers and
information.

You've got the ball Nick. Wadda ya know or what can you tell us?

John 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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 2

             Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force

From: "Stanton T. Friedman" <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 15:11:20 -0300
Fwd Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 17:03:04 -0400
Subject: Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force


UFO UpDates - Toronto wrote:

> Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 01:15:44 -0500
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> From: John <jvif@spacelab.net>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air
> Force
>  General

> >From: JBONJO@aol.com [James Bond Johnson]
> >To: updates@globalserve.net
> >Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 00:38:19 EDT
> >Subject: New High Tech Examination of Old Roswell Photos
> >         Clears Air Force General of Hoax

> >This Press Release from Orange County MUFON has been released
> >today to the wire services.

> <snip>

> Hi All,

> Stan, Kevin (or anyone else on the list who has researched the
> Roswell case) is this new photo enlargement development
> anything that we can/should get excited about?

> Wadda you tink? Inquiring minds want to know! <G>


As the first to find the photos in question, about 20 years agao,
I am of course very interested. I have spoken with Ron Regeher
and the UT Arlington people. The analysis that has been done
isn't yet very sophisticated and I understand even larger prints
have been made available to a UFO Researcher on the EastCoast.

I have never used the term Hoax in conjunction with Ramey's
coverup. Misrepresentation in the interest of national security.

I was also the first to locate and then visit with Retired
General DuBose. He definitely said that Ramey's boss (McMullen)
called telling DuBose to cover up the story, get some of the
wreckage up to him in DC with one of their colonel couriers, and
never talk aout it again, not even with General Ramey.

I think Regehr is sincere , but cannot really comment about the
supposed strange symbols until I see details.

STF







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 2

                              Re: Alien Baloney

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 13:55:14 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 17:06:00 -0400
Subject: Re: Alien Baloney

>Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 00:24:29 -0500 (CDT)
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Alien Baloney

>>Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 19:18:15 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time)
>>From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: Alien Baloney

>>One may not fully agree with Derrel Sims' or Roger Leir's views
>>or methods regarding UFO physical evidence but at least they are
>>doing something with the help of many experts and scientists to
>>get to the truth, whatever it may be.

>Wrong! We disagree precisely because they *aren't* following
>existing scientific protocols. As for the "help of many experts
>and scientists," I'm afraid you've been reading too many Leir
>press releases.

<snip>


Hello Dennis, hi All,

It is so very rare that I agree with something the Sasquatch
posts that I couldn't pass up the oportunity. <HUGE GRIN>

Dennis writes:

>Wrong! We disagree precisely because they *aren't* following
>existing scientific protocols. As for the "help of many experts
>and scientists," I'm afraid you've been reading too many Leir
>press releases.

In a 'nutshell' precisely what I've been complaining about!
People enjoy ascribing "motives" without ever taking into
consideration what is actually being said. (Sometimes)
what we have here is a failure to communicate! <G>

Watch out for the cowpies Sasquatch, I seem to spend a lot of
time scraping bull droppings off of my boots nowadays.

Peace,

John 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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 3

              Formatting Posts to UpDates using CompuServe v2.x

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 15:50:18 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 15:50:18 -0400
Subject: Formatting Posts to UpDates using CompuServe v2.x



For subscribers who asked for help with formatting
messages sent to UpDates via Compuserve, and there
are more than two, His Grace The Duke of Mendoza
has asked that I forward the following. For which
I am, on behalf of the many Compuserve served
UpDates subscribers, eternally grateful.

ebk

__________________________________________________


Formatting Posts to UpDates using CompuServe v2.x

Under either the Reply option or the Create Mail option, the
blank message window has a box in the TOP RIGHT hand corner
with two radio buttons: one labelled "Reformattable" and the
other "Send as Shown". The first is the default.

If you click on the "Send as Shown" button, you'll see in
the BOTTOM LEFT hand corner of the message window a box
saying Right Margin: and next to that, in a separate box, a
number. This is the number of characters in the line. The
default under "Send as Shown" is 78. Highlight or delete
that and set whatever number of chars/line you want. (There
is also an inverted triangle to the right of the number,
which gives various preset line lengths, but the shortest is
72 chars. You can't customize this list.)

Setting it for 65 chars gives some leeway for quote marks
when (if) anyone wants to reply to your message & saves them
reformatting the quote to fit the 70-char line.

Quote marks: it is a pain that, in Reply mode, C'Serve v2.x
software doesn't automatically reprint the message to which
you're replying and insert "quote marks" (>) at the
beginning of each line. You just have to stick them in
yourself. For this reason, C'Serve users - unlike some -
rarely recycle huge 23K posts just for the sake of dropping
in a three-line comment at the end of every fourth
paragraph.

However, C'Serve v3.x does perform this useful function when
using the Reply option. I believe you can download it from
somewhere on one of the CIS forums. Be warned, however. It
bellows an ineradicable welcome message at you when it
opens, it is hideously ugly to look at and it consumes vast
amounts of hard disk space (about 7 megs as I recall) for no
great advantage. But you may find it useful, especially as
CompuServe becomes more & more a web-based service provider,
for which v2.x is not geared.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 3

                      Official UFO Committee in Uruguay

From: "A. J. Gevaerd" <gevaerd@ufo.com.br>
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 14:15:46 -0300
Fwd Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 16:02:01 -0400
Subject: Official UFO Committee in Uruguay

Hi folks!

I just arrived from Argentina, where I attended a congress held
in the city of Victoria (Entre Rios) and lectured about UFOs in
Brazil. I was surprised to meet with 4 men from the official UFO
investigation committee of Uruguay, called "Centro de Receptacion
y Investigaciones de Denuncias de Objetos Voladores No
Identificados" (Cridovni), which means UFO Reports Collection and
Investigation Center. They were also lecturers at the
conference.

As far as I know, this is the ONLY known and OPEN, public,
military committee dedicated to UFO research in the world today,
financed by a government which doesn't want to hide it. Cridovni
was launched 19 years ago by the president of Uruguay and its Air
Force. Since that time, according to the members of the committee
present in Argentina, they have investigated about 800 UFO
reports, from which 1.5% remained unexplained.

They claim that they research the only "UFO Phenomena", rather
than assuming that these objects are proved to be
"extraterrestrial spacecraft". Their methods are extremely
scientific and resembles the techniques implemented by the late
doctor Hynek, which includes evaluation of strangeness and
witness credibility scores. The Cridovni, despite all time of its
existence, its official resources to use, all the vehicles to
transport their teams that they must have, labs and other
facilities to operate and probably also some official budget,
have A LOT of restrictions towards Ufology and UFO researchers.

For instance, they don't accept the abductions entirely and are a
bit skeptical toward cases such as the "gold" classical
kidnappings. "No scientific evidence to prove them yet has been
found", they said. The same happens with most cases that
civilians UFO researchers would easily accept, after a carefull
examination. "One must apply a lot of filters to retain what is
real from what is fantasy in UFO sightings", they mentioned.

The 4 men officially present at the Victoria congress were
divided in two civilians (a psychologist and a pilot) and two
military (a major and a lieutenant). They claim they investigate
cases, conduct interviews with witnesses and attend to
conferences always in 4, two civilians and two military. They did
a very interesting presentation, although excessively skeptic.
When asked to present a single case from their country, they said
"no, we are not here to tell stories, but to demonstrate our
methods of investigation". Was frustrating.

I was with Stanton Friedman and a few other Argentinean speakers
at the conference and most of us remained a little unsatisfied
with what we heard. We kind of expected some more to come from
an official committee. To speak for myself, I would say that I got
2 surprises in Argentina: one was meeting that official committee
and learning that they are 19 years old. The other was to realize
that they, military with resources, know absolutely nothing more
or else than we, poor civilians without any budget at all.

Hope this will help anyone in this list.

A. J. Gevaerd
Editor, Brazilian UFO Magazine
gevaerd@ufo.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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 3

             Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force

From: "Stanton T. Friedman" <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 19:36:18 -0300
Fwd Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 16:29:44 -0400
Subject: Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force


> Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 08:52:21 -0400
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air
>  Force   General

<snip>

> Mark Center phoned yesterday and during our conversation told me
> that the University of Texas had refused his request to post
> copies of the photos on his web site.  Now, just as in the Santilli
> case, we are stuck on a question of copyright.  The U of T is
> claiming copyright to the photos because they have the negatives.
> If James Bond Johnson was in the military when he took the photos,
> then the U of T does not own copyright to the images themselves.
> They are free to copyright any book, video, etc., in which they
> make use of them, but the unaltered images should be in public
> domain.

> Bob Shell

Bob the pictures were taken by an employee of the Fort Worth Star
Telegram NOT by the government. Presumably that gave them the
copyright.

STF






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 3

                          Corso -- some background

From: authority@webtv.net (Doc Barry in Phoenix)
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 13:49:02 -0700
Fwd Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 16:25:11 -0400
Subject: Corso -- some background

I've read Corso's book and found some errors on dates.  I also found some=
 contradictions from Corso's interviews. However I understand a man in his=
 80s could have recall problems.  We should have more people like Col.=
 Corso.

One way we can judge a persons credibility is to look at their past actions.=
 Agreed?? Col Philip Corso testified before a senate commitee back in 1992=
 about missing American prisoners of the Korean war that were not returned=
 as they were supposed to be. He stated in effect the government knew and=
 COVERED IT UP rather than risk another conflict over them.

They paid little attention to him.

Col Corso appeared again to testify in 1996 and now nobody is laughing.
The documents were and are still coming to light from the Eisenhower library=
 and other archives. Corso was in a position to know about this and has been=
 trying to get the government to confront the issue. This man has had an=
 outstanding record  of military service. HE WAS in a position to know about=
 Roswell or UFO related matters. If you think this guy is a humbug don't be=
 suprised if your eating crow in a couple of years.

His 96 testimony appears below and part of a newspaper artical about the=
 documents below that. Any comments below were made by others than myself.

- Doc

=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D

House Subcommittee on Military Personnel Statement of - Colonel
{ret.} Phillip Corso September 17, 1996

=95During the Korean War, I was Head of the Special Projects
Branch/Intelligence Division/Far East Command. General Douglas
MacArthur was in command. I stayed and served in the same
position under General Ridgwar and General Clark. My duties
included the production of Intelligence on political
(counter-insurgency), and subversive activities by the enemy in
both North and South Korea. Within this framework I was
responsible for intelligence and communist activities (North
Korea, Chinese and Soviet) within our prisoner of war camps in
South Korea and the enemy camps in North Korea. In 1953, I was a
staff member of the truce delegation at Panmunjom and
participated in the discussion for the exchange of sick and
wounded prisoners. I was on the ground and met and talked with
our returning sick and wounded.

During the course of my duties, I discovered that the entire
operation on the treatment and handling of our prisoners of war
was supervised, masterminded and controlled by the Soviet Union,
as was the entire operation of the war and hostilities in Korea.
I wrote a study on how this control extended into our POW camps
holding North Koreans and Chinese in South Korea, nominally in
our control. I titled the study, "WAR IN THE POW CAMPS." Soviet
policy, conveyed to their allies, was that a soldier taken
prisoner is still at war and a combatant. They trained soldiers
to be taken as prisoner and then agitate in the camps to keep the
POWs in our custory under their control.

The brainwashing and atrocities against American prisoners were
conscious acts of Soviet policy. Not only was it used on our
prisoners, but on their own people and others under their
control. The basis for their action was the Pavlovian theory of
conditioned reflexes.

I had information on medical experiments (Nazi style) on our
prisoners.
The most devilish and cunning was the techniques of mind altering
(Pavlov). It was just as deadly as brain surgery and many U.S.
POWs died under such treatment. This was told to me by our own
returning POWs.
Many POWs willed themselves to death.

My findings revealed that the Soviets taught their allies, the
Chinese Communists and North Koreans, a detailed scientific
process aimed at molding prisoners of war into forms in which
they could be exploited.
Returned prisoners who underwent the experience reported the
experts assigned to mold them were highly trained, efficient and
well educated.
They were specialists in applying a deadly psychological
treatment which often ended in physical torment. The Soviet
approach was a deliberate act of their overall policy which
actively rejects, subverts and destroys decent standards of
conduct and the whole structure of human values.

Upon my return to the United States, I was assigned to the
Operations Coordinating Board (OCB) of the White House, National
Security Council, and handled virtually all projects to U.S.
prisoners of war. Here I found out that U.S. policy forbade that
we win in Korea. The policy amounted to an actual paralysis and
diversion of activity to force the return of our prisoners in
enemy hands, including those in the Soviet Union.

Years later, I discussed this situation with Attorney General
Robert Kennedy in his office and he agreed with me. This "NO WIN"
policy is contained in policy directives NSC-68, NSC-68/2 and
NSC-135/3. The basis for this policy was in directives ORE-750,
NIE 2, 2/1, 2/2, 10 and 11. We called this the "FIG LEAF POLICY."

Note: Recently, the CIA in news releases admitted their NIE
(National Intelligence Estimates) were wrong or not accurate.

In the past I have tried to tell Congress the fact that in 1953,
500 sick and wounded American prisoners were within ten miles of
the prisoner exchange point at Panmunjom but were never
exchanged.
(Subsequent information indicated that they all died
afterwards.)

Although I prepared a statement that was made at the Panmunjom
delegation table, I was not asked even one question regarding
this event.

During my tour of duty as the chief of the Special Projects
Section of the Intelligence Division of the Far East Command, I
received numerous reports that American POWs has been sent to the
Soviet Union. These reports were from many sources: Chinese and
North Korean POWs, agent reports, Nationalist Chinese reports,
our guerrillas, NSA intercepts, defectors and from our own
returning POWs.

My intelligence centered around three train loads of 450 POWs
each. Two of these trainloads were confirmed over and over, the
third was not as certain. Therefore, the final figure was,
"confirmed 900, and 1,200 possibly. " These were the figures that
I discovered with President Eisenhower while I was a member of
his NSC.

The bulk of the sightings were at Manchu-Ii, on the border of
Manchuria and the USSR. Here the rail gauge changed and the U.S.
POWs had to be transferred across a platform to a waiting train
going into the Soviet Union.

These POWs were to be exploited for intelligence purposes and
subsequently eliminated. The methods of exploitation were not
only practiced on our POWs, but all others falling into COMMUNIST
hands.

To the skeptics and debunkers, I have only this to say: By some
flashback in time, I wish you could be present with me at the
prisoner exchanges in Korea in 1953 and look into the faces of
those sick and wounded prisoners --- Americans and allied
soldiers --- as they came across in the exchange. If you had
witnessed their sacrifices and what they had suffered by
COMMUNIST hands, you would not be a critic or skeptic today.

I will close with this final remembrance. At Panmunjom, as a
wounded Turkish soldier was exchanged, he peeled off the Chinese
padded clothing and flung them at the nearest COMMUNIST guard. I
asked the Turkish Captain standing with me, "What did he say?" He
answered, "Till we meet again."


-----------------------------------------------------------------
{BACKGROUND: Col.(ret.) Corso participated directly in
the decision by the late President Dwight D. Eisenhower to leave
live American prisoners of war in the hands of the North Koreans,
Chinese and Soviets at the end of the Korean War. His testimony
will focus on the circumstances surrounding that decision.

CORSO RELATED MATERIALS:

No.1A - White House Operations Coordination Board (OCB) memo,
"Meeting of POW Working Group," regarding "FIG LEAF". 9 Nov.
1953

No.1B - Eisenhower Papers, "Telephone Conversation with Army
Secretary Stephens," re: Missing POWs. 22 Dec. 1953

No.1C - Dept. of State, "Efforts to Secure the Return of American
Personnel Who Might Still be in Communist Custody." 22 Jan. 1954


No.1D - "Complaint of Detention and imprisonment of United
Nations Military Personnel in Violation of Korean Armistice
Agreement," Henry Cabot Lodge, to UN Secretary General. 20 Dec.
1954 *S

No.1E - White House OCB Memo, "Interview with Rastvorov
Concerning US POWs in the USSR." 31 Jan. 1955}

11:00 PM 9/16/1996

U.S. knew of POWs in N. Korea, papers say

Copyright 1996 Houston Chronicle

WASHINGTON -- Newly declassified documents show that the United
States knew immediately after the Korean War that North Korea had
failed to turn over hundreds of American prisoners known to be
alive at the end of the war, adding to growing speculation that
American prisoners might still be alive and in custody there.

The documents, obtained from the Dwight D. Eisenhower
Presidential Library and other government depositories by a
congressional committee, show that the Pentagon knew in December
1953 that more than 900 American troops were alive at the end of
the war but never released by North Korea.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 3

                             Re: A New Approach?

From: galevy <galevy@pipeline.com> [Gary Alevy]
Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 21:04:16 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 16:36:32 -0400
Subject: Re: A New Approach?

> Date: Mon, 01 Jun 1998 22:55:11 -0700
> From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net>
> To: updates@globalserve.net
> Subject: A New Approach?

> Dear List:

> I see that ORTK is planning a new hundred person march on
> Washington to demand release of UFO information.

> CSETI and Dr. Greer continue to petition the Lord (gov't) with
> Prayer (demands for congressional hearings).

> The UFO Lawyer has filed a suit, with an octagenerian colonel's
> (forthcoming) notarized statement, demanding disclosure of ET
> evidence.

> And many think the Paradigm Clock is soon to strike the witching
> hour.

> Personally, I think we are pissing up the wrong tree.

<snip>

> Terry

Much of your angst e.g., "they damned well better investigate"
could be better directed if you consider some alternative
viewpoints which might make current behavior more
understandable.

Consider that:

1) they are not unidentified to those who are in the position to
know. There is much historical evidence for this.

2) the government is not responsible for handling this situation.
Many security and 'difficult' issues are handled by 'privatized'
organizations. There is much historical evidence for this.

3) the people and organizations involved don't have to save
face. You're not even on their event horizon.

4) since when was it the obligation of the military and the
government to protect the populace. They protect interests, e.g.
national security, and moreover they define what those are, not
you.

5) regarding good guys and bad guys from out there.

One could well imagine that they would cut deals with both! For
examples of this you only need to pick up the days newspaper for
numerous examples.

6) regarding who is the 'boss'. (see #3 and #4 for the real
boss.)

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 3

                             Re: Sarah McClendon

From: MDJ50@webtv.net (Mike Jamieson)
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 15:58:06 -0700
Fwd Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 16:32:00 -0400
Subject: Re: Sarah McClendon

>Date: Monday, June 1, 1998 23:41:14 -0500CDT
>To: UFOUpDates--Toronto <updates@globalserve.net
>From: Dennis <stacy@texas.net
>Re: Sarah McClendon


>Corso is a goddam liar.

Would Mr. Stacy please itemize the facts that form the basis for
his belief that Col Corso is a ...... ....?






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 3

                    Mexican UFOs - a Canadian connection?

From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 18:08:42 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time)
Fwd Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 17:16:40 -0400
Subject: Mexican UFOs - a Canadian connection?

Hi Errol and UFO UpDates list,

A fellow amateur astronomer friend and military photo
interpretation analyst who, along with his supervisor,
"identified" the Carp UFO in the video as a U.S. Commanche attack
helicopter (flying in Canada years before its official first
flight!) contacted me again yesterday from his new post and had
this to say regarding the many UFOs seen over Mexico in the past
few years.

Nick, check this out.

http://www.services.bombardier.com/htmen/A4A.htm

This has been mistaken for UFOs in the past, especially in
Mexico where they have a large problem with insurgents.
When the counter rotating props are rotating it has a
disk-like appearance and then a dome on the top and a dome
on the bottom.

We all know about the AVRO Car built in Malton (a suburb in the
Toronto area) which could "hover" only a few feet above the
ground.  This Bombardier (based in Montreal) built craft has
proven itself as a very effective surveillance craft and can
hover too. Some have been sold abroad but Mexico is reported to
have bought very many of them.


Have any UFO reports been explained as sightings of this
Canadian built craft?

Nick Balaskas








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 3

                              Re: Alien Baloney

From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 20:36:13 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time)
Fwd Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 17:48:59 -0400
Subject: Re: Alien Baloney

> Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 14:02:53 -0500
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Alien Baloney

> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> >From: "Serge Salvaille" <sergesa@connectmmic.net>
> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Alien Baloney
> >Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 08:07:49 -0400

> >Nick,

> >Now this is something.  I hope you can be more explicit about
> >this "we had the opportunity to examine".

> >What kind of tests did you perform?  With what equipment? What
> >were the results? Were they published? Are they available?

> >This is very important matter.

> >Serge Salvaille

<snip>

> Now were cooking with gas! I want to reiterate (back) Serge's
> questions to Nick. They _are_ vitally important answers and
> information.

> You've got the ball Nick. Wadda ya know or what can you tell us?

> John Velez

Hi Serge, Hi John,

Earlier this year Derrel Sims sent me about a dozen UFO artifacts
including a few "alien implants" belonging to Roger Leir for
independent examination by scientists and qualified research
technicians, most from the Toronto area.  Test results for
Derrel's and Roger's UFO physical evidence are now coming in.
Many of the more unusual items have been tested by more than one
person and at several different institutions (York University,
University of Toronto, Mount Sinai and Toronto Hospitals,
Geological Survey of Canada, etc.  I expect Derrel and Roger to
release our scientfic findings in the very near future, along
with the findings from other researchers who examined these same
specimens and much other UFO physical evidence not yet shared
with us.

Depending on the specimens themselves and their brief histories
provided, appropriate physical, chemical and biological tests
were performed.  These include close examination using light and
scanning electron microscopes and use of nondestructive tests to
more advance tests involving x-ray diffraction, mass
spectroscopy, polarization, energy dispersion analysis, etc.

Roger had also entrusted me to have film fragments from Ray
Santilli (actual images said to be from the alien autopsy films)
to be tested by some of Canada's top film experts, which has now
been done.

The above research, although done by us for no monetary
compensation, is Derrel's and Roger's project.  Please contact
them with your questions regarding their UFO physical evidence.

I can comment on at least a few related items that were projects
of mine or MUFON Ontario's.

*  The Ecuadorian E.T. or elf has been proven to be the altered
remains of a 1 year old child by a paleonbiologist with the Royal
Ontario Museum; an anthropologist at UofT who's speciality is the
skeletons of very young humans and a scientist at the Toronto
Coroner's Building (glad I didn't stay too long at this place).

*  The two wheat samples collected inside UFO crop circles from
two locations in Sweden are still untested because I cannot find
anyone that is willing to have even a quick look.  Scientists at
Canada's Central Experimental Farm in Ottawa where they grow
wheat (and where I would eat my lunch in the summers while
working as a seismologist waiting to locate and calculate the
magnitude of the next Indian, Isreali or South African nuclear
test - but that's another story) are not even answering my
e-mails.

*  I managed to get out just in time during the ice storm that
struck eastern Ontario and southern Quebec this year (ice was
continuing to build on my windshield despite heat and lots of
windshield wiper fluid) as I drove back to Toronto after an
aborted plan to meet George Pantoulas who had promised us UFO
wreckage from a crash in Megas Platanos, Greece (see CSETI's web
page - it is one of 195 or so alleged UFO crashes reported so far
(who says that aliens are better drivers than us?).
Peter and Anastasia Arvanitis of MUFON Ontario plan to bring this
UFO wreckage to Canada in September.  I am still waiting to hear
from UFO-BC about the UFO wreckage from Chile...

*  While searching the Net recently, I discovered that Art Bell
had images and analysis on the alleged Roswell UFO crash wreckage
that was sent anonymously.  To my disappointment, not only were
the 4 major components of this UFO wreckage very Earthly looking
(the "chips" for example, look identical to punched out iron
metal slugs) but I quickly concluded that the wreckage, if that
is what it was, was made in the U.S.A.  I concluded this when I
noticed that a representive square chip had the following
dimensions: 6.368 mm x 6.361 mm x 1.596 mm.

Since the U.S.A. is the only major country that still uses
inches, feet and miles, converting the above values one gets the
following dimensions: 1/4 inch x 1/4 inch x 1/16 inch.
Then again, maybe there are E.T. engineers at some yet unknown
planet who also work with U.S.A. inches.

All kidding aside, I agree with Serge that UFO physical evidence
is a very important matter.  I hope I satisfied John's question
to me on "Whadda ya know..." although at this time I regret I
cannot satisfy his question on "...what can you tell us?".  Once
I learn something about UFO physical evidence which I know you
and others would like to know, I will share it. For now, I
suggest that you ask Derrel and Roger the same questions you
asked me.  You will really be amazed...

        Nick Balaskas







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 3

                       Australian May Reports Listing

From: Robert Frola <ufoicq@powerup.com.au>
Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 11:19:20 +1000
Fwd Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 17:32:30 -0400
Subject: Australian May Reports Listing

Hello,

Attached is the latest Reports Listing from Aussie land.

Enjoy!

Robert Frola
UFO Investigation Centre Queensland
AUSTRALIAN UFO REPORTS AND EXPERIENCES
1998 ISSUE THREE
JUNE

Compiled by Robert Frola
UFO Investigation Centre Queensland
PO Box 805 Springwood QLD 4127



_________________________________________________________________
______________________


ca.1978 Bayugall area, NSW (NL)
(Source: Barry Taylor, 28.05.98)
From Mr. C. About 20 years ago when working on a large property
in the Bayugall area South of Grafton, he saw a large bright
white low in the air and lighting the ground up. When speaking
about the sighting to work mates, they too said that they had
seen similar lights over the years when droving cattle during the
night and early mornings.

More recently, he has seen a bright white light on a regular
basis. One night he flashed a torch at it in the Morse code
Acknowledge and Reply code about a dozen times continually.
Suddenly the object flew off at rapid speed.

Ca18.02.83  bet. Bookham & Goulburn, NSW  0300-0500hrs  (CE-1)
(Source: Brad Mildem, E-mail: bradm@shoal.net.au. Paradox,
01.05.98) The witness was driving her husband, who finished work
at midnight, and her baby daughter from their home in Wagga Wagga
to her parent's home at Jamberoo, near Kiama, for the weekend.
Shortly after leaving Wagga on the Hume Hwy with her husband and
baby asleep, a large brightly luminous disc shape UFO appeared in
the sky ahead of her at an estimated 300-400 metres distance. The
object stayed in this position while she drove approx. 120 km.,
disappearing as she went through towns, and appearing again on
the other side of the town. It mostly stayed relatively still but
occasionally shot off at great speed to the left or right only to
return seconds later to the same position. The object disappeared
just north of Goulburn as the dawn was lightening the sky. It
rapidly gained altitude until out of sight in seconds. There was
no interference with the normal operation of the car , according
to the witness and the amount of traffic she remembers was normal
for that time of morning. Supposedly after having great
difficulty waking her husband at one point, he glanced at the
object , mumbled "yeah yeah" and was immediately asleep again.

Normally on this trip she would stop at Yass for an hour's break
for coffee and arrive at Jamberoo at about 7- 7.30am. This time,
on arrival she was genuinely surprised to find the trip had taken
1.5 to 2 hours longer than normal, even without the break at
Yass.

No subsequent sickness or body markings were noticed and as the
witness suspected no abduction at that time no further
investigation was undertaken until reported to Paradox in 1997.

REPORT STATUS. Celestial records show no planet, star or even the
moon, which could have explained the sighting. The lack of
reaction from other traffic could indicate the phenomenon was a
purely subjective one, however, until further evidence is
forthcoming the case will remain as UNEXPLAINED.

1993 Grafton, NSW (Shark Creek, Mini Waters)  2030hrs (NL)
(Source: Barry Taylor, 28.05.98)
Mr. G reported a UFO sighting 5 years ago (1993). At Shark Creek,
Mini Waters on the coast East of Grafton, 8.30pm on evening saw a
row of white blinking lights over the Woodford Island Hill. The
lights were rotating as if on the perimeter of a circular
object.

31.06.97 Brisbane, QLD  (Birkdale) ca.1345hrs  (DO) (Source:
Robert Frola, UFO Investigation Centre Queensland) While
travelling through Birkdale towards the Birkdale Fair Shopping
Centre, a married couple witnessed two large white lights in the
sky. Clouds around the objects appeared to be unusually dark. The
UFOs were described as 'long silver bodies with a light at each
end'. The two UFOs disappeared into the dark clouds. (Ufologist
Magazine - Vol.1 #4 Oct/Dec 1997)

01.07.97 Brisbane, QLD  (Alexander Hills) (NL) (Source: Robert
Frola, UFO Investigation Centre Queensland) A very bright object
was seen in the northwest sky over Brisbane Northern suburbs.
(Ufologist Magazine - Vol.1 #4 Oct/Dec 1997)

15.07.97 Brisbane, QLD  (Alexander Hills) (NL) (Source: Robert
Frola, UFO Investigation Centre Queensland) A yellow light was
seen in the sky. It moved from the northeast to the southwest.
(Ufologist Magazine - Vol.1 #4 Oct/Dec 1997)

30.07.97 Brisbane, QLD  (Kenmore) ca.2110hrs  (NL) (Source:
Robert Frola, UFO Investigation Centre Queensland) Four orange
lights were observed over Archerfield. They were moving in a line
abreast fashion (very low to the ground)  from the direction of
Ipswich towards the Samford Valley. One object fell to the
horizon, two disappeared over Mt Coot-tha, and the last object
was seen disappearing behind trees. No sound was heard.
(Ufologist Magazine - Vol.1 #4 Oct/Dec 1997)

13.10.97  nr Nowra, NSW  (Kangaroo Valley) 2310hrs (NL) (Source:
Brad Mildem, E-mail: bradm@shoal.net.au. Paradox, 01.05.98) A
report from Kangaroo Valley  (Just west of Nowra N.S.W.) Received
the following night and publicized in the local paper next week
failed to receive substantiation from other witnesses and so
cannot be verified as genuine.   The sighting apparently occurred
on the 13th Oct 97. The object was apparently seen at approx.
11.10pm and appeared in the west, over Barrengarry Mountain,
descending towards the power station and Tallowa dam. The witness
describes it as being "A dark mass against the sky, larger than
the Hercules we often get flying over here. It seemed to be
triangular. At first it had a bright white light at each rear
corner shining straight down and a blue light at the centre or
front." As it went beneath the horizon the lights went out and it
was lost to sight after another minute against the mountain
background. "It was flying very low and very slow with no sound
to be heard."

22.09.97 Brisbane, QLD  (Carina) (NL)
(Source: Robert Frola, UFO Investigation Centre Queensland) An
orange light was observed travelling in a semi circle fashion
towards the north-northwest over Belmont. The UFO didn't appear
to be travelling very fast. It was described as looking like a
bright streetlight, which pulsated slowly throughout its travels.
(Ufologist Magazine - Vol.1 #4 Oct/Dec 1997)

21.10.97 Brisbane, QLD (Trinder Park & Springwood) 2115-2127hrs
(NL) (Source: Robert Frola, UFO Investigation Centre Queensland)
At 9.15pm, while leaving Rob and Jan Niessen's place, Robert
Frola and Rob Niessen saw an orange-red object moving towards
them from the direction of Loganlea. Jan, at this moment was
called outside. The object traveled steadily and quickly across
the sky, disappearing from view towards Archerfield. Two outbound
commercial flights intersected the object's flight path,
indicating that the object was fairly low (about 1000-1500ft).
Duration: 10 minutes.

At 9.23pm, a second object was located by Jan, travelling on the
same flight path as the first. The second object appeared at
first to flicker, then remained constant throughout the sighting.
It too disappeared towards Archerfield. Robert Frola called Mace
Robertson to see if he can confirm seeing the same object from
Springwood. Mace located the object with his naked eyes, and
trained his telescope onto it shortly before it disappeared.
Henry Lacina, also viewed the object, just moments before it
disappeared. Two outbound aircraft, one commercial, the other
private, intersected the object's path.  Duration: 8 minutes.

Both objects were videotaped. (Ufologist Magazine - Vol.1 #4
Oct/Dec 1997)


22-28.12.97 Brisbane, QLD  (Logan City) 1300-1400hrs (Identified)
(Source: Robert Frola, UFO Investigation Centre Queensland ) A
silvery-white object was visible for an hour, every day for a
week until cloudy weather prevented it to be seen. The object was
seen directly above the witness, visible through the corona of
the sun. During the hour, the object would only move a couple of
degrees. Object was identified as Venus/Mars planetary
conjunction. (Telephone Interview)

29.12.97 Stradbroke Island, QLD  (Dunwich) 1945hrs (NL) (Source:
Robert Frola, UFO Investigation Centre Queensland ) At 7.45pm,
Brett was looking out of the window of his house to the southeast
when he saw a very bright white light spiraling down from the
sky. By the time Brett got outside the object had disappeared. No
sound was heard. (Ufologist Magazine - Vol.2 #1 Jan/Mar 1998)

April 1998  Grafton, NSW (NL)
(Source: Barry Taylor, 28.05.98)
Mr. M reported a white light and small single objects at high
altitude travelling at very fast speed going form the South to
the North, and sometimes North to South at various times during
April 1998.

April 1998  Grafton, NSW  0445hrs  (NL) (Source: Barry Taylor,
28.05.98. Response from Flap Newspaper article. Saturday
09.04.98) Mr. Frank B of Grafton rang about a strange sighting
that he had witnessed one morning (4.45am) early in April. He was
casually observing the clear starry early morning sky, when he
noticed a very bright white stationery light, at low altitude
over the top of his house. He was amazed to see it suddenly shoot
off at great speed, leaving a faint orange trail. This trail
"dissipated as if erased with a rubber"

10.04.98  Coutts Crossing, NSW  0400hrs (NL) (Source: Barry
Taylor, 28.05.98)
Mr. M of Coutts Crossing noticed a large bright yellowish/orange
light to the East towards the coast. He sighted to light against
a verandah post and said it appeared to move very slowly. It went
down 50mm (2in) compared to a point on the post, went back up
than returned to its original position. Observation time 10
minutes.

19.04.98  near Grafton, NSW  1900hrs (NL) (Source: Barry Taylor,
28.05.98)
Mrs. W, her daughter and a neighbour watched as 2 or 3 unusual
illuminated white objects were quickly maneuvering at low
altitude in the western sky towards the Grafton area at 7.00pm on
Sunday 19th April. The objects appeared to be heading in one
direction, than suddenly appear to be going in the opposite
direction as if they were circling. The three witnesses watched
the objects for about 15 minutes.

29.04.98  Central Coast, NSW  1830hrs (NL) (Source: Mike Farrell,
11.05.98)
On Wednesday 29 April 1998, at approximately 1830 hrs a NSW
Central Coast family reported seeing a unusual object moving
quickly across the sky from South to North. It was large,
spherical and orange-coloured. When viewed through binoculars
they could not make out any other shapes or surface features.
After passing directly overhead it slowed down to hover
motionless, then moved off towards the West.

At that point the family noticed two military-type planes (jets),
in the northern sky, probably from Williamtown AFB, quickly
travelling southwards, towards the object. The UFO shot off
southwards and disappeared over the southern horizon.

Soon afterwards, at least two helicopters, probably from
Singleton AFB, were seen heading from the North in the same
southerly direction. Later that same evening, family members
noticed a bluish-white light in the western sky, zigzagging North
to South.

The same night, a Terrigal (Central Coast) resident reported
seeing the same large orange object to a local radio station.

Family members contacted Williamtown AFB who referred them to
UFOR(NSW)'s Central Coast representative, Peter Turner. Peter is
now asking Williamtown AFB if they can confirm any of these
details, and reports that around 2300 hrs the Central Coast
family also heard an unusual rumbling noise pass overhead,
without an apparent source. Friends from Tumbi Umbi (Central
Coast) who later visited the witnesses, had heard something
similar in their area about the same time.

Peter telephoned Moira McGhee of INUFOR in Sydney on Friday 1st
May to see if her networks had reported anything similar.

Moira reports that around 1930 hrs that same evening, two
families in the Singleton area reported seeing a strange
orange-yellow light object travelling quickly across the sky in a
southeasterly direction. The light was quite large, made no noise
and was travelling at quite a low altitude. One of the Singleton
witnesses is an amateur astronomer, so space junk and pranks seem
unlikely.

20.05.98 Brunswick Heads & Urbanville, NSW  0720hrs (DO) (Source:
Barry Taylor, 28.05.98)
Reports of a magnesium bright white light seen in the eastern sky
from Brunswick Heads and Urbanville north of Lismore. Witnesses
rang local Radio stations about the sighting. It was concluded
that the object was either a large Meteor or small Asteroid.

22.05.98 Grafton, NSW  1910hrs (NL)
(Source: Barry Taylor, 28.05.98)
"On Friday night, about 4 km West of Grafton, I videoed an pale
orange light low in the sky and very slowly moving to the SW. The
object took 3min. 25secs. to move a short distance out of sight.
It was moving faster than the stars set, and in the wrong
direction to be a star setting. It was not a plane because it was
not flashing navigation lights. There was no sound. And in the
time observed a plane would have traveled much further. I
consider if Unidentified."

NOTE: This sounds like the same type of object reported from
Coutts Crossing on the 10th April. Barry Taylor.

23.05.98 Tyndale, NSW  1930hrs (NL)
(Source: Barry Taylor, 28.05.98)
Mr. L and his wife watched a strange green/red and white object
slowly moving to the south at Tyndale, north of Grafton. During
the 10-minute observation, their TV volume suddenly became very
loud, and static interference occurred on the picture.

30.05.98 nr Nowra, NSW  (Meroo Meadow) 1915hrs  (NL) (Source:
Brad Mildem, E-mail: bradm@shoal.net.au. Paradox, 01.05.98) A
ball of orange light was sighted over Meroo Meadow 6km NE of
Nowra  Friday 30 May 7.15pm. Witness was looking N.E. from
Worrigee when the orange ball appeared in the sky apparently
nearby to the Meroo Meadow private airstrip (approx. 6km distant
from witness). OBOL did not rise from the ground but switched on
at an estimated altitude of 200-300m. The object was large enough
to discern a visible circle of light, (match head size at arm's
length) and moved slowly westward, against the wind for about 15
seconds then blinked off. No sound was heard.

ABDUCTION CASES:

Name: Aurora
Country of Origin: Romania
Age: 45
Investigators: Robert Frola, Andrea Sison (Counselor) UFO Group:
UFOICQ
Date of Investigation: 18.02.98

On 11.02.98 Aurora contacted UFOICQ, and asked if she could
relate some of her paranormal experiences to us. She said she was
a qualified counselor, and was not in need of counseling, but she
just wanted to tell her story to people who would not judge her
negatively in the light of her experiences.

First paranormal experience: Occurred when Aurora was 6 y.o.,
while she was living in Romania. One day, she felt like she was
suddenly pushed to the floor, and she felt her whole body was
"paralyzed" except for her tongue. Then she heard a loud noise
"like a train or engine" coming towards her or a "wind blowing
through a pipe". She said she was very scared while this was
happening.

Straight after this experience, Aurora told her mother about it.
Her mother told her to "make the sign of the cross with her
tongue" if it happened again. Aurora also informed us that there
were many sightings in Romania at this time, but people were "not
allowed to talk about it", because many people were very
skeptical and individuals  "did not feel safe" talking about
sightings for fear that others "would judge them". Apparently it
was said to be "bad luck to look at falling stars", and this
referred to UFO's.

Second experience: Aurora was still living in Romania and was in
year 5 at school. One day she remembers that time and/or movement
"stopped for a few seconds". The sky and air looked red "like
there was red dust everywhere". At the time, she said she was
amazed and she felt it was a "pleasant experience".

After this experience, Aurora again informed her mother, who
thought there might be "something wrong with her blood". Her
mother took her to the doctor for blood tests, and all results
were normal.

Third experience: Occurred in August 1987 in Sydney. Aurora was
in bed when she saw a "shadow in the window" then a "caped
figure" appeared at the end of her bed. There were security bars
on her bedroom window, so the figure could not have climbed
through the window. She felt that her body was paralyzed except
for her tongue, so she made the sign of the cross with her
tongue, and the figure was "sucked out through the window". When
she woke up in the morning, she was naked. She told her husband,
and he said it might be the devil and to go and see a priest,
which she did.

Before this incident, Aurora had been participating in an IVF
program for a long time and was told she would probably never
fall pregnant. However, three months after this incident
occurred, she fell pregnant. Aurora said she feels this pregnancy
was associated with the caped figure. Also before this incident,
she had experienced painful periods, but after the visitation she
never experienced period pain again.

Fourth experience: In Brisbane 1995, Aurora was lying in bed when
she saw "a flame on the door". At the time there was no fire in
the house and nothing present that would cast a reflection. She
was not paralyzed, so she made the sign of the cross with her
hands. The flame then went "through the wall" into the next room
(where her son was in bed), and immediately her son started
screaming.  Aurora then ran into son's room where he was
screaming " take these things away" while wiping his forearms.
She couldn't see anything on her son's arms, but she said "let's
pray" then they both knelt on the floor and she said "please god,
help us". Next she heard "footsteps running down the stairs", and
when she ran to look there was "nothing there".

When he was 3 y.o, her son said he "chose" Aurora to be his
mother because she "looked lonely". When she questioned her son
about this some years later, he said he couldn't remember saying
that. He hasn't had nightmares, but he sees "red lights in the
house, like red eyes following him". These lights have never
harmed him, but he is frightened of them.

Fifth experience: In Springwood, Brisbane 1995 Aurora saw "orange
lights in the sky" - ("maybe four, not less than four").  At
first she thought they were stars but then they "went straight
down very fast" possibly around Eight Mile Plains. She wanted to
drive to the place, but didn't. She felt it was a "great
experience".

The next day she saw the incident reported in the newspaper.

Sixth experience: In Brisbane 1995 Aurora suddenly found herself
in "a place with a lot of empty rooms". Her impression was that
she was in a room, "like a doctor's waiting room", and she felt
"peaceful" with "no emotions, only thoughts" - some people (maybe
female) came to get her, they had no breasts or genitals, they
were hairless and their skin was "spongy looking", and of a
"creamy colour". Aurora felt they had "beautiful bodies", that's
why she thought they might be female. These beings walked her
"through the wall" into a room where there were two more beings.
She lay on a table and felt paralyzed and heard a loud noise
(like her first experience), then she saw "lights", and felt
pressure on her abdomen.  She became frightened and "fought back"
- she made the sign of the cross with her tongue and "came
back".

Straight after this experience, Aurora found a "spot /burn" on
her abdomen 4 mm long. She went and told her priest and he joked
about it.

Seventh experience: In Brisbane 1995, Aurora felt an arm/hand on
her in her sleep. She woke up but did not turn around to look -
she had a "reassuring comfortable feeling" and went back to
sleep.

Since Aurora's son was 5 months old, she has felt a "rocking" of
her bed about once a week. She said this is a good experience,
and it makes her "feel protected". Aurora claims she is "not
religious" but believes in a "greater power". In all of her
experiences, she has never noticed if she "lost" any time,
because she never thought to check for discrepancies. Now when
people visit her house, they often report seeing  "people walking
up the stairs" and then vanishing, as well as "shadows walking up
the stairs". They also comment that they "feel like sleeping"
because it is "so relaxing" in the house. Aurora is no longer
frightened by these experiences, and claims she has "got used to
them".

Aurora has also speculated on the causes of her experiences and
what they might mean. She feels her experiences are for a "good
cause", and if they are aliens trying to study humans then "why
not me". She also said it might be that god is trying to "show me
a way", then she feels comfortable with that too. Similarly, if
these experiences are due to her subconscious mind, she is
"thankful that it is showing me possible dangers".

My impressions of Aurora are that she appeared to be a very
credible source. To me, she seemed like an intelligent, warm and
trustworthy person.  She related her experiences with clarity and
calmness, without sensational embellishment. Her motivations in
contacting UFOICQ seem to be simply that, as she indicated, she
wished to tell her story to people who knew something about the
paranormal, would not judge her negatively in the light of her
disclosures, and would also be willing to share some of their own
personal experiences. At the conclusion of the interview, Aurora
said we would be welcome to investigate the incidents that were
still occurring at her house if we wished. We indicated that we
would happy for the opportunity to do so.


Sources for this issue:

Barry Taylor, PO Box 1157, Grafton, NSW 2460 UFOICQ, PO Box 805,
Springwood, QLD 4127 Paradox, PO Box 255, Nowra, NSW 2541






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 3

                         Pilot Saw UFO 20 Years Ago

From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose)
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 07:10:38 +0200
Fwd Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 21:13:38 -0400
Subject: Pilot Saw UFO 20 Years Ago

AFP story. URL:

http://www.herald.com:80/americas/digdocs/065985.htm

Stig

*******


Published Tuesday, June 2, 1998, in the Miami Herald

Pilot: Saw UFO 20 years ago

BUENOS AIRES, Argentina -- (AFP) -- A pilot has claimed he flew near an
unidentified flying object 20 years ago but did not tell anyone until
now for fear of being considered mad, the DyN news agency said Monday.

Aldo Mastice, who flies for a regional airline, said he was flying from
Buenos Aires to Neuquen at midnight two decades ago when an object as
long as a bus flew over his plane.

The object, which "crossed our route on a south to north course,'' was
"illuminated, but it was as if the light was part of the object,'' the
pilot explained.

Authorities at Ezeiza International Airport here said that no other
traffic was in the area at that time except a plane whose position had
already been identified.

Mastice said that at the time he contacted the pilot of the other plane
and that both agreed to "keep their mouths shut.''


Copyright =A9 1998 The Miami Herald


Getting in touch with HERALDlink







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 3

                               Re: UFO Burnout

From: bruce maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 00:53:28 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 21:12:25 -0400
Subject: Re: UFO Burnout


>From: millpond@idirect.com [Jacquie Cosford]
>Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 12:41:18 -0400
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO Burnout [was: Area 51 Still Operational]

>>Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 14:23:10 +0100
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: "John Cussen (CMG UK Limited)" <john.cussen@cmgplc.com>
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Skywatch: Area 51 Still Operational


>>Dear All,

>>Sorry to sound down about this but quite frankly I'm reaching a
>point of despair and disillusionment about this whole subject
.>lately, and I need something to get me going again.  This message
>is really an impassioned plea from someone who has lost his way,
>>so please, if you can, understand and help me?

>This is the first time I've posted here, so greetings to you all!

<snip>

>Soooo, I at least have a distant memory of a strange event and
>keep hoping for its return, if for no other purpose than to have
>someone else clarify my sighting.

Nothing like seeing to help with believing!

>I'm becoming bored with the same repetitive shows, the same
>interviews and information. Most of all, I'm disheartened by the
>disinformation out there and the irresponsibility of the media.
>I'm speaking here of a repeatedly aired show about the Lake
>County abduction of an entire family. It's a hoax.

>Let's see some real proof that aliens are visiting our
>planet.....we ARE ready!

>Best wishes,
>Jacquie

Years ago there were so few shows on the UFO subject that there
was no possibility for the "general practitioner" to get bored.
Nowadays we have an "embarrassment of riches" (phrase invented
by Dr. J Allen Hynek some 20 years ago to describe the large
number and wide variety  of UFO sightings), so people get "bored"
and want "real proof that aliens are visiting our planet."

That brings to mind two thoughts:

1)  investigation of sightings can be frustrating and irritating
as well as intriguing and stimulating and educational, but rarely
if ever boring (oh yes, some obvious mistakes or hoaxes are
"boring).

2)  Are you sure anyone REALLY wants to know the answer.... or
perhaps I should say, are you sure anyone is PREPARED for the
answer?   I suppose some are, or think they are, but the
changes...they will be many....if the answer turns out to be what
we THINK it is (Them, ET's, Other Intelligences).  The impact on
society will be far reaching and will have fast and slow
components of change.

You should have been at Fright Night during the Mid Atlantic
MUFON Symposium last month..  You'd would have been given plenty
of non-boring things to think about!






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 3

                  Re: UFOs and Grassroot Action: What next?

From: RGates8254@aol.com [Robert Gates]
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 00:15:35 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 21:08:06 -0400
Subject: Re: UFOs and Grassroot Action: What next?


>From: MDJ50@webtv.net (Mike Jamieson)
>Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 07:57:53 -0700
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: UFOs and Grassroot Action: What next?

>For over fifty years the UFO mystery has been an object of
>occasional public attention.  And though UFOs have become a very
>popular theme in entertainment, the issue has not received the
>type of serious attention from journalists, scientists and
>political leaders that is necessary for developing an
>understanding of this important matter.

It never will receive the attention that people in the UFO
community think it should.

This is true in most every field of science.  Why should the UFO
field be any different?

>The idea (and name) of Operation Right to Know manifested in the
>fall of 1991 when Ed Komarek and I began planning for our first
>event, an educational display at the White House ellipse for a
>week in March 1992.

>People began responding to the idea of ORTK and in July 1993 we
>held a demonstration and rally at the White House, an event many
>of you may remember.  ORTK events followed at the Pentagon, GAO,
>in Chicago, in Los Angeles, in London and elsewhere with fair to
>good press coverage (though local DC tv ridiculed us, causing us
>to turn down a morning after interview).

>But with all that, no mass movement has arisen to fight UFO secrecy (no
>where near it).  Given this atmosphere, ORTK organizers are wondering,
>what's next?

Its called people don't care as long as the economy is perceived
as being good, and they can indulge in beer and monday night
football.

As part of the impeachment of Nixon it was discovered that his
aide Charles Colson had ONE thats right O-N-E only FBI file.  The
Clinton Whitehouse had over 900.  The american public as a whole
said we don't care.

I think the "I don't care" attitude has spilled over into
anything connected with government which includes the UFO
coverup.

>Of course, we have announced our plans for a demonstration at the
>White House (for July 1999).  But it's hard to argue with some of
>the points raised so far in response to those plans.  Therefore,
>this posting is presented for the purpose of soliciting people"s
>thoughts re.: (1) alternative forms of action (other than
>conventional demonstrations; (2) alternative settings (other than
>White House); and (3) message content.

The only time the American public is going to care is if we have
sightings flaps and waves like 52, 57, 66, 67, 73, AND the press
gives it massive amounts of coverage, which leads to people
calling the white house and Congress demanding that something
should be done.  Then you will get the attention of the policy
makers.

Said in another way, people as a whole don't care about incoming
asterioids, BUT if the press reported that one was inbound and
going to impact in a month, two or three, you would see so much
groundswell and demands that something be done it would blow your
mind.

As long as the American public is happy/content with status quo,
they are not going to care an iotta about UFOs, ET, and
otherwise.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 3

                             Re: A New Approach?

From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net>
Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 23:10:52 -0700
Fwd Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 21:19:14 -0400
Subject: Re: A New Approach?

William Hand wrote:

> From: ufotruth@ix.netcom.com [William Hand]
> Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 07:43:38 -0500 (CDT)
> To: updates@globalserve.net
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: A New Approach?

> >I see that ORTK is planning a new hundred person march on
> >Washington to demand release of UFO information.

> Which I fully support and think is a good idea.

<snip>

Don't mistake my cynical view for criticism.  I applaud all
efforts; but, they have proved ineffective.  When one approach
does not work, we should try walking around the wall instead of
banging our heads against it.

<snip>

> Remember all we need is ONE tiny
> admission about one UFO crash, mass sighting, UFO landing,
> or something similar to get a crack in the coverup that we
> can force open.

I don't think any such admission could be considered "tiny".  I
also doubt that cracking a coverup will happen without the
support of the public.  I simply say that the time is right for a
movement; but, instead of trying to force an admission of guilt
and ask them to say "Yep, we lied to you," we're more likely to
make them explain what the hell is going on today.  I think we
need to ask for a new Bluebook. Make the Air Force accountable
for all unknown sightings by the public. After all, what the do
they have to do in this post-cold-war era anyway?  How can we
allow them to get away with those "flare" explanations on the
Phoenix sightings?  We should rally behind any public figure who
is willing to support a demand for explanations for those things
which are happening NOW.  I sent Barwood a campaign contribution.
How many on this list did?

> >How can we demand that the powers that be disclose that which
> >they have eternally claimed does not exist?

> We can demand it very easily. Be trying to get congressional
> hearings, by protesting outside of the White House, by taking
> government/military agencies to court, and by other methods. If
> we keep on demanding for long enough then the truth will come
> out sooner or later and hopefully it will be sooner.

Agreed.  BUT!  We're less likely to get explanations for
something which happened fifty years ago than that which is
happening now.  We're an instant gratification society.  Sure,
many are curious about Roswell, but how many will write their
congressperson about it?  You know what I think we need?  I think
we need to pool our resources and hire a Public Relations firm.
And we need to act on current events.

<snip>

> Whether they want to disclose the info or not we have a RIGHT
> to any and all UFO/ET information that our government and/or
> military has. PERIOD. The public has a RIGHT to it and we
> should keep on DEMANDING it.

I'm not too sure about this.  But, I am sure that we have the
right to ask our military to assure our safety.  I think it's
high time they prove to us that they are doing just that.

> Once the public knows the FULL TRUTH about our government and
> military's interaction with UFOs/ETs in the past then trust me
> the public will MAKE SURE that the government/military starts
> doing its job and telling us the FULL TRUTH about every single
> new UFO/ET incident, sighting, video, etc.

They can do this without past disclosures.  If you've lived in a
military family, you know that you don't tread on the graves of
your heros and heroines.

<snip>

> Those in power should do their jobs and make sure that the public
> who pays for their meals, food, cars, cloths, and homes knows the
> FULL TRUTH about UFOs/ETs and every other important issue facing
> this nation!

William, on this we agree completely.

<snip>

> But either way the government has a DUTY to tell us the full
> truth whether the aliens are evil, horrible, bad, family
> oriented, Christian, Nazi, nice, kind, or benign.

Doctors used to hide a diagnosis of cancer from their patients.
Our society has matured to the point that we can handle the
truth.  I don't think our military/government has recognized our
growth.

<snip>

> But really I just think we need to keep on pressuing for ALL
> info from the government/military. Past, Present, and any
> info they get in the future.

I won't argue with that.  However, getting current information is
easier that forcing an admission of deception.  Indeed, gaining
the former will result in the latter if indeed there was a
coverup at Roswell.

Warmest Regards,
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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 3

                              Re: Alien Baloney

From: bruce maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 00:53:22 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 21:09:45 -0400
Subject: Re: Alien Baloney


>From: SGBList2@aol.com [Stephen G. Bassett]
>Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 19:39:33 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Alien Baloney

  =A0
>>  Alien Baloney

>>  A local podiatrist says he's been surgically removing strange
>>  objects from people who think they were implanted by space
>>  aliens. But there are a few holes in his story

>>  By Skylaire Alfvegren
>>     Kalynn Campbell

________________________________


>As formal disclosure draws near it is comforting to know that
>scribes like Skylaire Alfvegren are lining up to ensure that Tony
>Ortega is not going to be all alone in the journalism jackass
>hall of fame.

SB

There never was any possibility that Ortega would be the only J.
J. in the "hall of fame." There are already numerous individuals
who have proven themselves worthy of the  J.J. Award (JJA)






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 3

                             Re: A New Approach?

From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net>
Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 22:41:29 -0700
Fwd Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 21:15:11 -0400
Subject: Re: A New Approach?

Diane Lovett wrote:

> From: RAMBLD@worldnet.att.net [Diane Lovett]
> Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 10:27:01 +0000
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: A New Approach?

<snip>

> The whole "the public would panic if the
> truth came out" kind of thinking that I never had any respect for
> before.

I have a good friend and coworker whose wife is a fundamentalist
minister.  She has forbidden the discussion of ET topics in their
home (including the bugs in the Mars rock) saying that these
certainly do exist -- as Satan's demons.  I'm not sure she would
panic at a public disclosure; but, it would confirm to her that
the government is in the grips of the devil.  (She could be
right!)

<snip>

> We just might have a
> bit more success if we focus on the present rather than the
> past.

You got the point precisely.  Those (in the gov't) who know, will
probably never tell; and, those who don't know might be
influenced to act on public opinion.  Public uproar caused the
CIA to act in 1952 with the overflights of Washington.  However,
in this post-Watergate world, a coverup will be less tasteful to
the influential than it was then.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 3

                             Re: Sarah McClendon

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 02:39:24 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 21:21:31 -0400
Subject: Re: Sarah McClendon

>From: RAMBLD@worldnet.att.net [Diane Lovett]
>Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 10:47:51 +0000
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Sarah McClendon


>> Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 01:07:29 -0500
>> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>> From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
>> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Sarah McClendon

>> Hi Diane,

>> If you have access to her you might want to point her at
>> Jan and Project 1947! They have government documents
>> galore and I'm sure she'd be interested in knowing about
>> their contents. Project 1947 is one of the few ongoing
>> research endeavors that -should be- better known and
>> supported by all.

>Hi John,

>I don't have any special access to Sarah, but she is very
>accessible and serious about looking into things. I am compiling
>a list of folks that I personally would like her to talk to or
>update herself on, and will include Project 1947 as well. I would
>love to see her get agressive with Clinton at the next press
>conference, armed with the things she has learned now!

>Diane


Hi Diane,

You wrote:

>I would love to see her get agressive with Clinton at the next press
>conference, armed with the things she has learned now!

Ya know, Bubba may just go for an engaging issue like this right
now! Lord knows he's desperately seeking a way to distract the
publics attention from the other "Starr problems" he's currently
dealing with! <VBG>

Peace,

John 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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 3

             Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 03:17:26 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 21:24:33 -0400
Subject: Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force

>From: ufotruth@ix.netcom.com [William Hand]
>Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 07:48:14 -0500 (CDT)
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force

>>Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 01:15:44 -0500
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: John <jvif@spacelab.net>
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force
>> General


>>Hi All,

>>Stan, Kevin (or anyone else on the list who has researched the
>>Roswell case) is this new photo enlargement development
>>anything that we can/should get excited about?
>>John Velez

William responds:

>It is just more bull. They are trying to claim that the weather
>balloon Junk that Ramey showed in his office to the press was the
>real debris found days earlier that was mistaken as debris from a
>flying disk.

Unless I misread the post they claim that the enlargements show
the "I-beam(s)" that Maj.Marcel had mentioned with the "bas
relief" raised characters showing on them. The post also mentions
the presence of "plastic" or a plastic like material which did
not exist in 1947. That's why I was asking guys like Kevin and
Stan to comment. I'm curious if it's more "smoke" or "smoking
gun."

And BTW Bill, it hasn't (yet) been determined that (any disc)
terrestrial or otherwise crashed at Roswell! It's what we're all
trying to determine.

>Well, there is NO WAY that any military officer, or
>even a child, could mistake the burnt weather balloon JUNK in
>Ramey's office as debris from a crashed flying disk. It is just
>IMPOSSIBLE.

Yer making some mighty big assumptions here.

>It does not matter how much they zoom the images it will
>only show more details of the fake weather balloon junk
>that let the press photograph after he had the REAL
>ET debris taken out.

Were you there? You sound so certain about the sequence of
events. ET's, saucer debris, again you make huge "assumptions."
Let's give this photo biz a good going over and a chance to be
checked out thoroghly before you hit the streets chanting,
"They've landed!" <G>

No-one (more than I) would like to see some "proof" that it's
ET's and saucers, but I'm not going to abandon/lose my common
sense and ability to apply a little critical thinking in the
process. I (think/believe) that we're dealing with an
extraterrestrial force/agent - but that's just "my belief."
No-one knows for sure with any degree of certainty. Not even you
Mr Hand.

I'd still like to hear Stans' estimation of these new photo
enlargements. We've already heard what Kevin thinks of the
photographer and his testimony. Which was pretty compelling stuff
Mr Randle! Thank you for posting it.

Peace,

John 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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 3

                          In Memorium - Ralph Noyes

From: Graham William Birdsall <106151.1150@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 08:25:49 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 21:45:36 -0400
Subject: In Memorium - Ralph Noyes

Dear Colleagues,

I regret to announce that after a fall at his home, Ralph Noyes
died on 24 May.

Ralph Noyes had a distinguished career with the Ministry of
Defence, but will best be remembered for his role as the former
head of the MoDs 'UFO desk', DS8 (Defence Staff 8).

Noyes provided numerous researchers with invaluable comment and
information upon retirement in 1977, and will be sadly missed by
all those who knew him.

An obituary of Ralph Noyes is being prepared by Timothy Good,
whom he regarded as a close friend, and will appear in the
July/August '98 issue of UFO Magazine.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 3

                            Alfred's Odd Ode #250

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 06:39:05 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 21:25:44 -0400
Subject: Alfred's Odd Ode #250

Apology to MW #250 (For June 3, 1998)

I'll have my protestation on the dying of the light. My own I've
yet to learn, my friend, in the coming of a fearful night. But
where we throw ourselves too forcefully into gods we've
manufactured, we erode communication, and are rendered, smote,
and fractured!

Tolerate the hoaxist and _encourage_ the behavior that will
deepen your confusion and distress. Make a hoax a crime, then --
a disturbance of the peace. What's left, then, is the _evidence_,
and we put it to the test!

But claims beyond the *ordinary* are requiring greater *proof*?
This is what you hide behind to stay contrived -- aloof! This is
not the way to check the merits of a claim! This is pseudo
rule-ishness! It corrodes and rots your brain. This is not a
metric that you use to measure merit! This is mere red herring --
a prevaricating carrot! On its face it *sounds* a good rule, but
it's lacking all the guidance that a paradigm must have for _use_
-- validity, reliance. _Who_ decides the magnitude of the *proof*
that's needed then? Who of us decides enough -- the evidence
that's in? Who of us will make the choice to say enough's enough
-- all I need is me, my friend, and I call my culture's bluff!

How can all these good folk be recounting all these tales -- of
abduction, or their sightings, in such similar detail? Explain to
me the footage, which I have in my possession, that I've looked
at very closely -- it _provokes_ concerned obsession! What about
these lights that flash, then drift across the cloudless sky --
nothing like I've seen before with open mind, or well trained
eye. And I was raised by scientists, and I bought into their
reason -- the scientific method (!), else fell short, and out of
season. And the little that they reasoned that they had not
figured out <g>, they left to just one jealous God we _won't_
know much about!!!

But I have come to find there's _more_ than culture's letting on
-- that science, all alone, is not _enough_ to carry on. That
God's interpretation by a scurrilous elite is the glue that keeps
us mired in continuous defeat! I've discovered that our systems
are to keep a status quo that the landed better live with while
they shovel us with snow!

Autonomy is here at hand, of that you can be sure! The power
found is limitless; O'leary's seen the cure! One fell swoop (!)
you're off the meter, and you're standing on your own, just think
what you can _now_ give back -- _respect_ is on the PHONE. The
man is not the man alone, he knows he'd come to find. That's why
he keeps you guessing, keeps you stupid -- keeps you blind!


Lehmberg@snowhill.com

I point my finger -- _knowing_ I point three back at myself!
Voltaire and Mill were dead on right, and everybody knows it --
for a little more of the ol' broad brushed hyperbole.

I wonder what they saw in _their_ skies. My Thanks to Jean Van
Gemert for the thought in the third paragraph.

Restore John Ford.


--
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.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 3

             Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force

From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 08:00:33 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 21:43:04 -0400
Subject: Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force

>From: ufotruth@ix.netcom.com [William Hand]
>Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 07:48:14 -0500 (CDT)
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force

>>Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 01:15:44 -0500
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: John <jvif@spacelab.net>
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force
>> General


>>Hi All,

>>Stan, Kevin (or anyone else on the list who has researched the
>>Roswell case) is this new photo enlargement development
>>anything that we can/should get excited about?

>It is just more bull. They are trying to claim that the weather
>balloon Junk that Ramey showed in his office to the press was the
>real debris found days earlier that was mistaken as debris from a
>flying disk. Well, there is NO WAY that any military officer, or
>even a child, could mistake the burnt weather balloon JUNK in
>Ramey's office as debris from a crashed flying disk. It is just
>IMPOSSIBLE.

>It does not matter how much they zoom the images it will
>only show more details of the fake weather balloon junk
>that let the press photograph after he had the REAL
>ET debris taken out.

>Best Regards,
>William


William,

You would be well advised to wait a bit on this one.  Copies of
the photos are ordered and will be analyzed by some
well-qualified people.

If there really are I-beams with heiroglyphs on them among the
junk on Ramey's office floor than we have a bigger mystery than
before.  We know that no such thing was part of Mogul, nor of any
other balloon.

I'm waiting for my own copies of the photos before reaching any
conclusions.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 3

               Re: Sheffield Incident Debunking the Debunkers

From: AlienHype1@aol.com [Max Burns]
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 07:26:07 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 21:41:10 -0400
Subject: Re: Sheffield Incident Debunking the Debunkers


As everyone is aware im sure about the ongoing disagreement
between Mr David Clark (Bufora Press Officer) and myself
regarding the chain of events on the 24th march 1997, over the
City of Sheffield and the Peak district.

And the Latest comments from Mr Clark and his playgroup that I
have Fabricated or twisted what Mr Jonathan Dagenhart said to me
when I interviewed him (Mr Dagenhart is a member of the RAF)

For your information Mr Jonathan Degenhart

The conversation went like this. He concented to being recorded.(edited text)

Burns           Hell there

Dagenhart       Hello

Burns           So what happened that night? You'd been the Wales...

Dagenhart       Well we'd been to Wales, Um on the way home,
              Um driving down Snake Pass and all of a
              sudden just coming up to the viaduct this
              man stepped out in front of us, flagged us down
                                                                 so we stopped,
pulled over I was in the front of
              the minibus with the driver and another passenger
              so I wound my window down and he started speaking
              to us he said I've got to get to Sheffield,
              Sheffield and that's basically all he said.

Burns           Did he look in shock?

Dagenhart       Yer he didn't seem to really know which way
              Sheffield was or what he was doing or anything
              and the thing is I said at the time when I rang
              the police he smelled of diesel fuel, well since
              then I've joined the airforce and I'm now
              working for the airforce and it wasn't diesel
              fuel it was aviation fuel that he'd got on him.

Burns           Ah absolutely superb

Dagenhart       and I will put my money on that

Burns           You work for the airforce

Dagenhart       I work for the Royal Air Force

Burns           Where do you work? as a civilian for the airforce

Dagenhart       No I actually work for the airforce I am paid by the air force

Burns           Really can I ask you what job you do?

Dagenhart       I'm a jet engine specialist

Burns           A jet engine specialist

Dagenhart       Yes

Burns           And where do you work?

Dagenhart       At the moment I'm down in Wolverhampton but in
             July I'm moving up to Lock (unintelligable) in Scotland

Burns           And he didn't know where he was?

Dagenhart       No

Burns           Yer and there were no vehicles in the area

Dagenhart       There was nothing.

Burns           Do you remember anything else was his English good

Dagenhart       No it wasn't it was very poor very poor.

Burns           And it was definitely aviation fuel

Dagenhart       yes

Burns           and you can substantiate that because you now work
              for the Royal Air Force on jet engines you now what
              aviation fuel smells like
Dagenhart       yes

Burns           Yer is there anything else you can tell me about
              that night where on Ladybower was he?

Dagenhart       um

Burns           before you go over it or...

Dagenhart       Yer you know as you're coming from snake pass end

Burns           Yes

Dagenhart       You come up on to the Ladybower the smaller of the
              two viaducts going straight on to Sheffield

Burns           And he really didn't know where he was going

Dagenhart       He didn't know where he was going it looked like he
              just walked off a hill

Burns           Really did he have any mud or anything on him.
              Could you tell was his clothing dirty

Dagenhart       I couldn't tell

Burns           But as you work for the Royal Air Force on jet
              engines your absolutely 100% certain that it was
              aviation fuel not diesel

Dagenhart       yes

Burns              I might contact you again if that's OK

Dagenhart       Yes well this is my parents number and I'm hardly ever here

Burns           Well I'll leave a message for you

Dagenhart       yes

Burns           Now in my report do you ant me to change your name keep you anon
ymous

Dagenhart       To be honest I don't care

Burns           Thanks very much Jonathan

Dagenhart       You're welcome

Dagenhart       Yer I will

Burns           Thanks mate

Dagenhart       OK

Burns           Bye

Dagenhart       Bye

Does this sound like a conversation with someone who I have
supposed  to have twisted what he's said It is without doubt that
the military are involved in a large cover up regarding the
attempted interception of the triangle, including conspriacy, the
placement of cover stories and debunking of witnesses, however
with this damming evidence from a member of Royal Air Force who
encountered the pilot or the co-pilot on Snake Pass about an hour
after the explosions occurred, stinking of aviation fuel within
three miles of Howden Moors, and as his job with the Air Force is
as a jet engine specialist, this witness is 100% certain that he
smelled aviation fuel on the man he encountered while on a mini
bus on the 24th March 1997.

This I feel places the M.O.D in a difficult situation, as I have
checked with all local filling stations and they assure me that
there is not much call for aviation fuel in the Peak District and
if there was, most people would put the fuel in a plane and not
take to wearing fuel as a fashion item while out walking.

Ohh and there's more

Update: Mr Jonathan Dagenhart

Telephoned me on the 12th of May at approx 11.30 and sounding
very flustered with a shaky voice informed me that I had twisted
what he said, and he no longer wanted to have his name put to his
original statement. He has also spoken with Mr Phil Taylor at the
News of the World informing him that he was going to lose his job
over his statement that he made to myself.

May I add that Mr Dagenhart is under the employ of the RAF where
he works on jet engines and when I questioned him about who had
spoken with him about this he just said a source I further
questioned him as to whether it was his employer the RAF who had
silenced him, and he replied that he could not say, on that he
ended the conversation and was very upset.

As far as I am concerned this proves the case, why would the RAF
be hauling an engineer over the hot coals like this to the point
of him telling a national news reporter that he was going to lose
his job, and trying to imply that I have twisted what he said,
bearing in mind that he made the comment about me twisting what
he had said before it has been in print anywhere, and he verified
the content of the taped transcript of our conversation to Mr
Mike Jarvis reporter for the News of The World in full and made
his statements freely and without prompting and when asked did he
want to remain anonamous he replied Im not bothered all of which
is on tape and can be cross verified by Mike Jarvis at the News
of The World.

Which I hope you all must agree for someone to turn around from
being not bothered to Im going to lose my job, proves my case
even more, why would the Militiary be pressurising a member of
there workforce to retract a statement about somthing they claim
has not occured.

I iterate to you all I have the Dagenhart tape and he first of
all made all comments freely and without promting and this
pivotal piece of evidence has been copied and sent to the four
corners of the planet.

The RAF are trying to make someone retract a statement about
something that they claim never happened anyway WHY ?

So Now Will you all stop listening to this group of distracters /
debunkers not sceptics, theres the evidence its put up or shut
time from me so I have released the taped interview to proove
once and for all who the liars are in the scenario, regarding the
Sheffield Flying triangle incident.Undisputable verafiable taped
testimony from a member of the RAF, can be heard and downloaded
at these two sites.

http://www.skipnet.com/~visitations/sheffield/
http://www.pufori.org/articles/sheffield/index_nf.htm

The report can also be read at
http://www.sightings.com

I will be the guest speaker on the IRC Undernet at Visitations
6th June 7pm Pacific  3.00am UK

To Answer your questions.. be there and here the truth

Hope this Finally clears things up

Max Burns










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 3

                             Re: Sarah McClendon

From: Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith]
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 18:53:27 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 22:23:01 -0400
Subject: Re: Sarah McClendon

With the compliments of the Duke of Mendoza:

>From: MDJ50@webtv.net (Mike Jamieson)
>Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 15:58:06 -0700
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: Sarah McClendon

>>Date: Monday, June 1, 1998 23:41:14 -0500CDT
>>To: UFOUpDates--Toronto <updates@globalserve.net
>>From: Dennis <stacy@texas.net
>>Re: Sarah McClendon

>>Corso is a goddam liar.

>Would Mr. Stacy please itemize the facts that form the
>basis for his belief that Col Corso is a ...... ....?

How about: his book? (That it exists is at least a fact, albeit
an improbable one.)

It's up to Corso to substantiate his claims. And before someone
pops up with it, signing an affidavit don't count for squat.
Corso may not even know he's lying. (Ask Glenn Dennis about
that.) But if Corso does know, I have to wonder: whatever
happened to the concept of honor in the US officer corps?

Meanwhile, I pump Dennis's hand for stating the obvious within
earshot of a public that habitually goes into paroxysms at
statements of the obvious, e.g. '"Roswell" and its alien works
are a mountain of crap', and even at slightly less obvious
suggestions, e.g. 'Kenneth Arnold probably saw pelicans'.

I'd rather have the Sasquatch in my foxhole than a goddam liar,
no matter how many goddam medals he's got.

Yrs &c
Prosector D. Mortuarian
Very Fine Carver









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 3

               UK.UFO.NW -IRC- guest Philippe Piet van Putten

From: United Kingdom UFO Network <ufo@holodeck.demon.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 19:15:37 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 22:18:56 -0400
Subject: UK.UFO.NW -IRC- guest Philippe Piet van Putten

UNITED KINGDOM UFO NETWORK

Saturday 6th June 1998

United Kingdom UFO Network special guest:

Philippe Piet van Putten

Philippe will be answering your questions live in a moderated
meeting starting at 11pm (UK time) Saturday 6th June 1998.

Philippe will be connecting from Sao Paulo (the 3rd largest city
in the world) in Brazil.

Full connection details at foot of mail.

-- BIOGRAPHY --

Born in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, on february 21, 1959;

Obtained a Bachelor Degree (BA) in Social Communications
from the Graduate College of Advertising and Marketing (ESPM)
in 1986.

Director of the Brazilian Academy of Parasciences (ABP) and
National Director for Picard UFO Research International
(PUFORI).

Editor of the bimonthly bulletin Aerospatial Phenomena (entering its
4th year of publication).

Former member of APRO, NICAP, CUFOS and MUFON.

Finishing an Encyclopedia of UFOs and Anomalous Aerospatial
Phenomena (to be released in the next few months).

Creator of the modern scientific-spiritualism (a parascience
devoted to the study of metaconsciousness and religious
experience).

Has traveled promoting scientific-spiritualism, UFOlogy,
parapsychology and other parasciences (India, Switzerland,
England, USA, France etc).

Some addional info can be found within WUFOR web site
http://www.fortunecity.com/tattooine/swampthing/20/

---

If you are using one of the dedicated IRC programs such as the
excellent MIRC available free from: http://www.mirc.co.uk/ 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.

MIRC is probably the best IRC program there is and it's free. To
download MIRC for Win95 or Win 3.1/3.11 fully configured for
connection goto:

http://www.holodeck.demon.co.uk

Select the 'Download' button.

To connect to the IRC channel using your java compatible web
browser goto:

http://www.holodeck.demon.co.uk
http://www.crowman.demon.co.uk
http://www.tedric.demon.co.uk

-Chatnet Servers-

LosAngeles.CA.US.ChatNet.Org
Pocatello.ID.US.ChatNet.Org
Chelmsford.MA.US.ChatNet.Org
Louisville.KY.US.ChatNet.Org
Portland.OR.US.Chatnet.Org
SLC.UT.US.ChatNet.Org
k9.chatnet.org
Tupelo.MS.US.Chatnet.Org
RockHill.SC.US.ChatNet.Org
StLouis.MO.US.Chatnet.Org
Pensacola.FL.US.ChatNet.org
Chicago.IL.US.ChatNet.Org
Skien.NO.EU.ChatNet.Org
London.UK.EU.ChatNet.Org
Dayton.OH.US.ChatNet.Org
Scranton.PA.US.ChatNet.Org
SF.CA.US.ChatNet.Org
ChatWorld.ChatNet.Org
WalnutCreek.CA.US.ChatNet.Org

Times of the meeting will vary depending on your part of the
world. We advise you to check for equivalent UK times.


We look forward to seeing you there.

--------------------------------
United Kingdom UFO Network
ufo@holodeck.demon.co.uk
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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 3

                             Re: Sarah McClendon

From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 18:57:28 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 22:24:48 -0400
Subject: Re: Sarah McClendon

>From: MDJ50@webtv.net (Mike Jamieson)
>Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 15:58:06 -0700
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: Sarah McClendon

>>Date: Monday, June 1, 1998 23:41:14 -0500CDT
>>To: UFOUpDates--Toronto <updates@globalserve.net
>>From: Dennis <stacy@texas.net
>>Re: Sarah McClendon


>>Corso is a goddam liar.

>Would Mr. Stacy please itemize the facts that form the basis for
>his belief that Col Corso is a ...... ....?


No, I won't itemize them all...just in case they sue. (One can
only hope.) Some, however, are mentioned in my response to Mr.
William, he-of-the-capital-letters, that I just posted.

If you want a rough estimate, though, pick up a copy of The Day
After Roswell and choose a page at random. Chances are it will
contain at least one royal whopper. Cor$so, bless his
capitalistic soul, can't even get the number of alien fingers
right. What was it, Phil, six or four? Why don't you just flip a
coin and then tell us clueless minions the truth? You do know
what the truth is, don't you?

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 3

             Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force

From: RGates8254@aol.com [Robert Gates]
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 20:29:47 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 22:43:28 -0400
Subject: Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force


>From: KRandle993@aol.com [Kevin Randle]
>Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 12:58:31 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears
>                         Air Force General

>Hi Errol and all -

>I thought since this stuff keeps appearing, that an opposing
>point of view might be amusing.

>>From: JBONJO@aol.com [James Bond Johnson]
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 00:38:19 EDT
>>Subject: New High Tech Examination of Old Roswell Photos
>>          Clears Air Force General of Hoax

In essence he told one story on tape in 1989 (before he was well
known in the UFO side of life) THEN after almost 9 years of being
exposed to various Roswell tales storys, hype, theories and
otherwise, he is now telling a different story as he has become
more known.

This is very similar to other Roswell witnesses who fingered "the
crash site" as being in one place, then when fame/money/or other
reasons come along they change their story to fit the current
situtation. As I recall we are up to 5-7 "this is the crash
site..." locations around Roswell.

Many people don't realize that President's and military officers
have routinely denied the existance of the stealth fighter right
up until it was declassified,  and not been a hoaxer or liar
because the classification/security laws hold them to a higher
level of accountability then normal people.

Since we know that people in the Pentagon ordered Ramey not to
discuss, talk about or otherwise and to give a cover story to the
press , Ramey could walk out to the reporters and claim it was a
kids kite and not be a hoaxer or liar, again because Ramey would
have been held to a higher accountability standard then a lay
person off the street.   His family should also understand this
principle as well.

The Clinton administration seems to operate under the theory that
what they say now and today is the truth.  Any recorded comments
that they made previous to today (especially the ones that
conflict with the current story) are explained away by saying "We
never said that"  or "Well our enemies are twisting the facts"
etc etc.

What I am interested in is  an honest explaination as to why Bond
said one thing on tape, why Bond is now denying ever saying it,
and why Bond is telling a different story.

I do make a couple of predictions and I hope I am wrong.

 1) These photos will be no  smoking gun one way or the other and or

 2) We will still be talking about them 3 years from now as we do
    on and off the MJ-12 documents, the alien autopsy film and
    other similar  and or

3) The skeptics will look at the blowups and claim "Well their it
   is proof that it was a balloon all the time.  and or 4) As for
   the so called symbols and writing, skeptics will probably make
   the case that this was on all sorts of balloon trains
   especially those mfg by the companys in question.

5) When Mr. Mogel himself Charles Moore sees the blowups,
   he will probably say "Yup, thats what I remember on balloon
   trains..."


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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 3

                         Re: New 'MJ-12' Documents?

From: "Stanton T. Friedman" <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 22:12:28 -0300
Fwd Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 22:41:52 -0400
Subject: Re: New 'MJ-12' Documents?

> From: RGates8254 <RGates8254@aol.com> [Robert Gates]
> Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 18:45:45 EDT
> To: updates@globalserve.net
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: New 'MJ-12' Documents?

> >  From: ufotruth@ix.netcom.com [William Hand]
> >  Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 15:02:08 -0500 (CDT)
> >  To: updates@globalserve.net
> >  Subject:  A DIRECT MESSAGE TO Serge Salvaille ABOUT THE NEW MJ12
> DOCUMENTS!!!

> >  >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> >  >From: "Serge Salvaille" <sergesa@connectmmic.net>
> >  >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: New 'MJ-12' Documents?
> >  >Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 11:08:15 +0600

> >  Serge Salvaille,

> >  There ARE NEW MJ12 documents! The authors of the book
> >  "ALIEN RAPTURE" are Edgar Rothschild Fouche' and Brad Steiger.
> >  Edgar Rothschild Fouche' had been in many black projects and
> >  classified projects for many years. After retiring from working
> >  for various government agencies he made a group of friends who
> >  had also worked in various black projects. They got together
> >  and talked several times about UFO/ET information, advanced
> >  technology, and black projects.

> >  He wanted to write a book about all of this information so he
> >  approached certain people in the military/government and asked
> >  them if he could write a book about it. They said he could but
> >  the book would have to be FICTION, he could not release any
> >  classified information that HE knew about personally, and
> >  the NAMES of the individuals would have to be changed.

> Let me get this right.  He approached people in the gov to write
> a book.  They said the book would have to be fiction and that he
> could not release any classified information he knew about
> personally.

> Apparently by inference it is OK to violate the numerous laws
> concerning the disclosure of classified information IF he did not
> know about it personally.

> That dog ain't going to hunt!!!!!!!

> >  So, to both prevent him from going to prison and to protect
> >  everyone who gave him information he wrote the book in a fiction
> >  format. (Just so you know I gathered all of this information
> >  while listening to Sightings on the Radio the other night
> >  in which he was interviewed).

> >  He recieved the MJ12 documents from one of his friends whose
> >  uncle (if I remember correctly) who was high up in the NSA,
> >  gave to him.

> So these alleged REAL documents came to him second handed, much
> like the original documents came to Bill Moore and Jamie
> Shandara.  The difference is he got them from an uncle in NSA,
> and Bill Moore got them via 35mm film from high level government
> intelligence officials.

> Bottom line is that they should be regarded as fiction until
> proven otherwise.

> Cheers,
> Robert

Sorry, the situation is not the same.

I spoke with Fouche and have read his manuscript. He told me his
associate retyped them so he doen't have even 2nd hand documents.
There are a number of strange changes from the Moore MJ-12
documents.. and certainly no research presented such as in my
book TOP SECRET/MAJIC and in my Final Report on Operation
Majestic 12 or iun Operation Majestic 12? YES. Long way to go on
these.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 3

                 UFO/9-1-1 Police Incident/pursuit: 12-14-94

From: "Kenny Young" <task@fuse.net>
Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 19:16:42 -0700
Fwd Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 22:54:35 -0400
Subject: UFO/9-1-1 Police Incident/pursuit: 12-14-94

This is a brief summation on the 9-1-1 dispatch tapes from the
December 14, 1994 Trumbull County Disturbance. A more exacting
transcript is being prepared. More information is available at
the web-site listed below.
______________________________________________________________

Notes: UFO/9-1-1 Police Incident, 12-14-94

An object was first visually observed at a treetop level before
midnight in the vicinity of Samson Drive and the Fifth Avenue
Extension. It was bluish-green with flames. Four calls were
placed to the dispatch office before midnight, and these calls
are not on the present tape. An additional call was placed to
WYTV Channel-33 news reporter 'Stacey.'

A unit (#998) is dispatched to Samson Drive to investigate.

At the point Unit #998 [Tobe Melero] views the object at close
range, it is now red, and illuminating the ground with a
tremendous red light "as bright as daylight." From all accounts,
the object was described as 'huge.' [Melero later stated that he
encountered an elderly man who was wandering in the roadway,
saying: "it was right above my house!" He also stated that when
he drew near to the object, he felt that it effected the
electronic instrumentation of his patrol cruiser]

Having reported his observation, other units are now dispatched
for backup and a call is placed to the airbase by the dispatcher.
There is no answer at the airbase, and a call is then placed to
the FAA tower, where the tower operator states to have nothing on
his radarscope within a 60-mile radius of Youngstown.

At this point, the unidentified aircraft departs from the Samson
Road area (is is not known the nature of departure whether it be
with path N, S, E or W, ascention, fade from view, etc).
Interestingly, Unit #998 advises that he was 'out of service' for
a duration to "gather his thoughts." The time is near 1:00 a.m.

The UFO is again reported when Unit #429 advises central dispatch
that an object is spotted to the east of the 9-1-1 center. The
dispatcher, eager to view the object, steps away to look for the
UFO as another person takes her place.

The object is said to be near Route 11, and several units from
different locations and directions triangulate its position from
areas near Kings Grave and Henheid. The object is now over an
empty field, and changes color from whitish red to a pulsating
greenish lavender.

The dispatcher returns, saying that she did not see the UFO. More
incoming radio traffic relevant to the UFO causes her to 'take a
break' where she plans to meet an officer who will pick her up
and take her to see it [During my 1996 interview with Royanne
Rudolph, she said that finally did see the lighted object, and it
resembled a 'red, rotating saucer'].

Through heavy radio traffic, several unspecified police units
converge upon the UFO and triangulate its position.

This documented triangulation of an aerial object from different
vantage points indicates to us that it is not a star, as the
object maintains a localized presence within a specific area (A
star cannot be triangulated from units approaching in different
directions). One unit claims that he is heading east to approach
the object, another unit advises that he is heading north to
approach the object.  A unit headed eastbound advised that the
object was 'southeast' of his location.

The object remains stationary for a duration over this empty
field prior to a departure path to the southeast, where it is
seen near an 84-Lumber hardware store. There it is described as a
structured object with an attachment or unspecified element
protruding from the top of it.

Every police department in the county now has the object under
observation, and many units are now pursuing the UFO from
different departments and localities.

Several units are maintaining the object under binocular
observation, and discern a 'parachute-like' structure attached to
the object. One unit tries to signal the object.

One officer, who is at the airbase, is also observing the object
from his vantage point. Present with him to view the UFO is a
security guard at the airbase.

At this point, "several" objects are suddenly under scrutiny by
law enforcement officials. This is announced rather cryptically,
as the officer states: "We have both of them under visual
observation, I think you'll know what I mean." It is not known if
the main object 'split' into several objects (a frequent element
reported in UFO sightings) or if additional objects were
generated elsewhere or 'arrived' on the scene.

One specific object, described as a 'white light,' appeared over
the airbase, where a police officer was present to report it.

Pursuit of these objects continued for some time, and it was
again stressed that all departments in the county were concerned
with the situation, and held the object(s) under visual
observation.

All objects ascended to a high elevation and appeared as stars in
the sky. As the objects were viewed at a high elevation, others
on the police force that did not place a close range observation
of the main object, while at its low elevation, assumed that
everyone else had mis-identified planets and shooting stars.

Some on the police force mused that stealth technology was
employed to negate radar detection, some speculated that they
weren't being told of a secret project from the airbase.

Toward the end of the event, jets were seen in the area, and one
officer believed they were military jets from the airbase
scrambled to engage the objects.

One officer refuted the 'planet' comment, but stated that there
were shooting stars visible. He stated that there were six
shooting stars in the same part of the sky that the UFO was seen
in.

One unit took exception to the remark that planets were mistaken
as UFOs, and he added: "What I saw was not a planet, it was
50-feet off the ground and lit up the whole area like daylight."

It is thought that the event ended around 6:00 a.m. from previous
discussions with officials involved, although a specific time is
not reflected on the tape.

A UFO sighting was reported on the previous evening, and also two
weeks earlier.

End of notes

Filed:
June 3, 1998
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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 3

             Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force

From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 17:25:10 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 22:21:11 -0400
Subject: Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force

>Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 19:36:18 -0300
>From: "Stanton T. Friedman" <fsphys@brunnet.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force

>> Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 08:52:21 -0400
>> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>> From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
>> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air
>>  Force   General

><snip>

>> Mark Center phoned yesterday and during our conversation told me
>> that the University of Texas had refused his request to post
>> copies of the photos on his web site.  Now, just as in the Santilli
>> case, we are stuck on a question of copyright.  The U of T is
>> claiming copyright to the photos because they have the negatives.
>> If James Bond Johnson was in the military when he took the photos,
>> then the U of T does not own copyright to the images themselves.
>> They are free to copyright any book, video, etc., in which they
>> make use of them, but the unaltered images should be in public
>> domain.

>> Bob Shell

>Bob the pictures were taken by an employee of the Fort Worth Star
>Telegram NOT by the government. Presumably that gave them the
>copyright.

>STF


Stan,

So you are telling me that James Bond Johnson was working for a
newspaper when he took these and not for the government?

I must have missed this somewhere along the way.  I thought he
was a military cameraman.  Sorry.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 4

                             Re: Sarah McClendon

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 23:07:34 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 01:23:02 -0400
Subject: Re: Sarah McClendon

>Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 11:31:17 -0400
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Sarah McClendon

>Hey Dennis,

>So you think Corso might not be telling the unvarnished truth,
>eh?

>Bob


Bob:

You know how it is? Sometimes you search and search for the right
words and they just don't come to you?


Thanks for putting it in a nutshell. That's what I meant to say
all along.

Meanwhile, we appreciate your tact and politeness in the matter.

Now, all we have to do is get the Cor$so/Birne$ duo to come down
on the side of truth, justice, and the American way. Just how
many fingers do the aliens actually have, anyway, three, four,
five or six? Or is that but a single, upraised middle digit I
see?

Hey, when you're trying to peddle a book, why should it matter?
Aliens trucked through Ft. Riley, Kansas, when all the other
witnesses have them flown to Wright-Pat? No problem! Roswell
debris languishing in a Pentagon file cabinet for 20 years,
gathering dust, until Mr. Superhero Cor$so arrives on the scene
and immediately sorts everything out, fending off the CIA with
one hand and winning the Cold War with the other in the process?
No problem!

And there are people out there who actually *believe* Cor$o's
crap?

I guess g-d miracles will never cease. Pardon my French.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 4

                             Re: Sarah McClendon

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 23:07:32 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 01:22:51 -0400
Subject: Re: Sarah McClendon

>From: KRandle993@aol.com [Kevin Randle]
>Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 11:47:40 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Sarah McClendon

>Hi Dennis and all -

>I'm not quite clear on your position on Cor$o.  Could you
>clarify?

>KRandle


Yes. I think he hasn't been completely truthful with us. I
apologize for not having made myself clearer earlier. Thanks for
bringing it to my attention.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 4

               Jazz Singer's True Account Of Extraterrestrial

From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose)
Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 06:43:28 +0200
Fwd Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 01:20:05 -0400
Subject: Jazz Singer's True Account Of Extraterrestrial

From: The New York Post June 3. URL:

http://www.nypostonline.com:80/060398/business/2272.htm


Stig


*******


BUSINESS
By MICHAEL SHAIN

<snipped>

Los Angeles singer Pamela Stonebrooke has upped the ante on
true-life, alien-abduction books.

Stonebrooke claims she had a sexual affair with a reptilian
something-or-other from outer space - and that she was the one
putting the moves on her alien captors.

More unusual than the singer's improbable tale of intergalactic
romance is that editors from at least three publishers bid for
book last week during a one-day auction.

Ballantine Books, a division of Random House, won and will
publish "Experiencer: A Jazz Singer's True Account of
Extraterrestrial Contact" next spring. The advance was said to be
about $100,000.

Far from being a "victim" in a hideous sexual encounter, "she
conquered her fear and carried the sexual action to the
reptilians," says the book proposal.

"She recounts this act of interspecies intercourse in a graphic,
no-holds-barred, tour de force description, unique in UFO
literature, replete with precise physical and emotional detail,
sensational without being sensationalistic," it says.

As far as proof of her amorous adventures, Stonebrooke shows
skeptics a series of marks on her leg, little scooped out patches
of skin - presumably because the aliens needed it to conduct
tests.

Several editors commented that Stonebrooke's height (she's a
six-footer) and Annie Lennox bleach-blonde hair cut will serve
her well on the TV talk-show circuit.

"She's hilariously funny too," says agent Sandra Martin , who
represents the singer Jewel . "She says: "Why would I make this
stuff up? It doesn't exactly help my singing career, does it?'"

Stonebrooke claims she has to remind herself constantly to keep
her legs well shaved. "People always want me to show them the
marks," she
says.

<snipped>


Copyright (c) 1998, N.Y.P. Holdings, Inc. All rights reserved.
Reproduction in whole or in part in any form or medium without express
written permission of the New York Post is prohibited.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 4

                      New Books On "Star Trek" Science

From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose)
Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 07:00:43 +0200
Fwd Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 01:22:08 -0400
Subject: New Books On "Star Trek" Science

From: The Sci-Fi Channel.

URL: http://www.scifi.com:80/pulp/sfecurrent/bookshelf.html


Stig


*******


Bookshelf


Two books - and four scientists - examine the factual underpinning of
Star Trek.


By Lawrence Tucker


Some TV shows are just _ shows. Despite Seinfeld's popularity, for
instance, no one has ever written a Seinfeld guide to job-hunting,
dating, or sex. Search high and low, you won't find The Homer Simpson
Diet or the Xena, Warrior Princess, Exercise Manual, or the Melrose
Place Good Grooming Guide-at least not yet. True, all of these series
have inspired their share of fan-oriented books, often modeled on The
Twilight Zone Companion, or else on the order of "What This Show Can
Teach You About Life." There is no dearth of X-Files novels,
biographies (pro and con) of Roseanne, or behind-the-scenes peeks at
shows like ER and Beverly Hills, 90210.

But no TV show, it's safe to say, has ever spawned as many books as
Star Trek. A fast-growing segment of this nonfiction universe-a sort of
subgenre of a subgenre of a subgenre-has examined the show's science
(Lawrence M. Krauss's The Physics of Star Trek), philosophy (The
Metaphysics of Star Trek by Richard Hanley; All I Really Need to Know I
Learned from Watching Star Trek by Dave Marinaccio; The Klingon Way: A
Warrior's Guide by Mark Okrand); language (a Klingon/English
dictionary, a traveler's phrasebook, and audiotaped courses in
"Conversational Klingon" and "Power Klingon," all authored or
coauthored by Okrand); mythologic implications (The Meaning of Star
Trek by Thomas Richards), management techniques (Make It So-Leadership
Lessons from Star Trek: The Next Generation by Wess Roberts and Bill
Ross); business ethics (The Ferengi Rules of Acquisition by Ira Steven
Behr); and nerd allure (The Joy of Trek: How to Enhance Your
Relationship with a Star Trek Fan by Sam Ramer).

-------

Life Signs: The Biology of Star Trek (HarperCollins, 204 pages,
$22.00), by the husband-and-wife team of Robert and Susan Jenkins,
approaches the series with the same mixture of skepticism, sympathy,
and hard scientific know-how that Professor Krauss brought to The
Physics of Star Trek; in fact, the authors-he's a geneticist, she's a
psychiatrist, and both are M.D.s-credit Krauss's book with inspiring
their own.

The game in books like these is to decide whether particular phenomena
depicted in the series are scientifically possible-or, as the Jenkinses
put it, "Is it possible even theoretically?" Most of the time, their
answer is yes. Salting their speculations with words like "probably"
and "likely" and "perhaps," they lean over backward to explain things
like synthehol (a Ferengi concoction that intoxicates like alcohol but
causes no hangovers, and whose effects can be instantly "shrugged off
whenever the situation calls for full alertness"); silicon-based life
forms like the burrowing, rock-dissolving Horta of Janus VI; and
mind-controlling parasites such as the ones infecting Starfleet
officials in The Next Generation episode "Conspiracy." ("Mosquitoes
bearing the malarial parasite," they point out, "behave differently
from noninfected mosquitoes. They develop an insatiable appetite -
frequently engorging themselves with so much blood that they cannot fly
away after they're finished.")

However, when it comes to things such as viruses the size of pillows
that float weightlessly in midair, Odo's effortless shape-shifting, and
Worf's ability, in the movie First Contact, to tie a tourniquet around
his leg in deep space, thereby remedying a rip in the foot of his
spacesuit, the authors are not buying. In fact, they relegate these and
other wonders to an amusing final chapter entitled "Where No One Will
Ever Go."

"When Odo takes the shape of a mouse," they remind us, "he might become
as small as a mouse, but he'll still weigh 180 pounds." As for Worf's
tourniquet, "Let's hope he tied it really tight," they note, "because
there's that vacuum-of-space thing. All the blood in his body would end
up in his foot, which would probably explode under the stress. Biology
can be messy!"

-------

Star Trek on the Brain: Alien Minds, Human Minds (W.H. Freeman, 235
pages, hardcover, $21.95), by two psychology professors, Robert Sekuler
and Randolph Blake, focuses on the emotional lives of the show's
characters, both human and nonhuman. As they explain near the start,
their narrative "runs a slalom course, weaving back and forth between
Star Trek on one side and contemporary understanding of mind and brain
on the other."

This strikes me as an accurate metaphor, but it also suggests why the
book, though intelligently written and refreshingly sober in style, is
a little less compelling than the ones on physics and biology: Rather
than asking, "Is what we're seeing scientifically possible?" it more or
less accepts the validity of whatever the series depicts. After all,
we're talking about characters' emotional behavior largely expressed
through conversation; one doesn't judge that on the same terms that one
judges, say, the behavior of a nebula or a virus. Instead, the book
reads as a series of essays on various aspects of psychology - grief,
humor, anger, sex, memory - illustrated with examples taken from the
series.

Sometimes their examples are delightful simply on their own, such as
the scene from the film Star Trek VII: Generations in which Data, who's
been trying to understand the strange human phenomenon called humor,
suddenly cries, "I get it! I get it!"

"You get what?" demands Geordi LaForge.

"When you said to Commander Riker, 'The clown can stay but the Ferengi
in the gorilla suit has to go.' During the Farpoint mission. We were on
the bridge. You told a joke. That was the punchline."

"Data, that was seven years ago."

"I know," says Data. "I just got it. Very funny."

And sometimes the examples from the series are marvelously apt, such as
the authors' illustration of "displaced aggression": a furious Worf
trying to control his temper as he hacks away at a slab of meat during
a high-level dinner with someone he detests.

Brain occasionally addresses some of the same material as Life Signs.
The Horta, for example-that "huge centipede-like creature" that lives
beneath the surface of Janus VI-appears here as well, illustrating how
imaginative empathy for a potential enemy can overcome our initial
impulse to destroy it. The creature has killed 50 Federation miners,
but the ever-rational Spock, mind-melding with it, learns that it is
the last of its kind and has simply been protecting its precious
50,000-year-old eggs. "One of Star Trek's delights," note Sekuler and
Blake, "is that things are not always as they seem."

Interestingly, the authors, like the Jenkinses, are also fascinated by
that miraculous Ferengi potion, synthehol. They advance a provocative
and subversive theory: "It may be that synthehol has no expensive,
psychoactive ingredient whatever, but merely produces a 'placebo'
effect." This is exactly what happens if people are told they are
consuming alcohol but in fact are given alcohol-free substitutes. These
misled individuals can become aggressive, gregarious, or relaxed,
depending on their environment. But their motor coordination and
judgment remain unimpaired. This description sounds suspiciously like
synthehol's effects."

Since the success of a placebo depends upon the consumer's belief in
its effectiveness, the authors add a perfectly sensible warning:
"Please don't discuss this possible placebo effect with any Starfleet
folk you happen to meet."

-------

The Rogers & Gillis Guide to ITC, by Dave Rogers and S.J. Gillis
(Shrewsbury, England: SJG Communications, 486 pages)

With the advent of Britain's first commercial network, ITV, in 1955,
the programs that the BBC had been offering began to look rather
staid-especially in contrast to such lively and colorful fare as The
Adventures of Robin Hood, starring Richard Greene. Robin Hood, whose
143 episodes ran til 1959, was the first series created for the new
network by Lew Grade's Independent Television Corporation. Since then,
ITC has produced dozens of classic TV shows, including Danger Man (a k
a Secret Agent) and The Prisoner, both starring Patrick McGoohan;
Father Brown, with Kenneth More as Chesterton's crime-solving priest;
The Saint, starring Roger Moore; Space 1999; UFO; and the Gerry
Anderson "supermarionation" series Supercar, Fireball XL5, Stingray,
Thunderbirds, and Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons.

This massive oversized paperback offers a painstakingly detailed
show-by-show guide to each of ITC's productions, plus a 238-page
cross-referenced directory of the actors. (Peter O'Toole shows up in a
1956 episode of The Scarlet Pimpernel.) It was clearly a labor of love
for TV buffs Rogers and Gillis, who spent years assembling all this
information. Thank God for fans like these!







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 4

             Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 00:36:17 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 08:40:48 -0400
Subject: Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force

>>From: KRandle993@aol.com [Kevin Randle]
>>Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 12:58:31 EDT
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears
>>                         Air Force General

>In essence told one story on tape in 1989 (before he was well
>known in the UFO side of life) THEN after almost 9 years of being
>exposed to various Roswell tales storys, hype, theories and
>otherwise, he is now telling a different story as he has become
>more known.

>This is very similar to other Roswell witnesses who fingered "the
>crash site" as being in one place, then when fame/money/or other
>reasons come along they change their story to fit the current
>situtation. As I recall we are up to 5-7 "this is the crash
>site..." locations around Roswell.

Kevin:

I appreciate that you finally appreciate the problem. But we only
have to extrapolate your argument one step further to cast
serious  aspersions on any number of allegedly original stories.
In other words, why should Jim Ragsdale's _first_ story be taken
at face value in light of subsequent ditherings and changes? Why
not assume he was dissembling -- cashing in on potential fame &
money -- to begin with? Ditto Frank Kaufmann and Frankie Rowe,
or, for that matter, Glenn Dennis.

Yes, we now have some 5-7 claimed crash sites. Perhaps you and
Stanton Friedman would like to apportion part of the blame for
same between you? Failing that, maybe you could just tell us
which crash site is the real one, and which fakes we should
avoid. After all, at $15 a pop, this stuff adds up pretty
quickly. Friedman is welcome to annoint his favorite crash site
as well, or sites, as the case may be. And of course you both
remain free to assign different dates to the many crashes, too.
If in doubt about any of the above, I cordially suggest you
consult The Day After Roswell by Mssrs. Cor$o and Birne$ for
definitive details, a move which should allay at least one or two
of my critics.

<snip>

>Since we know that people in the Pentagon ordered Ramey not to
>discuss, talk about or otherwise and to give a cover story to the
>press , Ramey could walk out to the reporters and claim it was a
>kids kite and not be a hoaxer or liar, again because Ramey would
>have been held to a higher accountability standard then a lay
>person off the street.   His family should also understand this
>principle as well.
>

I'm growing somewhat weary of this line of thought as well, if
for no other reason than it could just as equally apply to the
Mogul balloon project. Is anyone on record as saying that a UFO
had to be covered up? No, they are not. So if Ramey and DuBose
were told to keep quiet, so what? No one has ever said they were
told to keep quiet about the remains of an extraterrestrial
spaceship, just that they were told to keep quiet and cover up.
Exactly the same orders would apply to Project Mogul -- like it
or not -- which was also classified at the time.

<snip>

>What I am interested in is  an honest explaination as to why Bond
>said one thing on tape, why Bond is now denying ever saying it,
>and why Bond is telling a different story.

Human nature's a bummer, ain't it? I've been wondering how Cor$o
and Birne$ could collaborate on a complete work of fiction and
then pass it off as fact. But, hey, there you have it! What can I
say?

>I do make a couple of predictions and I hope I am wrong.

> 1) These photos will be no  smoking gun one way or the other and or

> 2) We will still be talking about them 3 years from now as we do
>    on and off the MJ-12 documents, the alien autopsy film and
>    other similar  and or

>3) The skeptics will look at the blowups and claim "Well their it
>   is proof that it was a balloon all the time.  and or 4) As for
>   the so called symbols and writing, skeptics will probably make
>   the case that this was on all sorts of balloon trains
>   especially those mfg by the companys in question.

>5) When Mr. Mogel himself Charles Moore sees the blowups,
>   he will probably say "Yup, thats what I remember on balloon
>   trains..."

Since when is five a couple?

But to make a couple of predictions of my own (which will come
true):

1) No information of however circumstantial or convincing a
nature will ever surface which will convince you that no
extraterrestrial craft(s) crashed at Roswell.

2) No information of however circumstantial or convincing a
nature will ever surface which will convince Stanton Friedman
that no extraterrestrial craft(s) crashed at Roswell, or that the
MJ-12 papers weren't produced as a result of same.

And I've got a third prediction as well: some people will
continue to believe Cor$o even _after_ they've read his book.
Just goes to show you.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 4

              Re: Stacy, Corso & Birnes [was: Sarah McClendon]

From: William Hand ufotruth@ix.netcom.com
Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 04:50:22 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 08:50:20 -0400
Subject: Re: Stacy, Corso & Birnes [was: Sarah McClendon]


>Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 18:57:28 -0500 (CDT)
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Sarah McClendon


>No, I won't itemize them all...just in case they sue. (One can
>only hope.) Some, however, are mentioned in my response to Mr.
>William, he-of-the-capital-letters, that I just posted.

Then you have no basis to call him a liar if you are not even
willing to tell us, in your opinion, what he has lied about.
If you think he is such a LIAR then why is he signing a sworn
affidavit for the Citizens Against UFO Secrecy? If he did
not tell the truth in his book, and all he cared about was
money, then there would be NO WAY that he would sign a sworn
affidavit because there would be NO NEED for him to do so.

>If you want a rough estimate, though, pick up a copy of The Day
>After Roswell and choose a page at random. Chances are it will
>contain at least one royal whopper. Cor$so, bless his

In my opinion his book describes some very amazing events. But
not anything that I would call a "royal whopper" or that would
have been even remotely impossible. There are many people that
have lived amazing lives and have experianced very facinating
events. Col. Corso is one of these people. He has lived a very
exciting and facinating life. You just don't like it that he
is willing to tell us about it so we can know the truth he
knows about UFOs/ETs/Roswell.

>capitalistic soul, can't even get the number of alien fingers
>right. What was it, Phil, six or four? Why don't you just flip a
>coin and then tell us clueless minions the truth? You do know
>what the truth is, don't you?

If you would have done any real RESEARCH into Col. Corso
you would have known the answer. There were FOUR fingers
on the aliens. Col.Corso stated this on the Art Bell show.
Bill Birnes stated on the Art Bell show that in the final
rush to meet a deadline he accidently made a mistake in the
book and put down six fingers instead of four.

In my opinion it was just a mistake. A mistake Bill Birnes
should not have made but an honest mistake. So will you PLEASE
stop trying to bash and trash Col. Philip J. Corso? Of course
you won't stop because you are trying to wrongfully discredit
him to keep the UFO/ET coverup going.

Best Regards,
William






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 4

              Re: Stacy, Corso & Birnes [was: Sarah McClendon]

From: Dan Geib <geibdan@qtm.net>
Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 07:45:12 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 08:54:06 -0400
Subject: Re: Stacy, Corso & Birnes [was: Sarah McClendon]


> Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 18:57:28 -0500 (CDT)
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Sarah McClendon

> >From: MDJ50@webtv.net (Mike Jamieson)
> >Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 15:58:06 -0700
> >To: updates@globalserve.net
> >Subject: Re: Sarah McClendon

> >>Date: Monday, June 1, 1998 23:41:14 -0500CDT
> >>To: UFOUpDates--Toronto <updates@globalserve.net
> >>From: Dennis <stacy@texas.net
> >>Re: Sarah McClendon

> >>Corso is a goddam liar.

> >Would Mr. Stacy please itemize the facts that form the basis for
> >his belief that Col Corso is a ...... ....?

> No, I won't itemize them all...just in case they sue. (One can
> only hope.) Some, however, are mentioned in my response to Mr.
> William, he-of-the-capital-letters, that I just posted.

> If you want a rough estimate, though, pick up a copy of The Day
> After Roswell and choose a page at random. Chances are it will
> contain at least one royal whopper. Cor$so, bless his
> capitalistic soul, can't even get the number of alien fingers
> right. What was it, Phil, six or four? Why don't you just flip a
> coin and then tell us clueless minions the truth? You do know
> what the truth is, don't you?

> Dennis

Gee Denis,

you verbaly slam everyone, you send me insulting messages,

You offer not one bit of rational behind your comments,
you answer peoples questions with insults, just like so many
otheres in this field who really dont have much of value to
add about anyting.

I asked you to support your claims and you send me insulting
mail. Responses like yours only add to water down the value of
all this. Your comments, like most ufo books etc, offer nothing
of substance just personal rants and unsubstantiated personal
agendas.

Odds are what Corso says is useless, but your thread adds even
less value. At least the old man offers courtesy and politness
and does it without the imature use of foul language.

To continue to waste peoples time with this thread is just that.
A waste of time.

Thank god for the delete, I will use it generously.


UFO Folklore at
http://www.qtm.net/~geibdan/framemst.html

Dan's Magic in Michigan
http://www.qtm.net/~geibdan/magician

<>=======<>========<>========<>=====<>






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 4

              Re: Stacy, Corso & Birnes [was: Sarah McClendon]

From: William Hand ufotruth@ix.netcom.com
Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 04:57:55 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 08:50:32 -0400
Subject: Re: Stacy, Corso & Birnes [was: Sarah McClendon]


>Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 18:53:27 -0400
>From: Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith]
>Subject: Sarah McClendon
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>With the compliments of the Duke of Mendoza:
>
>How about: his book? (That it exists is at least a fact, albeit
>an improbable one.)

The book is not improbable at all. It tells an amazing story
about what he knew about the UFO/ET coverup, Roswell, and how
the government/military responded to the possible (in that
they did not know why the ETs were here) threat.

>It's up to Corso to substantiate his claims. And before someone
>pops up with it, signing an affidavit don't count for squat.

In my book signing an affidavit DOES count for something.

>Corso may not even know he's lying. (Ask Glenn Dennis about
>that.) But if Corso does know, I have to wonder: whatever
>happened to the concept of honor in the US officer corps?

Corso would know if he was lying. But I will tell you this
he is NOT lying. He is a TRUTHFUL, HONORABLE, and CREDIBLE
man who in my opinion is telling the TRUTH about what he
knows about UFOs/ETs/Roswell.

Corso DOES have honor. He had enough honor to write his
book and tell the public the TRUTH about what he knew.

HE HAS A LOT MORE HONOR THAN YOU! AT LEAST HE REALIZES
THAT THE PUBLIC HAS A RIGHT TO KNOW THE TRUTH SO HE
TOLD WHAT HE KNEW. IF YOU AND YOUR BOSSES HAD ANY
HONOR ALL OF YOU WOULD DO THE SAME.

>Meanwhile, I pump Dennis's hand for stating the obvious within
>earshot of a public that habitually goes into paroxysms at
>statements of the obvious, e.g. '"Roswell" and its alien works
>are a mountain of crap', and even at slightly less obvious
>suggestions, e.g. 'Kenneth Arnold probably saw pelicans'.

That is pure bull crud. Roswell is NOT a mountain of crap.
You are just desperate to try and keep the UFO/ET coverup
going!

>I'd rather have the Sasquatch in my foxhole than a goddam liar,
>no matter how many goddam medals he's got.

Corso is NOT a liar. YOU are the LIAR. PERIOD.

Best Regards,
William










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 4

                  Re: Mexican UFOs - a Canadian connection?

From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 08:43:01 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 09:11:01 -0400
Subject: Re: Mexican UFOs - a Canadian connection?

>Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 18:08:42 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time)
>From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Mexican UFOs - a Canadian connection?

<Bombardier Information deleted for brevity>

>We all know about the AVRO Car built in Malton (a suburb in the
>Toronto area) which could "hover" only a few feet above the
>ground.  This Bombardier (based in Montreal) built craft has
>proven itself as a very effective surveillance craft and can
>hover too. Some have been sold abroad but Mexico is reported to
>have bought very many of them.

Unfortunately, this sounds more like a sales pitch than
evidence.

There was no information at the web site that I could find that
indicated where any of these craft were sold, and the primary
purpose was (as you note) surveilance.  How is it known that
Mexico has bought "many" of them, and for what purpose?

The AVRO car, which seems to be getting some attention lately, is
very old news and the "Bombardier" craft you've mentioned has
been mentioned several times in the past year as a probable cause
for some UFO reports.  Given its size, I'd be surprised if it was
very noticable from the ground when it was working at its maximum
altitude, but reflected light might be noticable and reported as
an unknown.  On the other hand, I would suspect some strobing
effect with two whirling blades keeping it aloft.

But the Mexico sightings I've seen show no strobing effect, and
there is no paper trail to show that there were any of these
craft in Mexico City at the time.  If one can show that there
were several being tested at the time (and Mexico City seems like
a poor choice for such a test), then it might be plausible as an
explanation.

>Have any UFO reports been explained as sightings of this
>Canadian built craft?

Good question.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 4

                                UFO*BC Update

From: UFO*BC <pengilly@axionet.com> [David Pengilly]
Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 05:32:38 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 09:09:26 -0400
Subject: UFO*BC Update

1) UFO*BC has finally updated their website: http://www.ufobc.org
   - check out the new UFO*BC store!
   - check out the latest sighting cases.

2) Don't forget the Sasquatch Conference this weekend!
   - I have added some times and locations to the web page:
    http://www.ufobc.org/events.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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 4

              Re: Stacy, Corso & Birnes [was: Sarah McClendon]

From: "Stanton T. Friedman" <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 09:45:27 -0300
Fwd Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 09:15:01 -0400
Subject: Re: Stacy, Corso & Birnes [was: Sarah McClendon]


> Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 18:53:27 -0400
> From: Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith]
> Subject: Sarah McClendon
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

> With the compliments of the Duke of Mendoza:

> >From: MDJ50@webtv.net (Mike Jamieson)
> >Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 15:58:06 -0700
> >To: updates@globalserve.net
> >Subject: Re: Sarah McClendon

> >>Date: Monday, June 1, 1998 23:41:14 -0500CDT
> >>To: UFOUpDates--Toronto <updates@globalserve.net
> >>From: Dennis <stacy@texas.net
> >>Re: Sarah McClendon

> >>Corso is a goddam liar.

> >Would Mr. Stacy please itemize the facts that form the
> >basis for his belief that Col Corso is a ...... ....?

> How about: his book? (That it exists is at least a fact, albeit
> an improbable one.)

> It's up to Corso to substantiate his claims. And before someone
> pops up with it, signing an affidavit don't count for squat.
> Corso may not even know he's lying. (Ask Glenn Dennis about
> that.) But if Corso does know, I have to wonder: whatever
> happened to the concept of honor in the US officer corps?

<snip>

Three  lies told by Corso..

1. He was a member of the National Security Council.  He
absolutely was not.

2. He made a big deal outof being head of the Foreign Technology
group under General Trudeau. The roster I have shows there were
only 2 people in that group: a Colonel Spengler (unfortunately
recently deceased ) and Lt. Colonel Corso. He was the junior
officer.

3.He claimed in Italy that he had been head of security at Sandia
in Albuquerque in l957. His own military records show that wasn't
true and the historian at Sandia checked files and records.. no
indication of Corso 1956,57,58.

There is also the question of where he got the July 6, l947 date
from.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 4

             Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force

From: "Steven Kaeser" <steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 06:41:02 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 09:08:13 -0400
Subject: Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force

>From: RGates8254@aol.com [Robert Gates]
>Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 20:29:47 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force
General

<massive snip>

>What I am interested in is  an honest explaination as to why Bond
>said one thing on tape, why Bond is now denying ever saying it,
>and why Bond is telling a different story.

>I do make a couple of predictions and I hope I am wrong.

> 1) These photos will be no  smoking gun one way or the other and or

> 2) We will still be talking about them 3 years from now as we do
>    on and off the MJ-12 documents, the alien autopsy film and
>    other similar  and or

>3) The skeptics will look at the blowups and claim "Well their it
>   is proof that it was a balloon all the time.  and or 4) As for
>   the so called symbols and writing, skeptics will probably make
>   the case that this was on all sorts of balloon trains
>   especially those mfg by the companys in question.

>5) When Mr. Mogel himself Charles Moore sees the blowups,
>   he will probably say "Yup, thats what I remember on balloon
>   trains..."

>Cheers,
>Robert

While copies of the photos are apparently available for those who
wish to order them, I surprised that we have no one on the list
close enough to the University of Texas at Arlington to visit the
school and see if this is worth getting excited over.
Unfortunately, I live too far from the scene or I'd try to get to
the exhibit myself.

As I read his description, it seems that Bond has seen something
in the photos that he does not readily recall from his 1947
involvement.  His position on this seems to have waffled through
the years, but the alleged evidence here are the photos and not
Bond's recollection of the events.

If there are symbols, and they can be identified, I would suspect
that it wouldn't be too difficult to track down a supplier
(assuming that they are man-made symbols).  Most major
manufacturers have records of their products that go back to
their beginnings, and most scientific endeavors keep copious
records to make sure that every aspect of their experiments can
be recreated.

I don't really believe these images can be compared to the AA
"film" or MJ-12, however.  The provenance of these negatives and
images is well known, and I've seen no credible criticism of
their authenticity.  On the other hand, there could be debate
over the effects of digital enhancement, which we've yet to learn
the details of.

Charles Moore is, unfortunately, no longer a disinterested
bystander in this debate.  He has joined the Roswell ranks as an
author who now has a contention to defend.  Again, if I recall
correctly, Moore had been contacted by UFO researchers in the
80's and he indicated at the time that he felt there was no way
that the classified MOGUL project could have been related to the
crash at Roswell.  However, his stance change after being
contacted by the Air Force as they prepared their 1994 report.
Since then he has become a major proponent of the MOGUL
explanation, and has spoken at numerous events to share his
"truth", which requires a number of speculative assumptions based
on limited hard evidence.  In an effort to help promote the MOGUL
explanation,  Jesse Marcel Jr. was contacted and asked to come
look at the remains of a MOGUL balloon (which I believe Moore
uses in his "dog and pony show") as well as some material that
had been "aged" in the desert.  Marcel was emphatic that the
material he saw did not resemble the items (or material) he
remembers seeing in his kitchen as a boy.

I would agree that these images will not end the debate, and
skeptics will use the images to their advantage as best they can.
I have to assume that if they had shown something truly
un-earthly after their enhancement, we'd have been hearing more
about it in the mainstream press.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 4

                              The 'Stacy Form'

From: "Serge Salvaille" <sergesa@connectmmic.net>
Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 09:11:12 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 09:25:52 -0400
Subject: The 'Stacy Form'

>Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 23:41:14 -0500 (CDT)
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Sarah McClendon

<snip>

>If she believes Cor$o's claims, then God help us all. Begging Jim
>Deardorff's pardon, but there hasn't been a bigger liar in the
>field since the days of Billy Meier.


Dennis,

Please don't sue me for copyright infringement <G>, but, from the
laugh I got from it, I believe your message should not go into
oblivion.

I took the liberty to modify your message in the following way:


If he/she believes ___________ claims, then God help us all.
Begging _________'s pardon, but there hasn't been a bigger liar
in the field since the days of __________.

Let's cut the crap. ___________ is a goddam liar, pure and
simple. (And so is his co-confabulator, ___________.)

You can send him my e-mail address, and you can send his attorney
my e-mail address.

I repeat: ___________ is a goddam liar.

And anyone who believes him for more than a minute is a goddam
fool.

Have I made myself clear?

___________ is a goddam liar. ___________ is merely a man after a
buck.

Any questions?

                                 Signed: ___________________

PS: ___________ is a goddam liar.



You will notice that this form applies not only to Cor$so but
also to too many people in the field.

I propose we call this the Stacy form.  All one has to do is to
fill in the blanks and stick it to a wall.

LOL,

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 4

                    Green Light for Norio's Area 51 Rally

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 09:29:08 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 09:29:08 -0400
Subject: Green Light for Norio's Area 51 Rally




From: UFOMIND Mailing List

http://www.ufomind.com/misc/1998/jun/d02-003.shtml

Green Light for Norio's Area 51 Rally
  [a.c.a51]

From: Peter Kazlouski <petekaz@erols.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 11:30:59 -0800



[Note from Moderator:  No endorsement is implied.  I do not plan to
attend. --GC]

Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.area51,alt.ufo.reports
Subject: GREEN LIGHT for June 6 People's Rally at AREA 51
         - Maps & Directions
Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 14:44:31 -0400

GREEN LIGHT for June 6 People's Rally at AREA 51 !  - Maps & Directions

Directions to Rally:

      http://eagle-net.org/groomwatch/maps.htm
Map 1:http://eagle-net.org/groomwatch/map1.htm
Map 2:http://eagle-net.org/groomwatch/map2.htm
Map 3:http://eagle-net.org/groomwatch/map3.htm

GroomWatch wrote:

SPECIAL ANNOUNCEMENT: THE PEOPLE'S RALLY AT AREA 51 ON JUNE 6,
1998 The People's Rally at AREA 51 will take place as scheduled
on Saturday, June 6, 1998, right at the restricted boundary line
on Groom Lake Road, as previously announced in the newsgroups.
This will be a legal, public assembly and will take place on
legal, public land. The event will be a spontaneous, peaceful
gathering of concerned citizens.
One of the purposes of the gathering will be to bring to the
attention of the news media once again the plight of former Groom
Lake workers who are still suffering from illnesses caused by
long-term exposure to highly toxic chemicals without their
knowledge while working at AREA 51, the base that officially
"doesn't exist". The former workers and their families' plea is
not so much to seek for monetary compensation as to seek for
cures to the diseases. There are no specific organizations behind
this event. Inquiries regarding the event are still coming in
from many states in the U.S., as well as from England, New
Zealand, Canada and Australia and other countries. Quite a number
of people may already be camping out overnight on Friday, June 5
at the site. The news media will show up to cover the event,
depending on how much publicity will be generated prior to the
event. (There will be a press conference on Friday, June 5 in
Rachel, Nevada) The event will start at 6 a.m. on Saturday, June
6, at the restricted boundary, and will last till about 11 a.m.
That Saturday evening, there will be a music festival in Rachel.
For the June 6 rally, each participant is suggested to bring a
mirror (of any kind ....... the larger the better) to the event.
All vehicles are to be parked off Groom Lake Road. Lincoln County
Sheriff Dept. will not allow any vehicle to be parked on the dirt
road for the event. Also, early on Sunday morning, June 7, there
will be a hike up to the ridges of Tickaboo Mountain to observe
the Groom Lake facility. This particular hike may be a
littlestrenuous since this time it will not originate from the
Alamo side, but will be from the west foothills, a direct
"frontal assault" on the mountains from the Tickaboo Valley
side.

Sincerely, Norio Hayakawa GroomWatch@aol.com P.S. The People's
Rally at AREA 51 will also be held on June 6, 1999 as well as
June 6, 2000.

Norio Hayakawa

http://www.eagle-net.org/groomwatch

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Both a mirror and flashlight (with extra batteries)
seem useful.  As to exactly how close anyone wants to get to area
51 or area s-4, that will be up to the individual.
-----------------------------------------------------------------

There is no substance whatsoever to the ridiculous rumor that
AREA 51 and its operations were abandoned and were located
elsewhere, such as to Utah. Basically, this rumor had originated
from what appeared to be a disinformative article that first
appeared in the June, 1997 issue of POPULAR MECHANICS.

The unexpected article no doubt was greatly "appreciated" by
Nellis AFB and particularly those at the "remote operating base"
at Groom Lake, Nevada. The folks at Nellis AFB probably rolled on
floor laughing over the article, which was for the most part
filled with factual errors, much to their absolute delight!! The
June, 1997, POPULAR MECHANICS piece also must have brought much
delight to the then Secretary of the Air Force, Sheila Widnall.
It is my hope that this type of misinformed article did not serve
to curtail the general public's interest in and rightful scrutiny
of AREA 51 (Groom Lake Complexes), particularly in regards to
those issues relative to the alleged infractions of environmental
statutes at the site. The article, written by Jim Wilson, science
editor of POPULAR MECHANICS, inferred that "the Air Force had
abandoned top-secret testing at its once most secret test site".
Then Wilson came to the hasty conclusion and stated that "we know
why and we know where they moved to (i.e., Utah)". Nothing is
farther from the truth than this overly generalized inference.
Jim Wilson, despite his probable sincerity and good intentions,
obviously missed the whole picture.

To begin with, he obviously took a wrong turn on "Groom Lake dirt
road" and went to a location that had very little to do with AREA
51.
It was obvious from the photo that what he did was go south on
the "Mail Box dirt road" from Hwy 375, crossed the "Groom Lake
dirt road" and went further south all the way till he encountered
an old, poorly maintained wind fence, believing that he had
arrived at the back gate of AREA 51, when in reality he had
arrived at the northeastern boundary of Range 61. There he
decided that nothing was happening at AREA 51, and made a hasty
statement, saying "the 'cammo dudes' are no longer patrolling the
perimeter of AREA 51" and further rashly stated that "what we
found was a securely locked wind fence that appears to have been
undisturbed for months". He further commented that even though he
had arrived at the back door to AREA 51, there was "no guard
post". Brilliant!! (There never was any.....ever at that
location!!).
He also stated in the article that the "warning signs flanking
the gate aren't very threatening either"...........(The reason
for that is because there never existed any "threatening" warning
signs there except the sign that says NO TRESPASSING...... Nellis
Bombing Range).
It is because that location is not AREA 51.......it is merely the
northeastern boundary of Range 61. Wilson then came to the
stunning conclusion that "AREA 51 has shut down !!". Again, a
brilliant conclusion!! I suggest next time that he go to the
right location......towards the real Guard Shack area......(west
all the way on Groom Lake road).....where he may really encounter
the "cammo dudes", white Jeep Cherokees and perhaps a Blackhawk
chopper or two to welcome him, if he dare go to the Guard Shack
area. He would also see some real "threatening" warning signs
along the dirt road that clearly say LETHAL FORCE WILL BE USED.

From what I understand from several reliable sources, Groom Lake
has not had a major lessening of activity whatsoever. In fact
there may be more going on NOW at Groom Lake than before. In
October of 1997, I observed the Groom Lake facility from high
atop Tickaboo Peak and verified with my own eyes that the
facility is not only there but even thought that there may be
slightly more structures out there than before! A couple of new
water tanks seem to have been added recently behind the big
hangar area. Also, deducing from a fairly recent, highly-detailed
panoramic photo that I acquired (allegedly taken several months
after the closure of both the Freedom Ridge and White Sides), I
have no doubt that there are some new constructions going on,
particularly along the southwest slope next to Groom Lake. (I had
observed the Groom Lake facility a number of times before from
both the White Sides hill and the Freedom Ridge before those
hills became off-limits to the public). Also, the night prior to
the day that I climbed the Tickaboo Peak in October of 1997, we
were standing at the exact spot where Jim Wilson had stood.....at
around 7:30 p.m., at the northeastern boundary of Range 61. As we
were looking towards the direction of Groom Lake, we were
surprised by a sudden illumination of the sky just over the
direction of Groom Lake and witnessed around 3 or 4 reddish
"balls" of light that appeared over the direction of Groom Lake
and then disappeared momentarily, after which the sky over that
area returned to total darkness. I could not speculate what those
reddish "balls" of light were.......(different from the usual
military aircraft flares that I had seen many times near AREA
51)........but his went on intermittently for about three times
during the next 20 minutes or so. There was no doubt that there
was activity of some kind that night at Groom Lake. This was in
stark contrast to the allegation by Jim Wilson that nothing is
going on at AREA 51 and that nothing was going on when he was
standing at the northeastern boundary of Range 61, looking
towards the Groom Mountains. Probably nothing major was going on
that was visible in the sky over Groom Lake on that particular
day or evening when he was there. Moreover, we must bear in mind
that most sensitive programs are thought to be conducted below
ground level, to begin with.

Primarily because of the (probably inadvertent) misinformative
article from the June, 1997, POPULAR MECHANICS, the whole world
seemed to have gotten the impression that there is nothing going
on at AREA 51, and that everything had moved to the Green River
Missile Launch "complex" in Utah. One of the erroneous facts that
Jim Wilson mentioned in the June, 1997, POPULAR MECHANICS article
was that there was an "officially named Area 6413" in Utah. There
is no "officially name Area 6413" in Utah. What he meant to say
was Restricted Air Space 6413 in Utah. However, it is my
understanding that even to this date, anyone can easily get right
next to the Green River Missile Lauch "complex". I highly doubt
that there is anything top-secret going on over there. Rather
than the Green River Missile Launch "complex" (which Jim Wilson
seemed to have inferred as the possible site of the New AREA 51),
we should keep a closer watch on the new "non-lethal" weapons
programs as well as the new "bacteriological warfare programs"
going on at Dugway Proving Grounds in Utah. It is, by far, more
"interesting" there than the Green River area!! All in all, the
June, 1997, POPULAR MECHANICS article was in such a drastic
contrast to the more substantial article that coincidentally
appeared one month prior, in the May, 1997 issue of POPULAR
SCIENCE in which Groom Lake was mentioned several times, with an
inference that there was still plenty going on at Groom Lake.

Some of the ongoing programs at AREA 51, according to reports
from the Monitoring Times and other publications, seem to include
a new series of B-2 follow-on by Northrop/Grumman at S-2,
possible newer versions of Darkstar (Tier 3 - UAV) by Lockheed at
S-4 and Tier 2+ and Tier 3+ UAVs at S-9 by such as Teledyne Ryan
Aero. In June of 1997, after the article appeared on POPULAR
MECHANICS, I was informed that some new components of new,
small-scale VOTL produced by Lockheed had just been transferred
to Groom from Air Force Plant 42 in Palmdale, California.
There is no doubt that there are new generations of Unmanned
Aerial Vehicles (UAVs - remote controlled surveillance platforms,
some of which may be oval shaped, etc.) being tested at Groom
Lake. New testing of "skins" for outer coating for a new
generation of stealth programs is going on as well, as inferred
by the May, 1997 issue of POPULAR SCIENCE. A new generation of
"electro-chromic panels" are probably continuing to be tested at
the facility. A move towards "daytime" stealth capability (such
as through the use of special sensors for transmission of image
reflections of the background environment on the lower as well as
upper bodies of the aircraft) may be in the works at AREA 51. I
would not be surprised at all if they were working on such as
limited tri- dimensional holographic image maximization that
could be integrated with the "electro chromic panels" not only
used to reflect background environment on the aircraft to bring
about "transparency effect" but also to bring about some
distorted image size of the aircraft. All this, in addition to
several new black, triangular aircraft (such as the alleged TR-3A
Black Manta) that they may be working on.

Anyway, the point is that there may indeed be some new programs
going on in Utah and elsewhere, but to infer that AREA 51 "moved"
to Utah is totally unfounded.

[Reformatted by moderator]

+--------------------------------------------------------------+
|                    UFOMIND MAILING LIST                      |
|       Supporting the World's Largest Paranormal Website      |
|       www.ufomind.com         Moderator: Glenn Campbell      |
|                                                              |
| Archived at: http://www.ufomind.com/misc/                    |
| Submissions to: ufomind@lists.best.com                       |
| "unsubscribe"/"subsingle" to: ufomind-request@lists.best.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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 4

             Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force

From: JBONJO@aol.com
Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 10:39:23 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 12:22:09 -0400
Subject: Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force


If you have any specific questions re the Roswell fotos, please
email them to me and I will attempt to address them. Please
include your name, location, and agreement that these can be
posted on the web.

JBONJO

http://www.ufomind.com/people/j/johnsonj/ James Bond Johnson
http://www.execpc.com/vjentpr/jbond.html Roswell Crash Photographer







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 4

                       Re: Jazz Singer's True Account

From: John <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 13:00:00 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 13:09:45 -0400
Subject: Re: Jazz Singer's True Account


>From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose)
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 06:43:28 +0200
>Subject: "Jazz Singer's True Account Of Extraterrestrial Contact"

>From: The New York Post June 3. URL:

>http://www.nypostonline.com:80/060398/business/2272.htm

>Stig

>*******

>BUSINESS
>By MICHAEL SHAIN

><snipped>

>Los Angeles singer Pamela Stonebrooke has upped the ante on
>true-life, alien-abduction books.

<snip>

>"She recounts this act of interspecies intercourse in a graphic,
>no-holds-barred, tour de force description, unique in UFO
>literature, replete with precise physical and emotional detail,
>sensational without being sensationalistic," it says.

The tidal wave of pure insanity that surrounds this subject is
astounding. Michael Shain describes this human/alien porno book
as a, "no-holds-barred, tour de force description, unique in UFO
literature, replete with precise physical and emotional detail,
sensational without being sensationalistic,"

Pish-tosh, it's nothing _but_ sensationalistic. How often do you
hear of 'bidding at auction' between publishers? They're not
stupid, sex sells and in todays market anything with an "alien"
in it sells. Put the three together, sex, aliens, greed, and you
have the perfect formula for a popular best seller in 1998!

Pamela Stonebrooke will single-handedly set abduction research
back 30 years. (Easily 30 years) Just watch how guys like
Letterman and Leno jump on this new author! The level of public
incredulity will hit 10.

Pam can write about whatever she wants to and sell it to whoever
she wants to. This is America. The question is, _should she_.
Maybe it's just me. Maybe I've just developed a warped sense of
ethics or what will be or won't be helpful to the cause of truth
seeking re: alien abduction.

We're a joke man. The vast majority of the people out there
snicker and gigggle (if not guffaw) whenever the subject is
raised. I'm going to post a portion of a post that I made to the
members of AIC (Abduction Information Center) just to illustrate
my point.

========================================================

Budd called me tonight and told me that the producer
from the David Letterman show had called and requested
that Budd appear as a guest and, (get this) they asked for
me specifically and Linda (from the "Witnessed" case) to
appear along with him. Must have gotten -my- name from
the website.

I told Budd to pass on it! Letterman is only going to use
anything we say as fodder for comedy material. Although
it would mean national exposure for Budd and his books
it would have done much more harm than good for us to
appear on such a venue. Budd agreed.

That's not why I am mentioning this. It just rubs my fur
the wrong way to think that Letterman and his staff think
that abductions and abductees make for good "comedy
material."

What they wanted to do was to have Dave interview us in
a conference room, tape it, and then use it during the
show. Anyone who's seen the Letterman show is familiar
with the format that I just described.

In essence, what they would have done is, take
the finished tape of our interviews, send it in to Daves'
writers, pick whatever bits they could write good jokes
about and air it as one of the many 'ha-ha' segments on
Lettermans' show.

Screw that, and screw Letterman for trying. Ya know, even
if we were all suffering from a psychological disorder,
why would that low-life want to make fun of it/us? I
also know that all topics are fair game for comedy. But
you don't get a cripple up onstage with you and goof on
wheelchairs, or have a rape victim standing there while
you tell 'rough sex' jokes. Dealing with this stuff has
been one of the hardest ordeals I've ever been through.
It's rough on a lot of ordinary folks that would rather
it all be happening to someone else.

Hopefully one day we -may be- taken seriously. For now,
all we're good for as far as the media and a majority of
the poeple is concerned is- a good laugh.

Well, I'm not laughing. I'm sure you're not either.

Peace,

John -Trying my best to represent us all as well as I can.

=========================================================

Stig's original post goes on to say,

>"She's hilariously funny too," says agent Sandra Martin , who
>represents the singer Jewel . "She says: "Why would I make this
>stuff up? It doesn't exactly help my singing career, does it?'"

Yeah honey, but I'll bet the hundred grand didn't hurt your bank
account either! <EG>

Pamela's getting ready to go out and bury us all a little
deeper. I wish I could show her the potential for damage
to us all. So freaking frustrating and sad.


John Velez, (Tired of all the BS)








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 4

              Re: Stacy, Corso & Birnes [was: Sarah McClendon]

From: "Jerome Clark" <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Thu, 04 Jun 98 10:13:00 PDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 12:29:27 -0400
Subject: Re: Stacy, Corso & Birnes [was: Sarah McClendon]


> Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 18:53:27 -0400
> From: Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith]
> Subject: Sarah McClendon
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

> With the compliments of the Duke of Mendoza:

> >From: MDJ50@webtv.net (Mike Jamieson)
> >Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 15:58:06 -0700
> >To: updates@globalserve.net
> >Subject: Re: Sarah McClendon

> >>Date: Monday, June 1, 1998 23:41:14 -0500CDT
> >>To: UFOUpDates--Toronto <updates@globalserve.net
> >>From: Dennis <stacy@texas.net
> >>Re: Sarah McClendon


> Meanwhile, I pump Dennis's hand for stating the obvious within
> earshot of a public that habitually goes into paroxysms at
> statements of the obvious, e.g. '"Roswell" and its alien works
> are a mountain of crap', and even at slightly less obvious
> suggestions, e.g. 'Kenneth Arnold probably saw pelicans'.

In the interest of fairness, not to mention elemental accuracy,
it should be pointed out that Roswell-as-ET advocates have been
among the most informed and articulate Corso debunkers. I think
here of Kevin Randle and Stan Friedman, who are too smart to
believe that "Kenneth Arnold probably saw pelicans." But then
some people will believe anything.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 4

             Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 12:53:13 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 13:35:15 -0400
Subject: Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force


> From: "Steven Kaeser" <steve@konsulting.com>
> To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force
>General
> Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 06:41:02 -0400

<Robert's post snipped>

>While copies of the photos are apparently available for those who
>wish to order them, I surprised that we have no one on the list
>close enough to the University of Texas at Arlington to visit the
>school and see if this is worth getting excited over.
>Unfortunately, I live too far from the scene or I'd try to get to
>the exhibit myself.

This was all done years ago. We used prints from the original
negatives to see if we could find anything that would help in
the identification. We did not. No words on the paper held by
Ramey and no symbols on the sticks.

The Air Force has the CIA do the same thing and they found
nothing. Had there been symbols, which would have helped
establish the Mogul explanation, the Air Force would have
announced it rather than their research produced no results.

>As I read his description, it seems that Bond has seen something
>in the photos that he does not readily recall from his 1947
>involvement.  His position on this seems to have waffled through
>the years, but the alleged evidence here are the photos and not
>Bond's recollection of the events.

This question wouldn't exist except for Johnson's new story. The
photos have been examined without results.

<snip>

> I don't really believe these images can be compared to the AA
>"film" or MJ-12, however.  The provenance of these negatives and
>images is well known, and I've seen no credible criticism of
>their authenticity.  On the other hand, there could be debate
>over the effects of digital enhancement, which we've yet to learn
>the details of.

Yes, we know where the photographs came from, but the problem is
the enhancement. Anyone with a computer and a graphics program
can produce whatever they want. The question them becomes one of
duplication. If the results can't be duplicated, then the results
are rejected.

 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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 4

             Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 12:44:37 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 13:33:01 -0400
Subject: Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force

>Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 00:36:17 -0500 (CDT)
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air
          Force General

>>>From: KRandle993@aol.com [Kevin Randle]
>>>Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 12:58:31 EDT
>>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears
>>>                        Air Force General

>>In essence told one story on tape in 1989 (before he was well
>>known in the UFO side of life) THEN after almost 9 years of being
>>exposed to various Roswell tales storys, hype, theories and
>>otherwise, he is now telling a different story as he has become
>>more known.

>>This is very similar to other Roswell witnesses who fingered "the
>>crash site" as being in one place, then when fame/money/or other
>>reasons come along they change their story to fit the current
>>situtation. As I recall we are up to 5-7 "this is the crash
>>site..." locations around Roswell.

Please note that neither of these quotes comes from my post. They
belong, I believe, to Robert Gates.

>Kevin:

>I appreciate that you finally appreciate the problem. But we only
>have to extrapolate your argument one step further to cast
>serious  aspersions on any number of allegedly original stories.
>In other words, why should Jim Ragsdale's _first_ story be taken
>at face value in light of subsequent ditherings and changes? Why
>not assume he was dissembling -- cashing in on potential fame &
>money -- to begin with? Ditto Frank Kaufmann and Frankie Rowe,
>or, for that matter, Glenn Dennis.

Dennis -

Where have you gotten the impression that I still accept the tale
told by Jim Ragsdale. In THE RANDLE REPORT (shameless plug here)
I wrote, "Moleny, personal agendas, and politics have muddied the
waters around the Roswell case in general and the Ragsdale case
in particular... Given that, all I can do is suggest that the Jim
Ragsdale story, as it now is told, is a hoax."

If that isn't clear enough, In the Fall 1996 issue of IUR I wrote
of the Ragsdale case, "And the Ragsdale story, which was once an
important piece of the Roswell puzzle has been rendered
useless."

About Glenn Dennis I wrote, "...others, such as Glenn Dennis, who
has been considered one of the important witnesses, have begun to
collapse. There is little that can be said except that we have
found nothing to confirm that his nurse exists or existed. And
when challenged on these points, he begins to change the tale. In
a police investigation, such changes signal the end of the
story."

Frankie Rowe hasn't changed her story as so much as expanded on
it. Given the circumstances, and her reactions, it is not at all
surprising that she didn't tell everything she knew during the
first interviews.

Frank Kauffmann's story has also expanded and changed. If you
want to believe this means that Frank has been less than honest,
that certainly is your right. But he has not been caught in the
web of lies that signalled the end of Jim Ragsdale, Gerald
Anderson, Glenn Dennis, and a host of others.

>Yes, we now have some 5-7 claimed crash sites. Perhaps you and
>Stanton Friedman would like to apportion part of the blame for
>same between you? Failing that, maybe you could just tell us
>which crash site is the real one, and which fakes we should
>avoid. After all, at $15 a pop, this stuff adds up pretty
>quickly.

There is the Mac Brazel debris field which everyone agrees is
a solid site. That is one.

There is the Boy Scout Mountain site which is the second Jim
Ragsdale site. That is two, and should be rejected for the
reasons cited above. That means there is one.

There is the Hesemann Socorro site, which everyone now agrees
has nothing to do with Roswell, but is a separate incident, as I
now understand it. That is three, and should be rejected. That
means there is one.

There is the second site that is two or three miles from the
Brazel site. It is mentioned in the MJ-12 documents. That is
four, and I believe should be rejected simply because there is no
good corroboration for it. That means there is one.

There is the second site north of Roswell. This is the Hub Corn
site and is based on the testimony of a number of witnesses such
as Edwin Easley and Curry Holden. That is five, and I believe is
a good site. That means there are two.

There is a second site on the Plains of San Agustin. This is the
Barney Barnett site. There is no specific location, other than
the Plains. There are some problems with the Barnett story,
including the dates. That is six. We can either reject it because
of the lack of corroboration, or we can accept it, depending on
our point of view. I tend to reject it. That means there are two.

There is the Gerald Anderson site on the Plains. That is seven.
I believe we can reject it because Anderson admitted lying
about aspects of the case and he was cuaght forging at least one
document and probably more. That means there are two.

>Friedman is welcome to annoint his favorite crash site
>as well, or sites, as the case may be. And of course you both
>remain free to assign different dates to the many crashes, too.

We are attempting to reconstruct events that are more than 50
years old. If we disagree on the dates by two or three days, we
are still talking about the first week of July. We are,
bascially, in agreement on that point.

>If in doubt about any of the above, I cordially suggest you
>consult The Day After Roswell by Mssrs. Cor$o and Birne$ for
>definitive details, a move which should allay at least one or two
>of my critics.


<snip>

>>Since we know that people in the Pentagon ordered Ramey not to
>>discuss, talk about or otherwise and to give a cover story to
>>the press , Ramey could walk out to the reporters and claim it
>>was a kids kite and not be a hoaxer or liar, again because
>>Ramey would have been held to a higher accountability standard
>>then a lay person off the street.   His family should also
>>understand this principle as well.

>I'm growing somewhat weary of this line of thought as well, if
>for no other reason than it could just as equally apply to the
>Mogul balloon project. Is anyone on record as saying that a UFO
>had to be covered up? No, they are not. So if Ramey and DuBose
>were told to keep quiet, so what? No one has ever said they were
>told to keep quiet about the remains of an extraterrestrial
>spaceship, just that they were told to keep quiet and cover up.
>Exactly the same orders would apply to Project Mogul -- like it
>or not -- which was also classified at the time.

Again, this wasn't a point I made, but I will address it. The
purpose Project Mogul might have be classified, but the
equipment was not. It was, in essence, a weather balloon and
radar reflector (or for those who want to nitpic, a cluster of
balloons and an array of equipment). However, that equipment was
NOT classified. It was so unimportant that pictures of a cluster
of balloons launched at Alamogordo appeared in newspapers around
the country on July 10, 1947. Had it been a Mogul balloon, there
would have been no need for SAC headquarters to issue warnings
to Ramey and DuBose.

Not to mention the fact that the CAA required the Mogul people
to announce through NOTAMS (Notice to Airmen) that the
launch had taken place.

 <snip>

>>What I am interested in is  an honest explaination as to why Bond
>>said one thing on tape, why Bond is now denying ever saying it,
>>and why Bond is telling a different story.

>Human nature's a bummer, ain't it? I've been wondering how Cor$o
>and Birne$ could collaborate on a complete work of fiction and
>then pass it off as fact. But, hey, there you have it! What can I
>say?

Actually, in the case of Johnson, I don't think money is the
issue. I think it is the draw of the spotllight.

>>I do make a couple of predictions and I hope I am wrong.

>>1) These photos will be no  smoking gun one way or the other
>>   and or

>>2) We will still be talking about them 3 years from now as we
>>   do on and off the MJ-12 documents, the alien autopsy film
>>   and other similar and or

>>3) The skeptics will look at the blowups and claim "Well their
>>  it is proof that it was a balloon all the time.  and or 4)
>>  As for the so called symbols and writing, skeptics will
>>  probably make the case that this was on all sorts of balloon
>>  trains especially those mfg by the companys in question.

>>5) When Mr. Mogel himself Charles Moore sees the blowups,
>>   he will probably say "Yup, thats what I remember on balloon
>>   trains..."

These were not comments I made. I'll the author of them explain
them.

>>Since when is five a couple?

>But to make a couple of predictions of my own (which will come
>true):

>1) No information of however circumstantial or convincing a
>nature will ever surface which will convince you that no
>extraterrestrial craft(s) crashed at Roswell.

You're going to have to do a lot better than Project Mogul. It
really makes no sense.

>2) No information of however circumstantial or convincing a
>nature will ever surface which will convince Stanton Friedman
>that no extraterrestrial craft(s) crashed at Roswell, or that
the >MJ-12 papers weren't produced as a result of same.

>And I've got a third prediction as well: some people will
>continue to believe Cor$o even _after_ they've read his book.
>Just goes to show you.

>Dennis

And I could predict that nothing is ever going to be discovered
that would convince that Roswell was extraterrestrial. So what?

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 5

             Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force

From: "Ben Field" <ben@abcfield.force9.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 18:56:33 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 00:09:14 -0400
Subject: Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force

>From: RGates8254@aol.com [Robert Gates]
>Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 20:29:47 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air
Force General

>In essence he told one story on tape in 1989 (before he was well
>known in the UFO side of life) THEN after almost 9 years of being
>exposed to various Roswell tales storys, hype, theories and
>otherwise, he is now telling a different story as he has become
>more known.
>This is very similar to other Roswell witnesses who fingered "the
>crash site" as being in one place, then when fame/money/or other
>reasons come along they change their story to fit the current
>situtation. As I recall we are up to 5-7 "this is the crash
>site..." locations around Roswell.

I have been in contact with J.Bond and I can tell you that he
does not want fame or money. He has turned down many interveiws
with media since this event has come about and when approched to
make a book with $$$ in mind he also said no to this.

>From the very start J.Bond has set out to just finnd the truth, and
help others by giving his account of the Roswell photo event.

>What I am interested in is  an honest explaination as to why Bond
>said one thing on tape, why Bond is now denying ever saying it,
>and why Bond is telling a different story.

J.Bond spent over 5 hours on the phone with the tape interveiw
that you are talking, thats along time and I am sure that it must
be difficult to conduct an interview of this lenght over the
phone, people are bound to say things and the other person on the
other end may get the wrong idea or the conversation may lead of
in a different direction than intended to. And anyway, how long
was it since the Roswell incident, people are going to forget
things, its just human.

All the best

Ben
BUFOD
http://www.abcfield.force9.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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 5

                              Re: Alien Baloney

From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 17:42:27 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 09:11:23 -0400
Subject: Re: Alien Baloney


>Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 20:36:13 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time)
>From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Alien Baloney

>*  I managed to get out just in time during the ice storm that
>struck eastern Ontario and southern Quebec this year (ice was
>continuing to build on my windshield despite heat and lots of
>windshield wiper fluid) as I drove back to Toronto after an
>aborted plan to meet George Pantoulas who had promised us UFO
>wreckage from a crash in Megas Platanos, Greece (see CSETI's web
>page - it is one of 195 or so alleged UFO crashes reported so far
>(who says that aliens are better drivers than us?).

>       Nick Balaskas

Hi Nick.

I am currently researching a book on alledged UFO crashes and I
am amazed that you quote "it is one of 195 or so". With the help
of K Randle my list only stands at 166, perhaps you could
enlighten me as to the other thirty or so? I would be extremely
grateful.

Or could you point me in the direction of where I could obtain
further information please.

Many thanks in advance.
---
      People can have it any colour, as long as its black!
                       Sean Jones
 Homepage--http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Zone/1745/index.htm
         Research 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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 5

                          Re: Stacy, Corso & Birnes

From: Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith]
Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 21:48:52 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 10:00:56 -0400
Subject: Re: Stacy, Corso & Birnes


With the compliments of the Duke of Mendoza:

>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: "Jerome Clark" <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Sarah McClendon
>Date: Thu, 04 Jun 98 10:13:00 PDT

>In the interest of fairness,

Whatever that has to do with it. I have an elaborate analogy
involving a claim that Princess Diana was really a man,
though, if you really want to push this.

>But then some people will believe anything.

Yep. There are even people who have thought that Phil Klass
would chuck them into the Chesapeake Bay riddled with
bullets, or some such thing, should they take up an
invitation to go sailing with the Dread Debunker.

It is, of course, far more ludicrous to think Kenneth Arnold
mistook a few pelicans for anomalous flying objects but,
iconoclastic to the last, I have laughed a lot harder at the
"death threat' scenario. Life's a bitch, ain't it.

best wishes
Portside D. Mainsail
Lee-Oh!






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 5

             Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force

From: joel henry <jhenry@wavefront.com>
Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 14:49:06 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 09:53:54 -0400
Subject: Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force

After reading many of the comments on the various pictures taken
of the so-called "Roswell Debris" aka Rawin ballon aka Mogul
balloon, I believe I have come up with a scenario to explain the
differences and similarities of the contents of these photos.

1- We know that the gov. lied about the original weather baloon
explanation so the world wide distributed photo of Marcel Sr.
sitting next to the rawin balloon debris is a willful and obvious
hoax perpetrated on the whole world.

Why stop there? If it was impotant enough to lie about, then the
wheels of counterintelligence would have started rolling as well.
One story won't cover all the bases.

2- the other photo(s) purporting to be of actual Roewell debris
or ballon material (depending who you ask) is actually a cleverly
manipulated mix of the most innocuous actual Roswell debris mixed
together well with some ballon debris in order to create the
condition that if anyone came forward and said "yes that photo is
of real roswell debris!" then anyone familiar with tha ballons
will also come forward and say "no! that's balloon debris!".

The worst thing here is they will both be right and the material
will then forever be labelled balloon debris no matter what is
said later. They cover their asses no matter who comes forward.
They probably thought that someday one of the cleanup crew might
come forward with a piece, and the likelyhood of it being so
different from anything on earth to prove extraterestrial origin
was very low. Especially from a small ruined piece.

Ramey knew he had to get people thinking weather ballon no matter
what the stories were that came up later. What better way to hide
the truth than stick it in plain site mixed up inthe middle of a
great big weather ballon debris lie!

As it turned out, Ramey's debunking took very well and silenced
the incident for 2 decades until Marcel Sr. finally came out of
the closet. And the burden of doubt has still been mercylessly
preserved even up to today.

I wish they hadn't hauled the debrtis away so quickly, so some
impudent serviceman could have gotten a really good look at what
was there and noticed the deception.

You have to hand it to Ramey, he knew he had to silence the
saucer issue quick and thorough. He succeeded at that all too
well. It makes you wonder if plans for such an occurance had
already been thought out and planned with several avenues to
chose from depending on the exact nature of the incident to cover
all the bases. And they are still doing it today.

Joel Henry


*****************************************************
Minnesota MUFON Webmaster
Minnesota MUFON Web Page= http://www.wavefront.com/~jhenry/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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 5

                        Re: Area 51 Still Operational

From: John Rimmer <johnr@magonia.demon.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 21:12:59 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 09:56:05 -0400
Subject: Re: Area 51 Still Operational

>Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Skywatch: Area 51 Still Operational
>From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
>Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 12:10:24 -0400
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>The UFO phenomenon is not supported by Lazar, or crop circles, or
>any of the promiscuously promised "great revelations" that are
>"just around the corner". It is supported by over 50 years of
>well documented sightings and trace evidence.

Here we go again, more armwaving. Where are these cases? Where is the
documentation other than in a stream of unreferenced pot-boilers?

>While the Lazars, Corsos, and Santilli's of the world endlessly
>promise and never deliver substantial proof of their wild claims,
>the real sightings are going on, and the data potential they
>represent is largely untapped.

>How many good distance estimates have slipped through the cracks,
>to take just one key measurement? With good distance
>measurements, we can do altitude, speed, luminous energy output.
>Yet few investigators make an effort to obtain triangulation,
>they simply rely on wild guesses by witnesses.

How can you get good distance measurements without first
*knowing* the altitude, size, etc? How can you get triangulations
if there's just one witness location? Where are the cases with
witnesses clearly seeing the same object from distant locations?

Documentation please!

>How many areas exist for some good experimental science to be
>done on UFOs? Many. If nothing else, work on free-air ionization,
>electrostatic and electrodynamic effects on lighting and power
>systems, energy required to produce burn traces and ground
>impressions in various sorts of soil...

Again, where are these trace cases? Jerome Clark was making great
deal of noise a while ago about Trans-en-Provence (France) but
he's gone all quiet about that now that it's been demolished by
French researchers who were actually on the spot. Now I see
someone on the Update is trying to resurrect Ubatuba which was
buried 30 years ago. Do me a favour!

>Science on UFOs is moved forward by incremental basic work,
>founded on good field investigation, not by revelation. And if
>half the effort spent on the tricksters was spent on real science
>done on real cases, we'd be getting somewhere.

I agree. If people were doing REAL research we wouldn't be
wasting our time on the dear dead extraterrestrial hypothesis.

>So don't lose hope, but shift focus to where the real work can be
>done. And remember: If it sounds like a con, it probably is a
>con. Don't waste time on tricks.

Here, here. And most of what I read sounds like a con to me.

--
John Rimmer






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 5

                              Re: Pres. Carter

From: RGates8254@aol.com [Robert Gates]
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 02:17:55 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 10:06:45 -0400
Subject: Re: Pres. Carter

>  To: updates@globalserve.net
>  From: "Beverly Trout" <btufo@netins.net>
>  Subject: Jimmy Carter
>  Date: Sat, 30 May 98 10:10:13 PDT

>  Does anyone recall details of Carter's report (while he was
>  president) of - as I recall - an aggressive giant rabbit?  I'm
>  not sure of my own recall - I think it was while he was in a
>  boat....maybe while he was on vacation somewhere???

Jimmy was on a float trip in central idaho when this incident
happened. If I recall correctly they had just come ashore for a
lunch break or something like that when the rabbit jumped into
Carters lap. Carter and nobody with him will divluge any of the
details of the rabbit caper.

So we are left with a very tiny Presidential coverup that has
been maintained for all these years.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 5

             Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force

From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 17:39:08 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 09:57:31 -0400
Subject: Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force

>From: JBONJO@aol.com
>Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 10:39:23 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears
>             Air Force General


>If you have any specific questions re the Roswell fotos, please
>email them to me and I will attempt to address them. Please
>include your name, location, and agreement that these can be
>posted on the web.

>JBONJO

>http://www.ufomind.com/people/j/johnsonj/ James Bond Johnson
>http://www.execpc.com/vjentpr/jbond.html Roswell Crash Photographer

I've been thinking of this U of T thing, and here is what comes to
my mind.  One of the greatest frustrations of all photographers is
that negatives contain many times the information than can be shown
on even the best of prints.  It is a fact of photographic life.

The U of T needs to make high resolution digital scans from the
original negatives and make them available to researchers.  These
would be far more valuable than any sort of photographic print.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 5

             Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force

From: RGates8254@aol.com [Robert Gates]
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 01:54:45 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 10:04:21 -0400
Subject: Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force


>  Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 00:36:17 -0500 (CDT)
>  To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>  From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
>  Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air
>           Force General

>  >>From: KRandle993@aol.com [Kevin Randle]
>  >>Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 12:58:31 EDT
>  >>To: updates@globalserve.net
>  >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears
>  >>                         Air Force General

>  >In essence told one story on tape in 1989 (before he was well
>  >known in the UFO side of life) THEN after almost 9 years of being
>  >exposed to various Roswell tales storys, hype, theories and
>  >otherwise, he is now telling a different story as he has become
>  >more known.

>  >This is very similar to other Roswell witnesses who fingered "the
>  >crash site" as being in one place, then when fame/money/or other
>  >reasons come along they change their story to fit the current
>  >situtation. As I recall we are up to 5-7 "this is the crash
>  >site..." locations around Roswell.

>  Kevin:

>  I appreciate that you finally appreciate the problem. But we only
>  have to extrapolate your argument one step further to cast
>  serious  aspersions on any number of allegedly original stories.
>  In other words, why should Jim Ragsdale's _first_ story be taken
>  at face value in light of subsequent ditherings and changes? Why
>  not assume he was dissembling -- cashing in on potential fame &
>  money -- to begin with? Ditto Frank Kaufmann and Frankie Rowe,
>  or, for that matter, Glenn Dennis.

>  Yes, we now have some 5-7 claimed crash sites. Perhaps you and
>  Stanton Friedman would like to apportion part of the blame for
>  same between you? Failing that, maybe you could just tell us
>  which crash site is the real one, and which fakes we should
>  avoid. After all, at $15 a pop, this stuff adds up pretty
>  quickly. Friedman is welcome to annoint his favorite crash site
>  as well, or sites, as the case may be. And of course you both
>  remain free to assign different dates to the many crashes, too.
>  If in doubt about any of the above, I cordially suggest you
>  consult The Day After Roswell by Mssrs. Cor$o and Birne$ for
>  definitive details, a move which should allay at least one or two
>  of my critics.

Dennis,

Before you blither and blather on, you owe Kevin a giant apology.
 For had you carefully read the message you would have discovered
that it was in fact me that you are responding to, not Kevin
Randle.  As for Corso and tend to disbelive his story BUT I am
willing to wait and see what the CAUS lawsuit turns up.  It might
be real interesting.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 5

             Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 14:10:13 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 09:35:21 -0400
Subject: Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force

>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
>Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 12:44:37 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears
>             Air Force General

<snip>

>And I could predict that nothing is ever going to be discovered
>that would convince that Roswell was extraterrestrial. So what?

>KRandle

Kevin:

Thanks for taking the time to address all my comments. Greatly
appreciated. You could make the above prediction, but if you did,
you'd run the risk of being wrong one day.

For example, the Air Force could come forward and say, OK, here's
the real Roswell debris, Cor$o was right all along, and I think
even you would agree that I would probably have to go along,
especially if they put on a stage show and demonstrated some
really cool extraterrestrial technology.

Conversely, if a saucer were to crash in downtown Cincinatti
tomorrow, perhaps during an aborted abduction, I might also
seriously reconsider Roswell in light of same, especially if
I-beams and examples of Toughflon were recovered by the ton,
along with four-fingered aliens.

My prediction, on the other hand, will stand the test of time.
Because you will never accept as fact any Air Force denials of
possessing saucer debris recovered at Roswell. So I can't imagine
a scenario -- any scenario -- that would lead to your concluding
that whatever Roswell was, it was of totally terrestrial nature.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 5

                          Re: Stacy, Corso & Birnes

From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 13:36:26 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 09:17:47 -0400
Subject: Re: Stacy, Corso & Birnes

>From: William Hand ufotruth@ix.netcom.com
>Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 04:50:22 -0500 (CDT)
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Sarah McClendon

<snip>

>Then you have no basis to call him a liar if you are not even
>willing to tell us, in your opinion, what he has lied about.

I'll tell you, in my opinion, what he lied about: seeing alien
bodies at Ft. Riley, being in charge of a file cabinet of Roswell
debris in the Pentagon, seeding same to technology, and so on. I
do, however, believe the part about him being in the Army.

>If you think he is such a LIAR then why is he signing a sworn
>affidavit for the Citizens Against UFO Secrecy?

Let's wait and see what the affidavit says first. But certainly
one who publishes an entire book based on personal fantasy would
have no trouble at this stage continuing the charade. What's the
Army or anyone else going to do -- court-martial him?

>You just don't like it that he
>is willing to tell us about it so we can know the truth he
>knows about UFOs/ETs/Roswell.

Yes, but there's only one thing wrong with this pretty picture:
you see, Cor$so doesn't *know* the truth about UFOs, ETs, and
Roswell. He got together with William Birnes, who is a writer and
book packager, and they cashed in on the 50th anniversary of
Roswell, producing a book that is long on personal claims and
totally devoid of anything resembling proof. You are the sucker,
and Cor$o & Birne$ are the suckees, if you will.

>If you would have done any real RESEARCH into Col. Corso
>you would have known the answer. There were FOUR fingers
>on the aliens. Col.Corso stated this on the Art Bell show.
>Bill Birnes stated on the Art Bell show that in the final
>rush to meet a deadline he accidently made a mistake in the
>book and put down six fingers instead of four.

Real RESEARCH, puh-leeze! (I've at least interviewed Birnes, have
you?) They got caught in a major screw up (probably after
watching the Alien Autopsy film)! What did you expect Birne$ to
say, "Oops! You caught me!" I've been rushed to meet deadlines
before, too, but I don't normally mistake four for six.

<snip>

>So will you PLEASE
>stop trying to bash and trash Col. Philip J. Corso? Of course
>you won't stop because you are trying to wrongfully discredit
>him to keep the UFO/ET coverup going.

>Best Regards,
>William

What coverup, dear boy? Do you think if there were an effective
coverup in operation that Cor$o's book -- to assume for the
briefest period of time measurable that it were actually truthful
-- would have been allowed to see the light of day?

What coverup? Have there ever been more UFO books and videos
available than there are now, ditto TV shows, ET-themed movies,
the X-Files and so on? What about the WWW? What coverup?

What do you want whoever is supposed to be in control of the
coverup to say that you don't already claim to *know*?

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 5

                         The Sheffield Non-Incident

From: David Clarke <dclarke14@compuserve.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 15:00:00 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 09:22:02 -0400
Subject: The Sheffield Non-Incident


The so-called "Sheffield incident" rather than being the biggest
UFO event this decade, as some people desperate for fame and
money would pretend, is more likely the biggest load of bull..

Max Burns' ever more desperate and obsessive attempts to prop up
the case he was determined would be "Britain's answer to Roswell"
grow funnier by the minute.

No one doubts lots of people saw funny lights and aeroplanes in
the sky over the Peak District on march 24, 1997..least of all
me....the RAF have admitted in Parliament they were involved in a
low-flying exercise that night which involved jets flying as low
as 250 foot as part of training for action in the Gulf.

The Tornados involved were not interceptor type fighters, they
were Gr1 strike bombers based at RAF Marham in Norfolk, planes
which would not be used in any interception mission involving a
potential UFO.

What people saw that night were not UFOs, they were military jets
and possibly a low-flying civilian aircraft too (it was even
filmed over the Sheffield, and I have a copy of the video).

We can argue all day about what people did or did not see, but
Max's report about this incident boils down to one specific
claim:

Namely, he claims a UFO - or Extraterrestrial craft in his case -
shot down a pursuing Tornado fighter over Sheffield that night
with the death of its pilot.

I challenge Max, as I have done on several occasions in the past
to provide me with:

1. The name of the base from which this Tornado was flying, and
its registration number

2. The name of the pilot who he claims died as a result of an
Extraterrestrial attack.

Despite repeatedly promising to supply this information, so far
Max has come up with zilch.

These are big claims, and without any solid evidence to back them
up Max's Sheffield Report remains just another collection of
stories from people who saw lights in the sky.

I have put the MOD on the spot over this incident and asked them
directly if they scrambled jets that night to intercept a UFO.
They have categorically denied such an event took place, and
maintain all military aircraft flying that night were taking part
in a pre-planned and pre-booked training exercise.

No doubt Max will claim they are lying and I am just another
agent of the cover-up, but these statement have been made on the
record and if they are lies then they can be challenged in the
House of Parliament if necessary.
If Max can provide me with one shred of solid evidence to back up
his claim that an alien craft shot down a Tornado that night -
surely the most momentous event in the history of the world -
then we can take this case further.

If he cannot provide the name of the base, and the name of the
pilot (hasn't his family wondered where he has been for the last
14 months?) then these claims should be regarded as the
unsubstantiated nonsense which they surely are.

In fact, so sure is he of what happened that night that his story
has changed on several occasions: first the Tornado had been shot
down and crashed into a reservoir with the loss of both its pilot
and co-pilot, then it had been "vanished" or captured. now the
co-pilot has managed to bail out and tried to hitch a lift back
into Sheffield while covered in aviation fuel.

If it wasn't so serious a claim it would be good material for a
Monty Python sketch, but it's obvious even Max himself can't
decide which one of these fantasies he is going to run with.

Even the News of the World - a downmarket rag known for
swallowing some of the biggest turkeys in the history of
newspapers - did not believe Max's claims so his chances of
pursuading the rest of the real world amount to precisely zilch.

So come on Max - put up or shut up - where is your evidence?

Who saw a UFO shoot down a Tornado?

Where was the Tornado based?... and what was the name of the
pilot?

I would lay a hefty bet that you will never be able to answer
these questions because this event simply never happened.

And finally, in the case of Mr Dagenhart - despite Mr Dagenhart
expressly asking Max Burns not to use his name in connection with
his claims, Max continues to do so to all and sundry on the
Internet.

What this shows is Max's complete disregard for an individual's
wish to remain anonymous and the ethics which he employs in the
course of his "investigations."

Mr Dagenhart has not been "silenced" by the MOD, his "source" was
in fact myself (but as you all know, I'm working for MI5). When I
contacted him and read him selected portions from Max's Sheffield
report (which Max had promised to send him but never did) he was
quite simply and to use his own words "horrified".

Dagenhart says Max made no reference to his claims about a
Tornado being shot down by a UFO in the conversations they had,
and certainly did not tell him he was intending to use his
(Dagenharts) testimony in a story claiming that he had seen the
co-pilot of a Tornado shot down by a UFO.
That is why this witness withdrew his evidence. He says the man
was not dressed in RAF flying gear, he was an Indian or Caribbean
man dressed in dark clothing.

It's a huge jump in logic and the rules of evidence to claim this
proves he was the co-pilot of a downed Tornado.

All this proves is simply how gullible some UFO believers really
are.

For those who are inferested in what REALLY happened on March 24,
1997, my feature article in the forthcoming issue of UFO Magazine
(published at the end of this month) will set out the facts - ALL
of them backed up by checkable, verifiable sources of evidence.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 5

             Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force

From: ufotruth@ix.netcom.com [William Hand]
Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 13:35:20 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 09:14:43 -0400
Subject: Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force

>From: JBONJO@aol.com
>Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 10:39:23 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears
>             Air Force General


>If you have any specific questions re the Roswell fotos, please
>email them to me and I will attempt to address them. Please
>include your name, location, and agreement that these can be
>posted on the web.

>JBONJO


Mr. James Bond Johnson,

First of all I would like to state that you are not the Roswell
Crash Photographer. The only thing you photographed was the
weather balloon JUNK that General Ramey displayed in his office.
What you photographed was nothing but a pile of junk that General
Ramey had switched for the REAL extraterrestrial wreckage that
was recovered. Now, I did not say the above to trash, bash, or be
rude to you. I said it because it is the truth.

Heck, at least we know the Army did tell the truth about one
thing.
What was photographed in Ramey's office was nothing but a weather
balloon just like they said. Should we believe that what they
displayed to the public was anything else? Surely, if they did
lie to us and what they found was NOT a weather balloon they
would NOT have displayed the UNKNOWN material to the PRESS for
them to photograph! They would have simply gotton a weather
balloon out of storage, had a few people stomp on it, partially
burn it, and then display it to the public and told them that was
what they REALLY found.

No one could have mistaken the junk that General Ramey displayed
in his office for a "flying disk", "flying saucer", or anything
other that a pile of weather balloon junk muchless highly trained
military officers. Now, I have no experiance when it comes to
weather devices but if I woke up one morning and found a pile of
junk like what Ramey displayed in his office spread across the
road infront of my home there is NO WAY that I would mistake it
for anything like a flying disk, flying saucer, or anything
"alien". I seriously doubt that any of the officers at the 509th
Bomb Group were SO incompetent that they would mistake the junk
that was displayed in his office for a flying saucer. If they
were that incompetent (and they were not) they should have all
been fired immediately.

Also, we need to realize that there are many witnesses who have
came forward who have described the bodies, the actual craft that
was recovered, the unique properties of the wreckage (like tin
foil thick material that would not burn, thin and light weight
I-Beams that would not break or burn, material that could be
folded up and it would unfold and become smooth again without any
creases like water, little wires that you could shine light
through one side and it would come out the other, etc..), the
recovery operation, etc. I could go through a whole list of names
but I will not because this letter is already getting long.

Now, we even have Retired Col. Philip J. Corso who was the former
head of the Army's foriegn technology division and a one time
member of the White House National Security Council (if that is
the correct name for it, I am a little sleepy) who has came
forward and admitted that he saw AUTOPSY photos of the alien
bodies that were recovered from Roswell, photos and drawings of
the CRAFT that was recovered, documents detailing the recovery
operation, and actual DEBRIS from the crash. This VERY CREDIBLE
witness is even planning to sign a sworn affidavit for the
Citizens Against UFO Secrecy!

If even ONE of the main witnesses of the Roswell Incident who saw
the craft or bodies is telling the TRUTH, and there are several
so I am sure that at least a few are, then there is NO WAY that
the military would have displayed ANY of the ET wreckage to the
PRESS or the PUBLIC. They would simply force witnesses into
silence with threats, make witnesses alter their testimony, and
display a weather balloon instead of the REAL WRECKAGE.

Heck, they might have even gotten lucky because of the fact that
both the weather balloon they used to show the press instead of
the real wreckage and the real wreckage both had symbols on them!
It would have been a nice coincidence for them to use to their
advantage to make people think what they captured was the fake
weather balloon stuff they showed the press in Ramey's office! Of
course I have not seen ANY evidence that the were any symbols on
ANY of the JUNK in Ramey's office.


There is more than enough evidence in various forms and
especially witness testimony to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt,
that what crashed outside of Roswell NM in early July of 1947 was
that of an extraterrestrial space craft. There are MANY witnesses
who have came forward and have spoke about the actual craft that
was found, the bodies, the HORRIBLE THREATS against witnesses
over what the Army said was just a pile of weather balloon JUNK.


So I guess what I am trying to say or ask you in this letter is
to please use common sence and realize that the JUNK in General
Ramey's office could NOT have been ANYTHING other than a simple
weather balloon that was shown instead of the real wreckage. That
is what logic, rationality, the evidence, and common sence points
too. So please, whether you have changed your story or not, like
some people have suggested, don't keep on going around telling
people that the junk you saw in his office was the real debris
when clearly it was NOTHING other than weather balloon JUNK!

All I want is for the full truth about Roswell to come out and to
say that the "JUNK" in Ramey's office was the REAL ET debris will
NOT help that occur. It will actually just help the debunkers and
government keep the truth from coming out that much longer.

Take care and God Bless you sir. I hope you have not been
offended by this letter. I have nothing against you at all. I
wish you a great, happy, peaceful, healthy, and wondeful life.
The only thing that I am against is the ridiculous idea that the
stuff in Ramey's office could have been the REAL ET debris.

Best Regards,
William











   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 5

                          Re: Stacy, Corso & Birnes

From: Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith]
Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 21:48:46 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 09:59:34 -0400
Subject: Re: Stacy, Corso & Birnes

With the compliments of the Duke of Mendoza:

>From: William Hand ufotruth@ix.netcom.com
>Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 04:57:55 -0500 (CDT)
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Sarah McClendon

I should like to thank Mr Hand for his meticulously
researched, soberly stated and highly detailed rebuttal of
my comments, e.g.

>The book is not improbable at all.

and

>Corso is NOT a liar. YOU are the LIAR. PERIOD.

I will be obliged henceforth to consider these important
findings when dealing with Col Corso's revelations, and am
most grateful to Mr Hand for his contribution to our
knowledge of these vital matters.

Mr Hand also touches a nerve when he says, or rather
trumpets:

>HE HAS A LOT MORE HONOR THAN YOU! AT LEAST HE REALIZES
>THAT THE PUBLIC HAS A RIGHT TO KNOW THE TRUTH SO HE
>TOLD WHAT HE KNEW. IF YOU AND YOUR BOSSES HAD ANY
>HONOR ALL OF YOU WOULD DO THE SAME.

My bosses & I are currently rather tired having spent many
weeks in meetings under the Arctic ice aboard the nuclear
submarine USS *Masonic Ritual* considering how thick to make
the paper on which my latest book was to be printed. In the
end we decided that as our cover in that respect was blown
anyway, we'd go for a decent weight and finish and forget
about the 1950s loo-roll effect suggested by one officer of
the watch, who was also doubling as night bar steward, a
post he considered beneath his station.

The great thing about being in a sub under the Pole at this
season is that the sun is over the yardarm for six months at
a time. (See separate post for more seafaring news.)

Meawhile Mr Hand should be warned that the Mossad satellite
CNI-DAWG, equipped with X-ray vision, is now stationed over
his home and has already established that (a) he does not
wear pink silk pyjamas (b) he eats vegetables (c) he does
not sleep in black satin sheets and (d) numerous other
significant negatives too personal to be listed here.

He should also be aware that the bosses are a bit pissed off
too and CNI-DAWG has been programmed to shower his house
with very old gefilte fish and exceptionally dense falafels
if he calls their or my honor into question again.

Yrs &c
Poutryfarm D. Marranhen
Chicken Soup

PS: Col Corso is a goddam liar, and a goddam bad liar too.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 5

               C-E: Argentine Pilot Claims He Flew With Ufo 20

From: John Stepkowski <legion@MIRA.NET>
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 16:02:06 +1000
Fwd Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 11:06:30 -0400
Subject: C-E: Argentine Pilot Claims He Flew With Ufo 20

Greetings All:

Something which may be of particular interest to our Sth. American
colleagues.

 -  John

====================================================================

>From AFP: - Argentine pilot claims he flew with UFO 20 years ago

   BUENOS AIRES, June 1 (AFP) - An Argentine pilot has claimed he
flew near an unidentified flying object (UFO) 20 years ago but did
not tell anyone until now for fear of being considered mad, the DyN
news agency said Monday.

   Aldo Mastice, who flies for a regional airline said he was
flying back from Buenos Aires to Neuquen at midnight two decades ago
when an object as long as a bus flew over his plane.

   The object, which "crossed our route on a south to north
course," was "illuminated, but it was as if the light was part of
the object," the pilot explained. "It was not the shape of a
plate."

   But authorities at Ezeiza international airport here said that
no other traffic was in the area at that time except a plane whose
position had already been identified.

   Mastice said that at the time he contacted the pilot of the
other plane and that both agreed to "keep their mouths shut."

   Mastice said that he had kept quiet about the incident for fear
he would be considered crazy. "Luckily the crew of the other plane
saw it too."

====================================================================
--

PROJECT 1947                        |  E-Mail:
http://www.iufog.org/project1947/   |  legion@mira.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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 5

                            Re: Nazi UFO Research

From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 08:11:10 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 10:46:31 -0400
Subject: Re: Nazi UFO Research

Kevin McClure has asked me to post the following research
document which takes a look at alleged Nazi UFOs.

Please feel free to copy this to anyone or any Net forum or list
you think would find it interesting.

If anyone wishes to respond to Kevin by email I can forward
messages etc on to him. He gives his snail mail address at the
end.
Andy

SECRETS OR LIES? - investigating the Nazi UFO legends
by Kevin McClure
This document is

1. a request for help with research

2. a report on research so far

3. a note of caution to those who have concluded that there is a
continuous line of development from a world war II German
technology involving the flight of high performance circular and
spherical aircraft, to the stimuli for a wide range of aerial
events that have been reported between the end of the war and
now.

4. a response to the information presented by Tim Matthews in his
widely distributed report titled 'Flying Saucers: SECRET HISTORY!'

Introduction

I'm certainly not the first researcher to attempt to establish
what is, and isn't, true among the many claims made concerning
the achievements of German wartime technology. I'm sure I won't
be the last. I'll openly admit that I have a very limited
understanding of any kind of technology, including aeronautical
issues, and that I have to depend on others to assist me in that
respect. But then, I suspect that much of the research that is
necessary here deals with a mixture of history, belief, and
disinformation. And I'm familiar with all of those.

I do hope to reach a reasonably firm conclusion to the question,
at least so that if any further information on the subject comes
to light, we can tell how it fits in, and whether it's likely to
be true. And it's only fair that I admit to my current view. I'm
not exactly open-minded, and on the basis of my research to date
I'd like to suggest the following hypotheses as a
starting-point:

1. Prior to 1950, no claim was made of any successful flight by
high performance circular or spherical aircraft in Germany
during the war.

2. No contemporary documentary evidence (from before 1946) has
been produced regarding any successful flight by high
performance circular or spherical aircraft in Germany during the
war.

3. The only sources of original information and evidence for the
wide, circular 'Schriever, Habermohl, Miethe and Bellonzo Flying
Disc' come from a brief newsagency report quoted in Der Spiegel
in 1950, under the name of a "Captain Rudolph Schriever" (also
possibly appearing at the same time in the Italian press), and
from German Secret Weapons of the Second World War by Major
Rudolf Lusar, published in Germany in 1957, and in London and
New York in 1959. Schriever seems to suggest that the craft did
not progress beyond blueprint stage, but Lusa appears to have
taken the 'Schriever' account, turned the planned speed and
height figures into ones that had actually been achieved,
changed some of the technical details, and added the vague,
non-technical drawing of this supposed craft which has been
reprinted in various contexts since.

I am not aware that Schreiver's existence has ever been
confirmed, and no proof has been produced to show that Lusar
would have had direct access - denied to conventional historians
- to any source of information about such a 'flying disc', which
he claims "climbed to an altitude of 12,400m" "within three
minutes", "and reached a speed of 2,000 km.h", on 14 February
1945. There is no independent evidence which suggests that these
claims have any basis in fact. An extensive search of
conventional literature on the war, together with German
encyclopedias, has found no mention of Lusar, or of any 'Flying
Disc' with such a performance record.

4. The only source of original information and evidence for the
spherical craft described as feuerball and kugelblitz is the
writer Renato Vesco, author of (the English title) Intercept -
But Don't Shoot, published in Italy in 1968 and in the USA in
1971, and of two other books in Italian. He was also the first
to make the link between those alleged craft and various reports
of light anomalies during the war, suggesting that they were the
cause of the 'foo fighter' phenomenon. No proof has been
produced to show how or why Vesco would have had access - denied
to conventional historians - to any source of information about
these flying spheres, and there is no independent evidence which
suggests that these claims for feuerball and kugelblitz have any
basis in fact. An extensive search of conventional literature on
the war together with Italian encyclopedias, has found no
mention of Vesco, or the feuerball and kugelblitz.

5. There is no contemporary (pre-1946), or other documentary
proof of any kind for the existence or flight, during the war,
or at any other time, of the unconventional 'flying saucer'
craft known as Vril and Haunebu. The material suggesting that
these craft, and the related methods of propulsion, existed
appears to have made its first appearance some 40 years after
the war. An extensive search of conventional literature on the
war has found no mention of Vril or Haunebu.

6. Schriever and Lusar make no mention of the feuerbal and
kugelblitz. Vesco makes no mention of the 'Schriever, Habermohl,
Miethe and Bellonzo Flying Disc'. Neither Lusar nor Vesco
mention the Vril or Haunebu craft.

Do you know more - or better?

None of the hypotheses set out above are final conclusions. I
want them to be discussed, and if evidence emerges to prove any
of them wrong, or to improve our understanding of this subject
in any way, it will be included in Secrets or Lies 2, which I
hope to put out in 3 months or so from now. However, they do
have a particular context, which needs explaining.

For some reason, a number of writers have recently placed new
articles about 'Nazi UFOs' in the UFO media. The first of these
that I came across was by UK researcher Tim Matthews, whose
article 'The New Ufology' in Sightings magazine, Vol.2 No 7
depended heavily on 'Nazi UFO' material taken from the Net,
which I recognised from a little research I'd done several years
ago. Since then, I understand that Matthews has written a book
called UFO Revelation, to be published by Blandford in 1998,
which will make substantial use of the supposed reality of
German wartime technology. He has also - as many of you will be
aware - published on the Net (and graciously sent me a hard
copy) a report titled Flying Saucers: SECRET HISTORY!

While I am responding particularly to Flying Saucers: SECRET
HISTORY!, this is certainly not the only material to have been
produced recently. UFO Magazine, Alien Encounters, The Probe and
Atlantis Rising have also published lengthy pieces which include
a variety of theories, including the one that the Nazi UFOs were
actually back-engineered from an alien craft that crashed in
Poland in 1938, and was appropriated by the Germans when they
invaded. Corso's Day After Roswell seems to suggest that the
German technological advances were so great that they may have
had 'help'. Nick Redfern's FBI Files expresses an acceptance, at
least, of the 'Nazi UFO' hypothesis on a similar basis. Without
exception, all of these pieces, and the arguments on which they
are based, depend on the assumption that successful flight(s) by
high performance circular and/or spherical aircraft took place
in Germany during the war. If the vailable evidence is
insufficient to reasonably conclude that those flights did not
take place, then we should be concluding that all those pieces,
all those arguments, are deeply flawed. The same point applies
to W A Harbinson's Genesis/Projekt UFO material, which has been
widely accepted as authoritative until now.


Specific questions

A number of questions need answering in order to progress this
research. Any help you can give with any of them will be greatly
appreciated. They also suggest some of the areas I believe
require consideration before anyone concludes that there really
were any 'Nazi UFOs'.

1. Any search on the Net using the key words 'Nazi UFOs' or
similar will produce several items by "Al Pinto" or "Tal",
apparently "Sponsored by Vangard Sciences, PO Box 1031,
Mesquite, TX 75150, USA". At first sight the extensive
information given on these sites appears factual and
well-researched, and apparently quotes an article written by
Vesco for Argosy Magazine, August 1969, which goes some way
beyond what is included in Intercept. Additional material re
Nikola Tesla and Viktor Schauberger is added to quotes from
Vesco and Lusar, particularly a claim that Schauberger had
developed the 'Schriever, Habermohl, Miethe and Bellonzo Flying
Disc' at Malthausen oncentration Camp, using prisoners to do the
work. Who are "Al Pinto" and "Tal", and what is "Vangard
Sciences"?

2. What genuine, provable, biographical information is available
for Renato Vesco? Pinto states that

"Renato Vesco is a fully licensed aircraft engineer and a
specialist in aerospace and ramjet developments. He attended the
University of Rome and, before WWII, studied at the German
Institute for Aerial Development. During the war, Vesco worked
with the Germans at the Fiat Lake Garda secret installations in
Italy. In the 1960s, he worked for the Italian Air Ministry of
Defense as an undercover technical agent, investigating the UFO
mystery."

However, on the cover of Intercept - But Don't Shoot is the
unambiguous statement that

  "Renato Vesco was born in Arona, Italy, in 1924. A licensed
pilot, in 1944 he commanded the technical section of the Italian
Air Force. In 1946-47 he served in the Reparto Tecnico Caccia.
Mr Vesco has been a senior member of the Italian Association of
Aerotechnics since 1943, and is a student of aeronautical
problems, particularly in the field of jet propulsion. He is a
contributor to various aeronautical publications."

There is clearly something very wrong here. Born in 1924, Vesco
would have been 14 or 15 when WWII broke out. Surely, by that
age, he had not attended the University of Rome and studied at
the German Institute for Aerial Development? If he worked with
the Germans at the Fiat Lake Garda secret installations in
Italy, why didn't Schreiver or Lusar mention him?

Would he really have "commanded the technical section of the
Italian Air Force" at the age of 19 or 20, and "been a senior
member of the Italian Association of Aerotechnics" at the age of
18 or 19? Surely, if he really were that remarkable, that
important, his name would have appeared in the index or
references of at least one of the countless books about the war
that I've examined? Yet it doesn't. Who was Vesco, and what did
he really know about wartime German aircraft? Where did his
material come from?

 3.Similar questions arise about Lusar. He is never more than
vaguely described, sometimes as being involved in the wartime
German Ministry of Propaganda, and elsewhere as being in the
Patent Office. However, he was only a Major, and it seems likely
that the material in his book was all, by 1957 available to
those who went to look for it. Is there any convincing
biographical information available about Lusar that suggests tha
t he had any special access to information about the 'Schriever,
Habermohl, Miethe and Bellonzo Flying Disc'?

4. Is there any convincing biographical information of any kind
about Captain Rudolph Schriever to confirm that given in the Der
Spiegel report? He was said to have been a former Luftwaffe
Captain, born in 1909 or 1910, and a graduate of Prague
University. He is also said to have been an aircraft designer
whose blueprints for a "flying top" were stolen from his
laboratory before Germany's collapse. In 1950 he was a US Army
Driver at Bremerhaven. If all these claims are true, I suspect
that it should be possible to trace Schriever, and to establish
whether he really worked with the others near Prague in 1944 and
1945 on the development of a 'Nazi UFO'.

5. Is there any convincing biographical material at all about
"Habermohl" that suggests that he was the Klaus Habermohl who
"designed the first radial-flow engine", and which places him
with the team near Prague in 1944/45?

6. Is there any convincing biographical information at all to
suggest that "the Italian Bellonzo" referred to by Lusar is, as
asserted by Matthews, the same person as "Guiseppe Belluzzo" who
Maurizio Verga has said was a "turbine expert who had been
working upon various circular craft from 1942."

7. The link between German spherical craft and the 'foo fighter'
stories appears to have been made first by Vesco in 1969.
Generally, the 'foo fighter' stories referred to lights and not
to solid objects, but Vesco produced a handful of very detailed
accounts (including reported conversations between the pilots
involved!) which have formed the basis of most modern accounts
of this phenomenon. I have a strong suspicion that in order to
find these accounts Vesco looked no further than contemporary
popular magazines such as Ray Palmer's essentially fictitious
Amazing Stories. The issue for May 1946 has been mentioned. Has
anybody else looked at this issue and come up with any answers?
I intend to deal with 'foo fighters' in detail in Secrets or
Lies 2.

8. Has anybody ever seen a copy of the supposed
magazine/newsletter Brisant, which is used to introduce
Harbinson's book Projekt UFO? Henry Stephens' 'German Research
Project sales list claims that "Harbinson's publisher lost his
copy of Brisant, no complete copy has been located". All that is
usua lly published from it is a supposed drawing of a plan of a
flying saucer, to quote Harbinson "altered by the West German
government to render them 'safe' for publication". I'll be
putting this point directly to Harbinson's publisher, but is
there any convincing evidence at all that Brisant, including the
drawing was anything other than a work of imagination produced
more than 30 years after the war?

9. Has anyone, previously, suggested that the AP release of
December 1944 about the Germans having "a secret weapon in
keeping with the Christmas season" which "resembles the glass
balls which adorn Christmas trees", "are coloured silve r and
are apparently transparent", and "have been seen hanging in the
air over German territory, sometimes singly, sometimes in
clusters", was actually a light-hearted bit of fun designed for
Christmas? The phenomenon described certainly doesn't bear any
resemblance at all to the 'foo fighter' reports.

More important, this item apparently appeared in the South Wales
Argus for 13 December 1944 and the New York Herald Tribune for 2
January 1945. Any competent historian will be aware that in
wartime, censorship ensures that the existence of mysterious,
enemy secret weapons is not announced by AP, and published
openly by the newspapers of combatant nations. Mainstream
history has taken no notice of these reports, and in the absence
of any evidence to the contrary I suggest they were no more than
reprints of a slight seasonal joke.

Tim Matthews, Bill Rose, and the need to test new evidence

Personally, I have little trouble in dismissing most of the
claims made in respect of the existence of Nazi UFOs. Tim
Matthews, in Flying Saucers: SECRET HISTORY!, has made a more
substantial case than most, although I consider that he has made
a number of assumptions which the evidence does not readily
support. Most of these will be apparent from the questions that
I have set out above.

Matthews has, however, made a set of particular claims which are
new, and have yet to be tested. These claims assert a 'secret
history' of the development of black and secret weapons
development under the cover of UFO sightings and explanations.
They are based on the research of Bill Rose, an individual who
has expertise as both an astronomer and photographer, and who I
have no doubt has great competence in those fields. I have seen
some of the work he has had published in astronomy magazines,
and am assured that it is of a high standard.

Rose has, apparently, been investigating the 'Nazi UFO' issue
for around three years, and I understand that he was, until
recently, working closely with Mark Ian Birdsall of Quest
Internationa l and UFO Magazine. I hope he hasn't given much
credence to Birdsall's 1988 'Nazi UFO' publication The Ultimate
Solution which carries a number of pictures of Hitler, and
contains some unusual assertions about German history.

Rose has, according to Matthews, conducted "on-site research in
Germany, Canada and America". On what sites, we are not told. He

"was able to discover that Dr Walter Miethe, whom all sources
agree was involved with Schriever, Klaus Habermohl and Guiseppe
Belluzzo (an Italian engineer) had been the Director of the
saucer programme at two facilities located outside Prague. In
May 1945, after testing of the prototype had taken place, both
Miethe and Schriever were able to flee in the direction of
Allied forces. Habermohl was captured by Soviet forces and
spirited East where he ended up working on various aviation
projects quite probably at facilities located outside Moscow."

Rose also, apparently,

"learned that not only had test flights taken place but that
film footage of these had been taken. This had always been
rumoured and makes perfect sense given the nazi fetish for
keeping records on everything. The footage, of good quality, has
subsequently been stored in a secure location and shown only to
a handful of people. Rose was shown some stills taken from the
original film and given his expert photo-technical background
concluded, after careful consideration, that this was probably
real and historical footage."

Leaving aside the problems of accurately identifying an alleged
still from a 50-year old movie film at a time when the
possibilities for the computer manipulation of images is
virtually limitless whatever the expertise of the observer,
these claims raise far more questions than they resolve. While
this account fits in with the legend of 'Nazi UFOs', that legend
appears to have little or no basis in proven, historical fact.
Suggesting that the conventional historical record lacks a few
facts that have been deliberately concealed is reasonable. A
proposition that a multitude of professional historians and a
media always hungry for new revelations about anything connected
with Nazi Germany, have spent 50 years on this subject and
failed to even identify, let alone investigate, this most high
profile, far-reaching series of events is simply implausible.

No period of history, ever, has received more attention than
WWII, and the focus, because of the vileness of what happened,
the mania of those involved, and the extent of the damage done,
has always been on Nazi Germany. Yet the history of 'Nazi UFOs'
simply does not exist in mainstream history. Instead, it depends
on unproven claims, on individuals with extreme right-wing
beliefs, and on publishers and magazines keen to profit from
sensational material, even where there is no evidence to suggest
that it is true. Such is the case with claims for a World War II
German technology involving the flight of high performance
circular and spherical aircraft. It has only ever existed in the
occult, paranormal, and ufological fringes.

I have no reason at all to suppose that either Bill Rose or Tim
Matthews have fabricated the evidence they are putting forward,
or that they are motivated by anything other than a genuine
desire to make a case they believe to be true. Without the
'wartime' material, Matthews' 'secret history' argument for the
terrestrial origins of what have been perceived as
extra-terrestrial UFOs is weakened though not, I think,
irrevocably destroyed. I think it is a viable argument even if
it is only begun in the 1950s, rather than the 1940s.

Rather, I suspect that neither Rose nor Matthews has exercised
sufficient caution in a field where caution needs to be almost
limitless. Neither has been involved in the UFO field for long,
and neither, so far as I know, has any experience of the odd mix
of 'occult' beliefs in superior intelligence and amazing
achievements that has attached itself to Nazism from the outset,
and continues to do so. They haven't learned the cynicism that
comes with experience of a field full of unreasoning belief, and
don't appreciate that if you go out as an 'expert' looking for
evidence for a book, or an article, or whatever, most of those
who you come across will be liars or fantasists looking, in
turn, for someone to publicise their case, or to publicly
support their version of events.

There may, occasionally, be exceptions to that rule. The
journalists who were offered the Hitler Diaries, and the eminent
historian who first examined them thought they had found one.
There are those who genuinely believe that the Nazis really
found the Spear of Longinus, with which Christ was killed to put
Him out of His agony. Others who are convinced that Nazi
explorers found a wonderful warm valley to inhabit in the middle
of the Polar Ice Cap, and live there still. On the other hand,
there still seem to be genuine doubts about the person who died
as Hess at Spandau. There is a mass of evidence, and it is hard
to entirely dismiss. But it is the weight and extent of that
evidence which gives it that position.

At present, we cannot decide what weight to give to the evidence
of Bill Rose, because we don't know what it is. Without it, I
suggest that Matthews' argument for the wartime flight of high
performance 'Nazi UFOs' is very thin indeed. With that evidence
once it is in the public domain and has been considered both by
professional, mainstream historians, and those of us who
understand how extraordinary beliefs develop and are propagated,
and for what reasons, the 'Secret History' argument may stand
up. I will look forward to being able to consider the full
detail of that evidence, particularly the sources which supplied
it, and how contact was made with them, in due course.

Conclusion, and a search for reference material

As I have said, this document is just a starting-point. To be
able to pursue this subject further much more reference material
is needed, and I'll set out a few items which, if you can
provide copies of them, would be really helpful. I can pay a
bit, but loans or photocopies would be hugely appreciated! The
following items come to mind . . .

*Argosy Magazine - June 1969 - article by Renato Vesco?

*American Legion Magazine, Dec 1945(?) re foo fighters

*Ray Palmer's Amazing Stories - any issue referring to foo
fighters

*Terziski, Vladimir - Close Encounters of the Kugelblitz Kind
(book)

*Steiger, Brad - The Rainbow Conspiracy (book)

*Kasten, L - The UFOs of the Third Reich (book)

*Mattern/Friedrich - UFOs Nazi Secret Weapon (book)

*Frank E Stranges - Nazi UFO Secrets and Bases Exposed (booklet)

*Michael X - We Want You Is Hitler Alive (book)

*Michael X - The German Saucer Story (book)

Thanks are due, at least, to David Sivier, Dave Newton, Peter
Brookesmith, Peter Williams, Wayne Spencer, Andy Roberts, Eugene
Doherty, Hilary Evans, Martin Kottmeyer and James Moseley, for
their help and advice in getting this far.

Contacting me is only really possible by post. I'm not on
E-mail, and I'm cautious with my phone number. However, my
address is:

3, Claremont Grove,
Leeds, LS3 1AX,
England,

and I'd be delighted to hear from anyone who can help with this
research.

Many thanks.

Kevin McClure






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 5

               C-E: Old Mystery Ripples Through UFO Circles -

From: John Stepkowski <legion@MIRA.NET>
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 08:19:29 +1000
Fwd Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 11:06:23 -0400
Subject: C-E: Old Mystery Ripples Through UFO Circles -

>From>: Victoria (BC) _Times-Colonist_  -- 31 May 1998

Old Mystery Ripples Through UFO Circles

HALIFAX, Nova Scotia (Canadian Press)--A strange object that crashed
into waters off Nova Scotia 31 years ago is making a splash in UFO
circles.

The story has been featured in segments on two TV shows--an Arts and
Entertainment special on UFOs, and *Sightings*, a now-cancelled American
series about the paranormal--and generated a book making the rounds at
New York publishing houses.

"Whatever it was, I don't know if we're ever going to be able to say with
absolute certainty," says researcher Chris Styles, who co-wrote the book.

"If nothing else it's a great mystery."

Styles, of Dartmouth, N.S., has spent the last five years trying to find
out what really happened on Oct. 4, 1967--the night several people from
Halifax to Shag Harbour, N.S., a town more than 150 kilometres west,
claim they saw an alien spaceship.

According to their stories, an 18-metre craft hovered over Shag Harbour,
tilted on a 45-degree angle and plowed into the water with a bright
flash and explosive roar, says Styles.

Three RCMP officers arrived at the site to find a glowing, pale yellow
object floating on the surface a kilometre from shore, he says.

By the time fishing boats and a coast guard vessel arrived, the object
had sunk, says Styles, adding his grandfather is among the witness
accounts.

Styles, who was 12 at the time, says as the strange object was spotted at
Shag Harbour, he saw an orange sphere hover over shipyards in Dartmouth.

The two sightings made headlines, then faded from the news after divers
failed to find any trace of the fallen object.

But Styles says he has uncovered government documents that reveal a
search effort in which authorities refer to the craft as an unidentified
flying object.

Styles says government insiders reveal an even stranger tale in which
two submerged objects were seen days later.

They suspect the Shag Harbour object travelled underwater up the coast
and met another craft that carried out underwater repairs, says Styles.

=======================================================================

--

PROJECT 1947                        |  E-Mail:
http://www.iufog.org/project1947/   |  legion@mira.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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 5

                           Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: "Greg Sandow" <gsandow@prodigy.net>
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 10:24:55 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 11:00:48 -0400
Subject: Occam's Razor and UFOs


"Mass Found in Elusive Particle," reads the headline on the front
page of today's New York Times. "Universe May Never Be the
Same."

And the subhead reads: "Discovery on Neutrino Rattles Basic
Theory About All Matter." This was certainly an important
scientific discovery. Neutrinos, the most elusive of all
subatomic particles, have long been thought to have no mass. Now,
apparently, scientists have proved that they DO have mass, thus
overturning all sorts of theories.

This gives me an occasion to talk about something I've been
thinking of for a while, Occam's Razor. This is a well-known
scientific adage, not exactly a theory or a principle, but a good
rule of thumb for research. It says, basically, that we shouldn't
make up theories without any reason, and that the simplest
explanation of something -- the one that does NOT require forming
new and alarming hypotheses -- is the one we should prefer.

No problem there. The scientist, Yoji Totsuka, who announced the
findings about the neutrino clearly shaves with Occam's Razor,
since he's quoted as saying: "We have investigated all other
possible causes of the effects we have measured and only neutrino
mass remains." In other words, he and his colleagues considered
all explanations that would have preserved the idea that
neutrinos don't have mass, and formed their radical, new idea
only after those explanations didn't work.

What does this have to do with UFOs? Well, skeptics like to
invoke Occam's Razor as one of their many reasons for concluding
that all UFO sightings have -- or probably have -- conventional
explanations. Peter Brookesmith has made that argument here; my
very smart composer friend Scott Johnson suggested it in a
conversation we had not long ago. In effect, they're saying:
"Here we have all these reports of strange lights, metallic
disks, you name it. Which is more likely, that they're all
misinterpretations of known phenomena (or of course lies), or
that they're ET visitors? Occam's Razor forces us to assume the
former."

But really it does no such thing. If it did, today's New York
Times headline would be impossible. It would have to read:
"Japanese-American Scientific Team Says Neutrino Has Mass;
Scientific Community Rejects Findings, Saying Occam's Razor Makes
Them Unlikely." Occam's Razor tells us how to do research, but
says nothing about what the research will reveal. It tells us to
eliminate familiar explanations first, but can't possibly say
that the radical new unconventional explanation will always turn
out to be false. If it did, scientific progress would be
impossible. We'd still believe in a flat earth, an "ether" that
fills all space, and the Biblical creation myth.

And in fact there's a great irony in skeptics turning Occam's
Razor against ufology. The irony is simply this: Responsible UFO
research is one of the best examples of Occam's Razor used
properly. What does a UFO investigator do when someone reports a
sighting? He or she tries to eliminate all conventional
explanations. That's what UFO witnesses do, as well. Over and
over, we read sighting reports that say something like: "I saw a
light, and I thought it was a plane. But I didn't hear any noise,
and soon the light descended close to the ground, behind a grove
of trees. So I figured it had to be a car, but...." Over and
over, UFO witnesses refuse to assume that what they're seeing is
something unknown. On the contrary, they assume it's something
familiar, and only when it clearly can't be do they conclude that
it's strange and unusual.

Some months ago, the Times reported another scientific upheaval.
Conventional scientific wisdom has long believed that mature
animals (including humans)don't grow new brain cells. Now it
turns out that this is wrong -- new brain cells do grow, after
all. Deep in the story was a sad little tidbit. Someone had
already proved that new brain cells grow, in research published
more than a decade ago. But nobody believed him. Science KNEW
that the growth of new brain cells was simply impossible.

That's what happens when you take Occam's Razor too far.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 5

                          Re: Stacy, Corso & Birnes

From: "Jerome Clark" <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Fri, 05 Jun 98 09:59:53 PDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 12:08:39 -0400
Subject: Re: Stacy, Corso & Birnes


> Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 21:48:52 -0400
> From: Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith]
> Subject: Stacy, Corso & Birnes [was: Sarah McClendon]
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

> With the compliments of the Duke of Mendoza:

> >To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
> >From: "Jerome Clark" <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Sarah McClendon
> >Date: Thu, 04 Jun 98 10:13:00 PDT

> >But then some people will believe anything.

> Yep. There are even people who have thought that Phil Klass
> would chuck them into the Chesapeake Bay riddled with
> bullets, or some such thing, should they take up an
> invitation to go sailing with the Dread Debunker.

Don't know that guy, I'm afraid, though once Klass made
a "joke" to that effect to me, in the course of a fairly
abusive communication.  Nobody, of course, has ever
accused Phil of possessing a sense of humor that rises
above the pre-adolescent. Speaking of believing anything:
Klass believes that ufology is tantamount to Communism,
among other odd and idiosyncratic notions.  Ah, what
one has to believe to be a Dread Debunker.

> It is, of course, far more ludicrous to think Kenneth Arnold
> mistook a few pelicans for anomalous flying objects but,
> iconoclastic to the last, I have laughed a lot harder at the
> "death threat' scenario. Life's a bitch, ain't it.

Sure is, my friend.  As I say, some people will believe
anything, even in supersonic pelicans.  Maybe
you're in the wrong field.  You really ought to be
taking your ideas to the cryptozoologists.

Cheers (and greetings from Gus),

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 5

                        Re: Area 51 Still Operational

From: "Jerome Clark" <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Fri, 05 Jun 98 09:54:48 PDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 12:13:48 -0400
Subject: Re: Area 51 Still Operational


> Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 21:12:59 +0100
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> From: John Rimmer <johnr@magonia.demon.co.uk>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Skywatch: Area 51 Still Operational

> >Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Skywatch: Area 51 Still Operational
> >From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
> >Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 12:10:24 -0400
> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

> Again, where are these trace cases? Jerome Clark was making great
> deal of noise a while ago about Trans-en-Provence (France) but
> he's gone all quiet about that now that it's been demolished by
> French researchers who were actually on the spot. Now I see
> someone on the Update is trying to resurrect Ubatuba which was
> buried 30 years ago. Do me a favour!

Ubatuba is a weak, hopeless case best forgotten.

Trans-en-Provence, recently attacked by French debunkers citing
anonymous sources and characterizing, in the style of rhetorical
inflation so beloved of their class, the GEPAN investigators as
"true believers," remains an interesting case, yet unresolved,
but judged intriguing and suggestive by a panel of independent
(i.e., nonufologist)  American scientists who looked at the
evidence.  A full statement of these scientists' views on the UFO
phenomenon in general, and the prospects of meaningful scientific
investigation of same, will be released shortly.  It will bear
little resemblance to anything liberal-arts major/literary critic
John Rimmer says here.  Of course it may be that John truly
believes science should be turned over to us English majors.

> >Science on UFOs is moved forward by incremental basic work,
> >founded on good field investigation, not by revelation. And if
> >half the effort spent on the tricksters was spent on real science
> >done on real cases, we'd be getting somewhere.

> I agree. If people were doing REAL research we wouldn't be
> wasting our time on the dear dead extraterrestrial hypothesis.

What silliness.  What (I assume assumed) ignorance. Those who
have done the REAL research, and who were or are also scientists,
have taken the ETH very seriously.  It is the Magonia types who
have sought to reduce UFO study to mere textual analysis and to
broad, sweeping claims devoid of empirical justification (e.g.,
Peter Rogerson's bizarre assertion that abduction stories are
triggered by Americans' supposed deep-seated fear of Hispanic
immigrants).  For a recent example of how REAL research is done,
see Brad Sparks' paper on the RB-47 case, in my The UFO
Encyclopedia, 2nd Edition, pp. 761-90.

I enjoy Magonia, which John edits, because it is fun to read and
full of imaginative notions too bold to wait for mere evidence to
justify them, but it doesn't tell me, or anybody, much about the
UFO phenomenon itself.  Magonia is best read as yet another
example of how a vastly complex, difficult-to-understand
phenomenon at the edges of knowledge is reinvented to meet the
needs, hopes, and fears of those observing and commenting on it.
John and his cohorts, alas, turn a psychosocial lens on everybody
but themselves.  It is not hard to imagine why.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 5

                              Re: Pres. Carter

From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 11:53:25 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 12:10:17 -0400
Subject: Re: Pres. Carter


>From: RGates8254@aol.com [Robert Gates]
>Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 02:17:55 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Pres. Carter

>>  To: updates@globalserve.net
>>  From: "Beverly Trout" <btufo@netins.net>
>>  Subject: Jimmy Carter
>>  Date: Sat, 30 May 98 10:10:13 PDT

>>  Does anyone recall details of Carter's report (while he was
>>  president) of - as I recall - an aggressive giant rabbit?  I'm
>>  not sure of my own recall - I think it was while he was in a
>>  boat....maybe while he was on vacation somewhere???

>Jimmy was on a float trip in central idaho when this incident
>happened. If I recall correctly they had just come ashore for a
>lunch break or something like that when the rabbit jumped into
>Carters lap. Carter and nobody with him will divluge any of the
>details of the rabbit caper.

>So we are left with a very tiny Presidential coverup that has
>been maintained for all these years.

>Cheers,
>Robert

There was no coverup, per se, that I'm aware of.

==== Begin one version found on the "net"===

The Killer Rabbit

Sharks are nothing compared to the rabbit that threatened Jimmy
Carter. For those of you who have forgotten that dramatic low
light of Mr. Carter's presidency, he was fishing out of a canoe
on a pond April 20, 1979, when a swimming rabbit charged Canoe
One. The President belabored the aggressive bunny with a canoe
paddle and the press had a wonderful time with the Attack of the
Killer Rabbit.

"Carter was not injured," said one tongue-in-cheek report.
Reports of what happened to the rabbit are not clear. The
President, in his fine 1988 book An Outdoor Journal (Bantam
Books) makes no mention of the incident (his only reference to
rabbits is that he used to shoot them as a kid).

===end===

This incident was an embarassment for Carter, but not really a
matter of National Security and there was no attempt (that I'm
aware of) to cover it up.  Of course, there was no Press Release
and I wouldn't have expected one to be released.

I should mention that the incident occured in West Virginia, not
in Idaho, and I was (at that time) the News Director at a radio
station near the Leetown Fish Hatchery, where Carter often went
fishing.  The Martinsburg Evening Journal (a conservative
newspaper at the time) ran a fairly large article about the
incident, with details obtained from workers at the hatchery,
rather than the Presidents press office.  As I recall, the Rabbit
actually was swimming in the river and attempting to get into the
President's canoe, and it was "discouraged" in it's attempt to
meet the President by hitting it repeatedly with the paddle.
This Rabbit was probably rabid, as this is not normal behavior
for rabbits in wild, wonderful, West Virginia.

One fact that was never mentioned in the press (that I'm aware
of) is that the Leetown hatchery was usually advised in advance
that the President was coming to fish.  If given enough warrning,
they'd make sure the stream that he was going to fish on was well
stocked, so as to make sure the President went back to Washington
a "happy camper".

Steve Kaeser

PS- Thanks for bringing this up.  It caused me to dig through a
lot of old memories I haven't reviewed in years.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 5

                     Re: Max Burns chat on #Visitations

From: Angela Shilling <angela@skipnet.com>
Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 09:38:20 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 13:27:41 -0400
Subject: Re: Max Burns chat on #Visitations

Max Burns has agreed to do a meeting on #Visitations.
He will be availible to answer your questions.

Saturday, June 6th - 7pm Pacific / 9pm Central / 10pm Eastern /
3am GMT

Where: #Visitations on the Undernet

How to Get to IRC: http://www.skipnet.com/~visitations/irc/


On the 24th March 1997 in and around the Pennines just outside of
Sheffield between the hours of 19.40 & 23.45 occurred one of the
biggest ufo incidents in recent years involving a huge Flying
Triangle, Military Jets, Sonic Booms, A Bolide Meteor, Unmarked
Helicopters, Glowing orange objects, and what I hope, when you
have studied the evidence, you will agree is a conspiracy on
behalf of the civilian & Military authorities to hide the facts
from the public about events one cold cloudless night.

Did a ufo destroy a Tornado jet killing the pilot? Are the
civilian & military authorities covering it up? Investigator Max
Burns speaks to local witnesses to find out what was happening
over the Pennines that night.

Read about it in The Sheffield Report:

http://www.skipnet.com/~visitations/sheffield/


-- BIOGRAPHY --

Name:           Max Burns

Age:                    35

D.O.B   :               04/12/62

Place of Birth:         Chester ( The North West of England )

Employment:     Entertainer/Marketing Manager /
                        Project Launch Leisure Industry

Contributing Writer For Alien Encounters Magazine UK

Picture Archive, Over 600 ufo photo's from around the world, 700 C.I.A
documents abductee art, video archive.

I have been a UFO researcher for 10 years have had an interest in the
subject since  sighting a craft at age9. Since I was a small boy strange
things have been going on, although i do not know if I am an abductee,
there are some anomalies in my life which i still do not have the answers
too. When I was about 5 I used to look out of my bedroom window and look at
the stars, but the question for me was not is there any life out there, but
my question was I wonder which planets are inhabited. Quite a profound
thought for some one of such a young age.also when i was about 6 or 7 I
remember a group of people round my bed during the night and a blue light
outside my window, but on this occasion i was too scared and put my head
under the blankets. then when i was 12 I went fishing in the countryside
with a friend we arrived at the lake which was a couple of miles away from
the nearest farm house next to Bluebell woods the time now was about
10.30am we both set our fishing gear up, and started the waiting game. at
about 12.30 I remember looking up at the sun which was right above us now
as it was July. And I remember thinking wow its hot then i felt like i was
coming over all dizzy and the air seemed to be filled with static
electricity I remember a humming sound well no not a humming sound, the
sound made by wet power lines, but more importantly there was no power
lines in fact there was no signs of technology within about a mile. then
the next thing I remember i was on the bank of the lake about 10 meters
away from my equipment, I felt like I was coming round from passing out I
was nauseous and disoriented and could here a noise coming from the field
at that point I felt scared and though that there must be a cow loose in
the barley field, the static type noise was also still there and i could
now make out a distant hum. i decided to pull myself to my feet as my
balance was still all over the place. as i got to my feet there was a
whoosh and the static noise was gone. i did not see any ship or anything, i
felt ill for about half an hour and then i noticed that i had not eaten any
of my sandwiches or had i used any of the bait for fishing and I had not
caught a single fish. at that point I shouted to my friend and asked what
time is it and he replied that it was 6.30pm i asked Trevor what was going
on and he gave me the Homer Simpson response ( I Dunno ) so we packed up
our stuff and confused and hardly speaking a word. that incident has
perplexed me since i was a small boy.. I must add here that i do not know
if I am an abductee, but strange things happen don't they?

About ten years ago I started having some time and decided to look into the
ufo subject making several good contacts around the world including Stanton
Friedman, Wendelle Stevens, John Lear, AJ Gevaerd Professor Cope Shellhorn,
G.C to his friends Bill Uhouse and My Dear Friend Christine Sanderson
(SkyGypsy) Who Know me well and I believe that when I tell them something
that they believe me to always being sincere. As well as lots of contacts
in UK Such as Graham Birdsall, Matthew Williams, Miles Johnston,and Phillip
Mantle as well as countless others. Most of my research was done privately
but about 3 years ago i decided to come public with some of the things I
have learned. Nina Pendread gave me the opportunity to be a contributing
writer for Alien Encounters UK. and I have written several articles for
them issues 13/14/15/16/17

I also work with some abductees from the UK without hypnotic regression and
I am just there to be a sympathetic ear to these people, although i cannot
speak for all of the people who claim that they have been abducted I am
quite certain that the good honest people who i deal with are being sincere
when they recall there abduction's to me. So yes I believe the evidence
shows we are in fact being visited by Extra terrestrials / Interdimentional
/ Time Travelers / Inner Earth Beings / Other. One of the above all of the
above who knows but where ever they are from is not important the fact is
that they are here.......is important..

Max Burns

---------------------------------------------------------------

UNDERNET SERVERS:

USA Servers:

LasVegas.NV.US.Undernet.org
RockHill.SC.US.Undernet.Org
washington.dc.us.undernet.org
StLouis.MO.US.UnderNet.org
SaltLake.UT.US.UnderNet.Org
McLean.VA.us.undernet.org
Baltimore.MD.US.Undernet.Org
NewYork.NY.US.Undernet.Org
SanDiego.CA.US.Undernet.org
dallas.tx.us.undernet.org
BayCity.MI.US.Undernet.Org
Arlington.VA.US.Undernet.Org
atlanta.ga.us.undernet.org
NewBrunswick.NJ.US.Undernet.Org

European Servers:

London.UK.eu.Undernet.org
Goettingen.DE.EU.undernet.org
Bari.it.eu.undernet.org
Regensburg.DE.EU.undernet.org
Caen.Fr.Eu.UnderNet.org
Oslo1.NO.EU.Undernet.org
Antwerpen.Be.Eu.Undernet.org

Other Servers:

auckland.nz.undernet.org
Vancouver.BC.CA.Undernet.Org
toronto.on.ca.undernet.org
montreal.qu.ca.undernet.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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 5

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: RobIrving@aol.com
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 13:09:03 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 13:31:55 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

>  From: "Greg Sandow" <gsandow@prodigy.net>
>  To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net>
>  Subject: Occam's Razor and UFOs
>  Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 10:24:55 -0400

Hi Greg,

>  This gives me an occasion to talk about something I've been
>  thinking of for a while, Occam's Razor. This is a well-known
>  scientific adage, not exactly a theory or a principle, but a good
>  rule of thumb for research. It says, basically, that we shouldn't
>  make up theories without any reason, and that the simplest
>  explanation of something -- the one that does NOT require forming
>  new and alarming hypotheses -- is the one we should prefer.

<snip>

Serious consideration of this forces one to agree with you...
Occam's Razor is a tool, or leveller - of course the level can be
read in different ways, depending on one's slant on things - but
not an ultimate justification.

>  What does this have to do with UFOs?

It has a lot to do with the predominant strand of UFO research,
i.e., the belief that a proportion of UFOs are Extraterrestrial
craft...

Of which there is no substantial evidence that we know of.

>  Responsible UFO research is one of the best examples of
>  Occam's Razor used properly. What does a UFO investigator
>  do when someone reports a sighting? He or she tries to eliminate
>  all conventional explanations.

You seem to be saying that once these conventional explanations
have been eliminated Occam's Razor would require that we look to
unconventional explanations: Take, say, Michael Hesemann's claim
that the increased radiation he says he detected in crop circles,
as he has eliminated in his mind all conventional explanations,
must be proof that aliens made the crop circle.

This is sad, but so typical of much UFO and associated research.

Just because something doesn't appear to fit conventional reasons
doesn't mean we suddenly have scientific licence to insert
fantasy in their place.  If we want to turn that fantasy into
convention we'd still need to apply at least the minimum of
convention to it.  It's easy to fit our shoddy explanations to
what might appear to be accurate testimony, but that doesn't make
either true.

Rob







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 5

                        Re: Area 51 Still Operational

From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 12:50:40 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 13:29:41 -0400
Subject: Re: Area 51 Still Operational

>Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 21:12:59 +0100
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: John Rimmer <johnr@magonia.demon.co.uk>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Skywatch: Area 51 Still Operational

>How can you get good distance measurements without first
>*knowing* the altitude, size, etc? How can you get triangulations
>if there's just one witness location? Where are the cases with
>witnesses clearly seeing the same object from distant locations?

>Documentation please!

There are some cases, where there are two witnesses, and
triangulation is possible.  There are also a few cases where
shadows as seen on the ground in the photographs, so (again)
distance and size can be triangulated.  The problem you will then
point out is the veracity of the witnesses or the photographs, so
providing documentation isn't really a good answer here, if
absolute proof is your goal here.

BTW, general distances sometimes be determined by an analysis of
the haze in front of an object, compared to objects that are a
know distance from the camera.  But, of course, that could be
faked, so again this isn't "absolute" proof.

>Again, where are these trace cases? Jerome Clark was making great
>deal of noise a while ago about Trans-en-Provence (France) but
>he's gone all quiet about that now that it's been demolished by
>French researchers who were actually on the spot. Now I see
>someone on the Update is trying to resurrect Ubatuba which was
>buried 30 years ago. Do me a favour!

I recall a case in France where the police placed trace evidence
(or photographs of it) into an investigation file.  The US Air
Force has a great deal of interesting physical evidence that they
haven't been able to explain, some of which is now available
through the FOIA process.  If Karl Phlock wants to chime in here,
he can provide some interesting details regarding the
"Scoutmaster Case" in Florida in the '60s, which the Air Force
investigated and couldn't explain.

>I agree. If people were doing REAL research we wouldn't be
>wasting our time on the dear dead extraterrestrial hypothesis.

There's some real research being done, and much of it has found
that many of the unexplainables are indeed explainable.  This was
the result of good research, not bad research.  There are also
cases where no conclusive answers can be found, and therein lies
the problem.  The extraterrestrial hypothesis is alive and well,
which means that it is really little more than a best guess or
conjecture, based on the "evidence" at hand.  However, I'd be the
first to state that it certainly hasn't been proved as a fact.

>>So don't lose hope, but shift focus to where the real work can be
>>done. And remember: If it sounds like a con, it probably is a
>>con. Don't waste time on tricks.

>Here, here. And most of what I read sounds like a con to me.

I would add that most of those doing what I would consider to be
"real research" aren't writing books or performing on the talk
show circuit.  We need to be skeptical of extraordinary claims,
but IMHO it's a mistake to paint all researchers with the same
brush.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 5

             Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force

From: "Greg Sandow" <gsandow@prodigy.net>
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 11:20:49 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 14:49:30 -0400
Subject: Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force


> Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 14:10:13 -0500 (CDT)
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears
> Air Force  General

> My prediction, on the other hand, will stand the test of time.
> Because you will never accept as fact any Air Force denials of
> possessing saucer debris recovered at Roswell. So I can't imagine
> a scenario -- any scenario -- that would lead to your concluding
> that whatever Roswell was, it was of totally terrestrial nature.

I can't speak for Kevin, but I can imagine a scenario that would
convince me. Suppose the Air Force documents about the Roswell
event -- the ones the GAO couldn't find -- should surface. I'm
talking about documents from the time, detailing what went on
behind the scenes. Presumably there were communications between
the Roswell base and Washington, along with reports, summaries,
and orders. If these appeared, if no one questioned their
provenance, and if they clearly detailed a coverup of a Mogul
balloon crash, I'd be convinced.

Kevin, not so incidentally, is one of the few people in ufology
who's willing to say "I'm wrong," with no excuses or
defensiveness. He did that about Glenn Dennis, for example. I
can't think of anyone in the field more likely to change a
long-held view, if the evidence proved him wrong.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 5

                        Re: Area 51 Still Operational

From: KRandle993@aol.com [Kevin Randle]
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 18:26:41 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 22:29:11 -0400
Subject: Re: Area 51 Still Operational


>Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 12:50:40 -0400
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Area 51 Still Operational

>>Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 21:12:59 +0100
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: John Rimmer <johnr@magonia.demon.co.uk>
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Skywatch: Area 51 Still Operational

<snipareno>

> I recall a case in France where the police placed trace evidence
>(or photographs of it) into an investigation file.  The US Air
>Force has a great deal of interesting physical evidence that they
>haven't been able to explain, some of which is now available
>through the FOIA process. If Karl Pflock wants to chime in here,
>he can provide some interesting details regarding the
>"Scoutmaster Case" in Florida in the '60s, which the Air Force
>investigated and couldn't explain.

The Scoutmaster case is from August 1952. The Air Force explained
it as a hoax. Given the scoutmaster's history of spinning tall
tales, had been discharged from the Marines in 1944 under less
than honorable conditions (during the height of WWII, what does
that tell you about the guy?) and there was no independent
corroboration for the sighting if you looked carefully at the
statements of the boy scouts who were there. All the physical
evidence was explainable with the exception of the burnt roots of
the grass samples. But, since the chain of custody was broken,
that might not be important.

Nearly everyone in the UFO fields realizes that this case is a
hoax. Please notice I said nearly everyone.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 5

             Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force

From: RGates8254@aol.com [Robert Gates]
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 18:05:33 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 22:24:56 -0400
Subject: Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force


>  From: "Greg Sandow" <gsandow@prodigy.net>
>  To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net>
>  Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears Air Force
>  General
>  Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 11:20:49 -0400

>  > Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 14:10:13 -0500 (CDT)
>  > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>  > From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
>  > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears
>  > Air Force  General

<snip>

>  Kevin, not so incidentally, is one of the few people in ufology
>  who's willing to say "I'm wrong," with no excuses or
>  defensiveness. He did that about Glenn Dennis, for example. I
>  can't think of anyone in the field more likely to change a
>  long-held view, if the evidence proved him wrong.

>  Greg Sandow

  What you have said about Kevin is correct.


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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 5

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 17:43:02 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 22:22:36 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


>From: RobIrving@aol.com
>Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 13:09:03 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Occam's Razor and UFOs

>>  From: "Greg Sandow" <gsandow@prodigy.net>
>>  To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net>
>>  Subject: Occam's Razor and UFOs
>>  Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 10:24:55 -0400

>Hi Greg,

>>  This gives me an occasion to talk about something I've been
>>  thinking of for a while, Occam's Razor. This is a well-known
>>  scientific adage, not exactly a theory or a principle, but a good
>>  rule of thumb for research. It says, basically, that we shouldn't
>>  make up theories without any reason, and that the simplest
>>  explanation of something -- the one that does NOT require forming
>>  new and alarming hypotheses -- is the one we should prefer.

><snip>

>Serious consideration of this forces one to agree with you...
>Occam's Razor is a tool, or leveller - of course the level can be
>read in different ways, depending on one's slant on things - but
>not an ultimate justification.

>>  What does this have to do with UFOs?

>It has a lot to do with the predominant strand of UFO research,
>i.e., the belief that a proportion of UFOs are Extraterrestrial
>craft...

>Of which there is no substantial evidence that we know of.

>>  Responsible UFO research is one of the best examples of
>>  Occam's Razor used properly. What does a UFO investigator
>>  do when someone reports a sighting? He or she tries to eliminate
>>  all conventional explanations.

>You seem to be saying that once these conventional explanations
>have been eliminated Occam's Razor would require that we look to
>unconventional explanations: Take, say, Michael Hesemann's claim
>that the increased radiation he says he detected in crop circles,
>as he has eliminated in his mind all conventional explanations,
>must be proof that aliens made the crop circle.

>This is sad, but so typical of much UFO and associated research.

>Just because something doesn't appear to fit conventional reasons
>doesn't mean we suddenly have scientific licence to insert
>fantasy in their place.  If we want to turn that fantasy into
>convention we'd still need to apply at least the minimum of
>convention to it.  It's easy to fit our shoddy explanations to
>what might appear to be accurate testimony, but that doesn't make
>either true.

>Rob

Rob,

Beautifully put.

I'm with you 100%.  But don't expect to find many friends here
when you try to tell them that it might not be ETs that they
are studying.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 5

                           Filer's Files #22-1998

From: George Filer <Majorstar@AOL.COM>=20
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 15:47:47 EDT=20
Fwd Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 23:42:40 -0400
Subject: Filer's Files #22-1998

Filer's Files #22-1998 MUFON Skywatch Investigations
George A. Filer, MUFON Eastern Director,
June 5, 1998, Majorstar@aol.com (609) 654-0020

Where have all the UFOs gone? There is a sudden down turn in
reports as hot weather and heavy solar wind activity makes their
appearance. Hypothesis is that UFOs like cold weather and a calm
sun.

NEW YORK

Robert Hanley reports I was amazed to see a fast moving Star
like object similar to the California sighting of June 1, 1998.
Both occurred at about the same 9:30 PM time frame. I am very
well versed in airframe types and good at judging altitude and
rates of speed having been in Naval Aviation. This must have
been a very large object at an extremely high altitude, and it
was moving at a very high speed. I first picked it up toward the
east from my backyard on western Long Island. I viewed it moving
south and climbing until I lost it behind the tree line. The
color of it was white light (probably reflected sunlight) and it
was way too high, way too large, and moving way too fast to be
conventional civil or military aviation. Thanks to Skywatch
International and Robert Hanley rhanley@gte.net.

MICHIGAN

On May 29, 1998, at 2:00 AM, I went to a large parking lot in
Grand Rapids to watch a storm approaching. I saw a ball of light
in the clouds traveling from the north side of the city to the
south side. I really do not think it was ball lightning. It
moved in a straight line and very fast through the clouds. I saw
the glow of water vapor around it. Although, the glow was not
very large I saw the object while leaving go deeper into the
clouds, and fade away. The cloud height could not have been too
high and the sighting took 10 to 15 seconds. Thanks to John
Thomson and ISUR. Phone: 616-361-0806 1936 Oakciff NE Grand
Rapids MI, 49525

OKLAHOMA:

On Monday June 1, 1998, Debbie Hickman of Elk City reports,
"While I was letting the cats out at 9:45 PM, I stepped outside
to skywatch. I observed three airplanes overhead, and I could
identify them as aircraft as they had red and white strobing
lights. I noticed a very dim light near the big dipper. As I
watched the light grew in brightness until it was brighter than
the other stars nearby. This light moved in a southerly
direction about two inches measured at arm's length while the
light was about 1/4 inch diameter. Then it suddenly winked out.
I scanned the skies for a few minutes, but the light did not
reappear. The sighting lasted about 10-15 seconds. Thanks to
Debbie and Jim Hickman, VP of Skywatch.

AUSTRALIA

On May 28, 1998, Hugo Starri at Buff Point reports seeing orange
lights flying in different formations starting at 7:30 PM. The
lights would fly very fast and then stop, start up, dash around
and disappear. The sighting lasted for about ten minutes. Hugo=92s
next door neighbor has been flying nearly every type of plane
for the last 40 years. He could not believe the sighting as it
unfolded. +61243993439 Thanks to Hugo Starri 14 Kyong Ave Buff
Point NSW 2262 Australia, hugo42@cci.net.au

ALIEN RAPTURE by Edgar Rothschild Fouche=92 and Brad Steiger

It has been rumored for years that the military's black
operations have perfected incredibly advanced gravity-defying
triangular super secret aerial platforms at least partially
derived from ET technology. It now appears the proof of such
vehicles is to be released in a new book entitled Alien Rapture
-The Chosen by Edgar Rothschild Fouche' and Brad Steiger, from
Galde Press. Tonight, the world's most exotic and classified
aerospace vehicle could be stealthily hovering over Phoenix,
Belgium, or your city. It is known as the TR-3B. The book
allegedly reveals top secret information about reverse
engineered alien technology from recovered alien artifacts. The
triangular shaped nuclear powered aerospace platform was
developed under the Aurora Program. The book claims the
hypersonic reconnaissance SR-75 Penetrator replaced the SR-71
spy plane and the TR-3B's first operational flight was in the
early 90s. At least three craft costing a billion dollars each
were flying by 1994. The TR-3B vehicle's outer coating is
reactive to electrical stimulation and can change color,
reflectiveness, and radar absorptiveness. The craft can appear
as a small aircraft or a flying cylinder. It can trick radar
receivers into falsely detecting a variety of aircraft, no
aircraft, or aircraft at various locations. A circular, plasma
filled accelerator ring called the "Magnetic Field Disrupter"
(MFD) surrounds the rotatable crew compartment. Sandia and
Livermore laboratories developed the reverse engineered MFD
technology. The MFD generates a magnetic vortex field that
disrupts or neutralizes the effects of gravity on mass within
proximity by 89 percent. This effect enables the craft to
outperform and outmaneuver any other aircraft. Many sightings of
triangular UFOs are the secret TR-3B. The NSA, NRO, CIA, and
USAF have been playing a shell game with aircraft nomenclature.
They created the TR-3, modified to the TR-3A and B, and the Teir
2, 3, and 4, with suffixes like 'Plus' or 'Minus'. Each of these
designators is a ircraft. Some are manned and others are
unmanned. The TR-3B's propulsion is provided by three multi-mode
thrusters mounted at each corner of the triangular platform. The
TR-3 is a sub-Mach 9 vehicle until it reaches altitudes above
l00,000 feet, then it picks up speed. Thanks to Skywatch
International Inc.

ABDUCTION CONTROVERSEY

John Thompson former Georgia State Director writes: =91If in fact
millions are being messed-with--I don't like the word abductions
as it=92s not happening as most abduction researchers think it is.
The aliens' real goal is to influence mankind's thinking
process. There is no evidence that physical abductions are
happening! But, people are seeing non-human entities-my own
investigations show they are! All the "black magic" is done by a
mental/technical process we can't comprehend, which does not
involve physically touching folks. I believe that this alien
intelligence -- one that is separate from the extraterrestrials
-- keeps revisiting people to "condition" and "recondition" them
as they see fit. In other words, what "abductions" are about is
mind- control; mind-control to keep humans from trying to stop
whatever the earth- bound aliens are doing. Their ultimate goal
may be for man to create a climate right for one-world rule;
with the aliens as the ultimate unseen rulers. The plan is to
ensure mankind's enslavement or destruction (as Dr. David Jacobs
correctly implies, but incorrectly understands). I don't think
it has anything do with making hybrids and breeding. That's all
smoke; much of it is created by the alleged "abductees"
themselves. The goal is control; the control of mankind.
Entities are being seen and they are coming back repeatedly. Dr.
Jacobs is right on this. Why? What are they doing in people's
bedrooms so frequently? They are not just visiting or looking us
over. It doesn't take 20 trips to the same individual to
determine that! They are here for their own evil and sinister
purposes--that's my conclusion. I am basing my conclusion on
over 120 formal UFO investigations that I have conducted, and
hundreds of others I have talked to. Most would not sign MUFON
forms for various reasons.

I don't agree with the "Gray" concept at all. Most entity
sightings I have investigated involved what I call the "Shadows"
or what old-timers in rural Georgia call, "Haints." I've had
people see them go through walls, run over them with their
trucks (they disappeared on coming inside the cab of the truck)
and seen them running along roads. The basic description all
witnesses give is a dark figured, less than six feet tall,
usually faceless featured, entity. Sometimes they are seen with
blazing red eyes and have clawed hands. On other entity cases
that involved more classic looking ET aliens, I judged two of
the abductees as not being mentally capable, and another as
being fantasy prone. The latter individual, incidentally, said
there were military officers aboard his flying saucer, working
hand in hand with the Grays and the little Browns. If you deal
with these ET type abductees enough you soon find large holes in
their stories. The only accounts that seem to stand up are these
"Shadows" that go back hundreds of years. I do not think these
are ET aliens, but actually demonic entities. These are engaging
in the mind- control. These are, as the Bible warns (and I'm not
a religious zealot), the entities who are trying to control
mankind. I do accept that ETs are visiting earth. I investigated
a case where a credible individual saw a silver-suited alien
after seeing a huge disc fly-over. I would like to believe
differently, but my research has led me to this line of
reasoning. I have always said that if I thought I was
investigating demons, I would get out of ufology and turn it
over to the clergy who want to exorcise "the evil aliens." Well,
I'm still here. But, now, I only concentrate on ET UFO signs.
Thanks to John Thompson.

ABDUCTEES SHOULD UNITE AND OBTAIN EVIDENCE

I have spoken with about a hundred fine and honest people who
feel something strange is happening in their lives. They are
concerned, distraught, but strangely confidential about their
abductions. They are often embarrassed to tell friends and even
loved ones. A few have written books under assumed names. Only a
brave few have ventured forth to tell their story on television
or in public. Yesterday, I spoke to the staff of my local
representative, who claimed they never had an abductee complain.
Very few police have been called, yet allegedly millions are
being abducted according to books such as written by Dr. David
Jacobs of Temple University. Most abductees freely admit they
are reluctant to go to the authorities. This is understandable
because they feel alone and have little real evidence. It also
appears the entities give them a clear message to remain silent.
Often hypnosis is used to obtain the abductee's story. Both
scientists and law enforcement tend to disregard evidence
obtained under hypnosis. I agree with Victoria Alexander who
suggested we treat an abduction as a crime seen and attempt to
gain evidence. Abducttees need to start thinking like detectives
or scientists. Sometimes, the abductee knows when and where an
abduction is likely to occur. Let's assume it from their
bedroom. The point of entry is often windows, walls or ceilings.
I suggest you closely examine your room for imperfections in
your walls or glass. Photographs of your room and your body may
be helpful to establish a basis or starting point. A good
documented physical check up with extensive blood work is
important. With the help of scientists we need to develop
experiments, that would prove an abduction. People often claim
they are floated out a window or through a wall. There may be
structural differences in these materials. There is some
indication people never actually leave their bedroom and the
entities come to them to perform their operations. Evidence of
their presence may in fact be over-looked. Upon w orning, take a
few moments to determine if anything is different, in your room
or the covers, etc. We have found strange marks on night
clothing and bedding. We have found strange dust on clean
surfaces. When analyzed this dust is more like crystallized
glass than dust.

I would encourage you to purchase a black light bulb. Recently I
bought one for $3.00. Use this light to look for any unusual
fluorescence markings or powders. One woman recently found a
silver like powder on her back. This powder is now being
analyzed. It was removed from her body with Scotch tape, placed
in a clean jar and mailed to a laboratory for analysis. Any
supporting evidence makes your story much more persuading to the
authorities. Nancy Talbot reports that wheat seeds have been
used to prove something unusual happened during the night to
experiencers. Wheat seeds were placed in a jell inside a
capsule, that was then put in the hair curlers of an
experiencer. Each night the abductee placed a new capsule in her
curlers and went to bed. After thirty days she had thirty
capsules each had been with her during sleeping hours. Each
night she kept a diary and noted when she felt she had been
abducted. The seeds and capsules they contained were examined in
a laboratory. One capsule had collapsed as if it had been in a
vacuum. The seed was different from the rest and appears to have
been under some type of radiation or distress. It would barely
germinate, while the others were healthy. This particular seed
was in her curlers, the night the woman wrote she had been
abducted. I suggest there may be other ways to test. Wearing a
watch or jewelry that would indicate altitude, pressure, or lack
of oxygen may provide additional data. The more scientific data
we have the better. Generally, the abductee does not know when
they are abducted. However, there are indicators such as
bleeding, the covers moved, pajamas put on incorrectly. When you
are reasonably sure you are abducted call the police and demand
a thorough investigation. I know this takes courage, but as a
citizen who pays taxes you have this right. Help the police look
for evidence. Attempt to keep your nightly clothing and
furniture surfaces exceptionally clean. Dust the bed stand each
night. Check each morning for find dust or glass pa r clothes
may have marks. Your person may have silver or strange powder.
Check the area with a black light. Many abductees report an
unusual powder residue in the room or on their person. This
should be analyzed. Small footprints are sometimes found outside
on the ground or in a house where there are no children. We need
detective work.

Collect samples of suspected powder or markings, in small clean
baby bottles using a cue tip. Deposit cue tip inside bottle.
Detailed records should be kept on the location of the material.
If black light or similar lights reveal silver or powder like
residue, remove with Scotch tape and place in baby bottle but
attempt to keep the residue from sticking to the bottle.
Scientists, and detectives are supposed to have open minds.
Challenge their scientific intuitiveness, masculinity,
femininity, patriotism, religion. Something that will get them
interested. Abductees must take the initiative and unite. Groups
are more likely to be heard than individuals. The tactics used
by any political group are effective in gaining political clout.
I encourage you to stand up and be heard. Go see your members of
Congress and show your evidence. Your medical records and other
proof can help you to be convincing. We are working towards
Congressional Hearings, your collected data and news reports are
important. We will attempt to help. We are in a phase of
intelligence and scientific collection of data. Yesterday Jon
Boby from the Letterman Late Night Show called and asked would
abductees like to tell their story on the show? Call me if you
would like to appear. Ethiopian proverb states "When spiders
unite they can tie down a lion."

UNCONVENTIONAL FLYING OBJECTS  IS A MUST READ BOOK

Ron Hannavig made the following analysis of Dr. Prudoff's
excellent review of former NASA engineer Paul Hill's book
Unconventional Flying Objects carried in last weeks Filer's
Files #21. One of the most consistently observed characteristic
of UFO flight is a ubiquitous pattern in which they tilt to
perform all maneuvers. Specifically, they sit level to hover,
tilt forward to move forward, tilt backward to stop, bank to
turn, and descend by "falling- leaf" or "silver-dollar-wobble"
motions.  Detailed analysis by Hill shows that such motion is
inconsistent with aerodynamic requirements, but totally
consistent with some form of repulsive force-field propulsion.
Remember those standard buffing machines used to buff the floors
in the military barracks? I could never get the hang of "flying"
one of those machines. What is being described here could be
likened to the experienced effects which are familiar to nearly
everyone who had gone through basic training. Another puzzle
resolved by Hill's analysis is that craft observed to travel
continuously at Mach 4 or 5 do not appear to generate
temperatures sufficiently high to be destructive to known
materials. In other words, UFOs appear to prevent high
aerodynamic heating rates rather than permitting a heating
problem to arise, then surviving it with heat-resistant
materials as is the case of the Shuttle whose surface
temperatures can reach 1300=BAC.

My background has been in solar energy conversion -- one of the
true pioneers in this field of implementing appropriate energy
technology. During the early days (circa the mid-70's), I
experimented with drawing a vacuum on the solar collection
devices; in essence, hermetically sealing the collector and
pulling a vacuum within the box. What happened: I was collecting
far more energy than was alleged to be available by the
standards of academia. By drawing a vacuum -- I had easily
proven their thermodynamics standards were totally out of date,
relative to the published assessments of the amount of solar
energy being actually available for collection. UFOs would
surely have to operate within an encapsulated environment --
much the same as my early, crude experiments with drawing a
vacuum within solar collection devices. A simple tried and
proven vacuum technique would achieve the desired thermodynamics
results -- as evidenced by the effects of a standard vacuum
bottle. Hill's analytical approach is provided by an analysis of
the economy of various flight-path profiles. It is shown that
high-angle, high-acceleration departures on ballistic-arc
trajectories with high-speed coast segments are more efficient
than intermediate-level, horizontal-path trips. The power plant
used in UFOs should not be too difficult to replicate, but will
not be revealed due to our existing corporate/political system.
Another typical nugget of information is the famous Ubatuba,
Brazil magnesium fragments claimed to have originated from an
exploded unidentified craft. (and) Since the only isotope
separation on a significant scale in terrestrial manufacture is
that of uranium, such a result must be considered at least
anomalous, and possibly as evidence for extraterrestrial
manufacture. Also, the inherent properties of gold - relative to
space travel, is unique. I am, of course, suggesting the mining
of gold by primitive societies ... throughout history, could
well have been rooted to satisfy the needs, rather than the
assumed wants s." Thanks to Ron Hannivig, Simpson PA

ROSWELL PHOTOGRAPHS

I'm in almost daily contact with Dr. J. Bond Johnson, the Fort
Worth Star-Telegram reporter, who shot the famous Roswell crash
debris photographs in General Ramey's 8th Air Force office in
Fort Worth, Texas on July 8, 1947. The Army Air Force had
previously announced that they had captured a flying saucer.
Johnson remembers being ushered into General Ramey's office
alone by Colonel Dubose, and being shown the wrapped up debris.
Since General Ramey was not there, it was suggested that he
unwrap the material that had just been flown in from Roswell.
Johnson remembers unwrapping the material and putting the most
exotic looking materials in the foreground, and the more mundane
aluminum foil backed paper in the background. Col. Dubose even
left the room leaving Johnson alone with the debris that smelled
as if it had burnt or exploded. Johnson told me he remembers
holding plastic like material similar to a key ring that he now
owns. He does not believe this kind of plastic was available in
1947. The Air Force's Roswell Report Fact Vs Fiction claims that
early Mogul Balloon ballast containers were manufactured from a
new plastic. This plastic however, turned out to be too weak for
holding the lead ballast, that is slowly released from the Mogul
Balloon train to reduce weight and keep the balloons up at
altitude. Major Jessie Marcel Senior and Junior had always
maintained that the most exotic looking Roswell crash debris was
an I Beam with hieroglyphic like symbols on it. According to
Johnson, he and Ron Regehr, an aerospace engineer and member of
MUFON in Orange County, CA. have viewed enhanced photos. Dr.
Johnson claims 3-D type marking on the I Beam is observable.
These symbols seem consistent with the Marcel's description of
the debris and appear to prove the debris was not switched.
Johnson cautioned that he is not a photo interpreter and is
reporting what he and Ron Regehr see. Another piece of unknown
metal like chrome trim appears in the photo. Many people have
accepted the Air Force explanation tha of the debris is a
military Radar Reflector.

Bob Durant writes: "I have examined with great care the 16 by 20
inch photographs taken by J. Bond Johnson in General Ramey's
office, with particular emphasis on the material shown in the
foreground of the photos. I find nothing inconsistent with the
rest of the material shown in the photos, which is plainly the
parts of a battered radar reflector. Similar examinations were
done years ago by Roswell researchers, with the same result. In
1994 the Air Force studied these photos, and used the CIA photo
interpretation laboratories to search for anomalies. None were
found. My conclusion is that Dr. Johnson should publish a
precise analyses, or stop wasting the time of serious
researchers." Regards, Bob Durant.

I personally feel we are getting closer to truth and detailed
analysis of the photographs will be needed by several different
organizations. The photographs may now prove once and for all if
the material is mundane or part of flying saucer. Enlarged
photographs made from the original negatives from Star-Telegram
Special Collections section of the University of Texas Library
at Arlington, Texas are enroute to me. We intend to analyze the
photographs with the best equipment available. It is apparent
the controversy over Roswell will continue.

Send your letters and photographs to George filer at
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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 6

                          Re: Alfred's Odd Ode #251

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 06:50:41 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 09:07:38 -0400
Subject: Re: Alfred's Odd Ode #251

Apology to MW #251 (For June 6, 1998)

Admitting I'm no prophet, or that brilliance isn't mine; I have
few facts, and I'm re-miss in knowledge I should find. Smarter
motes then me abound, as thick as fleas or flies, and battles
with your *facts* should leave me hammered in your eyes. But
then you make assumptions so your blacks and whites make sense,
and your arguments get heavy, are encumbered -- much entrenched.
And loath to leave the prominence that frames your *reputation*,
you make prevarication or a senseless refutation!

And then I have you where I've _found_ you, and we see your
posits smell. You stumble in your pitch black room -- admit that
you're not well. Admitting that you won't know more, or shake
your fist at God, you stand at last, complete, revealed -- an
undisputed knob.

You say "not so," but you're not looking! Your eyes are on the
ground! You clasp to you the insular; you push away profound!
You're satisfied with white bread, though it rots you from
within -- you are trembling in your countenance -- uneasy in
your skin.

You say your beads incessantly in a litany construed to take
your mind from that which scares the hell right _into_ you. So
pummeled by your nameless fear you wallow in your ethics . . .
_made_ by you to hide what's dear -- destroying our aesthetics!
Cut and slashed you cling to hope or faith which was untested.
Your arguments miasma, they're discredited and bested.
Contusions to your world view are the nightmares in your dreams;
you look around and see the mess -- perceive you're not so
clean. Your wounds now ooze an ichor 'cause you claim that
they're not there, and will never let clean air to them, or let
them heal fair. Shambling in this cyberspace like zombies,
living dead, STILL you wish, exclusively, the dullest, whitest
bread!

The lid is on, on GOD knows what! Can't you feel it pressing
down? Our spirit soars for reach and grasp, but we're mired to
the ground! We fight old wars that long ago misplaced their
right or wrong, and we elbow for position while we sing our
*righteous* songs.

The lid is on, on god KNOWS what! You can hear it in the air;
the whispers that there's life on Mars . . . a type that's
undeclared. Our permeated media is filled up to the brim with
alien abductions, UFO's and black clad men!

The lid is on, on god knows WHAT! It's in the planes we build.
Aurora just the tip of monstrous icebergs crammed, and filled!
What's the Hubble really seen? What HAS it found out there? Why
are _we_ kept from the truth existing undeclared?

The lid is on, ON god knows what. You keep up your distractions.
All evidence inconclusive, even _yours_ with your detractions.
Randi said, ironically, "There are those one shan't convince
with the monumental evidence that is rich, and full, and dense.
A believer's a believer and will _not_ relate to facts that are
counter to a fond belief -- they're settled on that track." I
cover tiny smiles with the fingers of one hand, thinking, that's
an apt description of the skepti-bunky's stand!

If you argue -- make assumptions, then they must, in fact, be
valid. Assuming the forthcoming? Then be disappointed, Alice.
Assume the *News* plays heads up ball, and check into a home,
dementia has _consumed_ you, and you're senile to the bone.
Assume that your religion has your interests at its heart, and
be doomed to disappointment as you play your backward part.
Assume an honest government, or an efficacious school, and
become the spineless charlatan, charmless loser, or a fool!

Lehmberg@snowhill.com

Yeah -- well . . . you get to do that in a poem -- splash the
right color paint around, see where it sticks, and watch who
gets the angriest, or becomes the most irritated. That
irritation, I've discovered, is proportionate to how worried the
reader is regarding where, or how much of that paint actually
sticks.

Restore John Ford.


--
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.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 6

                 eSufo - Neutrinos and Molecules of Creation

From: "David Watanabe" <davew@exosci.com>
Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 01:42:14 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 09:02:25 -0400
Subject: eSufo - Neutrinos and Molecules of Creation

exoScience UFO * 6/6/98 * exosci.com/ufo

* SOME INTERESTING NEWS...

Firstly, there is now evidence that neutrinos have mass.  This has
tremendous implications on our model of the universe, because we now
can assume a much higher mass of the universe than previously thought
- when neutrinos were massless.  The amazing abundance of neutrinos
in our universe means that even an exceedingly small mass can change
the entire characteristic of our universe - namely whether or not the
universe will expand infinitely, or whether it will ultimately
collapse (or neither!).  Read the full story (complete with diagrams)
at:

   http://exosci.com/news/65.html


Secondly, I have posted a very interesting article about the creation
of the first primitive molecules which were self-sustaining
(essentially an enzymatic nucleic acid molecule with attached amino
acids).  This is of particular interest to the UFO community (the
exobiology community), as we are, of course, interested in how
readily life is created under certain circumstances.  Check it out
at:

   http://exosci.com/news/66.html


* RESTORATION

While it seems to happen every month or two, our ISP yet again shut
down the mailing list for a few days (thinking we were a commercial
spam list or something equally absurd).  Regardless, that's why
messages have been sparse over the past few days.  Things are back to
normal, though! :)


 David Watanabe
 davew@exosci.com

____________________________________________________
exoScience UFO=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=
 http://exosci.com/ufo/

****************************************************
To SUBSCRIBE / UNSUBSCRIBE, send email to:
     davew@exosci.com
with either "subscribe ufo" or "unsubscribe ufo" (no
quotation marks) in the SUBJECT.
****************************************************

To POST, send email for approval to:
     davew@exosci.com
____________________________________________________
Copyright (c) 1998 David Watanabe - davew@exosci.com


"I think I ripped a hole in the spacetime continuum"
 -Ajax (Duckman)








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 6

                        Re: Area 51 Still Operational

From: "Steven Kaeser" <steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 07:32:59 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 09:06:06 -0400
Subject: Re: Area 51 Still Operational


>From: KRandle993@aol.com [Kevin Randle]
>Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 18:26:41 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Area 51 Still Operational


<snip>

>> I recall a case in France where the police placed trace evidence
>>(or photographs of it) into an investigation file.  The US Air
>>Force has a great deal of interesting physical evidence that they
>>haven't been able to explain, some of which is now available
>>through the FOIA process. If Karl Pflock wants to chime in here,
>>he can provide some interesting details regarding the
>>"Scoutmaster Case" in Florida in the '60s, which the Air Force
>>investigated and couldn't explain.

>The Scoutmaster case is from August 1952. The Air Force explained
>it as a hoax. Given the scoutmaster's history of spinning tall
>tales, had been discharged from the Marines in 1944 under less
>than honorable conditions (during the height of WWII, what does
>that tell you about the guy?) and there was no independent
>corroboration for the sighting if you looked carefully at the
>statements of the boy scouts who were there. All the physical
>evidence was explainable with the exception of the burnt roots of
>the grass samples. But, since the chain of custody was broken,
>that might not be important.

>Nearly everyone in the UFO fields realizes that this case is a
>hoax. Please notice I said nearly everyone.

>KRandle


Kevin-

I've learned to take everything I see in this genre with a
"grain of salt" until I can check into it myself, and I
certainly haven't performed any great research into this case. I
mentioned only in response to a blanket statement that seemed to
indicate that the author was unaware of any cases where physical
evidence had been collected and analyzed. This case happened to
come to mind, and I brought it up.

I would note that in 1952 the military labeled just about every
case a "hoax", "Venus", "air inversions", or "misidentification
of birds or aircraft". Indeed, this may have been the correct
explanation for many unknowns, but the military was obviously
trying to put a "spin" on this subject and not really trying to
get the truth to the public. In July of that year the military
had to deal with the Washington DC sightings that showed
military leaders the impact of the public's intense interest and
how it could disrupt communication lines. Indeed, this was the
year that the military grew to fear the impact of the public's
reaction more than the "unknowns" themselves. Given it's
behavior over the years, I would tend to take anything the
military issued in a public statement about UFOs with a very
large "grain of salt".

Secondly, the fact that he left the marines under less than
honorable circumstances was not exactly unusual. Without
details, this may or may not be relevant to his being an
honorable person, and (again) the "spin" on this facet of his
life comes from the military's release of information, as are
the allegations of his "spinning tall tales".

On the other hand, he was a Scoutmaster. This means that a
sponsoring organization (most like a church) thought enough of
his character to assign him the task of helping to guide older
boys as they become young men. This is not a guarantee of good
character, but generally tends to be a reasonable indicator. As
I recall, it was after his alleged sighting that his life began
to fall apart, and I would suggest that there are few who have
had a serious "sighting" that haven't suffered some sort of
paradigm shift in their "reality". I would suspect that many of
us have flaws in our character that we've learned to control as
we go through our daily routines. It wouldn't surprise me if an
encounter with something completely unknown or frightening had
the effect of bringing those "flaws" to the surface.

Without a second witness (and I'll concede that the scouts, who
only saw a light through the trees, didn't see enough to provide
good testimony) this case rests on the anecdotal comments of a
person whose character has been questioned.  As far as the trace
evidence is concerned, postulating what might have caused it
does not prove what "did" cause it. To prove that he had hoaxed
this case one would have to show how it was accomplished and
prove that he had the ability to pull off such a hoax.

No, this isn't a particularly good case to waste much time on.
There are too many dead ends, and the available information has
been tainted by those who may have had motives contrary to the
search for truth. If I recall correctly, the central character
in this incident left the community as an outcast and later
attempts to locate him (many years after the fact) failed.

But I stand by my statement that there are good traces cases,
that have not been fully explained, in the public record.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 6

                Re: Aliens In Advertising [was: Info request]

From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 00:20:36 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 08:49:55 -0400
Subject: Re: Aliens In Advertising [was: Info request]

>From: RAMBLD@worldnet.att.net [Diane Lovett]
>Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 10:35:35 +0000
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Info request

>> Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 06:43:06 -0500
>> From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
>> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Info request

>> > From: ParadigmRG <ParadigmRG@aol.com> [Stephen G. Bassett]
>> > Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 15:22:02 EDT
>> > To: updates@globalserve.net
>> > Subject: Info request

>> > I am in need of the names of major (Fortune 1000) companies which
>> > have utilized alien imagery in their advertisements during the
>> > last 5 years.  By alien imagery I am referring to concepts drawn
>> > from abduction/contact research rather than from the pure
>> > imagination of the production artists.

>> > SB

>> I'm glad someone else is interested in this. Take a random surf
>> through your garden variety cable at any time of the day or night
>> and the alien imagery pops up like mushrooms. Bart Simpson
>> (Butterfinger) and Fred Flintstone (Fruity Pebbles) are the the
>> latest players. I find these, and similar ads -- unsettling, and
>> insulting.

>Mr. Bassett,
>It will take a while, but I will start keeping a record of all
>the commercials I see using the greys as a gimmick, and post it
>later. I am curious though what your goal is in gathering this
>info. Alfred, like you I find this abundance of cutesy aliens,
>particularly in ads directed toward children, really offensive
>and disturbing. It does seem to be mushrooming, and I have
>thought about complaining to the advertisers but admit I am too
>wary of disclosing to them why I find them so distasteful. I have
>a 3 year old to whom the greys are a very real thing in her life,
>and she is affected by this bombardment of images very badly, and
>won't watch some of her favorite kid's shows on TV anymore
>because of it. There are also print ads, bumper stickers,
>buttons, stickers, you name it! The greys are clearly rapidly
>becoming a part of our cultural conciousness, and I for one very
>unsettled about that.

>Diane

Although there are some of us who are offended by being
conditioned, it is a natural process for advertisers to grasp
what is popular and expand on it to their benefit.

There is cough medicine, cough drops, Kodak photo finishing,
K-Mart ads, cow-abducting straws at Macs and Beckers milk stores
being advertised on the back of buses, car rentals, car
manufacturers, candy bars, movies, toys, jewellry, cartoons, air
travel, alien lottery tickets, Molson Brewery in Canada,
Pop-tarts, Pepsi.....

The list goes on and on and you can't deny that it is a popular
way to get people's attention these days.  At the 50th
Anniversary Roswell Exposition, there was everything alien you
could think of and the kids were eating it up.

Although to an experiencer, it may be somewhat disturbing, the
general inexperienced public is accepting it as an everyday
topic.  It has come out of the closet and the more people are
made aware of aliens, abduction, and ufos, etc., the better
understood the experiencers are, and the efforts of researchers.
Experiencers are less and less being labeled 'nuts' and that
alone is progress in this field.  So if someone feels all this
should be kept hidden in a closet, they might as well hide in a
closet themselves and deny that this 'may' be reality and
something we will have to accept in the future..

Here is a contribution to Mr. Bassett's request.  Hope it helps.

http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/archives/1998/mar/12/031200493.html

March 12, 1998

 Beetle Ads Rely on Fond Memories

 ASSOCIATED PRESS

 NEW YORK (AP) -- Volkswagen is making the car the
 star of its eagerly anticipated advertising introducing
 its new Beetle automobiles.

 The ads appearing this month on television,
 magazines and billboards show off the distinctive
 rounded shape of the new Beetles and taps fond
 memories of their inelegant but resilient namesakes of
 a generation ago.

 VW spokesman Tony Fouladpour said about one-third
 of the VW dealers in the United States are getting the
 cars this week and the cars should be in showrooms
 nationally by the end of March.

 The ads employ a spare approach that shows the new
 cars against a white background along with short
 written observations.

 "If you sold your soul in the 80s, here's you chance to
 buy it back," one ad appearing both on TV and in print
 says.

 "The engines's in front, but its heart is in the same
 place," says another ad. "Less Flower. More power,"
 says a third ad.

 Volkswagen isn't relying solely on fond memories of
 the original cars.

      *  In one commercial that may appeal to younger drivers,
 the Beetle spins at a furious pace. "Reverse
 engineered from UFOs," the ad says.

 There is not a celebrity endorser -- or anyone else -- in
 sight. The ads omit details often found in car ads like
 price or fuel efficiency.

     *   "We wanted to let the car sell itself," Liz Vanzura,
 Volkswagen's director of marketing and advertising,
 told reporters assembled Thursday at a New York art
 studio to see the new ad campaign.

 She said consumer research showed people ages 16
 to 90 have fond memories of the original Beetles, last
 sold in the United States in 1981.

 "People have an emotional reaction to the car ... as if it
 were an old friend," she said.

 Volkswagen's original Beetle became a
 counter-cultural status symbol in the 1960s and the
 simple, often irreverent approach that was used to
 advertise the Bugs as they were known was a striking
 break from Madison Avenue's traditional approach.

 "Think small" said one VW Beetle ad from the early
 1960s when "large" was big. A 1960 ad said "Lemon"
 in big letters beneath a picture of the Beetle,
 explaining in small type below that the car had been
 rejected because of a blemish on the chrome in the
 glove compartment.

 Those ads have been celebrated as among the best
 ever made.

 * Ron Lawner, chief creative officer at the agency that
 created the ads, Arnold Advertising in Boston, said he
 wanted to build on that heritage with the new
 campaign while avoiding pitching specific features.

 "We wanted to keep the ads as simple as they can be.
 This car is really about the way it makes you feel.
 Nothing looks like this or has the character or the
 personality of this," he said.

 The TV advertising starts March 23 and the print ads
 are already showing up in the April issues of
 magazines like Vanity Fair.

 The new Beetles actually share little other than the
 name with the originals, VW executives say. The new
 cars are roomier, have the engines in front rather than
 the back and have more reliable air conditioning and
 heaters.

 At a starting price of $15,200, the Beetles compete
 with models like the Dodge Neon, Honda Accord and
 Toyota Corolla.

 Volkswagen expects to sell about 50,000 new Beetles
 in the United States in the next year and another
 70,000 in other countries. At the peak, 423,008
 original Beetles were sold in 1968 in the United
 States.

 Some dealers have already begun taking orders and
 made waiting lists for the first arrivals of the new
 Beetles.

 Volkswagen doesn't expect the new Beetle to become
 its best-selling car despite the interest in the
 introduction. Its best-seller in the United States was the
 Jetta at about 90,000 last year, VW said.

 Vanzura said she hopes the Beetle will be a magnet
 that draws the curious into the VW dealers.

 She said the Beetle should demonstrate that
 Volkswagen is a modern carmaker and help "make
 the Volkswagen brand important again" here.

EOF

Sue Kovios

Protagoras (c.485-410 BCE)
     "Man is the measure of all things."

  No pienses que es imposible,
  confia en tu corazon,
  nada es lo que parece,
  el mundo es una ilusion.

(translation:
  Don't think it's impossible,
  trust your heart,
  nothing is what it seems
  the world is an illusion.)






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 6

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: "Greg Sandow" <gsandow@prodigy.net>
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 14:31:11 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 09:21:02 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


>From: RobIrving@aol.com
>Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 13:09:03 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Occam's Razor and UFOs

>>This gives me an occasion to talk about something I've been
>>thinking of for a while, Occam's Razor. This is a well-known
>>scientific adage, not exactly a theory or a principle, but a good
>>rule of thumb for research. It says, basically, that we shouldn't
>>make up theories without any reason, and that the simplest
>>explanation of something -- the one that does NOT require forming
>>new and alarming hypotheses -- is the one we should prefer.

><snip>

>Serious consideration of this forces one to agree with you...
>Occam's Razor is a tool, or leveller - of course the level can be
>read in different ways, depending on one's slant on things - but
>not an ultimate justification.

>>What does this have to do with UFOs?

>It has a lot to do with the predominant strand of UFO research,
>i.e., the belief that a proportion of UFOs are Extraterrestrial
>craft...

>Of which there is no substantial evidence that we know of.

Which is why belief in it is called The Extraterrestrial [note
the word that follows] Hypothesis.

>>Responsible UFO research is one of the best examples of
>>Occam's Razor used properly. What does a UFO investigator
>>do when someone reports a sighting? He or she tries to eliminate
>>all conventional explanations.

>You seem to be saying that once these conventional explanations
>have been eliminated Occam's Razor would require that we look to
>unconventional explanations: Take, say, Michael Hesemann's claim
>that the increased radiation he says he detected in crop circles,
>as he has eliminated in his mind all conventional explanations,
>must be proof that aliens made the crop circle.>

>This is sad, but so typical of much UFO and associated research.

>Just because something doesn't appear to fit conventional reasons
>doesn't mean we suddenly have scientific licence to insert
>fantasy in their place.  If we want to turn that fantasy into
>convention we'd still need to apply at least the minimum of
>convention to it.  It's easy to fit our shoddy explanations to
>what might appear to be accurate testimony, but that doesn't make
>either true.

I'll let you and Michael Hesemann fight this one out. I didn't
say that the exhaustion of conventional explanations opened the
door for belief in anything at all.

In fact, I don't recall saying anything to endorse any
explanation of UFOs, or of any UFO sighting. I was talking only
about skeptics who use Occam's Razor -- or, rather, misuse it --
as an argument for conventional explanations. If you want to use
what I said as a springboard for an attack on ufology you don't
like, go right ahead.

But that's not the discussion I was trying to start.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 6

                              Re: Occam's Razor

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 02:09:52 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 08:59:23 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor


Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 17:43:02 -0400
To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


>From: RobIrving@aol.com
>Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 13:09:03 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Occam's Razor and UFOs

>>  From: "Greg Sandow" <gsandow@prodigy.net>
>>  To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net>
>>  Subject: Occam's Razor and UFOs
>>  Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 10:24:55 -0400

Dear sirs:

If I may put in 2 cents worth, Occam's Razor is merely a rule of
thumb .. a highly useful one at that .. but it fails ..

Occams Razor  is a tool,  but not a rule,  of logic!

On numerous occasions, Occams Razor has led me astray while I was
troubleshooting electronic problems in the semiconductor
industry.

On one occasion, a little plastic switch housing became so
electrically conductive that it could turn itself on at will,
without having the metal contacts touch together!!

Anyone else would have thrown the switch away. I cut it open and
SAW the contacts clearly separated .. but it still conducted
invisibly! Uri Geller time!

I finally found a thin hairline crack which may have filled with
oil and dust. Over time, enough leakage current must had heated
the crack until it carbonized, and became partly conductive ..
enough to switch the circuit.

I have never seen this before or since.

Occam's Razor would seem useless in cases like this.

Best wishes

-  Larry Hatch








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 6

                        Re: Area 51 Still Operational

From: John <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 17:31:19 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 09:43:03 -0400
Subject: Re: Area 51 Still Operational


>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: "Jerome Clark" <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Area 51 Still Operational
>Date: Fri, 05 Jun 98 09:54:48 PDT

>> Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 21:12:59 +0100
>> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>> From: John Rimmer <johnr@magonia.demon.co.uk>
>> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Skywatch: Area 51 Still Operational

>> >Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Skywatch: Area 51 Still Operational
>> >From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
>> >Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 12:10:24 -0400
>> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

<huge snip>

Hi Jerry,

Pardon the interruption. I'll retreat after this little tidbit.

You wrote:

>Peter Rogerson's bizarre assertion that abduction stories are
>triggered by Americans' supposed deep-seated fear of Hispanic
>immigrants).

I had never heard this one before. I'm going to file it in the
same folder that I keep Sasquatches'  "fetal infanticidal guilt"
theory of abduction. And along with Elizabeth Lotus and
whatshisface the Canadian electric helmet guy [Michael Persinger
--ebk] they'll make good company for each other in there! <G>

Oh sorry, my question is.....

How does old Pete explain a Puerto Rican abductee like me?
I don't know about 'deep seated fears' but I do know the
"white folks" were mad as hell that we were here! Had to
learn how to fight and defend myself at 5 years of age because
of it. If any, the object of my nightmares are white folks! <LMAO!>

Land of oportunity! Here we learned that we are;

*"Free to wait tables and shine shoes," -

and that, . . .

*"Porto's no be in Ame-ree-ka!" <EG>

Peace,

Juan Velez, filled with cultural self-dread!
(*Some 'bits' from "West Side Story")








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 6

                        Re: Area 51 Still Operational

From: "Jerome Clark" <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Fri, 05 Jun 98 13:06:17 PDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 09:44:30 -0400
Subject: Re: Area 51 Still Operational


> Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 12:50:40 -0400
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Area 51 Still Operational

> >Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 21:12:59 +0100
> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> >From: John Rimmer <johnr@magonia.demon.co.uk>
> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Skywatch: Area 51 Still Operational>

> I would add that most of those doing what I would consider to be
> "real research" aren't writing books or performing on the talk
> show circuit.  We need to be skeptical of extraordinary claims,
> but IMHO it's a mistake to paint all researchers with the same
> brush.

If those doing "real research" aren't writing about it or
otherwise communicating their work and conclusions to
colleagues in coherent, readily available form, then they
are doing no one any good whatever.  An essential part
of science is publication of results, not the hording of same
for one's self-gratification.  If these are the sorts of people
who in your opinion merit praise, God help us; with them
we will go nowhere except off a cliff.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 6

               Re: Nua Blather: Irish UFO Season Declared Open

From: Dave Walsh <dave@nua.ie>
Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 17:32:17 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 09:54:09 -0400
Subject: Re: Nua Blather: Irish UFO Season Declared Open

*******************************************************************
NUA BLATHER  NUA BLATHER NUA BLATHER
Weekly free email of Dogma Destruction,
Forteana and High Weirdness

By Daev Walsh   Email: blather@nua.ie
Web: http://www.nua.ie/blather/
*******************************************************************
June 5 1998  Published By:  Nua Limited  Vol 2. No. 4
*******************************************************************


IRISH UFO SEASON DECLARED OPEN
After an unreasonably quiet winter, we would appear to be on the
cusp of the National Annual Summer Irish UFO Splurge. After the
Blanchardstown report from April, we managed to remain calm and
collected, but thanks to Paul Collins in The Munster Express of May
22nd any unfounded illusion of national sanity has been since been
scuppered.


Collins confides that he is "very sceptical about such matters and
tend to make fun of them, but, in the interests of balance, I feel
bound to mention a story from the front page of last week's Tipperary
Star. A couple, described as 'highly respected members of the
community' told the newspaper they saw an object in the sky between
Derrynaflan and Killenaule on the night of February 28th last.

"Because they did not want to face ridicule and be the butt of local
jokes they decided to remain silent about their experience but, once
they heard a description of the object seen over the North Sea, they
decided to come forward because their 'UFO' was almost identical.
They said they clearly saw the UFO hovering at what appeared to be
about 400 feet above the ground. The ship was approximately 250ft.
wide and 100ft. high. It had lights, three on one side and two on the
other, and had panels with vertical lines through them as distinct
from windows.

"The husband and wife said there was no sound at all from the object
which, at first, moved very slowly but then accelerated so fast it
disappeared in an instant."
(http://www.munster-express.ie/980522/opinion.htm)
(http://www.nua.ie/blather/archives2/issue2no1.html)


It would appear that another hilarious summer is upon us. . .




JAYSUS WEPT
On Good Friday 1993, Jesus Christ fled Dublin for Dundalk, armed
with a *hammer* to protect himself from the demons that pursued him,
only returning after 3pm, when it was safe (tradition holding that
Jesus was crucified at 1500 hrs. A few months later, according to his
courtroom testimony on May 28th, it struck him that he didn't have
the stuff to be Jesus, and relegated himself to John the Baptist, on
a mission to 'prepare the world for the second coming'. The unnamed
man (at least in any conventional manner) was being tried for various
forms of assault at the Dublin Circuit Criminal Court, where he
dismissed his counsel, stating that that his "'solicitors and
barristers are not at one with God and are not to be trusted,' Dr
Stephen Curran, from the Central Mental Hospital, told the jury."

"'He was unconcerned about the court case as "he has bigger fish to
fry', the doctor added."
(http://www.irish-times.com/irish-times/paper/1998/0528/ct7.html)


AND FURTHERMORE - THE HUMPTY DOO POLT
Blather, over the last while, has attempted to gather together a
coherent picture of the goings-on in the Australian poltergeist
story. So far, Cheyne D. Conrad
(http://www.nua.ie/blather/archives/issue1no50.html) and Peter Darben
(http://www.nua.ie/blather/archives2/issue2no1.html) have graciously
contributed their observations to this paltry publication. Now
fortean author Paul Cropper [co-author of *Out of the Shadows:
Mystery Animals of Australia*
(http://www.strangemag.com/bookcat.othermystanim.html)] who has been
on the scene of the alleged poltergeist has seen fit to share his
observations of the phenomenon, and to make some corrections.

========================================
I was intrigued enough by the initial press reports to visit
Humpty Doo and spend 4 days (April 27th-30th) with the residents at
the house, together with my friend Tony Healy -- this was the week
after the Today Tonight 'expose'. On the last 2 days we were joined
by a reporter from the Sydney Morning Herald (Frank
Robson)(http://www.smh.com.au/index.html).

We all witnessed classic polt activity -- showers of stones
(apparently through the roof and ceiling, in one instance I
witnessed), objects thrown (knives, glass, gravel, pegs, crucifix,
coins, scissors, pot lids, bullets, spanners, stones, brass fittings,
batteries), beds disturbed, messages written on walls, etc.

In all, Tony and I witnessed around 24 incidents over the 4 days we
were there, and some of these could not be explained away as sleight
of hand or some other kind of hoax. As far as Tony, Frank and I (and
every other visitor to the house we interviewed) were concerned,
something very strange was happening there.

Firstly, a few corrections to your original report by Cheyne:

        - the total number of witnesses was over 30, not 17
        - the house was fibro, not timber, and about 20 years old
        - Kirsty's last name is Agius, not Aggis
        - Kirsty *never* owned up to hoaxing, despite being badgered by a
          Today Tonight reporter by phone for nearly an hour late one
          night
        - the freelance cameraman who was filming when the item was
          supposedly thrown does not believe that Kirsty threw anything
          (the image was 'discovered' back in Sydney later)

Peter Darben's update contains further inaccuracies:

        - While only a few incidents were caught on camera, all of the
          Today Tonight team were convinced the polt was legit - the
          problem was it didn't seem to like being photographed. Quite
          often, the individuals changing camera film would have items
          thrown at them!

        - the throwing 'hoax' was never admitted by anyone

        - there was independent evidence available - the other witnesses.
          Tony and I spoke to several local newspaper and Darwin ABC
          journalists who had arrived at the house skeptics and left
          believers. These witnesses were there to prove the story the
          hoax, and all saw things that totally baffled them. You can
          also include 3 priests who visited the house, who were all
          convinced.

        - the money. Today Tonight did pay around $1000 to each person,
          but that was after they had taken over the house completely for
          a week, often making the group stay outside for hours on end.
          At at the end of this, they accused them of hoaxing - seems
          like small compensation to me! Further to this, the group could
          have made a lot more money if that was their ultimate aim, as
          the media fury was still in full flight while we were there.
          Instead, they refused to have any further media involvement. I
          got to know all of them, and I just don't believe that they
          were hoaxing this at all.

        - the group was NOT evicted (Australian News Network, April 21st
          http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national/4249585.htm).

The house was in pristine condition because the group had paid for
repairs -- out of their own pockets! So much for the money motive!
Most of the polt damage was confined to things that they owned.

The group did move out voluntarily at the end of the week we were
there. In the end, they had had enough of the polt, of not being
believed and of the media and public frenzy. As far as I know, the
house is still unoccupied.

Tony and I are doing a story in Fortean Times of our experiences,
with further details on the case.

Just wanted to set the record straight.

Paul Cropper
========================================




Dave (daev) Walsh
June 5th 1998


Feedback and comments to <blather@nua.ie>

Have your say: http://www.nua.ie/blather/blabber

*******************************************************************

NUA INTERNET SURVEYS
A weekly newsletter, Internet Surveys is a free digest of the most
interesting surveys containing data relating to the Internet.
It is available by sending an email to
<surveys-request@lists.best.com>
with the word "subscribe" in the body of the message.

NUA WHAT'S NEW
A monthly newsletter, What's New is a free monthly newsletter
highlighting the new additions, happenings and changes at Nua.
It is available by sending an email to
<whatsnew-requestlists.best.com>
with the word "subscribe" in the body of the message.

NUA NEW THINKING
New Thinking is a free, weekly, 500-word email column, whose
objective is to contribute to a practical philosophy for The
Digital Age. It is available by sending an email to
<newthinking-request@lists.best.com> with the word "subscribe" in
the body of the message.

*******************************************************************

SPONSORSHIP:
While Blather will always remain free to the subscriber, Nua is
always willing to talk to interested parties with regard to
sponsorship.
Contact Daev Walsh: <daev@nua.ie>

*******************************************************************

Blather archives, please go to:
http://www.nua.ie/blather/archives/index.html


*******************************************************************
1798 REBELLION ON LOCAL IRELAND - http://local.ie/history/1798/
*******************************************************************

Local Ireland launches new site about 1798 rebellion in Ireland

<http://local.ie/history/1798>

Local Ireland has launched a major new site commemorating the 1798 rising
in Ireland.  1798 marked the year of one of the bloodiest rebellions in
Ireland since the Williamite War of 1640, when the Gaelic political order
collapsed, Catholics lost their civil rights and their land was confiscated
and passed on to wealthy Protestant settlers. "The Year of the Rising" in
1798 also marked the first time a foreign military nation joined forces
with Irish insurgents in a  pledge to fight against British colonial rule.

Local Ireland's new site about 1798 includes sections on

* the historical, social and political background which lead to the rebellion;
* the injustice of British rule in Parliament;
* the military background, tactics and weapons used in the battles;
* the significance of the American Civil War (which many Irishmen were
drafted to fight in);
*  the influence of the French Revolution and the Age of Enlightenment on a
nation which had suffered under the hands of the British for almost 600 years.

*******************************************************************
NUA MISSION STATEMENT
*******************************************************************

To excel in the establishment and development of online relationships and
brands.

For further information on how Nua can help your organisation get the best
out of the Internet, contact our marketing director, Mary Gorman
<mary@nua.ie> or our representative in New York, Niall Swan <nswan@nua.ie>

Mary Gorman:   mailto:mary@nua.ie
Niall Swan:    mailto:nswan@nua.ie


*******************************************************************

NUA LIMITED
Nua, a vibrant, innovative, Irish company whose focus is in helping
progressive organisations adapt to the new environment created by the
Internet. We have the management/marketing, design and technical
skills to truly understand your unique situation, and to translate
that understanding into a successful Internet presence for you.

Nua has received an array of awards since its genesis in 1996. Among
those are the coveted "Best Overall World Wide Web Business
Achievement" the top prize for website development in Europe.
http://www.nua.ie/about/review.html
SUBSCRIBING TO BLATHER
Send an email to:
<blather-request@lists.best.com>
with the word
subscribe
in the body of the message. An automatic acknowledgement
should be returned to you by e-mail within a few minutes.

UNSUBSCRIBING
Send an email to
<blather-request@lists.best.com>
with the word
unsubscribe
in the body of the message.

TECHNICAL PROBLEMS
If you are having any technical problems,
please email the Nua Webmaster at: <web@nua.ie>.

*******************************************************************

____________________________________________________________________
NUA : Internet Consultancy & Developer         http://www.nua.ie/
Dave Walsh <daev@nua.ie> Tel: +353-1-676-8996  Fax: +353-1-661-3932
Read Blather: http://www.nua.ie/blather - weekly weirdness by email







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 6

                 Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General

From: Robert Todd <RTodd12191@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 14:59:03 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 10:02:50 -0400
Subject: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General

Mr. Randle stated:

> From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
> Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 12:44:37 EDT
> To: updates@globalserve.net
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General

> >Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 00:36:17 -0500 (CDT)
> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General

>>>>From: KRandle993@aol.com [Kevin Randle]
>>>>Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 12:58:31 EDT
>>>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General

<large snip>

> Again, this wasn't a point I made, but I will address it. The
> purpose Project Mogul might have be classified, but the
> equipment was not. It was, in essence, a weather balloon and
> radar reflector (or for those who want to nitpic, a cluster of
> balloons and an array of equipment). However, that equipment was
> NOT classified. It was so unimportant that pictures of a cluster
> of balloons launched at Alamogordo appeared in newspapers around
> the country on July 10, 1947. Had it been a Mogul balloon, there
> would have been no need for SAC headquarters to issue warnings
> to Ramey and DuBose.

> Not to mention the fact that the CAA required the Mogul people
> to announce through NOTAMS (Notice to Airmen) that the
> launch had taken place.

This is a claim Mr. Randle keeps repeating, despite the fact
that it has been debunked before.

Essentially, Mr. Randle's claim is that members of the New York
Univeristy (NYU) Balloon Group were required to provide high
density air traffic areas with information about the launches of
their balloons. In other words, the pilots and others at Roswell
were aware of the balloon arrays because the CAA demanded that
the launches be announced in the Notices to Airmen (NOTAMs),
which the pilots would have read.

One of the reasons the NYU balloon launches were moved to
Alamogordo Army Air Field (AAAF) was because of the airspace
restrictions placed on the development effort in the New
York/New Jersey/Pennsylvania area by the CAA.  No formal
arrangements were made to notify anybody in the New Mexico area
because it was assumed (no doubt with a wink and a nod on the
part of NYU personnel) that the balloons would not drift off the
White Sands range.  It wasn't until balloons started landing all
over the place in June and July of 1947 that the CAA got
involved and arrangements were made to issue notifications.

I discussed this issue several times with Prof. Charles Moore,
who headed the NYU balloon team at AAAF, and he states
unequivocally that they made no notifications in either June or
July of 1947, and that they didn't "get legal" until September
of 1947. Therefore, there is absolutely no reason to think
anybody at Roswell Army Air Field (RAAF) knew anything about the
NYU balloon launches from AAAF.

These facts are documented in the CAA correspondence reproduced
as part of the NYU balloon development reports, which, in turn,
were reproduced in the Air Force's first report on the Roswell
incident.  The CAA correspondence is dated in August of 1947,
long after the NYU Balloon Group had left Alamogordo Army Air
Field in early July of 1947.  The NYU Balloon Group did not
return to Alamogordo Army Air Field until September of 1947.

<snip>

Robert Todd






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 6

                 Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General

From: Robert Todd <RTodd12191@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 14:58:39 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 09:59:16 -0400
Subject: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General

Steven Kaeser wrote:

>From: "Steven Kaeser" <steve@konsulting.com>
>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force
>General
>Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 06:41:02 -0400

>>From: RGates8254@aol.com [Robert Gates]
>>Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 20:29:47 EDT
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force
>General

><massive snip>

<snip>

> Charles Moore is, unfortunately, no longer a disinterested
> bystander in this debate.  He has joined the Roswell ranks as an
> author who now has a contention to defend.

I object to the subtle implication that Prof. Moore is promoting
something other than what he believes to be the truth.  Mr. Kaeser
never calls into question the motives or sincerity of the authors
who promote the alien spaceship explanation, much less the
motives and sincerity of the witnesses who do the same.

> Again, if I recall
> correctly, Moore had been contacted by UFO researchers in the
> 80's and he indicated at the time that he felt there was no way
> that the classified MOGUL project could have been related to the
> crash at Roswell.  However, his stance change after being
> contacted by the Air Force as they prepared their 1994 report.

This is a comeplete misrepresentation of what Prof. Moore's
position has been, and almost certainly is the result of a
nearly complete lack of familiarity with what Prof. Moore has
stated on this subject.  I am constantly amazed and discouraged
by the willingness of so many people to pontificate on matters
about which they have little or no information.  The literature
is available for anybody to examine, but few people in the UFO
field seem interested in examinaing it.  I would suggest that
Mr.  Kaeser read _UFO Crash at Roswell: Genesis of a Modern
Myth_, by Benson Saler, Charles Zeigler, and Charles Moore.

On page 175 of that book, Prof. Moore states that William Moore,
who started the Roswell myth with Stanton Friedman,  contacted
Prof. Moore in 1979 and asked him "if one of the New York
University balloons could have plowed long, deep furrows in the
ground . . . ."  Prof. Moore responded saying that, _based on
the description Bill Moore had given him_, he could say that the
NYU balloons (_not_ "Mogul balloons") could not have been
responsible for plowing such furrows.  Nevertheless, Prof. Moore
held the belief that one of NYU's balloons probably had been
responsible for the Roswell incident, but he thought it was one
of the newer, plastic balloons that had mystified the witnesses.
Bill Moore had told Prof. Moore "that some heavy craft had
crashed, made long, furrowlike gouges in the ground, lost some
parts, then rebounded into the air and left the region."
Obviously, the NYU balloons were not capable of making long
gouges in the earth.  _That_ was the context of Prof. Moore's
statement to Bill Moore.

Furthermore, Prof. Moore had never heard the classified code
name "Mogul" until I brought it to his attention in the early
1990s.  I also furnished him with one of the Roswell articles
that had appeared in the _Roswell Daily Record_ (RDR), in which
Mac Brazel was quoted describing the material he had found on
the Foster Ranch.  Bill Moore had never showed him any of the
articles from the RDR.  It wasn't until that point that Prof.
Moore's position changed.  He realized that what had caused the
incident had not been one of the newer, plastic balloons, but a
train of neoprene balloons that carried the radar targets, and
that the radar targets were the source of the mystery.  The
balloons used in these clusters were regular meteorological
sounding balloons.  But the balloon material discovered on the
Foster Ranch, and shown in the Roswell photographs, was not the
source of the Roswell "mystery."  The source of the "mystery"
was the debris from the silvery, metallic-looking radar targets
that had been found on the remote ranch.

> Since then he has become a major proponent of the MOGUL
> explanation, and has spoken at numerous events to share his
> "truth", which requires a number of speculative assumptions based
> on limited hard evidence.

Perhaps Mr. Kaeser could tell us at which "numerous events"
Prof. Moore has "share[d] his 'truth'"?

In fact, the only hard evidence of the Roswell incident is the
photographs taken by J. Bond Johnson.  Without question, those
photographs show the remains of neoprene sounding balloons that
had been exposed to sunlight for several weeks, and radar
targets. Enlarging those photographs cannot possibly show
anything but neoprene sounding balloons, and radar targets.

It is not a speculative assumption that Prof. Moore recalls the
use of the reinforcing tape on the targets the NYU Balloon Group
was using. He used those targets between 100 and 150 times, and
each time he wondered about the symbols on the reinforcing tape.
His recollection does not stem from a single use of the
balloons, whereas the recollec- tions of the Roswell witnesses
do stem from their single observation of the tape.  Moreover,
based on the information presently available, it appears the
targets being used by the NYU Balloon Group in New Mexico were
pre-production models that had the quick-fix tape with symbols
on it, and the Balloon Group had brought the targets with them
from New Jersey.  As a result, it is likely the NYU Balloon
Group were the _only_ people in New Mexico who were using the
radar targets with the reinforcing tape that showed the
meaningless symbols.  This links the Roswell debris directly to
the NYU Balloon Group, which was working on an unclassified
portion of Project Mogul.

It is also interesting to note that the symbols that appeared on
the Roswell debris, as described by the witnesses, appeared in
precisely the location where the tape was afixed to the balsa
wood in the radar targets.  The single exception is Dr. Marcel,
who claims that the symbols appeared on the inner surface of
"I-beam" shaped members.  (It is not clear from the witness
statements whether the symbols actually were on tape, or the ink
had bled through the tape onto the balsa wood"-like" members.)

> In an effort to help promote the MOGUL
> explanation,  Jesse Marcel Jr. was contacted and asked to come
> look at the remains of a MOGUL balloon (which I believe Moore
> uses in his "dog and pony show") as well as some material that
> had been "aged" in the desert.  Marcel was emphatic that the
> material he saw did not resemble the items (or material) he
> remembers seeing in his kitchen as a boy.

Mr. Kaeser has no cause to use snotty characterizations like
"dog and pony show," except to imply that Prof. Moore knowingly
is stating erroneous information.  Prof. Moore does not attend
events to speak on the subject of Roswell, and does not perform
a "dog and pony show" in connection with the Roswell incident.
He has stated what he believes to be true in the book cited
above, and I would recommend that Mr. Kaeser borrow a copy from
his local library so he will know what he is talking about.  If
indeed Prof. Moore, or anybody else, invited Dr. Marcel to
examine radar target and neoprene balloon material in various
stages of decomposition, so what?  Mr. Kaeser implies that such
an invitation was sinister or insincere in some way, with not a
shred of evidence to justify such a characterization.

Furthermore, as written, Mr. Kaeser's statement suggests that
Prof. Moore contacted Dr. Marcel and invited him to his "dog and
pony show," as Mr. Kaeser calls it.

The fact is that Prof. Moore has never contacted Dr. Marcel.
Dr. Marcel called Prof. Moore,  twice as Prof. Moore recalls,
and asked for copies of some of the NYU reports.  Prof. Moore
furnished these reports to Dr. Marcel.  While driving through
Socorro on his way to Roswell, Dr. Marcel contacted Prof. Moore
and asked to see a radar target.  Prof. Moore met with Dr.
Marcel and his associate at Dr. Marcel's motel and showed him a
radar target and balloon.  Presumably this is the "dog and pony
show" to which Mr. Kaeser referred, a "show" put on at the
specific request of Dr. Marcel.

With regard to Dr. Marcel's recollections, why is more weight
given to those recollections than is given to the recollections
of Bessie Schreiber (nee Brazel)?  I contacted her and furnished
her with copies of the Roswell photographs.  I asked her if the
material shown in those photographs looks like the material she
helped her father gather up back in July of 1947.  She stated
that the material depicted in those photographs _does_ look like
the material they picked up back in July of 1947.  Furthermore,
Bessie Brazel wasn't awakened in the middle of the night to view
the debris; she helped her father pick it up in broad daylight.
Jesse Marcel, Jr., was awakened by his father in the middle of
the night.

But the promoters of the Roswell myth discount Bessie Brazel
Schreiber's statements because her brother, Bill Brazel, claims
she wasn't even at the ranch, when in fact the Brazel children
_did_ live at the ranch after school let out for the summer,
which would have been before the story blew up in July.  But the
Roswell promoters like Bill Brazel's tales better, because they
add more mystery to the story.  He claims he picked up bits and
pieces of the Roswell debris which were later consfiscated by
the Air Force following some loose talk in a bar.  Bill Brazel
didn't live at the Foster Ranch, but Bessie did after school let
out for the summer.  But because Bill Brazel's tales are to
their liking, the Roswell promoters accept his claims, and
reject Bessie's.

And I ask again, why is it we haven't been told what Mrs. Marcel
(Major Marcel's wife, and Jesse Marcel, Jr.'s mother) had to say
when she was asked about the Roswell debris?  As I undestand it,
she said the debris was _not_ from an alien spaceship.  This is
just one of numerous examples where the promoters of the alien
spaceship explanation have distoted, misrepresented, or hidden
evidence that runs counter to the alien spaceship explanation.

I have been in communication with Prof. Moore for many years
now, and I know him to be a completely honest individual.  He
certainly is no apologist for the government.  He states what he
believes is the truth, and it is disgraceful that Mr. Kaeser
attempts to inply otherwise.  Prof. Moore also is a first-class
scientist, and I would recommend that anybody who cares to do so
read about some of his scientific accomplishments at:

  www.nmt.edu/mainpage/alumni/goldpan/moore.html

> I would agree that these images will not end the debate, and
> skeptics will use the images to their advantage as best they can.

If these images were enough to end the debate, they would have
ended it already.  There is _no_ question of what those photos
show, and what they show is neoprene balloon envelope material
that had been exposed to sunlight for several weeks, and the torn
remains of one or more radar targets.  Enlarging the photographs
cannot change what they show.  Unfortunately, the promoters of
the alien spaceship explanation have concocted a twisted scenario
to explain away the Roswell photographs.  They agree that the
photographs show the remains of neoprene balloon envelope
material and the tattered remains of a radar target, but they
further claim these materials were substituted for the "real"
Roswell debris.  It doesn't seem to matter that the verbal
descriptions of the debris from the witnesses match what is shown
in the photos, except that the meaningless symbols are not
visible in the photographs.

<snip>

Robert Todd







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 6

                  There Is No ETH Only The UFO/ET Reality!

From: ufotruth@ix.netcom.com [William Hand]
Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 09:14:59 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 10:36:59 -0400
Subject: There Is No ETH Only The UFO/ET Reality!

Everyone,

I am getting sick and tired of people talking about the so
called "extraterrestrial hypothesis". This is because it should
be obvious to anyone who has looked at all the evidence that has
been acquiredover the last 50 years that UFOs/ETs are REAL and
that they are visiting earth.

We have evidence in many forms that advanced space craft(s) are
flying in our skies and that some of them most likely are not of
earth origion. Some of these forms of evidence that have been
gathered over the last 50 years are as follows:

Thousands of animal mutilations.

Thousands of alien abductions.

Thousands of UFO/ET sightings every single year.

Thousands of UFO/ET videos, films, and photos.

Hundreds of first hand ex-government and ex-military witnesses
to UFO/ET information, incidents, landings, sightings, crashes,
etc.

Thousands of crop circles.

Alien implants that have been recovered.

UFO mass sightings like the one in Phoenix and others.

Amazing FOIA documents that have been released.

Thousands of stupid, ridiculous, and outright insane
explanations of UFO/ET activity, incidents, and sightings from
the govt/military.

Lie after lie after lie after lie from the government/military.

Many UFO trace cases.

Many UFOs tracked by RADAR.

Many UFOs chased by jets and aircraft.

etc. etc. etc.

----------------

There is MORE than enough evidence to PROVE beyond any reasnable
doubt that UFOs/ETs are visiting earth. Of course there is no
way that anyone can be 100% sure of ANYTHING. Heck, for all I
know there is even a chance that Bill Clinton is an innocent,
honest, caring, respectful, and patriotic man but I seriously
doubt it.

I think it is safe to say that due to all of the evidence that
has been collected we can safely state that there is a 99.9%
percent chance that UFOs/ETs are visiting earth even if we threw
out, and I see no reason to do this, 95% of all the evidence
that has been collected.

So it is time that we STOP talking about the so called
"extraterrestrial hypothesis" and start realizing that because
of the HUGE ammount of evidence that has been collected over the
years we have more than enough evidence to prove beyond a
reasnable doubt that UFOs/ETs exist and are visiting earth.

It is NOW TIME that we all start PUTTING ASIDE our differences
and start working TOGETHER to do our best to peacefully,
legally, and lawfully FORCE the government/military to tell us
the FULL TRUTH about UFOs/ETs and EVERYTHING THEY KNOW about
them. We are the people who are supposed to BE the government
and who PAY for the government so we have a RIGHT to know the
TRUTH, the FULL TRUTH,and NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH about UFOs/ETs
that are visiting earth.

Now, if you do not want to get involved yourself, even though we
all should try to if we are able, please support others who are
attempting to expose the truth about UFOs/ETs. You can volunteer
your time, send them an envelope in the mail with a few bucks
(most UFO organizations have a very small budget and every
dollar really does help out), spread the word about their
efforts, or just email them with a kind word of support.

If we all work together and try to help in someway, not matter
how large or small, then we can end this coverup and make the
government/military tell us the full truth that we DESERVE and
have a RIGHT to know!

Best Regards, William

PS: We all need to work together and try to help expose the
UFO/ET coverup. Now, some people are not going to like the
approach that others are using to try and expose the truth. But
doing SOMETHING is better than doing NOTHING and if we all work
together and support ALL efforts to expose the truth about
UFOs/ETs, whether we believe that certain organizations are
using the right approach or not, then we can END this coverup
very quickly.

Those in the military/government who are keeping the coverup
going LOVE to see us, and I have done this too, bicker and argue
about how to expose the coverup instead of actually DOING
SOMETHING, ANYTHING, to try and expose the coverup.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 6

                          Re: Stacy, Corso & Birnes

From: "Philippe Piet van Putten" <abp1@uol.com.br>
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 18:18:54 -0300
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 10:16:51 -0400
Subject: Re: Stacy, Corso & Birnes


>Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 13:36:26 -0500 (CDT)
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Stacy, Corso & Birnes

>>From: William Hand ufotruth@ix.netcom.com
>>Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 04:50:22 -0500 (CDT)
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Sarah McClendon

><snip>

>>Then you have no basis to call him a liar if you are not even
>>willing to tell us, in your opinion, what he has lied about.

>I'll tell you, in my opinion, what he lied about: seeing alien
>bodies at Ft. Riley, being in charge of a file cabinet of Roswell
>debris in the Pentagon, seeding same to technology, and so on. I
>do, however, believe the part about him being in the Army.

>>If you think he is such a LIAR then why is he signing a sworn
>>affidavit for the Citizens Against UFO Secrecy?

>Let's wait and see what the affidavit says first. But certainly
>one who publishes an entire book based on personal fantasy would
>have no trouble at this stage continuing the charade. What's the
>Army or anyone else going to do -- court-martial him?

>>You just don't like it that he
>>is willing to tell us about it so we can know the truth he
>>knows about UFOs/ETs/Roswell.

>Yes, but there's only one thing wrong with this pretty picture:
>you see, Cor$so doesn't *know* the truth about UFOs, ETs, and
>Roswell. He got together with William Birnes, who is a writer and
>book packager, and they cashed in on the 50th anniversary of
>Roswell, producing a book that is long on personal claims and
>totally devoid of anything resembling proof. You are the sucker,
>and Cor$o & Birne$ are the suckees, if you will.

>>If you would have done any real RESEARCH into Col. Corso
>>you would have known the answer. There were FOUR fingers
>>on the aliens. Col.Corso stated this on the Art Bell show.
>>Bill Birnes stated on the Art Bell show that in the final
>>rush to meet a deadline he accidently made a mistake in the
>>book and put down six fingers instead of four.

>Real RESEARCH, puh-leeze! (I've at least interviewed Birnes, have
>you?) They got caught in a major screw up (probably after
>watching the Alien Autopsy film)! What did you expect Birne$ to
>say, "Oops! You caught me!" I've been rushed to meet deadlines
>before, too, but I don't normally mistake four for six.

><snip>

>>So will you PLEASE
>>stop trying to bash and trash Col. Philip J. Corso? Of course
>>you won't stop because you are trying to wrongfully discredit
>>him to keep the UFO/ET coverup going.

>>Best Regards,
>>William

>What coverup, dear boy? Do you think if there were an effective
>coverup in operation that Cor$o's book -- to assume for the
>briefest period of time measurable that it were actually truthful
>-- would have been allowed to see the light of day?

>What coverup? Have there ever been more UFO books and videos
>available than there are now, ditto TV shows, ET-themed movies,
>the X-Files and so on? What about the WWW? What coverup?

>What do you want whoever is supposed to be in control of the
>coverup to say that you don't already claim to *know*?

>Dennis

Hi folks,

I have never had any contact with Mr. Dennis Stacy (he never
replied my e-mails or letters, not even when I was MUFON's
National Director) but I must fully agree with his standpoints
concerning the claims of Mr. Philip Corso.

OK. He was in the Army, so what ?! I read the first edition of
his book (with Strom Trurmond's foreword) and, honestly, I felt
it was a tremendous waste of time.

The UFO pictures in the book, from the National Archives, have a
strange note: "Lt. Col. Corso was never able to confirm the
veracity of the following purported UFO surveillance photos..."
Never able ?!! A man who had clearance to high-security info ?!!
Those ridiculous b&w photos from the NA were the best he could
find for his book ? A man who worked inside the Pentagon and had
debris from a crashed saucer could not verify the authenticity
of photos ?!!

Sign an affidavit ?!! He's an old man; He has nothing to loose
after all he claimed in his book. Obviously he has no fear of
being court-martialed.

I'm sorry, but I can't buy his story either !


Best regards

Philippe Piet van Putten
The Brazilian Academy of Parasciences (ABP)
abp1@uol.com.br
Picard UFO Research International (PUFORI)
brasil@pufori.org



-----Mensagem original-----
De: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
Para: updates@globalserve.net <updates@globalserve.net>
Data: Sexta-feira, 5 de Junho de 1998 11:00
Assunto: UFO UpDate: Re: Stacy, Corso & Birnes








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 6

                        Re: Area 51 Still Operational

From: Gary Alevy <galevy@pipeline.com>
Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 10:33:06 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 10:55:25 -0400
Subject: Re: Area 51 Still Operational

>From: "Steven Kaeser" <steve@konsulting.com>
>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Area 51 Still Operational
>Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 07:32:59 -0400

>>From: KRandle993@aol.com [Kevin Randle]
>>Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 18:26:41 EDT
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Area 51 Still Operational

><snip>

>>The Scoutmaster case is from August 1952. The Air Force explained
>>it as a hoax. Given the scoutmaster's history of spinning tall
>>tales, had been discharged from the Marines in 1944 under less
>>than honorable conditions (during the height of WWII, what does
>>that tell you about the guy?) and there was no independent
>>corroboration for the sighting if you looked carefully at the
>>statements of the boy scouts who were there. All the physical
>>evidence was explainable with the exception of the burnt roots of
>>the grass samples. But, since the chain of custody was broken,
>>that might not be important.

>>Nearly everyone in the UFO fields realizes that this case is a
>>hoax. Please notice I said nearly everyone.

>>KRandle

>Kevin-

>I would note that in 1952 the military labeled just about every
>case a "hoax", "Venus", "air inversions", or "misidentification
>of birds or aircraft". Indeed, this may have been the correct
>explanation for many unknowns, but the military was obviously
>trying to put a "spin" on this subject and not really trying to
>get the truth to the public. In July of that year the military
>had to deal with the Washington DC sightings that showed
>military leaders the impact of the public's intense interest and
>how it could disrupt communication lines. Indeed, this was the
>year that the military grew to fear the impact of the public's
>reaction more than the "unknowns" themselves. Given it's
>behavior over the years, I would tend to take anything the
>military issued in a public statement about UFOs with a very
>large "grain of salt".

>Secondly, the fact that he left the marines under less than
>honorable circumstances was not exactly unusual. Without
>details, this may or may not be relevant to his being an
>honorable person, and (again) the "spin" on this facet of his
>life comes from the military's release of information, as are
>the allegations of his "spinning tall tales".

>On the other hand, he was a Scoutmaster. This means that a
>sponsoring organization (most like a church) thought enough of
>his character to assign him the task of helping to guide older
>boys as they become young men. This is not a guarantee of good
>character, but generally tends to be a reasonable indicator. As
>I recall, it was after his alleged sighting that his life began
>to fall apart, and I would suggest that there are few who have
>had a serious "sighting" that haven't suffered some sort of
>paradigm shift in their "reality". I would suspect that many of
>us have flaws in our character that we've learned to control as
>we go through our daily routines. It wouldn't surprise me if an
>encounter with something completely unknown or frightening had
>the effect of bringing those "flaws" to the surface.

<snip>

The name of the scoutmaster in question was Sonny Desverges.
This case was discussed within the past 6 months on a television
documentary broadcast on a television station in New York City.

If I recall correctly, one of the participants on this list,
Karl Pflock was also featured on this documentary in regards to
his personal investigation of the "Florida Scoutmaster" case,
which was so named by Ruppelt.

Curiously none of the locals, still living in the same locale,
had anything negative to saw about the scoutmaster.  They seemed
to indicate that he had been railroaded by the military in the
investigation of the UFO sighting.

I have a question for Kevin.  Where was the chain of custody
lost in the ground trace evidence of the Scoutmaster case?  I
have seen no mention of this in the literature, could you please
cite the appropriate references.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 6

                          Re: Alfred's Odd Ode #251

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 07:47:24 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 11:04:11 -0400
Subject: Re: Alfred's Odd Ode #251

>Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 06:50:41 -0500
>From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Alfred's Odd Ode #251

<snip>

Dear Odd Alfred:


> Restore John Ford.

Restore that nut case to what? Long Island? He belongs on Fantasy
Island.

Best wishes

-  Larry Hatch









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 6

                          Re: Aliens In Advertising

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 07:35:44 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 11:01:31 -0400
Subject: Re: Aliens In Advertising

>Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 00:20:36 -0400
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Info request

>>From: RAMBLD@worldnet.att.net [Diane Lovett]
>>Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 10:35:35 +0000
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Info request

>>> Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 06:43:06 -0500
>>> From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
>>> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Info request

>>> > From: ParadigmRG <ParadigmRG@aol.com> [Stephen G. Bassett]
>>> > Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 15:22:02 EDT
>>> > To: updates@globalserve.net
>>> > Subject: Info request


Dear Sirs and Madames:

This thread is far afield from my work. However..

I have heard about (but not seen) an advertisement in which grey
aliens come to Earth on a quest. Are they looking for the usual
predictable stuff?  Do they want to float that pretty brunette
out the window again? NO!

They want the latest fastest Pentium II microprocessors Intel
can provide.

A rather self-serving advert of course, but then the "aliens"
didn't pay for it either. (I do not work for Intel.)

I happen to like the Pentiums, and would recommend them to the
"aliens" if I did not suspect that they have faster and more
powerful devices.

Best wishes

-  Larry Hatch







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 6

                              Ancient Mysteries

From: Rob Meyer <robmeyer@sedona.net>
Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 07:02:55 -0700 (MST)
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 10:33:09 -0400
Subject: Ancient Mysteries


Ancient Mysteries of Star Civilizations
UFOs & Orb Light Phenomenon in
Sedona's rEd Rock Canyons

Come share an evening with Robert Meyer

How the Orb light phenomenon, an extraterrestrial presence
occurring in third dimensional reality is elevating the
vibratory rate of consciousness and see the Sacred  geometry of
the Orbs.

How ancient knowledge, sacred geometry, earth grids and ley
lines affect the cellular vibratory rate and frequency of the
human body and the effects of Haarp & particle accelerators on
the human race .

How the current electromagnetic activity and the light phenomena
are contributing to restructuring our DNA and altering our
cellular structure .

Rob will be sharing photos & video footage of the ORBs


Rob will be conducting a Sky watch Vision Quest following the
lecture. this is a two hour outdoor secession  in which
participants will work with specialized night vision equipment
camera and video equipment in real-time experience with the ORBs
and other potential extraterrestrial contact. The entire lecture
and Sky watch Vision Quest will be videotaped and available for
purchase. Advanced sign up required for the sky watch tour.

Rob Meyer is past president of the International Tesla Society
and was an investigator for Mufon on the East Coast of the US.
An internationally recognized photographer whose UFO photos have
been featured in the Sedona Journal Of Emergence High Time
Magazine, Tucson Citizens Newspaper, student of sacred geometry
and ancient wisdom Rob's background brings a scientific and
practical focus to topics long considered to be merely myth
.legend or fantasy.  Rob has been featured in the  Leading Edge
Newspaper and several books. He has traveled to locations around
the world and the United states investigating and documenting
UFOs, Paranormal activities and the knowledge
of healing sciences passed down by the ancients.

Friday June 19,1998  7:00 to 9:00 PM
Sedona Verde Valley Association of Realtors
55 Sinagua Dr Sedona, AZ
Call 520-284-1404 for Information

Lecture $10.00  Sky watch $25.00

Visit the Website at: sedonavortexconnection.com/robmeyer


Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 16:52:06 +0000
From: robmeyer@sedona.net
To: imd@sedona.net
Subject: UFOs & ORbs


Orbs & Ufos in the Red Rock Canyons
By Robert Meyer

On May 14,1998 Rob Meyer and Darlene Kyurn, Susan Stone, Jan
Murphy and 7 others witnessed the most unusal occurances of Orbs
and UFOs to date. On the evening of May 14, 1998 our skywatch
group was out in the Loy bute Canyons viewing the night sky when
out of nowhere Orbs started appearing. To the amazement of the
group, of which some have never seen or experienced these ORBs
energies, these orbs came in large groups and circled around
each and every person in the group . As we watched through the
night vision equipment these orbs came right up to all of us as
though to check us out. The group then split up into groups of
three and started doing ceremony and to our amazement the Orbs
came in and circled around each of the groups. Throughout the
entire evening these Orbs never left and seemed to follow us
around. Several of the group mentioned how they could feel the
energies of these Orbs. Some of the group viewed others in the
group through the night Vision and were amazyed at what they
were seeing taking place . As the evening skywatch came to a
close we all got together to say our good byes to to our friends
the Orbs. We then departed the area and headed back to Sedona.
On our way back to Sedona on a remote dirt road in view of Doe
Mt I observed most unusal sets of colored lights coming from the
top of the mountain. As we got closer to the location were these
lights were appearing I stopped the van and to all our eyes
before us were two UFOs pulsing multple colors. I became so
excited that I jumpted out of the van and told everyone to stay
by the van no matter what happens. As I walked up the road the
ships became clearer in view and at that moment I felt compelled
to try to make contact. I started sending 3 short flashes from
my flashlight to try to establish a dialog of communications
with the ships. As I continued to flash 3 short blurps and the 3
long blurps all of a sudden the ship on the right started
dispersing mulptable colors from the ship in 3 blurp durations.
I then contunied ti flash to the ship on the left and again to
all who witnessed this great moment the ship pulsed back 3
flashes of colored lights this continued for over 40 minutes and
then we relocated ourselves to a better location to continue the
dialog of communications with the ships. On arriving at new
location we observed huge colors of gold, yellow, green, Blue.
At that moment it appeared that there were beings walking around
the area were the ships were so I started flashing 3 flashes at
them in short and long blurps .Then again to all of our amazment
I starting getting smaller pulses of colored lights flashed back
at me. The group was so stund by what was taking place no of us
were able to even talk. I keep up the communication for 15
minutes and then asked everyone if they were ready to leave and
they all wanted to hike up to were the ships were but, I
explained to them if they wanted to meet us they have the
ability to and asked all again that we leave the area. On
exiting the location the ship on the mountain released 3 final
multi colored flashes as if to say good bye. On our way back to
Sedona I asked what each person had seen and what there
experiences had been and we all agreed that we felt a most
powerful feeling of Love and oneness with eaxh other and the
ships and beings. This entire experience has changed my life as
well as the others in the group and we all as many around the
world are awaiting the day they will land and we will
communicate with our brothers and sisters from thr stars. I will
be updating these events as they happen and if you have had a
UFO experience e-mail us at sedonavortexconnection.com/robmeyer

LOVE LIGHT BALANCE Rob & Darlene



To: Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 16:52:06 +0000
From: robmeyer@sedona.net
Subject: Orbs & Ufos in the Red Rock Canyons
By  Robert Meyer

On May 14,1998 Rob Meyer and Darlene Kyurn, Susan Stone, Jan
Murphy and 7 others witnessed the most unusal occurances of Orbs
and UFOs to date. On the evening of May 14, 1998 our skywatch
group was out in the Loy bute Canyons viewing the night sky when
out of nowhere Orbs started appearing. To the amazement of the
group, of which some have never seen or experienced these ORBs
energies, these orbs came in large groups and circled around
each and every person in the group. As we watched through the
night vision equipment these orbs came right up to all of us as
though to check us out. The group then split up into groups of
three and started doing ceremony and to our amazement the Orbs
came in and circled around each of the groups. Throughout the
entire evening these Orbs never left and seemed to follow us
around. Several of the group mentioned how they could feel the
energies of these Orbs. Some of the group viewed others in the
group through the night Vision and were amazyed at what they
were seeing taking place. As the evening skywatch came to a
close we all got together to say our good byes to to our friends
the Orbs. We then departed the area and headed back to Sedona.
On our way back to Sedona on a remote dirt road in view of Doe
Mt I observed most unusal sets of colored lights coming from the
top of the mountain. As we got closer to the location were these
lights were appearing I stopped the van and to all our eyes
before us were two UFOs pulsing multple colors. I became so
excited that I jumpted out of the van and told everyone to stay
by the van no matter what happens. As I walked up the road the
ships became clearer in view and at that moment I felt compelled
to try to make contact. I started sending 3 short flashes from
my flashlight to try to establish a dialog of communications
with the ships. As I continued to flash 3 short blurps and the 3
long blurps all of a sudden the ship on the right started
dispersing mulptable colors from the ship in 3 blurp durations.
I then contunied ti flash to the ship on the left and again to
all who witnessed this great moment the ship pulsed back 3
flashes of colored lights this continued for over 40 minutes and
then we relocated ourselves to a better location to continue the
dialog of communications with the ships. On arriving at new
location we observed huge colors of gold, yellow, green, Blue.
At that moment it appeared that there were beings walking around
the area were the ships were so I started flashing 3 flashes at
them in short and long blurps. Then again to all of our amazment
I starting getting smaller pulses of colored lights flashed back
at me . The group was so stund by what was taking place no of us
were able to even talk. I keep up the communication for 15
minutes and then asked everyone if they were ready to leave and
they all wanted to hike up to were the ships were but, I
explained to them if they wanted to meet us they have the
ability to and asked all again that we leave the area. On
exiting the location the ship on the mountain released 3 final
multi colored flashes as if to say good bye. On our way back to
Sedona I asked what each person had seen and what there
experiences had been and we all agreed that we felt a most
powerful feeling of Love and oneness with eaxh other and the
ships and beings. This entire experience has changed my life as
well as the others in the group and we all as many around the
world are awaiting the day they will land and we will
communicate with our brothers and sisters from thr stars. I will
be updating these events as they happen and if you have had a
UFO experience e-mail us at sedonavortexconnection.com/robmeyer
Mary I will have a picture of the orbs for you possible tonight.

Love Light Balance Rob & Darlene








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 6

                        Re: Area 51 Still Operational

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 10:28:48 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 10:41:56 -0400
Subject: Re: Area 51 Still Operational


>From: "Steven Kaeser" <steve@konsulting.com>
>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Area 51 Still Operational
>Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 07:32:59 -0400


>>From: KRandle993@aol.com [Kevin Randle]
>>Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 18:26:41 EDT
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Area 51 Still Operational


 <snip>

>>>I recall a case in France where the police placed trace evidence
>>>(or photographs of it) into an investigation file.  The US Air
>>>Force has a great deal of interesting physical evidence that they
>>>haven't been able to explain, some of which is now available
>>>through the FOIA process. If Karl Pflock wants to chime in here,
>>>he can provide some interesting details regarding the
>>>"Scoutmaster Case" in Florida in the '60s, which the Air Force
>>>investigated and couldn't explain.

>>The Scoutmaster case is from August 1952. The Air Force explained
>>it as a hoax. Given the scoutmaster's history of spinning tall
>>tales, had been discharged from the Marines in 1944 under less
>>than honorable conditions (during the height of WWII, what does
>>that tell you about the guy?) and there was no independent
>>corroboration for the sighting if you looked carefully at the
>>statements of the boy scouts who were there. All the physical
>>evidence was explainable with the exception of the burnt roots of
>>the grass samples. But, since the chain of custody was broken,
>>that might not be important.

>>Nearly everyone in the UFO fields realizes that this case is a
>>hoax. Please notice I said nearly everyone.

>>KRandle


>Kevin-

>I've learned to take everything I see in this genre with a
>"grain of salt" until I can check into it myself, and I
>certainly haven't performed any great research into this case. I
>mentioned only in response to a blanket statement that seemed to
>indicate that the author was unaware of any cases where physical
>evidence had been collected and analyzed. This case happened to
>come to mind, and I brought it up.

>I would note that in 1952 the military labeled just about every
>case a "hoax", "Venus", "air inversions", or "misidentification
>of birds or aircraft".

In 1952 this simply was not the case. Project Blue Book collected
some 1500 sightings in 1952 and of those 303 were labeled as
unidentified. Although Major General Samford suggested the
Washington National radar cases were inversions, the official
explanation in 1952 was unidentified.

>Indeed, this may have been the correct
>explanation for many unknowns, but the military was obviously
>trying to put a "spin" on this subject and not really trying to
>get the truth to the public. In July of that year the military
>had to deal with the Washington DC sightings that showed
>military leaders the impact of the public's intense interest and
>how it could disrupt communication lines. Indeed, this was the
>year that the military grew to fear the impact of the public's
>reaction more than the "unknowns" themselves. Given it's
>behavior over the years, I would tend to take anything the
>military issued in a public statement about UFOs with a very
>large "grain of salt".

Unless it has been corroborated by other research. In the
scoutmaster case this has been done.

>Secondly, the fact that he left the marines under less than
>honorable circumstances was not exactly unusual. Without
>details, this may or may not be relevant to his being an
>honorable person, and (again) the "spin" on this facet of his
>life comes from the military's release of information, as are
>the allegations of his "spinning tall tales".

During WWII it was extremely difficult to get tossed out of the
military because of the manpower requirements. However, he was
tossed for being absent without leave and for stealing a car.

His tall tales included being dropped onto a Japanese held
island on a secret mission, that he was badly injured in an
accident on work in which a car fell on him and he was pinned
for a number of hours. That he was a PFC test pilot in the
Marines during the war. None of these things are true. Those who
knew him suggested that he spun tall tales.

>On the other hand, he was a Scoutmaster. This means that a
>sponsoring organization (most like a church) thought enough of
>his character to assign him the task of helping to guide older
>boys as they become young men. This is not a guarantee of good
>character, but generally tends to be a reasonable indicator. As
>I recall, it was after his alleged sighting that his life began
>to fall apart, and I would suggest that there are few who have
>had a serious "sighting" that haven't suffered some sort of
>paradigm shift in their "reality". I would suspect that many of
>us have flaws in our character that we've learned to control as
>we go through our daily routines. It wouldn't surprise me if an
>encounter with something completely unknown or frightening had
>the effect of bringing those "flaws" to the surface.

All well and good but no evidence that this is true here. After
reporting his sighting, he hired a publicity agent to that he
could sell his story to the highest bidder. He suggested that he
had been silenced by "brass" from Washington, though he managed
to tell his story to everyone who was interested in hearing it.

It probably should be noted that he began to spin his tale in
the middle of August 1952, after a great deal of newspaper
coverage of the flying saucer reports.

>Without a second witness (and I'll concede that the scouts, who
>only saw a light through the trees, didn't see enough to provide
>good testimony) this case rests on the anecdotal comments of a
>person whose character has been questioned.

It's doubtful that the scouts saw anything through the trees
based on there statements and the physical reality of the site.

>As far as the trace
>evidence is concerned, postulating what might have caused it
>does not prove what "did" cause it. To prove that he had hoaxed
>this case one would have to show how it was accomplished and
>prove that he had the ability to pull off such a hoax.

He had been caught telling lies about his background in the
past. That is very damning evidence. And we don't have to prove
the case a hoax, but it must be proved authentic. Too often in
this field we get this backward.

>No, this isn't a particularly good case to waste much time on.
>There are too many dead ends, and the available information has
>been tainted by those who may have had motives contrary to the
>search for truth. If I recall correctly, the central character
>in this incident left the community as an outcast and later
>attempts to locate him (many years after the fact) failed.

This is a lousy case and if not for the grass samples that Ed
Ruppelt found interesting, we wouldn't be talking about it. But,
that evidence was compromised because the chain of custody of
those samples has been broken.

And the scountmaster, because of his BACKGROUND, having been
thrown out of the Marines, having stolen a car, having told lies
to his friends and family has more to do with his reputation
than claiming to have seen a UFO.


>But I stand by my statement that there are good traces cases,
>that have not been fully explained, in the public record.

And I wouldn't argue that point with you. I'd reject the
scoutmaster case simply because there are too many things wrong
with it. It is in essence, a single witness case where there is
no good physical evidence to corroborate it, and the on-site
investigations suggests that it couldn't have happened the way
it was reported, which also suggests that it is a hoax.

Now, if I was very good at promoting my own work, I would have
told you to find a copy of PROJECT BLUE BOOK - EXPOSED so that
you could read all of this. I looked at the case carefully and
was surprised by what I learned. I also found the scoutmaster,
got his telephone number, but didn't have the chance to talk to
him. He has apparently died.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 6

                        Re: Area 51 Still Operational

From: John Rimmer <johnr@magonia.demon.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 16:11:14 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 13:23:14 -0400
Subject: Re: Area 51 Still Operational

>Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 17:31:19 -0500
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: John <jvif@spacelab.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Area 51 Still Operational

>>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: "Jerome Clark" <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Area 51 Still Operational
>>Date: Fri, 05 Jun 98 09:54:48 PDT

>>> Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 21:12:59 +0100
>>> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>> From: John Rimmer <johnr@magonia.demon.co.uk>
>>> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Skywatch: Area 51 Still Operational

>>> >Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Skywatch: Area 51 Still Operational
>>> >From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
>>> >Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 12:10:24 -0400
>>> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

><huge snip>

>Hi Jerry,

>Pardon the interruption. I'll retreat after this little tidbit.

>You wrote:

>>Peter Rogerson's bizarre assertion that abduction stories are
>>triggered by Americans' supposed deep-seated fear of Hispanic
>>immigrants).

>I had never heard this one before. I'm going to file it in the
>same folder that I keep Sasquatches'  "fetal infanticidal guilt"
>theory of abduction. And along with Elizabeth Lotus and
>whatshisface the Canadian electric helmet guy [Michael Persinger
>--ebk] they'll make good company for each other in there! <G>

>Oh sorry, my question is.....

>How does old Pete explain a Puerto Rican abductee like me?
>I don't know about 'deep seated fears' but I do know the
>"white folks" were mad as hell that we were here! Had to
>learn how to fight and defend myself at 5 years of age because
>of it. If any, the object of my nightmares are white folks! <LMAO!>

As the interlocutor between Peter Rogerson's Mancunian* fastness
and Cyberspace, I'd just point out that Jerry oversimplifies PR's
argument, as usual. Peter's not saying that abductions are
"caused" by fear of immigration, and he's certainly not saying
that members of minority and immigrant communities can't be
abductees. But there's a case to be made that some of the general
public's responses to the adbuction phenomenon might be triggered
by such fear. Apart from anything else, just look at the word
"alien", and how its used in the USA. As you say: "the white
folks were mad as hell that we were here!"

*[one who comes from Manchester, England --ebk]

 [Please try and remember that UpDates _is_
  world-wide, folks--ebk]
--
John Rimmer






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 6

                        Re: Area 51 Still Operational

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 11:03:17 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 13:17:38 -0400
Subject: Re: Area 51 Still Operational

>Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 21:12:59 +0100
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: John Rimmer <johnr@magonia.demon.co.uk>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Skywatch: Area 51 Still Operational

>>Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Skywatch: Area 51 Still Operational
>>From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
>>Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 12:10:24 -0400
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>The UFO phenomenon is not supported by Lazar, or crop circles, or
>>any of the promiscuously promised "great revelations" that are
>>"just around the corner". It is supported by over 50 years of
>>well documented sightings and trace evidence.

>Here we go again, more armwaving. Where are these cases? Where is the
>documentation other than in a stream of unreferenced pot-boilers?

Gee, John, how about Soccorro, Levelland, Exeter, Delphos...

Not to mention strong military radar/visual cases, such as that
recently documented by Brad Sparks in his excellent piece for
Jerry's book.

I mean, really, you expect someone to reproduce all of the cases
of the last 50 years that have stood the test of time on an
Internet mailing list? Why don't you read the literature and
save us some time?

>>How many good distance estimates have slipped through the cracks,
>>to take just one key measurement? With good distance
>>measurements, we can do altitude, speed, luminous energy output.
>>Yet few investigators make an effort to obtain triangulation,
>>they simply rely on wild guesses by witnesses.

>How can you get good distance measurements without first
>*knowing* the altitude, size, etc? How can you get triangulations
>if there's just one witness location? Where are the cases with
>witnesses clearly seeing the same object from distant locations?

Gee, John, you get them by having multiple witnesses or by using
witnesses who are in a car. Or you use cases where the object
clearly passed in front of a background object. Or you use
radar. Take your pick.

I've done one case with triangulations and I'm working on
another. It is definitely possible to get distances and sizes.

>Again, where are these trace cases? Jerome Clark was making great
>deal of noise a while ago about Trans-en-Provence (France) but
>he's gone all quiet about that now that it's been demolished by
>French researchers who were actually on the spot. Now I see
>someone on the Update is trying to resurrect Ubatuba which was
>buried 30 years ago. Do me a favour!

Really, Ubatuba demolished? By who? Sure, there are problems
with some of the work done, and it is a sad thing that the
primary piece was completely destroyed during the original
analyses, but without funding and participation by mainstream
labs, what was done was at least a contribution.

Jerry will have to respond to your comments on his reaction to
whatever so-called "demolition" of Trans-en-Provence has
occurred. However, I have yet to see such a refutation.

And lets try the medical effects experienced by Flynn and by
Webb. Let's take the pressure measurements of Quarouble and
Camrose.

>>Science on UFOs is moved forward by incremental basic work,
>>founded on good field investigation, not by revelation. And if
>>half the effort spent on the tricksters was spent on real science
>>done on real cases, we'd be getting somewhere.

>I agree. If people were doing REAL research we wouldn't be
>wasting our time on the dear dead extraterrestrial hypothesis.

Yes, yes, it's dead (sigh). I hear this wishful thinking all the
time. Exactly what killed it? I'm not an ETH proponent, but it
sure has less problematic aspects than MHH, PNH, CSH, or the
ELH.

Now, tell us John, how many field investigations you've been on,
how many old cases you've examined, and how much of the
literature you've actually read. Then maybe we will know how
much weight to give to your unsubstantiated rant.

------
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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 6

                 Re: John Ford [was: Alfred's Odd Ode #251]

From: John <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 13:20:18 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 13:37:36 -0400
Subject: Re: John Ford [was: Alfred's Odd Ode #251]

>Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 07:47:24 -0700
>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Alfred's Odd Ode #251

>>Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 06:50:41 -0500
>>From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Alfred's Odd Ode #251

><snip>

>Dear Odd Alfred:

>> Restore John Ford.

>Restore that nut case to what? Long Island? He belongs on Fantasy
>Island.

>Best wishes

>-  Larry Hatch

Hi Larry, hi All,

Geez Larry, although I agree with you that John Ford is a bit of
a "nutcase" (and that is based on having met him, spoken with him
on several occasions and after a lengthy review of what he was
offering as 'evidence.') but, the guy deserves a fair hearing
before he gets convicted in the court of public opinion.

Other than Als' humanitarian reminders I never hear anything
about this case anymore. How long has this guy been held without
trial? Aren't there guarantees in place to insure a speedy trial?
And purely as a 'soul' issue, you may want to ask yourself why
you are so quick to dismiss a fellow human being and relegate him
to the trash heap (worse yet, prison in this case!) because you
'disagree' with him or with his claims.

Yoofology aside, as an American I want to know why this guy has
been languishing in prison for so long, without the benefit of
speedy justice. Think about it Larry. If this guy is found
innocent he has already served almost three years! If it was
_you_ in there I'm sure the worse thing that could happen to you
would be to find yourself forgotten by your peers. We owe it to
John and to ourselves to back the guy (as if he was innocent)
until his guilt or lack of it is determined by a jury of his
peers.

I don't agree with him either Larry. And I even agree that John
_is_ a bit of a "nutcase" but wrong is wrong man. You should be
angered by the way John is being dealt with whether you agree
with him or not. I thought your comment was mean-spirited and
beneath you.

Al, thanx for playing 'public conscience' if it wasn't for your
noble intentions a _grave_injustice_ may go completely
unnoticed.

There but for the Grace of God go you or I.

Just my tuppence,

John 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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 6

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: RobIrving@aol.com
Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 12:49:35 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 13:32:16 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

> Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 17:43:02 -0400
>  To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>  From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
>  Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

Hi Bob,

>  Beautifully put. I'm with you 100%.  But don't expect to find
>  many friends here when you try to tell them that it might not
>  be ETs that they are studying.

Thanks Bob. Well, I've always got you <g>.

Of course, I'm not trying to tell anyone that there aren't ETs
(or UTs and ITs, come to that), just that, as things stand, ol'
William's blade is more likely to lead us away from that
explanation than towards it.

Unless concensus demands otherwise, that is, but it would be
rather unfortunate if that were to happen without anyone
bothering to offer at least some substantive evidence.

For what it's worth, Greg's interpretation of Occam's razor was
itself more complicated than necessary. He writes:

>>  It says, basically, that we shouldn't make up theories without
>>  any reason, and that the simplest explanation of something --
>>  the one that does NOT require forming new and alarming
>>  hypotheses -- is the one we should prefer.

By this standard the Inquisition was correct to dispute Galileo's
new (not entirely new) and alarming hypothesis. Occam was more
basic, however. He simply said that we should not multiply
entities beyond necessity (read that we should not complicate
explanations beyond necessity).

In Galileo's case it was necessary, and he was able to explain
why, thus furthering our knowledge of the world around us.

What with the aforementioned Hesemann's pseudo-scientific antics,
Simms and Leir's three year-old promise of analysis results,
CSETI's false claim to be conducting 'scientific research and
education', etc., etc... it seems that explaining why isn't
exactly a primary goal on the ufological agenda.

The ufological razor seems to read more like: 'If people accept
what they're told without question, why complicate this
unecessarily with explanations?'

Rob







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 6

                          Re: Abduction Documents?

From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com>
Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 12:09:22 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 13:28:28 -0400
Subject: Re: Abduction Documents?

Can anyone help me with the following?

I am looking for government/official documents (or reference to
them in books/zines/web sites etc) which *specifically* refer to
the abduction phenomenon.

Thanks

Andy






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 6

                 Re: John Ford [was: Alfred's Odd Ode #251]

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 11:29:35 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 13:35:33 -0400
Subject: Re: John Ford [was: Alfred's Odd Ode #251]

> Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 07:47:24 -0700
> From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Alfred's Odd Ode #251

> >Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 06:50:41 -0500
> >From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> >Subject: Alfred's Odd Ode #251

> <snip>

> Dear Odd Alfred:

> > Restore John Ford.

> Restore that nut case to what? Long Island? He belongs on Fantasy
> Island.

> Best wishes

> -  Larry Hatch

I find your lack of incredulity puzzling, your lack of compassion
disheartening, and your abundant arrogance insulting. The real
irony here is if situations were reversed _he_ would likely be
trying to get _you_ out. John Ford is one of ours that _may_ have
been brought down for unjust reasons by a corrupt political
machine. The "fantasy island" crack was uncalled for, especially
in light of your apparent 'Gilligan's Island' sensibility.

Fondest regards

Lehmberg@snowhill.com

Restore John Ford.

--
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.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 6

                        Re: Area 51 Still Operational

From: John Rimmer <johnr@magonia.demon.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 16:53:16 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 13:25:01 -0400
Subject: Re: Area 51 Still Operational

>Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 12:50:40 -0400
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Area 51 Still Operational

>>Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 21:12:59 +0100
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: John Rimmer <johnr@magonia.demon.co.uk>
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Skywatch: Area 51 Still Operational

>>How can you get good distance measurements without first
>>*knowing* the altitude, size, etc? How can you get triangulations
>>if there's just one witness location? Where are the cases with
>>witnesses clearly seeing the same object from distant locations?

>>Documentation please!

>There are some cases, where there are two witnesses, and
>triangulation is possible.  There are also a few cases where
>shadows as seen on the ground in the photographs, so (again)
>distance and size can be triangulated.  The problem you will then
>point out is the veracity of the witnesses or the photographs, so
>providing documentation isn't really a good answer here, if
>absolute proof is your goal here.

I don't know which cases you might have in mind, where witnesses
are sufficiently separated to attempt triangulation, I'd be
interested to hear of them. I think the problem might be that the
witnesses would only have a very vague idea of the exact bearing
of their sighting from their viewpoint - especially if they were
interviewed by investigators some time after the event, or away
from the location of the sighting. Even so, in the case of distat
objects it would give some idea of size and location - so details
please...

Ground shadows of objects in photographs would also give a good
idea of size and distance, but I agree that all the other
problems associated with verification of photographs would apply
here.

>BTW, general distances sometimes be determined by an analysis of
>the haze in front of an object, compared to objects that are a
>know distance from the camera.  But, of course, that could be
>faked, so again this isn't "absolute" proof.

Certainly this is so, and in some photographs the subjective
"look" of the object is as good an indication of distance as
anything else.

<snip>

>There's some real research being done, and much of it has found
>that many of the unexplainables are indeed explainable.  This was
>the result of good research, not bad research.  There are also
>cases where no conclusive answers can be found, and therein lies
>the problem.  The extraterrestrial hypothesis is alive and well,
>which means that it is really little more than a best guess or
>conjecture, based on the "evidence" at hand.  However, I'd be the
>first to state that it certainly hasn't been proved as a fact.

Describing ETH as "best guess" or "conjecture" is rather watering
down what the Eager Believers would like us to think. It
certainly is conjecture, but I think even "best guess" is
overstating the case. For some other guesses, check out Magonia
Online.

>I would add that most of those doing what I would consider to be
>"real research" aren't writing books or performing on the talk
>show circuit.  We need to be skeptical of extraordinary claims,
>but IMHO it's a mistake to paint all researchers with the same
>brush.

This was the whole point of my first interjection in this debate.
Where can we see this "real research"? It's not in the
mass-market paperbacks, that's for sure. We've been waiting an
awful long time for the Invisible College to do an appearing
act!

--
John Rimmer
Magonia Online
http//www.magonia.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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 6

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: RobIrving@aol.com
Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 13:48:43 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 14:00:26 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

> From: "Greg Sandow" <gsandow@prodigy.net>
>  To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net>
>  Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs
>  Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 14:31:11 -0400

Hi Greg,

>> Of which there is no substantial evidence that we know of.

>  Which is why belief in it is called The Extraterrestrial [note
>  the word that follows] Hypothesis.

As you've drawn attention to it I should point out that
'hypothesis' usually implies some effort on the part of its
proponents to show that it can make testable predictions. Mere
belief, of course, does not carry that requirement. It's a small
point, but as we're working through the scientistic terms used
and abused in ufology it may be worth mentioning.

>  I was talking only about skeptics who use Occam's Razor -- or,
>  rather, misuse it -- as an argument for conventional explanations.

I essentially agreed with you. As you went on to say,
conventional explanations may only be of limited use as more
information arrives.

My point was that this is dependant upon the quality of
information; I don't think that in populist ufology we get much
quality information.

If we did, I think that more people - including the so-called
scientific establishment - would take it more seriously. That's
the challenge... all the time ufology yearns for scientific
credibility, that is, which, by the way, I don't see that it
necessarily has to (but evidently leading ufologists think so or
they wouldn't keep harping on in those terms).

>  If you want to use what I said as a springboard for an attack on
>  ufology you don't like, go right ahead.

Don't take it so personally. I liked your message... it made me
think. I just didn't agree with every aspect of it, that's all. I
tend to ignore messages I totally agree with, or that I don't
think much of.  Yours happened to fall nicely somewhere between,
though closer to the former.

>  But that's not the discussion I was trying to start.

Oh well... better me beating you over the head than Brookesmith.

Rob







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 6

                            'Alien' Photo Request

From: "David Baker" <davbak@globalnet.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 19:41:19 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 13:58:47 -0400
Subject: 'Alien' Photo Request

Guys n' gals...

I'm trying to track down an "Alien Photo" from the November 1989
issue of Aviation Week and Space Technology magazine. The picture
was part of an ad for AMOCO, headlined "technology so advanced it
will help you answer some big questions." It shows the head and
shoulders of an alien, with it's four fingered hand held up in a
gesture of 'friendship'.

Can anyone remember it, and is available on any websites?

By the way, this is just a request for a cool picture, not the
first round of a load of arguments about it's authenticity etc.
Although if you feel the need....

Thanks to all...






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 6

                         Re: New 'MJ-12' Documents?

From: Dave Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 15:10:11 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 20:43:16 -0400
Subject: Re: New 'MJ-12' Documents?


>From: "Stanton T. Friedman" <fsphys@brunnet.net>
>Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 22:12:28 -0300
>Fwd Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 22:41:52 -0400
>Subject: Re: New 'MJ-12' Documents?

>>From: ufotruth@ix.netcom.com [William Hand]
>>Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 15:02:08 -0500 (CDT)
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject:  A DIRECT MESSAGE TO Serge Salvaille ABOUT THE NEW MJ12
>DOCUMENTS!!!

>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>From: "Serge Salvaille" <sergesa@connectmmic.net>
>>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: New 'MJ-12' Documents?
>>>Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 11:08:15 +0600

>>Serge Salvaille,

>>There ARE NEW MJ12 documents! The authors of the book
>>"ALIEN RAPTURE" are Edgar Rothschild Fouche' and Brad Steiger.
>>Edgar Rothschild Fouche' had been in many black projects and
>>classified projects for many years. After retiring from working
>>for various government agencies he made a group of friends who
>>had also worked in various black projects. They got together
>>and talked several times about UFO/ET information, advanced
>>technology, and black projects.

<snip>

>>So, to both prevent him from going to prison and to protect
>>everyone who gave him information he wrote the book in a fiction
>>format. (Just so you know I gathered all of this information
>>while listening to Sightings on the Radio the other night
>>in which he was interviewed).

>>He recieved the MJ12 documents from one of his friends whose
>>uncle (if I remember correctly) who was high up in the NSA,
>>gave to him.


>Stanton Friedman:

>I spoke with Fouche and have read his manuscript. He told me his
>associate retyped them so he doen't have even 2nd hand documents.
>There are a number of strange changes from the Moore MJ-12
>documents.. and certainly no research presented such as in my
>book TOP SECRET/MAJIC and in my Final Report on Operation
>Majestic 12 or iun Operation Majestic 12? YES. Long way to go on
>these


Based on the teasers of the new MJ-12 documents printed on the
Sightings Web page, it looks like at least some of the so-called
factual material is going to be as fictitious as the rest of the
book.  A case in point is the alleged Attachment D to the MJ-12
documents, the "Preliminary Autopsy of Extraterrestrial
Biological Entity(s)."  The key here is that this "document" is
dated 5 July 1947.  Unfortunately, this introduces a number of
severe anachronisms.  E.g., it states that:

"Lt. General Nathan Twining commander of Air Materiel Command at
Wright Field and Secretary of Defense (Select), James V.
Forrestal are witnesses and will hand carry the report of the
initial autopsy to the President of the United States."

To the best of my knowledge, Twining was still at Wright Field
on July 5 and didn't arrive in New Mexico until July 7.
Forrestal was then Secretary of the Navy, NOT the Sec. of
Defense (Select).  The National Security Act, creating the post
of Secretary of Defense, didn't pass Congress until July 26 and
was signed into law by Truman.  Truman immediately appointed
Forrestal as his new Secretary of Defense the same day, but
still a full three weeks AFTER the alleged Attachment D calls
him the Sec. of Defense (Select).  Forrestal was finally sworn
into office as the first Sec. Of Defense on Sept. 17.

Now one could quibble and say everybody knew that Forrestal
would be appointed to the post once (and if) the National
Security Act got through Congress.  But it still seems strange
that Forrestal would be identified by a still nonexistent
government post, rather than by his real one.

Then this alleged document goes on to say:

"Unidentified debris of nonferrous materials was discovered 75
miles northwest of Roswell by a local rancher William Brazel,
witnessed by his son and daughter.  An early morning aerial
search resulted in discovery of partially intact and severely
damaged unidentified aerospace vehicle and unidentifiable bodies
on 5 July 1947."

Now this is getting real sloppy, since Brazel didn't even
register on the military's radar scopes until July 6 at the
earliest, when he went to Roswell to report the crash.  Yet his
name and supposed facts of his involvement are included in this
"document" dated July 5.

Fouche's new "documents" are supposedly typewritten copies of
the originals. That makes them exceedingly easy to hoax, since
they are nothing but text. Anybody can read a Roswell book or
two, glean a few items, then sit down and knock out a new MJ-12
"document."  Who needs an original?  Whoever made up these
"documents," however, was exceedingly careless.  They apparently
didn't bother to cross-check the historical details to at least
give the papers an air of authenticity (as was the case with the
original MJ-12 papers).  The short teaser segments on the
Sightings Web page are full of mistakes.  Clearly they have been
hoaxed.  Whether Fouche did this on his own or was fed this
disinformation by one of his mysterious associates is unknown.

David Rudiak






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 6

                        Re: Area 51 Still Operational

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 14:52:56 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 20:33:31 -0400
Subject: Re: Area 51 Still Operational


>Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 10:33:06 -0400
>From: Gary Alevy <galevy@pipeline.com>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Area 51 Still Operational

>>From: "Steven Kaeser" <steve@konsulting.com>
>>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Area 51 Still Operational
>>Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 07:32:59 -0400

>>>From: KRandle993@aol.com [Kevin Randle]
>>>Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 18:26:41 EDT
>>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Area 51 Still Operational

>><snip>

>>>The Scoutmaster case is from August 1952. The Air Force explained
>>>it as a hoax. Given the scoutmaster's history of spinning tall
>>>tales, had been discharged from the Marines in 1944 under less
>>>than honorable conditions (during the height of WWII, what does
>>>that tell you about the guy?) and there was no independent
>>>corroboration for the sighting if you looked carefully at the
>>>statements of the boy scouts who were there. All the physical
>>>evidence was explainable with the exception of the burnt roots of
>>>the grass samples. But, since the chain of custody was broken,
>>that might not be important.

>>>Nearly everyone in the UFO fields realizes that this case is a
>>>hoax. Please notice I said nearly everyone.

>>>KRandle

 <snip>

>The name of the scoutmaster in question was Sonny Desverges.
>This case was discussed within the past 6 months on a television
>documentary broadcast on a television station in New York City.

>If I recall correctly, one of the participants on this list,
>Karl Pflock was also featured on this documentary in regards to
>his personal investigation of the "Florida Scoutmaster" case,
>which was so named by Ruppelt.

>Curiously none of the locals, still living in the same locale,
>had anything negative to saw about the scoutmaster.  They seemed
>to indicate that he had been railroaded by the military in the
>investigation of the UFO sighting.

And did they mention his brushes with the law? That he had been
less than honorably discharged from the Marines during WWII? Did
they edit the piece so that those who said something negative
ended up on the cutting room floor? Did they have a spin that
suggested this was a solid case marred by government cover-up?

> I have a question for Kevin.  Where was the chain of custody
>lost in the ground trace evidence of the Scoutmaster case?  I
>have seen no mention of this in the literature, could you
please >cite the appropriate references.

Ruppelt (p. 241) wrote: "I thought that we'd collected all the
items that could be analyzed in a lab until somebody thought of
one I'd missed, the most obvious of all - soil and grass samples
from under the spot where the UFO had hovered. We'd had samples,
' but in the last-minute rush to get back to Dayton they had
been left in Florida."

Later he suggested that the samples had been under the control
of the intelligence officer, but there is no documentation that
the samples were locked in a safe and inaccessible except by
authorized personnel. In other words, the chain of custody is
broken because we have no clue about where they were left, how
they were stored, or who might have had access to them.

But why are we even talking about this case. It just doesn't
deserve our attention.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 6

                              Re: Occam's Razor

From: "Greg Sandow" <gsandow@prodigy.net>
Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 12:42:20 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 20:55:44 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor


> Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 02:09:52 -0700
> From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> Subject: Occam's Razor And Oddball Events


> Dear sirs:

> If I may put in 2 cents worth, Occam's Razor is merely a rule of
> thumb .. a highly useful one at that .. but it fails ..

> Occams Razor  is a tool,  but not a rule,  of logic!

> On numerous occasions, Occams Razor has led me astray while I was
> troubleshooting electronic problems in the semiconductor
> industry.

> On one occasion, a little plastic switch housing became so
> electrically conductive that it could turn itself on at will,
> without having the metal contacts touch together!!

> Anyone else would have thrown the switch away. I cut it open and
> SAW the contacts clearly separated .. but it still conducted
> invisibly! Uri Geller time!

> I finally found a thin hairline crack which may have filled with
> oil and dust. Over time, enough leakage current must had heated
> the crack until it carbonized, and became partly conductive ..
> enough to switch the circuit.

> I have never seen this before or since.

> Occam's Razor would seem useless in cases like this.

Thanks, Larry. This is exactly what I was talking about. Occam's
Razor is, just as you say, a handy rule of thumb, a reminder not
to go off on crazy tangents when you haven't looked at all
possibilities.

But if it determined what we thought we were going to find at the
end of the process, we'd be in big trouble.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 6

                              Re: Alien Baloney

From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 17:42:27 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 20:52:38 -0400
Subject: Re: Alien Baloney


>Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 20:36:13 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time)
>From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Alien Baloney

>*  I managed to get out just in time during the ice storm that
>struck eastern Ontario and southern Quebec this year (ice was
>continuing to build on my windshield despite heat and lots of
>windshield wiper fluid) as I drove back to Toronto after an
>aborted plan to meet George Pantoulas who had promised us UFO
>wreckage from a crash in Megas Platanos, Greece (see CSETI's web
>page - it is one of 195 or so alleged UFO crashes reported so far
>(who says that aliens are better drivers than us?).

>       Nick Balaskas


Hi Nick.

I am currently researching a book on alledged UFO crashes and I
am amazed that you quote "it is one of 195 or so". With the help
of K Randle my list only stands at 166, perhaps you could
enlighten me as to the other thirty or so? I would be extremely
grateful. Or could you point me in the direction of where I could
obtain further information please.

Many thanks in advance.
---
      People can have it any colour, as long as its black!
                       Sean Jones
 Homepage--http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Zone/1745/index.htm
         Research 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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 6

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: "Jerome Clark" <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Sat, 06 Jun 98 13:33:02 PDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 20:38:17 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


> From: RobIrving@aol.com
> Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 12:49:35 EDT
> To: updates@globalserve.net
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

> > Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 17:43:02 -0400
> >  To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> >  From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
> >  Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

> Of course, I'm not trying to tell anyone that there aren't ETs
> (or UTs and ITs, come to that), just that, as things stand, ol'
> William's blade is more likely to lead us away from that
> explanation than towards it.

Ah, I don't think so, unless one holds that 50+ years of failed
explanations for puzzling UFO cases demands another 50+.

> The ufological razor seems to read more like: 'If people accept
> what they're told without question, why complicate this
> unecessarily with explanations?'

Since ufologists have been asking questions, challenging each
other's theories and conclusions, and arguing for as long as
there has been a ufology, yours seems, uh, not to be the most
accurate characterization, even of what goes on on this list,
that I've ever heard.

Though we all use the word, we ought to acknowledge that no such
animal as "ufology" exists;  there are just a lot of ufologists,
good and bad, sane and crazy, educated and ignorant, and all
points between.  As I have said repeatedly, however, in the end
what will matter is the best evidence. So far the best evidence
appears irreduceable to conventional  explanation.  Even Condon's
minions couldn't manage it. Blue Book was able to dispose of it
only by jettisoning serious investigation altogether and
concocting explanations from the comfort of a desk at
Wright-Patterson or the Pentagon.

And finally, as critics of Occam's razor have always pointed out:
though the notion has its uses, it is in fact a principle of
logic, not a law of nature.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 6

                        Re: Area 51 Still Operational

From: "Greg Sandow" <gsandow@prodigy.net>
Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 16:09:13 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 20:54:10 -0400
Subject: Re: Area 51 Still Operational


> Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 17:31:19 -0500
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> From: John <jvif@spacelab.net>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Area 51 Still Operational

> How does old Pete explain a Puerto Rican abductee like me?
> I don't know about 'deep seated fears' but I do know the
> "white folks" were mad as hell that we were here! Had to
> learn how to fight and defend myself at 5 years of age because
> of it. If any, the object of my nightmares are white folks! <LMAO!>

Well, see, Juan, you secretly, unknown even to you, identify with
white folks, and you're shaking with fear at your own
heritage!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

<laughing VERY hard>

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 6

                 Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 15:48:21 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 20:47:35 -0400
Subject: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General


>From: Robert Todd <RTodd12191@aol.com>
>Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 14:58:39 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General

<snip>


> With regard to Dr. Marcel's recollections, why is more weight
>given to those recollections than is given to the recollections
>of Bessie Schreiber (nee Brazel)?  I contacted her and furnished
>her with copies of the Roswell photographs.  I asked her if the
>material shown in those photographs looks like the material she
>helped her father gather up back in July of 1947.  She stated
>that the material depicted in those photographs _does_ look like
>the material they picked up back in July of 1947.  Furthermore,
>Bessie Brazel wasn't awakened in the middle of the night to view
>the debris; she helped her father pick it up in broad daylight.
>Jesse Marcel, Jr., was awakened by his father in the middle of
>the night.

>But the promoters of the Roswell myth discount Bessie Brazel
>Schreiber's statements because her brother, Bill Brazel, claims
>she wasn't even at the ranch, when in fact the Brazel children
>_did_ live at the ranch after school let out for the summer,
>which would have been before the story blew up in July.  But the
>Roswell promoters like Bill Brazel's tales better, because they
>add more mystery to the story.  He claims he picked up bits and
>pieces of the Roswell debris which were later consfiscated by
>the Air Force following some loose talk in a bar.  Bill Brazel
>didn't live at the Foster Ranch, but Bessie did after school let
>out for the summer.  But because Bill Brazel's tales are to
>their liking, the Roswell promoters accept his claims, and
>reject Bessie's.

What we have is Bessie Brazel's statements which are in direct
conflict with a number of others. According to Loretta Proctor,
Marian Strickland, Tommy Tyree, and Bill Brazel, the family
remained in Tularosa that summer because they had renters. Bill
Brazel said that he went down to the ranch after seeing his
father's name in the paper because he knew there would be no one
around to help with the chores.

Those who accept the Mogul explanation accept Bessie Brazel's
testimony her tales are to are to their liking, and reject
Bill's and the others because they don't.

>And I ask again, why is it we haven't been told what Mrs. Marcel
>(Major Marcel's wife, and Jesse Marcel, Jr.'s mother) had to say
>when she was asked about the Roswell debris?  As I undestand it,
>she said the debris was _not_ from an alien spaceship.  This is
>just one of numerous examples where the promoters of the alien
>spaceship explanation have distoted, misrepresented, or hidden
>evidence that runs counter to the alien spaceship explanation.

When I spoke to Mrs. Marcel (Major Marcel's wife, and Jesse
Marcel, Jr's mother) she said that she had handled material from
an alien spacecraft. She also said that she had accompanied her
husband to the debris field. It was clear at the time I spoke to
her, that she did not have a clear memory of the events and
nothing positive would be gained from reporting what she said
then.

>I have been in communication with Prof. Moore for many years
>now, and I know him to be a completely honest individual.  He
>certainly is no apologist for the government.  He states what he
>believes is the truth, and it is disgraceful that Mr. Kaeser
>attempts to inply otherwise.  Prof. Moore also is a first-class
>scientist, and I would recommend that anybody who cares to do so
>read about some of his scientific accomplishments at:

>  www.nmt.edu/mainpage/alumni/goldpan/moore.html

Damn, I really hate to have to agree with Mr. Todd about
anything, but I will on this one point. Prof. Moore has always
been kind and helpful to me and I don't believe that he would
intentionally spin the truth to his point of view.

 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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 6

                         Help Wanted - Ghost Fliers

From: David Clarke <dclarke14@compuserve.com>
Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 18:57:52 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 21:41:09 -0400
Subject: Help Wanted - Ghost Fliers

From: Dave Clarke, Sheffield.

Ghost Planes/Ghost Fliers/Phantom Airplanes and Helicopters

Help wanted for an on-going research project into flexible
phantoms of the sky: mystery aircraft associated with UFOs and
UFO flap areas. John Keel refers to unidentified unmarked grey
aircraft reported in UFO flap areas, and reports of such mystery
craft were common from Scandinavia in the 1930s.

Also looking for refs to sightings of mystery unmarked
helicopters from US and rest of the globe.

I have numerous references to UK sightings of Ghost
Fliers/Phantom Copters, looking for comparable reports from
elsewhere.

Looking for notes, reports, links to web sites etc with info on
historical and current sightings or reports.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 6

                        Re: Area 51 Still Operational

From: John Rimmer <johnr@magonia.demon.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 22:58:08 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 21:38:10 -0400
Subject: Re: Area 51 Still Operational


>Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Area 51 Still Operational
>From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
>Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 11:03:17 -0400
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 21:12:59 +0100
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: John Rimmer <johnr@magonia.demon.co.uk>
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Skywatch: Area 51 Still Operational

>>>The UFO phenomenon is not supported by Lazar, or crop circles, or
>>>any of the promiscuously promised "great revelations" that are
>>>"just around the corner". It is supported by over 50 years of
>>>well documented sightings and trace evidence.

>>Here we go again, more armwaving. Where are these cases? Where is the
>>documentation other than in a stream of unreferenced pot-boilers?

>Gee, John, how about Soccorro, Levelland, Exeter, Delphos...

These are all, in ufological terms, "good" cases and there are
puzzling factors about each of them. I think you will also find
that each case has been "explained" by one researcher or another
-- and I'm not talking about your usual-suspect skeptics here,
but bona fide ufologists -- so that no one case can be quoted as
the smoking gun. This has meant that ETH proponents have always
had to rely on what they see as the weight of evidence - "over
50 years of well documented sightings..." but 50 years' worth of
disputed and inconclusive investigations is no more convincing
that one disputes and inconclusive investigation.

>Not to mention strong military radar/visual cases, such as that
>recently documented by Brad Sparks in his excellent piece for
>Jerry's book.

Yes, a case over 40 years old - has there been nothing better
since? Or has radar got a bit too sophisticated since then?

>I mean, really, you expect someone to reproduce all of the cases
>of the last 50 years that have stood the test of time on an
>Internet mailing list?

No, just one...

> Why don't you read the literature and
>save us some time?

I've been reading the literature for well over half of those
fifty years, and I ain't seen nothing yet!

>>>How many good distance estimates have slipped through the cracks,
>>>to take just one key measurement? With good distance
>>>measurements, we can do altitude, speed, luminous energy output.
>>>Yet few investigators make an effort to obtain triangulation,
>>>they simply rely on wild guesses by witnesses.

>>How can you get good distance measurements without first
>>*knowing* the altitude, size, etc? How can you get triangulations
>>if there's just one witness location? Where are the cases with
>>witnesses clearly seeing the same object from distant locations?

>Gee, John, you get them by having multiple witnesses or by using
>witnesses who are in a car. Or you use cases where the object
>clearly passed in front of a background object. Or you use
>radar. Take your pick.

>I've done one case with triangulations and I'm working on
>another. It is definitely possible to get distances and sizes.

Well, I have my doubts, and I've expressed them on another
posting, about the accuracy of triangulations based on memories
and guestimates, but the real point is distances and sizes of
*what* exactly? I'm sure you're not implying that because two
people saw something roughly the same size in roughly the same
place it's got to be an extraterrestrial spacecraft.

>>Again, where are these trace cases? Jerome Clark was making great
>>deal of noise a while ago about Trans-en-Provence (France) but
>>he's gone all quiet about that now that it's been demolished by
>>French researchers who were actually on the spot. Now I see
>>someone on the Update is trying to resurrect Ubatuba which was
>>buried 30 years ago. Do me a favour!

>Really, Ubatuba demolished? By who? Sure, there are problems
>with some of the work done, and it is a sad thing that the
>primary piece was completely destroyed during the original
>analyses, but without funding and participation by mainstream
>labs, what was done was at least a contribution.

Well, Jerry Clark seems to think its dead as well, so sort that
one out with him.

>Jerry will have to respond to your comments on his reaction to
>whatever so-called "demolition" of Trans-en-Provence has
>occurred. However, I have yet to see such a refutation.

Probably the most accessible source is the chapter
"Trans-en-Provence: when science and belief go hand in hand" in
the Fortean Tomes book "UFO 1947 - 1997. I think it came out in
an American edition. Jerry's not impressed by it, but the French
investigators on the spot were.

>And lets try the medical effects experienced by Flynn and by
>Webb. Let's take the pressure measurements of Quarouble and
>Camrose.

>>>Science on UFOs is moved forward by incremental basic work,
>>>founded on good field investigation, not by revelation. And if
>>>half the effort spent on the tricksters was spent on real science
>>>done on real cases, we'd be getting somewhere.

>>I agree. If people were doing REAL research we wouldn't be
>>wasting our time on the dear dead extraterrestrial hypothesis.

>Yes, yes, it's dead (sigh). I hear this wishful thinking all the
>time. Exactly what killed it? I'm not an ETH proponent, but it
>sure has less problematic aspects than MHH, PNH, CSH, or the
>ELH.

Let's get one thing straight. I'm not saying that every UFO
report has been neatly explained and tied up in red ribbons by
Phil Klass et. al. There is plenty of puzzling stuff around -
you want an example, try Travis Walton, check out John Harney's
criticism of Klass's explanation on the Magonia website:
<www.magonia.demon.co.uk/ethbull/ethbull2> and ethbull3>. What I
am saying is that there is no objective evidence, no actual
physical evidence that points us consistently towards the ETH.

>Now, tell us John, how many field investigations you've been on,
>how many old cases you've examined, and how much of the
>literature you've actually read. Then maybe we will know how
>much weight to give to your unsubstantiated rant.

I can assure you that over the past 30-odd years I've served my
time on investigations and read a heck of a lot more than most
(in more than three decades I've seen most of the arguments (and
evidence) come round at least three times). It's because we want
to re-examine some of the old cases that I'm desperately trying
to find some material that will stand up.

Listen, after 30 years in this game you'd be ranting too!


--
John Rimmer
Magonia Online
www.magonia.demon.co.uk
A P.L.A.Driftwood Enterprises publication,
with added material by Dot Weighbridge






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 6

               Vallee Hoaxed Corbin, UFO Sweden & 'Sightings'

From: "true.x-file. news" <true.x-file.news@n2news.com>
Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 14:39:53 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 21:33:46 -0400
Subject: Vallee Hoaxed Corbin, UFO Sweden & 'Sightings'


TRUE.X-FILE.NEWS An Internet News Service

"If The Truth Is Out There...We'll Find It!" For Immediate
Release:

Jacques Vallee Hoaxed Science & Ufo Community With His
"Anatomy"! Ufo Sweden, Paranet'S Michael Corbin, Among Those
Taken In By The Scam! Jeff Rense Responds By Posting Rebuttal To
Vallee's Hoax At "Sightings" Site!

Dateline San Francisco, 6/6/98: The title is featured
prominently at the center of their homepage located at
http://www.algonet.se/~ufo/english.html. "The Philadelphia
Experiment Fifty Years Later" it says. It had appeared at a web
page for the radio show "Sightings" hosted by Jeff Rense,whom
some say is more credible than Art Bell. He lived up to that
image of credibility by posting the original version of this
report as a rebuttal. You can find it, and the rebuttal, at
http://www.sightings.com/ufo/philahoax.htm because the problem
is that the Jacques Vallee article the rebuttal refers to, has
now been conclusively proven to be a fraud and is under
investigation.

Dr. Jacques F. Vallee, scientist and world reknowned UFO
researcher, who was the model for the French scientist in the
movie "Close Encounters of the Third Kind" has been the target
of an ongoing private investigation now accusing him, and
Editor-in-Chief of the Journal of Scientific Exploration,
Bernhard Haisch, of promoting research fraud. This stems from
the 1994 publication in the JSE of the paper ironically titled
"Anatomy Of A Hoax" which is supposed to be an attempt to debunk
the legendary Philadelphia Experiment story with the new
testimony of a US Navy sailor claiming he was there and the
event never happened. The paper was accepted by many as the
"best research" done on the work yet. Paranet Inc. owner,
Micheal Corbin, even got special permission from Vallee to
reproduce the article in its entirety and it can be seen
archived at http://www.geocities.com/Area51/7354/Hoax.txt The
only problem, which Special Civilian Investigator Marshall
Barnes so easily proves, is that the so-called witness lied,
Jacques Vallee had lied about the subject before himself, and
when Barnes presented the proof of this to JSE editor Haisch, he
refused to do anything about it, even though people were
believing the witness was telling the truth. A bigger hoax even
than the alien autopsy film, because where the film hasn't been
conclusively proven to be a fake, Investigator Barnes proves
Vallee's witness sure is one.

"If you go to http://www.jse.com/v8n1a2.html you will see the
abstract for Vallee's article, 'Anatomy of a Hoax,' he begins.
Going to the middle of the third sentence you will see where he
states that claims by witnesses to the event have repeatedly
been found to be "fraudulent". It's here that my case against
Vallee begins, using his own stated standard for truth. You will
notice that he follows that by saying that he has interviewed a
man who was on the scene "the night" that the ship disappeared
and he can explain it in minute detail. By going to
http://www.access.digex.net/~patin/philaj.html a site where one
of those who has been fooled by the fraud has erected a
condensed version of the article, you can read how this
so-called witness, Edward Dudgeon, meets Vallee. First at the
5th paragraph under the title of What Actually Happened in
Philadelphia, you will read how Vallee states that he saw
Dudgeon's "identification and his disharge papers". In fact, a
discharge certificate is reproduced in the actual journal
version of the article with Dudgeon's name on it. However, there
is no indentication that Vallee saw anything that proved that
Dudgeon was on the ship that he will claim to be on. We don't
even know what kind of 'identification' papers Vallee saw. Birth
certificate? Social Security card? This is important because it
establishes the uncertainty that Edward Dudgeon is even Edward
Dudgeon! When you see the following evidence of his untruthful
testimony, you'll understand why this issue of identity is
critical.

"If you continue reading about Dudgeon you will see at the 12th
paragraph below the title heading, at the beginning of the 5th
line of the paragraph, Dudgeon says "Your book Revelations was
wrong about making the ship invisible to radar: the Germans
hadn't deployed radar at the time..." The time period in
question is the summer of 1943. As you can see by clicking on
http://www.picknowl.com.au/homepages/rpy/keilcana.htm and
http://www.cnd.net/~kais/navy/deutsch2.jpg the German navy had
radar on top of their ships before WWII. By clicking on
http://www.cnd.net/~kais/navy/raiders.htm and scrolling down to
the third and fourth pargraphs under the heading: 'The "pocket
battleship" Admiral Scheer', you can read how these same radar
systems were used to kill and sink allied shipping and crew. It
is obvious that Dudgeon's comment is entirely without merit,
especially when you consider that the Germans had radar on their
JU88 dive bombers which attacked and sank ships like the USS
Lansdale, and these were outfited with such equipment in 1942.
You can see evidence of this by going to
http://www.cnd.net/~kais/ac/kampflug/ju88.htm and reading about
these planes and their cousins. By clicking where "BMW equipped
88G-1", "188E-2" and "188E-2" are underlined on that page you
can see for yourself that these plans were armed with radar. The
last one was the type that sank the USS Lansdale and slaughtered
the entire 580 man crew of the SS Paul Hamilton (there is some
question of that ship identity being correct but the account
comes from the Department of the Navy. The Lansdale did sink.
See this daughter speak of her father who survived it at
http://wae.com/messages/msgs4275html )by blowing it out of the
water with torpedoe attacks. The same kind that the picture's
caption so plainly describes. Even German submarines had been
intended to get radar in 1941, had radar detectors in 1943 and
got radar in 1944. Around this time of Memorial Day it is a
special affront to the sacrfice of those who gave their lives to
keep the world free from Nazism in the face of weapons guided by
the same radar systems that Dudgeon claims that the Germans had
not deployed. And Vallee presents this liar as though he had
checked him out."

If that isn't stunning enough to see that historic evidence that
directly contradicts Vallee's "witness", it gets worse. Barnes
showed us that by going back to
http://www.access.digex.net/~patin/philaj.html and scrolling
down to the tenth paragraph below the heading, we see that
Dudgeon claims that he was on the "DE 50, U.S.S. Engstrom".
Remember, Vallee himself has said nothing about seeing any
confirmation of this and we have already seen direct evidence
that this man cannot be trusted. Now he will lie again four
paragraphs further where he claims that the Eldridge(the shipped
allegedly used for the Experiment) and his ship, the Engstrom,
and two other ships went out on shakedown together the first
week of July. Barnes points out that this is the lie that would
place Dudgeon as the so-called witness that nothing happened.
But, the official Navy records for the Eldridge show that the
ship wasn't launched until July 25, didn't get a commissioned
crew until August 27 and then didn't go on its shakedown cruise
until September. It was the period between July 25 and August 27
that a skeleton crew would have been used to do the Experiment,
seeing that it would be top secret and a skeleton crew would not
be listed as the official commissioned crew, making the tracing
of them as potential witnesses virtually impossible. Barnes
didn't have a direct link to the Navy records but sent us to
http://www.tricountyi.net/~randerse/asf1.htm to scroll down
where it says "TABLE 1 PX HISTORICAL SETTING" you will see the
dates "1943-July- 25--Eldridge launched(13)" and directly below
that "1943-Aug. 27--Eldridge commissioned-- New York (14,15),
and finally directly below that "1943-Sept.-- Eldridge shakedown
and escort duties through to late Dec.(16)". "I assure you that
these dates are accurate because they reflect the same
information that I got from three different published official
Navy ship record sources, as well as other books that have
quoted the same records," he added. We did some checking
ourselves at a local library and found that he was correct by
looking in the Dictionary of Navy Warships from the Naval
Historical Center.

"Where is the peer-review that the JSE and Haisch have so
proudly bragged about?" Barnes points out. "Didn't anyone ask
Vallee for any evidence of this man's claims at all?" We guess
not.

"This information effectively rules Dudgeon out as a credible
witness and destroys the validity of Vallee's so-called
"research", and his paper's thesis, because the shakedown cruise
that the Eldridge supposedly had with the Engstrom didn't
happen. We don't even know if Dudgeon was on the Engstrom. We
don't even know if Dudgeon is really even 'Dudgeon'!"

For most people that would be enough to convince them, but
Barnes found more. Alot more, and remember, he didn't even
supply us with *everything*.

"As the paper with the ships dates suggests," he continues,
"there was indeed interest in invisibility by the US Navy. By
going back to Table 1 you will see the date of 1941-Dec. 7 where
Dunninger submits a ship invisibility idea to the Navy after
Pearl Harbor. Dunniger was a magician who claimed that he knew a
way to make a ship invisible by using the sun's rays. This idea
would become classified by the U.S. Navy and to this day has
never been revealed. If you go back to
http://www.access.digex.net/~patin/philaj.html and scroll down
to the 21st paragraph below the heading you will see Vallee ask
Dudgeon "What about the luminous phenomena he described?" This
question is in reference to the glow that was said to have
enveloped the ship before it became invisible.Dudgeon responds
by saying that the glow was really a coronal discharge phenomena
called "St. Elmo's Fire". Scroll down to the last paragragh
before it says End Of Quotation, and Dudgeon repeats the lie
about the shakedown cruise dates and then repeats his statement
about the St. Elmo's Fire. You'll notice that he makes no
mention in either place about a ship appearing to "be gone" due
to St. Elmo's Fire, however in the TV program, Mysterious Forces
Beyond, Dudgeon is asked on camera, by Jacques Vallee himself,
the same question about anything happening to the ships during
shakedown. Dudgeon's response is as follows, and I quote "Then
this ship off to the distance, when that moisture hit and
shorted out the ship,looked like it disappeared. The only thing
that you could see was the white wake off the bow and sliding
down along side the ship, but as far as the ship's concerned, it
appeared to be gone!" I would like your indulgence here since I
don't have the capacity to play you the video of this incident,
which I do own a copy of, but I think that I have earned the
right to not have to have every piece of critical evidence
availble here now. However, in reference to Dudgeon's TV show
quote, I would like for you to compare it to this quote by the
original eyewitness to the experiment(whom I find has
credibility problems as well, but many others have made similar
statements concerning this incident)by going to
http://www.tricountyi.net/~randerse/tech1-2.htm and scrolling
down the 12th paragraph where it begins with "I watched the air
all around the ship...turn slightly, ever so slightly darker
than all the other air..." In that paragraph he ends by saying
"I watched as thereafter the DE 173 became rapidly invisible to
human eyes. And yet, the precise shape of the keel and the
underhull of that...ship REMAINED impressed into the ocean water
as it and my own ship sped along somewhat side by side and close
to inboards..." The similarities between the two accounts, I
feel, are obvious and whether or not the Dudgeon account is
true, the purpose was to give a rational explanation for the
later witness account. In other words, to Mr. and Mrs. Skeptic
at home it would be a simple matter of 'Oh, Marge. See? It
wasn't a top secret military project that made the ship
invisible. It was only St. Elmo's Fire, a common incident of
nature!'"

"Notice, however, nothing of the testimony that Dudgeon gave on
St. Elmo's Fire making a ship invisible is in the JSE account as
we have already seen. Why leave it out? I now refer you to the
full account of the article, reproduced with the direct
permission of Jacques Vallee (an apparent violation of the
standard JSE policy of any article they publish being owned by
them and not reproducible elsewhere)given to one Micheal Corbin
at http://www.geocities.com/Area51/7354/Hoax.txt where if you
scroll all the way to the bottom and then scroll up until you
see the word "Acknowledgments" standing alone (I'm sorry but
this is the fastest way to get you there) you will see directly
below that that Vallee thanks various people for their
contribution to his article. One of those is Vice-Admiral
William D. Houser, who is credited with his "willingness to
review the manuscript of this article". Now, without getting
into comments attributed to the Vice-Admiral by Vallee about
there not being anything high-tech or beyond state of the art on
the ship (a ludicrous comment because the state of the art
during the war was changing all the time and even Dudgeon said
that they had new types of depth charge launchers installed, etc
and no one has ever said that the equipment allegedly used for
the Experiment was of such a nature anyway) the issue at hand
here is the reviewing of the manuscript before publication by
the Vice-Admiral. Vallee uses this as if it would give the
article more credibility. However, the opposite is the case.
Consider this: if the Philadelphia Experiment did happen, then
it still top secret. After all according to Popular Science
Magazine , May 1996, the Yahudi project to make B24 Liberators
invisible to surfaced submarines by putting special lights on
their wings in the daylight sky was classified until the mid
'80s. This means that the Navy would officially deny that the
Experiment ever took place, which it does as you saw at the ONR
web site. More to the point is the fact that I checked with US
Navy personnel who confirmed for me that if, an officer was
given the opportunity to "review a manuscript" that contained
information that revealed the nature of something that was
classified or top secret, that that officer would be required to
remove that information from the article if he could.
Furthermore, there were actual policies in place, before the
article was written, which were only referred to me in a fax,
but that I, with the use of some snazzy search word "kung-fu",
was able to locate for you to see for yourselves at
http://www.dodssp.daps.mil/Directives/table29.html  where you
can scroll down to OPNAV 5510.161 (eleven from the op)and see
that that document deals with "Witholding Of Unclassified
Technical Data From Public Disclosure".

"The bottom line is simply this," Barnes emphasized, "If Dudgeon
says that St. Elmo's Fire made a ship invisible, that may fool
skeptics, but for review in a science journal where the purpose
of the article is to persuade the readers into thinking that the
whole story is a hoax so that none of them gets any ideas about
trying to reproduce it themselves, then Dudgeon's statement
becomes an *intelligence* problem because if St. Elmo's Fire
made a ship go invisible then there is no reason why that
couldn't be studied and done as a miltary project! It makes the
ONR statement that "such an experiment would only be possible in
the realm of science fiction" out to be a lie(which it is
anyway)and for that reason Dudgeon's account, which I know he
gave because I saw him in my video tell it right to Vallee's
face in response to a direct question that Vallee asked him, was
removed. This was filmed in 1993, according to another
participant in the program and the article was published in
1994. According to the article, Vallee met Dudgeon in 1992. When
Vallee asked Dudgeon the question it came off as if it were
rehearsed. In other words, Vallee knew this story about
Dudgeon's claim about the St. Elmo's Fire making the ship
invisible before the article was published, and felt it was so
compelling that he had Dudgeon repeat it on TV. So why wasn't it
in the article? I submit it is for the very same reason that I
claim, and if Houser didn't remove it himself I suspect that he
told Vallee it should come out. It is obvious, after all, that
Vallee was committed to disinforming anyone he could about this
issue."

So why, when he was confronted with this evidence and more, did
Haisch refuse to put a disclaimer on the JSE web page for the
article abstract? We'll have that answer, supported once again
with Marshall's stunning style of overwhelming evidence, when we
continue this story in a second part. In the meantime, Marshall
is intensifying his investigation to include Bernhard Haisch,
the Journal of Scientific Exploration, the Society for
Exploration, Edward Dudgeon and those credited for supplying
information in Vallee's "Anatomy" fraud. We'll have more as the
events unfold.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 6

                            Guilt By Association

From: "Greg Sandow" <gsandow@prodigy.net>
Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 16:41:58 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 21:03:36 -0400
Subject: Guilt By Association


>From: RobIrving@aol.com
>Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 13:09:03 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net

>You seem to be saying that once these conventional explanations
>have been eliminated Occam's Razor would require that we look to
>unconventional explanations: Take, say, Michael Hesemann's claim
>that the increased radiation he says he detected in crop circles,
>as he has eliminated in his mind all conventional explanations,
>must be proof that aliens made the crop circle.

I've been pondering this comment from Rob Irving. Frankly, I'm
baffled.

As I noted in an earlier post, I didn't say anything about
Michael Hesemann -- or Roswell, or abductions, or crop circles,
or alien autopsies, or the Dulce base, or any ufological belief
-- in the post Rob was answering...

Now, suddenly, it's as if I'm asked to be responsible for
Hesemann, and, for all I know, any or all of everything else on
my list..

I'm reminded of something that happened more than 20 years ago,
when I worked in the music program of the New York State Council
on the Arts. A new director of music was appointed, an
African-American guy who turned out to be a bad choice. In fact,
he was a disaster, and in no time flat had alienated not just
the music staff, but many people who'd applied for funding. He
was a decent person (I've seen him since, over the years), but
wrong for this job.

Well, criticizing him in the office became difficult, for racial
reasons. Other African-Americans on the staff tended to defend
him, and to view any criticism of him as possibly racist. One of
my colleagues on the music staff was himself black -- a really
splendid guy who now runs the program himself, and by a happy
fluke lives across the street from me. So at one point I went to
him and asked him why he didn't speak out against our new boss,
since he was also black, and his criticism would weigh very
heavily.

In reply, he told me something that really opened my eyes. He
said that African-Americans are forever asked by white people to
take responsibility for anything any other black person does,
and he wasn't going to play that game.

I've never forgotten that. And now I feel as if I'm in a similar
position. Because I said something that put me on the "UFOs are
real" side of a 50 year-old debate, suddenly I'm being told
about an extravagance committed by someone else who takes that
view, someone I don't know, have never endorsed in public or
private, and whose opinions are entirely irrelevant to any point
I was trying to make.

What's going on here? Dennis Stacy did something similiar a
while ago, when I said that the ETH was a perfectly reasonable
hypothesis (underline the word "hypothesis," please), in the
face of reports (underline "reports," too) of craft that are
said to look and maneuver like nothing we know exists on earth.
Dennis replief with dismayed reflections on a whole lot of
ETH-oriented ufology he thinks is nonsense, as if I'd somehow
bought into all of it simply because I'd said something good
about the ETH.

Well, I've really had enough of this. I'm responsbile for my own
views -- period. Oh, maybe I'll take some responsibility for
Budd Hopkins and David Jacobs, since I've defended them
noticeably often though I've often criticized them, too, so
anyone who thinks I buy into absolutely everything they say and
do has another guess coming). But I must say that I find it
markedly offensive when someone decides that I'm a proponent of
the ETH, and therefore need Michael Hesemann thrown at me. Now
think I know how black activists in America must have felt, a
few years ago, when anytime they uttered a peep they'd get
chstised: "First disassociate yourself from Louis Farrakhan!"

I mean....Bob Shell, whom I like and respect, doesn't think UFOs
are extraterrestrial. He thinks they represent some other kind
of reality. Do I throw John Keel in his face? Do I say "Well,
the danger of your position is that soon you'll be thinking you
get phone calls from alien entities, telling you a bridge is
going to collapse"? (An episode in one of Keel's books.)

David Pritchard, the MIT physicist, is apparently having second
thoughts about his involvement with abductions, and certainly
opposes some of the conclusions Budd and Dave have come to. Do I
say "Well, it's dangerous to be a physicist -- just look at
Edward Condon"? (Condon, of course, was the physicist who headed
the very negative late '60s University of Colorado study of
UFOs, on contract from the Air Force. )

The saddest thing about all this is a fear Dennis has. I
understand what he's worrried about, but I think he exaggerates.
He thinks ufology is demeaned by all the wild claims some people
make, and that therefore respectable scientists and others with
intellectual credentials will reject all of us together. In
other words, I'd better be careful, talking about the ETH,
because somehow then I'm in bed with poor Philip Corso. As a
result, some astronomer at Cal Tech -- who might otherwise
listen to my UFO arguments -- will stumble over Corso's book and
back away from me, saying, "Uh oh....those UFO nuts really ARE
crazy!"

I'm not worried. I do get out in the wider world from time to
time, and I see no evidence of what Dennis fears, not even a
shred. In fact, my daytime career has taken me in new directions
during the past year or two, so I've met a lot of new people. As
we get friendly, we're naturally interested in each others'
lives, and I  find myself telling people I've recently met that
I'm interested in UFO research.

Well, fine, these are musicians and people in the music
business, not scientists, but some of them are sharp as a
whipcrack, many are more worldly than nearly anyone in ufology,
and some are noticeably skeptical. Yet nobody ever says, "UFOs,
huh? You mean that alien autopsy crap on TV?" Maybe they'll ask
my opinion, saying "You're interested in UFOs? Tell me, do you
think that alien autopsy was real?" My point, though, is that
they're not fools. The concept of "tabloid TV" already exists in
their minds, so they'd automatically discount anything like the
alien autopsy, if they happened to run across it. Do you imagine
they think all gay people, let's say, are idiots, just because
they see a few of them making fools of themselves on Jerry
Springer? The people I find myself talking to can easily accept
that there's such a thing as serious UFO research, and not in a
hundred years would they dream that something they see on Fox or
UPN has anything to do with it. (Nor would they have to assume
that every book with UFO in its title, or what goes on at UFO
conventions, necessarily has any part of it.)

And you know....every field has its embarrassments. Maybe
ufology -- a cottage industry that tries to carry out what ought
to be science without even 1% of the scientists it needs to do
that -- has more than its share. But classical music, the
business I'm in, has plenty. Pavarotti, for instance, has made
himself one in recent years. Kurt Masur, music director of the
NY Philharmonic, is an embarrassment (as opposed to being merely
bad) every time he conducts Aaron Copland. Roberto Alagna and
his diva wife were an embarrassment during recent contract
negotiations with the Metropolitan Opera. Nearly every brochure
any classical music organization prints is an embarrassment,
because the text will be nothing but empty superlatives. ("The
acclaimed virtuoso Itzhak Perlman will play Beethoven's glorious
Violin Concerto.") RCA Records was an embarrassment a few years
ago when they tried to promote Gunther Wand, a conductor nobody
cared about, as a superstar. (They must have lost a bundle,
too.)

And for a real whopper, how about the Boston Symphony? Their
music director, Seiji Ozawa, has held his job for 25
increasingly unwelcome years. (Unwelcome at least to a large
number of the musicians who play for him.) You'd be hard-pressed
to find a serious classical music professional who thinks his
leadership of the BSO is anything less than a disgrace. In more
than 20 years in this business, I've never, ever, heard anyone
that prominent talked about with such disrespect. But meanwhile
his coarse, shapeless, empty performances get standing ovations,
and -- thanks to fabulous PR, impish charm, and a podium manner
that makes it look like he's an incisive conductor, even though
he isn't -- he remains some kind of folk hero in Boston.

But when I meet someone from the orchestra world, do I throw
Ozawa in their face? ("You're the marketing director of the
Pittsburgh Symphony? Aren't you ashamed to work for an
orchestra?") Give me a break!

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 7

                            X-Files Movie Preview

From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 00:51:09 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 01:56:24 -0400
Subject: X-Files Movie Preview

List,

FYI

On Monday, June 8  FOX will air a one-hour special on the making
of the X-Files movie.  I believe the time is 8:00 p.m.

Sue

  No pienses que es imposible,
  confia en tu corazon,
  nada es lo que parece,
  el mundo es una ilusion.

(translation:
  Don't think it's impossible,
  trust your heart,
  nothing is what it seems
  the world is an illusion.)







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 7

               Re: UFO/9-1-1 Police Incident/pursuit: 12-14-94

From: Susan Baldwin <sblee@stc.net>
Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 21:06:47 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 01:42:18 -0400
Subject: Re: UFO/9-1-1 Police Incident/pursuit: 12-14-94


> Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 19:16:42 -0700
> From: "Kenny Young" <task@fuse.net>
> To: updates@globalserve.net
> Subject: UFO/9-1-1 Police Incident/pursuit: 12-14-94

> This is a brief summation on the 9-1-1 dispatch tapes from the
> December 14, 1994 Trumbull County Disturbance. A more exacting
> transcript is being prepared. More information is available at
> the web-site listed below.

> A unit (#998) is dispatched to Samson Drive to investigate.

> At the point Unit #998 [Tobe Melero] views the object at close
> range,
> Filed:
> June 3, 1998
> Kenny Young
> --
> UFO Research
> http://home.fuse.net/task/


Kenny

Think any of the police caught it on the cameras in their cars? Do these
police HAVE cameras in their patrol cars?

Susan





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 7

                          BWW Media Alert 19980606

From: <BufoCalvin@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 22:20:12 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 01:47:18 -0400
Subject: BWW Media Alert 19980606

Bufo Calvin
P O Box 5231, Walnut Creek, CA  94596
Internet: BufoCalvin@aol.com
Website: <A HREF="http://members.aol.com/bufocalvin">http://members.aol.com/bufo
calvin<;/a>
<A HREF="surprise link to Amazon.com">http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=048
6230945/bufosweirdworldA/<;/a>
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED (permission is granted to reproduce or redistribute this
edition of Bufo's WEIRD WORLD 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).
 Bufo Calvin
P O Box 5231, Walnut Creek, CA  94596
Internet: BufoCalvin@aol.com
Website: <A HREF="http://members.aol.com/bufocalvin">
http://members.aol.com/bufocalvin<;/A>

<A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0486230945/bufosweirdworldA/">
Surprise Link to Amazon Books</A>
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED (permission is granted to reproduce or redistribute this
edition of Bufo's WEIRD WORLD 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).

June 6, 1998

My apologies if the header or trailer to this appear twice.  Major technical
upgrade to the mailing list server by my "mysterious benefactor", and I just
want to make sure they get included so you have the necessary release to
redistribute.

Sorry this is brief: busy weekend getting ready to teach a class Monday...

TELEVISION

THE DISCOVERY CHANNEL
Sunday, June 14, 1:30 PM, ARTHUR C. CLARKE'S MYSTERIOUS WORLD (PSYCHIC
DETECTIVES)
Sunday, June 14, 7:00 PM, BEYOND BELIEF: UFO'S AND ALIEN IMPLANTS

THE LEARNING CHANNEL
Sunday, June 7, 12:00 PM, CHARIOTS OF THE GODS: THE MYSTERIES CONTINUE
Sunday, June 7, 1:00 PM, MYSTERIES OF THE BIBLE (more with Erich Von Daniken
and ancient astronauts)
Sunday, June 7, 2:00 PM, ANCIENT TECHNOLOGIES (part three with Erich Von
Daniken)

THE TRAVEL CHANNEL
Sunday, June 15, TRAVELERS: LAS VEGAS (includes UFO buffs)

___________________________

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 Media Alert the same way. Also, please let me know if
there is something in the media you think I should cover. Deadline is Tuesday, t
he 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.  For more information on OPUS, see its we
bsite at http://members.aol.com/josephxx3






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 7

                          Re: Aliens In Advertising

From: Jean Hewson <jhewson@nfld.com>
Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 01:22:29 -0230
Fwd Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 01:54:31 -0400
Subject: Re: Aliens In Advertising


> From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> To: updates@globalserve.net
> Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Aliens In Advertising
> Date: Saturday, June 06, 1998 12:31 PM

> Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 07:35:44 -0700
> From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> Subject: Re: Aliens In Advertising

> I have heard about (but not seen) an advertisement in which grey
> aliens come to Earth on a quest. Are they looking for the usual
> predictable stuff?  Do they want to float that pretty brunette
> out the window again? NO!

Has anyone seen the Kodak commercials that feature the guy that
tells the photography store clerk that he's been abducted and his
pictures are the proof?

We've seen them here in Canada, don't know if our American
brothers and sisters have seen them yet. but I assume that they
have

Cheers, Jean






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 7

                            Re: Nazi UFO Research

From: bruce maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 01:15:49 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 02:05:44 -0400
Subject: Re: Nazi UFO Research


>Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 08:11:10 -0400
>From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com>
>Subject: Nazi UFO Research
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>Kevin McClure has asked me to post the following research
>document which takes a look at alleged Nazi UFOs.

>Please feel free to copy this to anyone or any Net forum or list
>you think would find it interesting.

>If anyone wishes to respond to Kevin by email I can forward
>messages etc on to him. He gives his snail mail address at the
>end.

>Andy

>SECRETS OR LIES? - investigating the Nazi UFO legends
>by Kevin McClure
>This document is

>1. a request for help with research

>2. a report on research so far

>3. a note of caution to those who have concluded that there is a
>continuous line of development from a world war II German
>technology involving the flight of high performance circular and
>spherical aircraft, to the stimuli for a wide range of aerial
>events that have been reported between the end of the war and
>now.

>4. a response to the information presented by Tim Matthews in his
>w<

Dear Mr. McClure,

Thank you for your rather elegant discourse on the Nazi UFO
theory... (NUT) ...which is about as solid as a "kraut ball."

Ever since I read Harbinsons' GENESIS twenty years ago.... which
was a neat story, by the way.... I have rejected the NUT.

My tendency to reject was increase by the discovery in the FBI
files of a January 1949 document which is an interivew with the
Air Force Colonel in charge of the Nuclear Energy for the
Propulsion of Aircraft (NEPA) project. He told the FBI that the
sightings of flying saucers and "given impetus" to our own
program to create an atomic powered aircraft. Why would this be
so? Apparently because Air Force analysts studying saucer
dynamics had concluded that only atomic power could explain the
extreme capabilities for acceleration and long distance flight
(long distance if they were assumed to come from countries in
Europe.. or farther away!).  In other words, our best analysts
had apparently concluded that "dumb old chemical" engines were
not good enough.

So, do we now change all the NUFOT's to suggest that the Nazi's
had succeeded in creating atomic powered aircraft?

Another thing: there were SO MANY saucer sightings throughout
the United States and the world that the supposed Nazi builders
of these craft must have made dozens.... hundreds..... but at
what facilities? In caves in Antarctica? Mountains in Argentina?
Where? It takes a major infrastructure of materials and
logistics to create a fleet of aircraft. SOMEBODY WOULD HAVE
NOTICED if large supplies of aeronatical grade metal, advanced
electronic devices, etc. were being assembled in some location
to create a fleet of aircraft.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 7

                          Re: Guilt By Association

From: "Jerome Clark" <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Sat, 06 Jun 98 22:08:17 PDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 01:52:54 -0400
Subject: Re: Guilt By Association


> From: "Greg Sandow" <gsandow@prodigy.net>
> To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net>
> Subject: Guilt By Association
> Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 16:41:58 -0400

> >From: RobIrving@aol.com
> >Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 13:09:03 EDT
> >To: updates@globalserve.net

> >You seem to be saying that once these conventional explanations
> >have been eliminated Occam's Razor would require that we look to
> >unconventional explanations: Take, say, Michael Hesemann's claim
> >that the increased radiation he says he detected in crop circles,
> >as he has eliminated in his mind all conventional explanations,
> >must be proof that aliens made the crop circle.

> I've been pondering this comment from Rob Irving. Frankly, I'm
> baffled.

> As I noted in an earlier post, I didn't say anything about
> Michael Hesemann -- or Roswell, or abductions, or crop circles,
> or alien autopsies, or the Dulce base, or any ufological belief
> -- in the post Rob was answering...

> Now, suddenly, it's as if I'm asked to be responsible for
> Hesemann, and, for all I know, any or all of everything else on
> my list..

An excellent point, Greg, and a rhetorical strategy on the part
of the ETHphobes that's getting not only boring but irritatingly
transparent.  Simply deny that any good evidence exists, point to
the most absurd beliefs as if even the most conservative
proponents were answerable for them, and declare the subject
closed.  Never mind the well- investigated, puzzling cases which
exist in abundance and which are known to anyone who bothers to
study the relevant literature; just wave the arms, declare the
best cases not good enough for some concocted reason or another.
Ignore the patterns demonstrated over 50 years of UFO history and
toss them out the window. Invent a cartoon version of the ETH and
debunk it.

After you've done this, after you've jettisoned just about any
evidence that bears on the issue, you have arrived at the sort of
antiempirical medieval mindset that more and more dominates
ufological discourse.

Personally, I'd take one richly documented field report from a
McDonald, a Webb, a Weitzel, or a Sparks over all of the airy
psychosocial speculation I've seen to date. It's high time these
guys began casting a critical -- dare I say skeptical? -- look at
themselves.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 7

                 Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General

From: "Steven Kaeser" <steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 22:14:07 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 01:46:29 -0400
Subject: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General

>From: Robert Todd <RTodd12191@aol.com>
>Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 14:58:39 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General


<Robert Todd response deleted for brevity>

My post was not intended to defame Prof. Moore, and I regret that
was the impression given. I certainly believe that Prof. Moore
believes that his theory in this matter is accurate.

>Perhaps Mr. Kaeser could tell us at which "numerous events"
>Prof. Moore has "share[d] his 'truth'"?

His comments offered at the New Mexico Institute of Mining and
Technology (NMIMT) were posted to the Internet several years ago,
and the book you mentioned that he co-authored was released about
a year or so after that. It seems that Prof. Moore felt the need
to speak about the subject at some level, but I certainly
wouldn't compare his involvement to that of UFO proponents.

>Mr. Kaeser has no cause to use snotty characterizations like
>"dog and pony show," except to imply that Prof. Moore knowingly
>is stating erroneous information.

<snip>

A lot has been found between the lines that I certainly hadn't
intended. My definition for "dog and pony show" is really little
more than an "expected presentation", but your definition is
apparently much more negative. A "dog and pony show" does not by
implication indicate that false or eroneous information is given
out. Again, I'm not implicating that Prof. Moore is spreading
dis-information or trying to mislead the public.

>The fact is that Prof. Moore has never contacted Dr. Marcel.
>Dr. Marcel called Prof. Moore,  twice as Prof. Moore recalls,
>and asked for copies of some of the NYU reports.  Prof. Moore
>furnished these reports to Dr. Marcel.  While driving through
>Socorro on his way to Roswell, Dr. Marcel contacted Prof. Moore
>and asked to see a radar target.  Prof. Moore met with Dr.
>Marcel and his associate at Dr. Marcel's motel and showed him a
>radar target and balloon.  Presumably this is the "dog and pony
>show" to which Mr. Kaeser referred, a "show" put on at the
>specific request of Dr. Marcel.

That is not the way Dr. Marcel portrayed the meeting during a
presentation in Roswell last year, but how the meeting came about
isn't really an issue.

Dr. Marcel didn't believe the material resembled what he recalls
on his kitchen floor, but you believe his memory is flawed and
that other testimony that supports the balloon theory is more
valid.

My point regarding Prof. Moore was that he is no longer a
dis-interested scientist in relation to Roswell, but is now an
author promoting a theory. IMO, he crossed the line when he
co-authored the book. My intent was not to defame his integrity,
or that he was promoting anything other than what he believes to
be the truth. If my comments were thought to be too flippant, I
apologize.

Steve 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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 7

                                Re: John Ford

From: bruce maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 01:15:56 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 02:08:03 -0400
Subject: Re: John Ford


>Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 17:39:08 -0400
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force

>>From: JBONJO@aol.com
>>Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 10:39:23 EDT
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Examination of Roswell Photos Clears
>>             Air Force General

<snip>

>I've been thinking of this U of T thing, and here is what comes to
>my mind.  One of the greatest frustrations of all photographers is
>that negatives contain many times the information than can be shown
>on even the best of prints.  It is a fact of photographic life.

>The U of T needs to make high resolution digital scans from the
>original negatives and make them available to researchers.  These
>would be far more valuable than any sort of photographic print.


HEAR, HEAR!

Did we hear that the CIA or some such already tried digital
enhancement a few years ago?

Anyway, digital versions of the negatives can be passed around
quite easily and lend themselves to computer-aided
processing....... and, unfortunately, to computer aided
skullduggery! If someone comes up with alien lettering on the
sides of the "beams", .... wait for confirmation from someone
else before believing it.....

Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 20:12:46 -0400
To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: John Ford [was: Alfred's Odd Ode #251]


>Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 11:29:35 -0500
>From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Alfred's Odd Ode #251

>> Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 07:47:24 -0700
>> From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
>> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Alfred's Odd Ode #251

>> >Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 06:50:41 -0500
>> >From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
>> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>> >Subject: Alfred's Odd Ode #251

>> Dear Odd Alfred:
>> > Restore John Ford.
>> Restore that nut case to what? Long Island? He belongs on Fantasy
>> Island.
>> Best wishes
>> -  Larry Hatch

>I find your lack of incredulity puzzling, your lack of compassion
>disheartening, and your abundant arrogance insulting.
>Fondest regards

>Lehmberg@snowhill.com

Personally I find some of Mr. Hatch's comments on this and other
posts juvenile.  Oh well, I guess we're all entitled to our
'opinion'.

Sue Kovios







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 7

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: bruce maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 01:15:42 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 02:02:08 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


>From: "Greg Sandow" <gsandow@prodigy.net>
>To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Occam's Razor and UFOs
>Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 10:24:55 -0400


>"Mass Found in Elusive Particle," reads the headline on the front
>page of today's New York Times. "Universe May Never Be the
>Same."

<snip>

>This gives me an occasion to talk about something I've been
>thinking of for a while, Occam's Razor. This is a well-known
>scientific adage, not exactly a theory or a principle, but a good
>rule of thumb for research. It says, basically, that we shouldn't
>make up theories without any reason, and that the simplest
>explanation of something -- the one that does NOT require forming
>new and alarming hypotheses -- is the one we should prefer.

>No problem there. The scientist, Yoji Totsuka, who announced the
>findings about the neutrino clearly shaves with Occam's Razor,
>since he's quoted as saying: "We have investigated all other
>possible causes of the effects we have measured and only neutrino
>mass remains." In other words, he and his colleagues considered
>all explanations that would have preserved the idea that
>neutrinos don't have mass, and formed their radical, new idea
>only after those explanations didn't work.

>What does this have to do with UFOs? Well, skeptics like to
>invoke Occam's Razor as one of their many reasons for concluding
>that all UFO sightings have -- or probably have -- conventional
>explanations. Peter Brookesmith has made that argument here; my
>very smart composer friend Scott Johnson suggested it in a
>conversation we had not long ago. In effect, they're saying:
>"Here we have all these reports of strange lights, metallic
>disks, you name it. Which is more likely, that they're all
>misinterpretations of known phenomena (or of course lies), or
>that they're ET visitors? Occam's Razor forces us to assume the
>former."

>But really it does no such thing. If it did, today's New York
>Times headline would be impossible. It would have to read:
>"Japanese-American Scientific Team Says Neutrino Has Mass;
>Scientific Community Rejects Findings, Saying Occam's Razor Makes
>Them Unlikely." Occam's Razor tells us how to do research, but
>says nothing about what the research will reveal. It tells us to
>eliminate familiar explanations first, but can't possibly say
>that the radical new unconventional explanation will always turn
>out to be false. If it did, scientific progress would be
>impossible. We'd still believe in a flat earth, an "ether" that
>fills all space, and the Biblical creation myth.>

>.And in fact there's a great irony in skeptics turning Occam's
>Razor against ufology. The irony is simply this: Responsible UFO
>research is one of the best examples of Occam's Razor used
>properly. What does a UFO investigator do when someone reports a
>sighting? He or she tries to eliminate all conventional
>explanations. That's what UFO witnesses do, as well. Over and
>over, we read sighting reports that say something like: "I saw a
>light, and I thought it was a plane. But I didn't hear any noise,
>and soon the light descended close to the ground, behind a grove
>of trees. So I figured it had to be a car, but...." Over and
>over, UFO witnesses refuse to assume that what they're seeing is
>something unknown. On the contrary, they assume it's something
>familiar, and only when it clearly can't be do they conclude that
>it's strange and unusual.


HURRAH... you have won the Perspicacity Award award for being
one of the few (apparently) who really understand where the
science is in ufology.

As I have long pointed out in lectures, we can't use "positivie"
identification with flying saucers because we don't know what
they are supposed to be able to do, how they are supposed to
look, or whatever. Instead we must resort to a negative form opf
proof.... RULING OUT ALTERNATIVES..... i.e., all conventional
explanations must be rejected befoire we have a true Unknown.
One we have that unknown, then there is reason for speculation.

OCCAM's RAZOR CUTS BOTH WAYS.
It is a double edged sword.

The skeptics don't seem to realize this. They offer an
explanation and then go away laughing (another kook with a UFO
sightings). Upon examination said explanation falls apart, so
they offer another. They penny us to death with garbage
explanations.... and we lose thje "propaganda war" because the
newsmedia treats explanations with unduen respect. Example:"
the Japan Airlines sighting of Nov. 1986 which was investigated
by the FAA in eartly 1987. Klass/ CSICOP initially claimed the
crew saw Venus and Jupiter. Then I showed there were impossible
(still in sky after plane landed.... but the UFO had disappeared
half an hour before... the UFOs weren't in the same
direction.... i.nitial sighting of UFOs when they were traveling
along in front of the aircraft and the crew felt heat from the
UFOs!). A few months later CSICOP published a revised
explanation: now it was moonlight reflected from clouds.

GIVE ME A BREAK!!!!!!

(Anyone who want's a copy of my complete report less
illustrations send email. I can send a plain text version.
Otherwise, Get IUR, April May issue, 1987).

Anyway, Once One Side of Occam's Razor has chopped off all the
coinventional explanations... the only thing left is
unconventional, Sherlock (after you rule out all the probable,
what's left must be the improbable).

This IS the way new discoveries are made in mainstream science.
(too bad most vocal UFO skeptics aren't really in the
mainstream!)

Oh, yes. One more thing. As I read the report of neutrino mass
and how they had rejected all other explanations.... I chuckled
to myself. I, just like you, immediately made the connection
with UFO research.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 7

                                Re: John Ford

From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 20:12:46 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 01:36:05 -0400
Subject: Re: John Ford


>Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 11:29:35 -0500
>From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Alfred's Odd Ode #251

>> Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 07:47:24 -0700
>> From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
>> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Alfred's Odd Ode #251

>> >Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 06:50:41 -0500
>> >From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
>> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>> >Subject: Alfred's Odd Ode #251

>> Dear Odd Alfred:
>> > Restore John Ford.
>> Restore that nut case to what? Long Island? He belongs on Fantasy
>> Island.
>> Best wishes
>> -  Larry Hatch

>I find your lack of incredulity puzzling, your lack of compassion
>disheartening, and your abundant arrogance insulting.
>Fondest regards

>Lehmberg@snowhill.com

Personally I find some of Mr. Hatch's comments on this and other
posts juvenile.  Oh well, I guess we're all entitled to our
'opinion'.

Sue Kovios







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 7

                                Re: John Ford

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 01:52:53 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 08:28:24 -0400
Subject: Re: John Ford


> From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
> Re: Alfred's Odd Ode #251

> >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>

> >>From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>

> >> Restore John Ford.

> >Restore that nut case to what? Long Island? He belongs on Fantasy
> >Island.

> Geez Larry, although I agree with you that John Ford is a bit of
> a "nutcase" (and that is based on having met him, spoken with him
> on several occasions and after a lengthy review of what he was
> offering as 'evidence.') but, the guy deserves a fair hearing
> before he gets convicted in the court of public opinion.

<snip>

Dear  Alfred and John:

I was unaware that John Ford was being held without a trial, and
apologise if my referral to 'fantasy island' offended.

Is he being held in a mental institution? I don't understand how
else he could be held without a trial for so long!

I only spoke to Ford on the phone once. It was simply awful, and
I need not give the details.

-  Larry Hatch










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 7

                                Re: John Ford

From: Scott R. Caput <scaput@shadow.net>
Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 02:22:29 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 08:18:38 -0400
Subject: Re: John Ford


> >Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 07:47:24 -0700
> >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Alfred's Odd Ode #251

> >>Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 06:50:41 -0500
> >>From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> >>Subject: Alfred's Odd Ode #251

> ><snip>

> >Dear Odd Alfred:

> >> Restore John Ford.

> >Restore that nut case to what? Long Island? He belongs on Fantasy
> >Island.

> >Best wishes

> >-  Larry Hatch

> Hi Larry, hi All,

> Geez Larry, although I agree with you that John Ford is a bit of
> a "nutcase" (and that is based on having met him, spoken with him
> on several occasions and after a lengthy review of what he was
> offering as 'evidence.') but, the guy deserves a fair hearing
> before he gets convicted in the court of public opinion.

> Other than Als' humanitarian reminders I never hear anything
> about this case anymore. How long has this guy been held without
> trial? Aren't there guarantees in place to insure a speedy trial?
> And purely as a 'soul' issue, you may want to ask yourself why
> you are so quick to dismiss a fellow human being and relegate him
> to the trash heap (worse yet, prison in this case!) because you
> 'disagree' with him or with his claims.

> Yoofology aside, as an American I want to know why this guy has
> been languishing in prison for so long, without the benefit of
> speedy justice. Think about it Larry. If this guy is found
> innocent he has already served almost three years! If it was
> _you_ in there I'm sure the worse thing that could happen to you
> would be to find yourself forgotten by your peers. We owe it to
> John and to ourselves to back the guy (as if he was innocent)
> until his guilt or lack of it is determined by a jury of his
> peers.

> I don't agree with him either Larry. And I even agree that John
> _is_ a bit of a "nutcase" but wrong is wrong man. You should be
> angered by the way John is being dealt with whether you agree
> with him or not. I thought your comment was mean-spirited and
> beneath you.

> Al, thanx for playing 'public conscience' if it wasn't for your
> noble intentions a _grave_injustice_ may go completely
> unnoticed.

> There but for the Grace of God go you or I.

> Just my tuppence,

> John Velez


Bravo John! Well said. This is my first post, but I've been
reading for a few years now. I've noticed a negativity in the
group as of late and am positive that nothing good can come from
it. Let's try to focus a bit more on the positive, and get back
on the path.

--
Scott R. Caput

The brain is by far the most complexly organized piece of matter
we know. It is enormously more complicated in structure than a
star is, for instance, which is why astronomers know so much
about stars, and psychologists know so little about brains.

                       Isaac Asimov








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 7

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl>
Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 03:38:10 +0200 (MET DST)
Fwd Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 08:15:18 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


>From: RobIrving@aol.com
>Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 13:48:43 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

>> From: "Greg Sandow" <gsandow@prodigy.net>
>>  To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net>
>>  Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs
>>  Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 14:31:11 -0400

>>  But that's not the discussion I was trying to start.

>Oh well... better me beating you over the head than Brookesmith.

>Rob


Why, I also don't agree with a word the good Duke says,
- he usually doesn't know what he is talking about -,
but he has a sense of humor. Since the field doesn't
seem to be making much progress anyway we could at least
try to have more fun. We need more Brookesmiths.

            __________________________________________
           /    Met vriendelijke groet/Best wishes    \
                      Henny van der Pluijm
                      hvdp@worldonline.nl

                       Technology Pages
                http://home.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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 7

                                Re: John Ford

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 02:46:54 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 08:22:01 -0400
Subject: Re: John Ford

>Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 11:29:35 -0500
>From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Alfred's Odd Ode #251

>> Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 07:47:24 -0700
>> From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
>> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Alfred's Odd Ode #251

>> >Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 06:50:41 -0500
>> >From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
>> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>> >Subject: Alfred's Odd Ode #251

>> <snip>

>> Dear Odd Alfred:

>> > Restore John Ford.

>> Restore that nut case to what? Long Island? He belongs on Fantasy
>> Island.

>> Best wishes

>> -  Larry Hatch

>I find your lack of incredulity puzzling, your lack of compassion
>disheartening, and your abundant arrogance insulting. The real
>irony here is if situations were reversed _he_ would likely be
>trying to get _you_ out. John Ford is one of ours that _may_ have
>been brought down for unjust reasons by a corrupt political
>machine. The "fantasy island" crack was uncalled for, especially
>in light of your apparent 'Gilligan's Island' sensibility.

>Fondest regards

>Lehmberg@snowhill.com

>Restore John Ford.

Hello Al, hi All,

A buddy sent me an "update" on the Ford case that I wanted to
share with all of you. As I haven't asked permission to reprint
a 'private' communique I am hiding any details that may reveal
the identity of the person that sent it. The important/pertinent
details are all there though.

=============================

The news is that he has been recently transferred to a mental
hospital. And, of course, there are some serious charges against
him.  I work here in a (deleted) as a (deleted) and worked many
of my past (deleted) years with "penal code" patients.  Some of
those patients have not gone to trial yet because they are
incompetent to understand the charges against them and unable to
cooperate with their defense (and the others are not guilty by
reason of insanity).  So there probably is no conspiracy against
Mr. Ford --just that apparently he's not doing too well
emotionally and mentally.

Lets hope he gets well enough to defend himself at trial.

(anonymous)

=============================

My response:

Hi (deleted),

Cheeses, Mary, and Joseph, let's hope they aren't basing the
diagnosis of incompetence/insanity on his belief in UFOs! Then it
becomes a serious issue (and a very real threat) for us all.

Thanx for the note. ;-)

John
===========================

If this is true, that John Ford has been institutionalized
because of his belief in UFOs, then we all have _a lot_ to think
about. I don't know about you guys (and I don't make a whole lot
of money) but I'm going to send in a few bucks to this guys
defense fund and maybe even send John a little note of support if
I can find out which 'laughing academy' he is being detained in.
After three years of the kind of medication that they usually
make those poor bastards take he may not even be the same person
anymore. That, my brothers and sisters is tantamount to punishing
a person without due process or a jury conviction.

Like I said in my first post,

"Innocent until proven guilty,"  and . . .

"there but for the Grace of God go you or I!"

Peace,

John 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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 7

                 Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General

From: Stanton T. Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 08:32:41 -0300
Fwd Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 08:36:59 -0400
Subject: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General


> From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
> Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 15:48:21 EDT
> To: updates@globalserve.net
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General

> >From: Robert Todd <RTodd12191@aol.com>
> >Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 14:58:39 EDT
> >To: updates@globalserve.net
> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General

> <snip>

> When I spoke to Mrs. Marcel (Major Marcel's wife, and Jesse
> Marcel, Jr's mother) she said that she had handled material from
> an alien spacecraft. She also said that she had accompanied her
> husband to the debris field. It was clear at the time I spoke to
> her, that she did not have a clear memory of the events and
> nothing positive would be gained from reporting what she said
> then.

> >I have been in communication with Prof. Moore for many years
> >now, and I know him to be a completely honest individual.  He
> >certainly is no apologist for the government.  He states what he
> >believes is the truth, and it is disgraceful that Mr. Kaeser
> >attempts to inply otherwise.  Prof. Moore also is a first-class
> >scientist, and I would recommend that anybody who cares to do so
> >read about some of his scientific accomplishments at:

> >  www.nmt.edu/mainpage/alumni/goldpan/moore.html

> Damn, I really hate to have to agree with Mr. Todd about
> anything, but I will on this one point. Prof. Moore has always
> been kind and helpful to me and I don't believe that he would
> intentionally spin the truth to his point of view.

>  KRandle

Somebody put a big and FALSE spin on the meeting between Don
Berliner and myself with Charles Moore and later the same day
with Duke Guildenberg in "Case Closed". Perhaps it was McAndrew.

It was perfectly clear that both were aware of the July 9 RDR
article (apparently provided by Bob Todd) but NOT aware of the
July 8 articles including such details as "found last week" or
the many other articles that had already been published, or
Marcel's testimony.... Selective choice of data....

STF






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 7

                                     Re:

From: "Stanton T. Friedman" <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 08:22:37 -0300
Fwd Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 08:31:53 -0400
Subject: Re:

> From: Dave Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
> Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 15:10:11 EDT
> To: updates@globalserve.net
> Subject: Re: New 'MJ-12' Documents?

> >From: "Stanton T. Friedman" <fsphys@brunnet.net>
> >Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 22:12:28 -0300
> >Fwd Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 22:41:52 -0400
> >Subject: Re: New 'MJ-12' Documents?

> >>From: ufotruth@ix.netcom.com [William Hand]
> >>Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 15:02:08 -0500 (CDT)
> >>To: updates@globalserve.net
> >>Subject:  A DIRECT MESSAGE TO Serge Salvaille ABOUT THE NEW MJ12
> >DOCUMENTS!!!

> >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> >>>From: "Serge Salvaille" <sergesa@connectmmic.net>
> >>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: New 'MJ-12' Documents?
> >>>Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 11:08:15 +0600

<snip>

> >>There ARE NEW MJ12 documents! The authors of the book
> >>"ALIEN RAPTURE" are Edgar Rothschild Fouche' and Brad Steiger.
> >>Edgar Rothschild Fouche' had been in many black projects and
> >>classified projects for many years. After retiring from working
> >>for various government agencies he made a group of friends who
> >>had also worked in various black projects. They got together
> >>and talked several times about UFO/ET information, advanced
> >>technology, and black projects.

> >I spoke with Fouche and have read his manuscript. He told me his
> >associate retyped them so he doen't have even 2nd hand documents.
> >There are a number of strange changes from the Moore MJ-12
> >documents.. and certainly no research presented such as in my
> >book TOP SECRET/MAJIC and in my Final Report on Operation
> >Majestic 12 or iun Operation Majestic 12? YES. Long way to go on
> >these

> Based on the teasers of the new MJ-12 documents printed on the
> Sightings Web page, it looks like at least some of the so-called
> factual material is going to be as fictitious as the rest of the
> book.  A case in point is the alleged Attachment D to the MJ-12
> documents, the "Preliminary Autopsy of Extraterrestrial
> Biological Entity(s)."  The key here is that this "document" is
> dated 5 July 1947.  Unfortunately, this introduces a number of
> severe anachronisms.  E.g., it states that:

<snip>

> David Rudiak


David Rudiak is right on here. I am supposed to be on with Jeff
Rense on June 10 to review this Fouche stuff and expect to  havea
full list of Factoids. We shouldn't forget that loads of copies
of the Eisenhower Briefing Document, the Cutler Twining memo etc
have been floating around for a decade.

STF

UFO UpDates - Toronto wrote:






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 7

                      David Clarke & Jonathan Dagenhart

From: AlienHype1@aol.com
Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 21:13:47 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 08:13:10 -0400
Subject: David Clarke & Jonathan Dagenhart


Well now David Clark is now about to be exposed as a liar, yes i
said it a liar.

May i remind everyone who does not know it but David Clark is
the Bufora Press officer, and a journalist for the local paper
In Sheffield, The Star. which happens to only get bought on the
day the Jobs are advertised. Most people only by the local rag
if they wish to buy a car, or find a job or just for the
television guide.I lived in the area for three and a half years
and my former girlfriend carried out the extensive market
research for the star with others when she worked there for a
short while. and those were the conclusions of the market
research. True.

David Clark is now claiming that it was him who got Jonathan
Dagenhart to call me After he showed Mr Dagenhart my report and
the way i was using his interview in my report, Mr Clark is also
Claiming that I never informed Mr Dagenhart of my reasons for
wanting to talk with him and once again this is completley
untrue.

After Jonathan Dagenhart Had informed me without prompting That
the man he encountered was infact covered in aviation fuel and
he had substanciated the above stated I informed Mr Dagenhart of
what i believe had occurred and he was fully aware of the
connotations intended it for my report.and i know post the full
transcript of the conversation that took place which will place
The Bufora press officer in his place as a liar

here is the evidence may I also add that all Clark does is
follow my witneses round like a demented schoolboy trying to get
them to alter there recolections. Mr Clark you have no
credibility you are a liar you represent the Bufora group as
press officer, I urge Bufora to remove this compusive liar from
there group as you can clearly see he has damaged your reputaion
once again as i have now exposed him for the liar that he is ,un
professional and has no credibility.

please read the transcript

Mr Jonathan Degenhart

After writing a letter to this man regarding his comments in the
police log he telephoned me Here follows the verbatim transcript
of my telephone conversation. Taped interview between Max Burns
and Jonathan Dagenhart on 2/5/98 Time 11.10 am I had to call the
witness back on another phone so as to set up the recording
equipment the conversation went like this. He concented to being
recorded.


Burns           Hell there

Dagenhart            Hello

Burns           So what happened that night? You'd been the Wales...

Dagenhart            Well we'd been to Wales, Um on the way home, Um
               driving down Snake Pass and all of a sudden just
               coming up to the viaduct this man stepped out in
               front of us, flagged us down so we stopped, pulled
               over I was in the front of the minibus with the
               driver and another passenger so I wound my window
               down and he started speaking to us he said I've got
               to get to Sheffield, Sheffield and that's basically
               all he said.

Burns           Did he look in shock? Dagenhart Yer he didn't
               seem to really know which way Sheffield was or what
               he was doing or anything and the thing is I said at
               the time when I rang the police he smelled of diesel
               fuel, well since then I've joined the airforce and
               I'm now working for the airforce and it wasn't
               diesel fuel it was aviation fuel that he'd got on
               him.

Burns           Ah absolutely superb

Dagenhart            and I will put my money on that

Burns           You work for the airforce

Dagenhart            I work for the royal air force

Burns           Where do you work? as a civilian for the airforce

Dagenhart            No I actually work for the airforce I am paid by the
               air force

Burns           Really can I ask you what job you do?

Dagenhart            I'm a jet engine specialist

Burns           A jet engine specialist

Dagenhart            Yes

Burns           And where do you work?

Dagenhart            At the moment I'm down in Wolverhampton but in July
               I'm moving up to Lock (unintelligable) in Scotland

Burns           Ar Do you know, I must send you a full copy of this
               report of what's happened Do you remember they were
               looking for a crashed plane .

Dagenhart            Yep

Burns           Yer they've lost a military jet.

Dagenhart            Oh right

Burns           And I believe he was the co-pilot of the tornado jet
               that's crashed. Did it look like a flying suit he
               was wearing?

Dagenhart            Um I don't know he'd got clothes on but I mean it
               was dark and he'd got dark clothes on that's all.

Burns           And he didn't know where he was?

Dagenhart            No

Burns           Yer and there were no vehicles in the area

Dagenhart            There was nothing. A police car past us about 2
               minutes after we passed him Ur cos. wed got a full
               minibus there was no room at all to get him on so
               we drove off. We told him the right way to go and a
               few seconds later a police car passed us. See when
               i spoke to the police later that evening
               (unintelligible) been on that road there had been
               nobody there and in a matter of seconds

Burns           I think I saw you cos I was there in the area. I
               think I saw your minibus I saw a military landrover
               as well.

Dagenhart            Yes there probably was a couple of landrovers around
               but we'd got a white minibus with a trailer on the
               back.

Burns           Yer did you go through Castleton at all out that way
               or did you just go over Ladybower and into Sheffield
               that way.

Dagenhart       Over Ladybower and into Sheffield that way.

Burns           That night I've got 13 witnesses to an enormous ufo
               flying about everywhere

Dagenhart            right

Burns           A military interception and they're trying to cover
               it up but you know I'll send you a copy of this if
               you like

Dagenhart            yer brilliant

Burns           Do you remember anything else was his English good

Dagenhart            No it wasn't it was very poor very poor.

Burns           Yer I think he might have been a Nato pilot or
               co-pilot

Dagenhart            Yes he was of sort of African sort of origin very
               very dark skinned

Burns           And it was definitely aviation fuel

Dagenhart            yes

Burns           and you can substantiate that because you now work
               for the Royal Air Force on jet engines you now what
               aviation fuel smells like

Dagenhart            yes

Burns           Do you know what if you was a woman I'd be bringing
               you flowers today oh this is absolutely brilliant
               can anyone else substantiate this?

Dagenhart            There was 15 other people in the minibus like 15
               other people in the minibus who were all there on
               the evening

Burns           Is there any chance Do you know the other people
               well?

Dagenhart            I know some of them well but I don't know them all
               there's about 8 that I don't know at all I know
               about four off the trip

Burns           Is there any chance you could speak to someone
               else that saw him and get them to call me

Dagenhart            Yer I can do Burns Could you

Dagenhart            I'll give it a go yer

Burns           I'll post you a copy of this report after the
               weekend

Dagenhart            right brilliant

Burns           Yer is there anything else you can tell me about
               that night where abouts on Ladybower was he?

Dagenhart            um

Burns           before you go over it or...

Dagenhart            Yer you know as you're coming from snake pass end

Burns          Yes

Dagenhart            You come up on to the Ladybower the smaller of
               the two viaducts going straight on to Sheffield

Burns           And he really didn't know where he was going

Dagenhart            He didn't know where he was going it looked
               like he just walked off a hill

Burns           Really did he have any mud or anything on him
               Could you tell was his clothing dirty

Dagenhart            I couldn't tell

Burns           But as you work for the Royal Air Force on jet
               engines your absolutely 100% certain that it was
               aviation fuel not diesel

Dagenhart            yes

Burns           Is there any chance you could write this down for
               me

Dagenhart            yes

Burns           Could you in handwriting not typed

agenhart             yer no problem

Burns           do you know what thanks very much for
               calling what's your first name

Dagenhart            Jonathan

Burns           Jonathan thanks very much for calling me you've
               been absolutely superb cos. I was giving up hope
               of getting in contact with you I was going to
               come and knock on your door and put a note
               through your door you know to Rotherham next
               time I was up there cos. I used to live in
               Rotherham

Dagenhart            Oh right

Burns           I used to live in Kimberworth

Dagenhart            Oh right cool

Burns           You know off Meadowbank Road

Dagenhart            Yep Ive got friends who live up there

Burns           How old are you Jonathan

Dagenhart            I'm 25 and a half

Burns           25 and a half Do you mind me asking about your
               education?

Dagenhart            No go for it

Burns           What education have you got?

Dagenhart            I went to a little secondary school in the town
               where I lived in Swinton the local secondary
               school didn't do any A levels didn't go to
               college didn't do anything left school with all
               GCSE passes there all Ds and Es very low passes
               got a job working in Milton Keynes, worked there
               for 4 and a half years came back home did other
               little jobs, trained as an outdoor educating
               instructor then joined the Royal Air Force that's
               basically it

Burns           Well you're obviously intelligent because the air
               force dont take idiots

Dagenhart            No  I was travelling abroad as well in about 18
               months I mean in about three years I spent about
               18 months abroad

Burns           Listen can I give you another number to ring me
               on instead of the one I gave you in the letter
               Yer if you pass it on to one of your friends if
               they could call me today it would be appreciated
               its **** ******* and I might contact you again if
               that's OK

Dagenhart            Yes well this is my parents number and I'm hardly
               ever here

Burns           Well I'll leave a message for you

Dagenhart            yes

Burns           Now in my report do you ant me to change your
               name keep you anonymous

Dagenhart            To be honest I don't care

Burns           Thanks very much Jonathan

Dagenhart            You're welcome

Burns           You've been absolutely brilliant try to get
               someone else to ring with a statement

Dagenhart       yer I shall

Burns           About the bloke

Dagenhart            Yer I will

Burns           Thanks mate

Dagenhart            OK

Burns           Brilliant

Dagenhart            No problem

Burns           Bye

Dagenhart       Bye


It is without doubt that the military are involved in a large
cover up regarding the attempted interception of the triangle,
including conspriacy, the placement of cover stories and
debunking of witnesses, however with this damming evidence from
a member of Royal Air Force who encountered the pilot or the
co-pilot on Snake Pass about an hour after the explosions
occurred, stinking of aviation fuel within three miles of Howden
Moors, and as his job with the Air Force is as a jet engine
specialist, this witness is 100% certain that he smelled
aviation fuel on the man he encountered while on a mini bus on
the 24th March 1997.

This I feel places the M.O.D in a difficult situation, as I have
checked with all local filling stations and they assure me that
there is not much call for aviation fuel in the Peak District
and if there was, most people would put the fuel in a plane and
not take to wearing fuel as a fashion item while out walking.

Update:

Mr Jonathan Dagenhart Telephoned me on the 12th of May at approx
11.30 and sounding very flustered with a shaky voice informed me
that I had twisted what he said, and he no longer wanted to have
his name put to his original statement. He has also spoken with
Mr Phil Taylor at the News of the World informing him that he
was going to lose his job over his statement that he made to
myself.

May I add that Mr Dagenhart is under the employ of the RAF where
he works on jet engines and when I questioned him about who had
spoken with him about this he just said a source I further
questioned him as to whether it was his employer the RAF who had
silenced him, and he replied that he could not say, on that he
ended the conversation and was very upset.

As far as I am concerned this proves the case, why would the RAF
be hauling an engineer over the hot coals like this to the point
of him telling a national news reporter that he was going to
lose his job, and trying to imply that I have twisted what he
said, bearing in mind that he made the comment about me twisting
what he had said before it has been in print anywhere, and he
verified the content of the taped transcript of our conversation
to Mr Mike Jarvis reporter for the News of The World in full and
made his statements freely and without prompting and when asked
did he want to remain anonamous he replied Im not bothered all
of which is on tape and can be cross verified by Mike Jarvis at
the News of The World.

Which I hope you all must agree for someone to turn around from
being not bothered to Im going to lose my job, proves my case
even more, why would the Militiary be pressurising a member of
there workforce to retract a statement about somthing they claim
has not occured.

I iterate to you all I have the Dagenhart tape and he first of
all made all comments freely and without promting and this
pivotal piece of evidence has been copied and sent to the four
corners of the planet.

The RAF are trying to make someone retract a statement about
something that they claim never happened anyway WHY ?

There yer go David Clarke upfromt and personal the liar.

if anyone would like a full copy of the interview on tape then
contact me. I am sorry to be so blunt but this group are
desperate for no one to listern to me and there it is David
Clark is a Liar, its got a nice ring to it though.

regards Max Burns Liar catcher






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 7

                 Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General

From: RTodd12191@aol.com
Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 10:23:35 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 12:13:17 -0400
Subject: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General


>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
>Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 15:48:21 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General

>>From: Robert Todd <RTodd12191@aol.com>
>>Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 14:58:39 EDT
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General

><snip>

>>With regard to Dr. Marcel's recollections, why is more weight
>>given to those recollections than is given to the recollections
>>of Bessie Schreiber (nee Brazel)? I contacted her and furnished
>>her with copies of the Roswell photographs. I asked her if the
>>material shown in those photographs looks like the material she
>>helped her father gather up back in July of 1947. She stated
>>that the material depicted in those photographs _does_ look like
>>the material they picked up back in July of 1947. Furthermore,
>>Bessie Brazel wasn't awakened in the middle of the night to view
>>the debris; she helped her father pick it up in broad daylight.
>>Jesse Marcel, Jr., was awakened by his father in the middle of
>>the night.

>>But the promoters of the Roswell myth discount Bessie Brazel
>>Schreiber's statements because her brother, Bill Brazel, claims
>>she wasn't even at the ranch, when in fact the Brazel children
>>_did_ live at the ranch after school let out for the summer,
>>which would have been before the story blew up in July. But the
>>Roswell promoters like Bill Brazel's tales better, because they
>>add more mystery to the story. He claims he picked up bits and
>>pieces of the Roswell debris which were later consfiscated by
>>the Air Force following some loose talk in a bar. Bill Brazel
>>didn't live at the Foster Ranch, but Bessie did after school let
>>out for the summer. But because Bill Brazel's tales are to
>>their liking, the Roswell promoters accept his claims, and
>>reject Bessie's.

>What we have is Bessie Brazel's statements which are in direct
>conflict with a number of others. According to Loretta Proctor,
>Marian Strickland, Tommy Tyree, and Bill Brazel, the family
>remained in Tularosa that summer because they had renters. Bill
>Brazel said that he went down to the ranch after seeing his
>father's name in the paper because he knew there would be no one
>around to help with the chores.

That's all well and good, but the final authority must be Mac
Brazel himself, who told newspaper reporters that his daughter
was on the ranch and helped him pick up the debris. Mr. Randle
and other Roswell promoters reject the newspaper accounts of
what Mac Brazel told reporters because they claim those
statements were made under duress, even though the "evidence"
for this contention is suspect. Yet the part about Bessie Brazel
being on the ranch does not advance the supposed cover-up in any
way, so even by their own standards, there is no reason to doubt
the quote of Brazel regarding the presence of his daughter.
Unfortunately, after the passage of fifty years, the newspaper
accounts still represent the most reliable source of information
for what happened back in 1947.

<snip>

>>And I ask again, why is it we haven't been told what Mrs. Marcel
>>(Major Marcel's wife, and Jesse Marcel, Jr.'s mother) had to say
>>when she was asked about the Roswell debris? As I undestand it,
>>she said the debris was _not_ from an alien spaceship. This is
>>just one of numerous examples where the promoters of the alien
>>spaceship explanation have distoted, misrepresented, or hidden
>>evidence that runs counter to the alien spaceship explanation.

>When I spoke to Mrs. Marcel (Major Marcel's wife, and Jesse
>Marcel, Jr's mother) she said that she had handled material from
>an alien spacecraft. She also said that she had accompanied her
>husband to the debris field. It was clear at the time I spoke to
>her, that she did not have a clear memory of the events and
>nothing positive would be gained from reporting what she said
>then.

Given the fact that Mr. Randle has distorted and misrepresented
so many facts in the past, without corroboration in the form of
a tape recorded interview, I am not willing to rely solely on
Mr. Randle's claims.

>>I have been in communication with Prof. Moore for many years
>>now, and I know him to be a completely honest individual. He
>>certainly is no apologist for the government. He states what he
>>believes is the truth, and it is disgraceful that Mr. Kaeser
>>attempts to inply otherwise. Prof. Moore also is a first-class
>>scientist, and I would recommend that anybody who cares to do so
>>read about some of his scientific accomplishments at:

>> www.nmt.edu/mainpage/alumni/goldpan/moore.html

>Damn, I really hate to have to agree with Mr. Todd about
>anything, but I will on this one point. Prof. Moore has always
>been kind and helpful to me and I don't believe that he would
>intentionally spin the truth to his point of view.

Damn, I really hate it when Mr. Randle agrees with me on
anything. It makes me wonder if I haven't made an error
somewhere in my assessment. If we were talking about anybody
other than Prof. Moore, I would seriously reconsider my
position.

Cordially,

Robert Todd







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 7

                    Re: David Clarke & Jonathan Dagenhart

From: David Clarke <dclarke14@compuserve.com>
Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 10:23:29 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 12:20:28 -0400
Subject: Re: David Clarke & Jonathan Dagenhart

>From Dave Clarke, Sheffield.

In a personal profile featured in a previous posting, Max Burns
describes himself as "an entertainer"; how appropriate this
profession is for someone whose claims become more and more
entertaining every passing day.

Deciphering Max's junior school attempts at sentence
construction and embarrassing lack of understanding of basic
syntax is difficult enough, so any hopes of conducting a logical
agument with him is fraught with even greater problems.

The vehemence of his increasingly desperate attacks upon those
he labels "debunkers" are not only an insult to the intelligence
of the majority of UFO Updates readers, but serve to illustrate
the corner he has painted himself into over the case he hopes
will bring him fame and fortune.

They also demonstrate how little he knows or cares about the
rules of evidence and nature of proof which is needed to
convince the serious UFO community and the world at large about
the reality or otherwise behind claims he is making.

This message will be brief, and to the point.

To reiterate the challenge I put to Max Burns in a previous
posting, and which he has once again chosen to ignore, regarding
the "Sheffield Incident":

Max - you claim to possess "conclusive evidence" that an
Extraterrestrial Space Craft attacked and destroyed an RAF
Tornado fighter above Sheffield on the evening of March 24,
1997, resulting in the death of the pilot.

These are big claims, and require solid, checkable evidence to
back them up.

I challenge you through the medium of UFO Updates to provide:

1. The name and address of one single witness who claims to have
   witnessed a UFO shoot down a pursuing Tornado jet over
   Sheffield on the night in question.

2. The name of the RAF or NATO base from which the Tornado
   originated;

3. The registration number of the aircraft;

4. The name of the pilot you claim has lost his life as a result
   of this incident.

If you cannot provide this evidence, which can be independently
checked and validated by other researchers, then your claims
must be regarded as unsubstantiated nonsense.

They might convince a few dozen belief-driven people who are
prepared to accept any story at face value without checking
whether there are any facts to support them, but they will not
convince the rest of us until you come up with hard evidence.

Over to you Max - put up or shut up - let's see evidence, and
not empty rhetoric which proves just how feeble your claims
really area.

*For those who want to see the item by item rebuttal of Max's
claims in the Sheffield Report, see my forthcoming feature
article in UFO Magazine, available on June 25, which provides
the first objectively written account of what really happened
over the Peak District on March 24 last year.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 7

                            Corso Signs Affadavit

From: Peter Gersten <UFOLAWYER1@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 10:54:09 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 12:27:26 -0400
Subject: Corso Signs Affadavit

CONTACT INFORMATION
Peter A. Gersten
520-284-5248
e-mail: Ufolawyer@caus.org

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:                                  June 8, 1998

RETIRED ARMY COLONEL SWEARS UNDER OATH TO SEEING ALIEN BODIES AND
AUTOPSY REPORTS..

Attorney Peter A. Gersten, executive director of Citizens Against
UFO Secrecy, Inc (CAUS), a non-profit Arizona activist
organization dedicated to ending all secrecy surrounding this
planet's contact with an extraterrestrial intelligence, announced
today that retired Army Colonel Philip J. Corso has sworn under
oath to statements previously made in his best selling book 'Day
After Roswell.'

Gersten stated that Colonel Corso has provided CAUS, for use in
its lawsuit against the Department of Army, with a sworn
affidavit re-affirming previous statements that he saw alien
bodies in July, 1947 and had the opportunity to read their
autopsy reports in 1961.

The CAUS lawsuit, which was filed March 25, 1998 in the U.S.
District Court in Phoenix, is asking the federal court to direct
the Army to provide Gersten and CAUS with any and all documents
relevant to what the Colonel, now swears under oath, he saw and
read.

"The CAUS lawsuit is, in and of itself, ground breaking" Gersten
declared. "Now with the Colonel's affidavit, we should be able to
defeat the government's attempt to have the lawsuit dismissed and
go forward with the judicial disclosure process."

Perjury, or lying under oath, is punishable as a criminal offense
usually incurring a jail sentence for the person convicted.
Colonel Corso is believed to be the highest ranking military
officer, if not the only officer, to come forward and state under
oath to seeing 'extraterrestrial biological entities (EBEs.)

CAUS v. Department of Army; Civil 98-0538PHXROS can be found at
the CAUS website located at http://www.caus.org.

END OF PRESS RELEASE


Be sure to visit the CAUS web site at http://caus.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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 7

                    Re: New 'MJ-12' Documents? [Re-send]

From: "Stanton T. Friedman" <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 08:22:37 -0300
Fwd Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 12:21:14 -0400
Subject: Re: New 'MJ-12' Documents? [Re-send]

> From: Dave Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
> Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 15:10:11 EDT
> To: updates@globalserve.net
> Subject: Re: New 'MJ-12' Documents?

> >From: "Stanton T. Friedman" <fsphys@brunnet.net>
> >Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 22:12:28 -0300
> >Fwd Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 22:41:52 -0400
> >Subject: Re: New 'MJ-12' Documents?

> >>From: ufotruth@ix.netcom.com [William Hand]
> >>Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 15:02:08 -0500 (CDT)
> >>To: updates@globalserve.net
> >>Subject:  A DIRECT MESSAGE TO Serge Salvaille ABOUT THE NEW MJ12
> >DOCUMENTS!!!

> >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> >>>From: "Serge Salvaille" <sergesa@connectmmic.net>
> >>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: New 'MJ-12' Documents?
> >>>Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 11:08:15 +0600

<snip>

> >>There ARE NEW MJ12 documents! The authors of the book
> >>"ALIEN RAPTURE" are Edgar Rothschild Fouche' and Brad Steiger.
> >>Edgar Rothschild Fouche' had been in many black projects and
> >>classified projects for many years. After retiring from working
> >>for various government agencies he made a group of friends who
> >>had also worked in various black projects. They got together
> >>and talked several times about UFO/ET information, advanced
> >>technology, and black projects.

> >I spoke with Fouche and have read his manuscript. He told me his
> >associate retyped them so he doen't have even 2nd hand documents.
> >There are a number of strange changes from the Moore MJ-12
> >documents.. and certainly no research presented such as in my
> >book TOP SECRET/MAJIC and in my Final Report on Operation
> >Majestic 12 or iun Operation Majestic 12? YES. Long way to go on
> >these

> Based on the teasers of the new MJ-12 documents printed on the
> Sightings Web page, it looks like at least some of the so-called
> factual material is going to be as fictitious as the rest of the
> book.  A case in point is the alleged Attachment D to the MJ-12
> documents, the "Preliminary Autopsy of Extraterrestrial
> Biological Entity(s)."  The key here is that this "document" is
> dated 5 July 1947.  Unfortunately, this introduces a number of
> severe anachronisms.  E.g., it states that:

<snip>

> David Rudiak


David Rudiak is right on here. I am supposed to be on with Jeff
Rense on June 10 to review this Fouche stuff and expect to  havea
full list of Factoids. We shouldn't forget that loads of copies
of the Eisenhower Briefing Document, the Cutler Twining memo etc
have been floating around for a decade.

STF

UFO UpDates - Toronto wrote:






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 7

                                Re: John Ford

From: nick@the-den.clara.net (Nick Humphries)
Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 14:16:32 GMT
Fwd Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 12:08:17 -0400
Subject: Re: John Ford


>Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 02:46:54 -0500
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: John Ford [was: Alfred's Odd Ode #251]

<snip>

>If this is true, that John Ford has been institutionalized
>because of his belief in UFOs, then we all have _a lot_ to think
>about.

I'll jump in here and just say that if people were
institutionalized purely on their belief in UFOs, then the
institutions will be full to bursting point.
There ARE insane people out there, and John Ford _appears_ to be
one of them.
His belief in UFOs is _probably_ irrelevant.

But assuming he's an innocent victim of a worldwide conspiracy
takes a LOT to beleive - independent QUALIFIED mental analysis
would solve the issue either way. I haven't seen anyone on here
claim that he shouldn't be instituationalized and be able to back
it up properly.

Restore John Ford - if he's confirmed sane and innocent.

-------------------------------------------------------
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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 7

                      UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 3, Number 23

From: Masinaigan@aol.com
Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 12:28:45 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 13:24:39 -0400
Subject: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 3, Number 23


     UFO ROUNDUP
Volume 3, Number 23
June 7, 1998
Editor: Joseph Trainor

RAAF JETS HUNT UFO NEAR
GRAFTON, NEW SOUTH WALES

     Fighter jets of the Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF)
were seen crisscrossing the night sky following a UFO
sighting near Grafton, New South Wales.
     The flap began April 19, 1998 when "Mrs. W., her
daughter and a neighbour watched as two or three round
illuminated white objects were quietly maneuvering at low
altitude in the western sky" at 7:30 p.m.  The UFOs were
"heading into the Grafton area."
     As they watched, "the objects appeared to be heading
in one direction, then suddenly appeared to be going in the
opposite direction, as if they were circling.  The three
witnesses watched the objects for about 15 minutes."
     On April 29, 1998, at 6:30 p.m., another family near
Grafton "reported an unusual object going quickly across
the sky. It was large, spherical and orange-coloured.
When viewing through binoculars, they could not make out
any other details or surface features.  After going directly
overhead, it slowed down to a lower speed, then it veered
off toward the west."
     "At this moment, the family saw two military-type planes
(jets) in the northern sky, probably from the (RAAF)
Williamtown air base, quickly traveling southward--towards
the object.  The UFO shot off to the south and disappeared
over the horizon."
     "Soon afterward, at least two helicopters, probably from
the (RAAF) Singleton air base, were seen heading from the
north to a more southerly direction.  Later that evening, the
family members noticed a bluish-white light light in the
western sky, zigzagging from north to south."
     Grafton is a city in Australia's state of New South
Wales about 300 kilometers (180 miles) north of
Sydney.
     At around 7:30 p.m. that same evening, two families
in Singleton, N.S.W. "reported seeing a strange orange-
yellow light object traveling quickly across the sky in a
southeasterly direction.  The light was quite large, made
no noise and was traveling at quite a low altitude.  One of
the Singleton witnesses is an amateur astronomer."
     At 11:30 p.m., residents of Tumbi Umbi, a small town
in the Central Coast region near Grafton, "heard a weird
rumbling noise pass overhead."  (See Australian UFO
Reports and Experiences #3 for June 1998.  Many thanks
to editor Robert Frola and Australian ufologists Michael
Farrell, Peter Turner and Moira McGhee for these reports.)

LARGE LUMINOUS UFO SIGHTED
BY EIGHT TEENS IN AUSTRIA

     On Monday, June 1, 1998, at 9:30 p.m., Christian K.,
his friends Daniel and Lisa, and five other youths were
hanging out at a beach on the Traunsee (lake) in
Gmunden, Austria they "observed a bright red-orange
object across the lake near Grinberg (mountain)."
     Gmunden is just off the B-1, the main Wels-Salzburg
highway, in the Oberosterreich region of Austria,
approximately 264 kilometers (185 miles) west of Vienna.
     "My friends Daniel and Lisa saw it first," Christian
reported.  "Strangely, nobody saw it before (previously)
and noticed how it got there.  We were looking north-
northeast from the small port of Gmunden to the top of
the Grinberg."  That it was "a reflection of the sun is
questionable, as it was a half-hour after sundown, and
the mountain was not illuminated by the sun."
     "We first thought it was a helicopter.  This seems
impossible due to its climb rate," which he estimated to
be "six meters (20 feet) per second, and you can hear a
helicopter at that distance, especially if the (engine)
noise is reflected by a mountain in the background."
     "Then, when it started climbing faster and faster, and
was higher than the mountain, you could see that it was
not just one big light.  It was about one meter wide" at
arm's length, and "was almost round, just flattened a
bit at the top and the bottom, so that to us it was an
oval just a little bit wider than taller."
     The teens talked about it for another ten minutes,
and then Christian went home.  He lives about two
kilometers (1.2 miles) to the north, at the foot of
Grinberg mountain.
     "When I reached home (at 10 p.m.), my little
brother was watching TV, and it was blank," with no
signal "for about four seconds.  When I asked since
when (how long the TV had been malfunctioning--J.T.),
he told me, 'Since about twenty minutes ago,' or a
few minutes after the phenomenon."
     The afternoon of Tuesday, June 2, 1998, Christian
and his brother were out in the yard when they saw
"three PC-4 planes fly over the Grinberg.  My neighbor
said the reconnaissance planes must have come from
the (Austrian air) base at Hirsching."  The trio kept the
aircraft in view for five minutes.  (Email Interview)

DAYLIGHT DISC FLIES OVER
BOATERS IN PARAGUAY

    South America's latest UFO encounter took place
Saturday afternoon, May 24, 1998, in the small
nation of Paraguay, just north of the capital city,
Asuncion.
     Miguel Bustamente Saavedra was spending his
day off boating with several friends on the wide
Rio Paraguay.  Suddenly, they saw a metallic gleam
in the sky to the north, over the town of Aceval.
     "I noticed something brilliant in the sky," Miguel
reported.  "It was like a big mirror seen in the air.
I thought it was an airplane, but it wasn't because"
the next moment "I saw a metal-colored object in the
air like an egg."
     "The object was going gently up and down and
from right to left.  When it suddenly made a move to
the left and took speed more (accelerated), I couldn't
see it any more."  (Many thanks to Tim Hagemeister
of NACOMM for this report.)

UFO STARTLES CROWD IN
NORTHERN ITALY

     On Saturday, May 30, 1998, at night, "a luminous
white ball" crossed the sky over Alessandria, a city
in northern Italy 100 kilometers (60 miles) north of
Genoa.
     "According to diverse testimony taken independently
from the eyewitnesses, there were several observations
of a luminous white ball in the sky...The light, bigger
than the full moon and followed by a short trail of the
same white color, seemed to enter vertically" into
the crowd's field of view "before disappearing in one
or two bright and dazzling flashes."
     "One of the witnesses also reported hearing a
deafening boom at the same time."  (Grazie a
Paolo Toselli e Edoardo Russo di Centro Italiano
di Studi Ufologici per questo rapporto.)

FLASHING ORANGE UFO SEEN
OVER WEST TEXAS PRAIRIE

     On Sunday, May 31, 1998, at 11:30 p.m., Texan
ufologist Mike Harman and his brother-in-law were on a
skywatch near Andrews, Texas (population 10,678)
when they spotted a strange flash in the sky.
     Andrews is on Highway 385 approximately 350 miles
(560 kilometers) west of Dallas.
     "The cloud cover had finally lifted, and we were able to
view the heavens once again," Mike reported.  "After about
15 minutes of skywatching, I noticed what I perceived as
a flash in the western sky.  And then, there it was again.
I grabbed my binoculars and started searching the sky
for what had caused this."
     "I couldn't seem to get the binoculars up to my eyes
fast enough...so I watched and again I saw another flash.
The object was moving at about the speed of a normal
satellite would have, except this one was low on the
horizon, probably no more than 35 or 40 degrees, and
moving from south to north."
     "Once I spotted the object, I noticed through my
binoculars that the object was glowing orange in color.
It would gradually brighten until it was as bright as the
brightest stars in the sky, then return to its orange glow.
When it peaked at its brightest, it seemed almost to
flash."
     Mike estimated that the average time cycle between
normal glow and "brightest flash" was two seconds.  The
entire sighting "lasted about four minutes."  (Many thanks
to Mike Hartman for this report.)

FLASHING UFO SPOTTED IN
ELK CITY, OKLAHOMA

     Another flashing UFO was spotted at 9:45 p.m. on
Monday, June 1, 1998, in Elk City, Oklahoma.
     Ufologist Debbie Hickman reports, "While I was
letting the cats out, I stepped outside to skywatch.
I observed three airplanes overhead, and I could identify
them as aircraft as they had red and white strobing lights."
     "I watched a very dim light over the Big Dipper, and,
as I watched it, the light grew in brightness until it was
brighter than the other stars nearby.  The light moved in
a southerly direction" and was "about two inches (four
centimeters long) at arm's length.  Then it suddenly
winked out.  The light was one-quarter inch
(0.5 centimeters) diameter arm's length.  I searched
the sky for another few minutes, but the light did not
reappear.  The sighting lasted about 10 to 15 seconds."
     Elk City is on Interstate Highway 40 approximately
112 miles (179 kilometers) west of Oklahoma City.
(Many thanks to Jim and Debbie Hickman for this
report.)
(Editor's Note: The stars of Ursa Major, also known as
the Big Dipper, range in magnitude from Alkaid at
1.8 to Megrez at 3.3.)

UFOs SEEN OVER MEMPHIS
AND CHATTANOOGA

     On Saturday, May 30, 1998, at 9:10 p.m.,
Pete Rogers stepped outside of a large medical
facility on Poplar Avenue in Memphis (population
610,337), the largest city in Tennessee.  He was
on his break and decided to have a cigarette.
     Five minutes later, "I caught a flash of light out of
the corner of my eye.  I immediately turned to see
what had made the flash.  I saw an intense bluish-
violet disc-shaped glow that lasted about one second,
fading to an after-image like you have when you look
into the sun or a real bright light."
     He estimated that "the light was about one to
1.25 inches (2 to 2.5 centimeters) in diameter at
about arm's length.  It was in the sky to the northeast
about 60 to 70 degrees above the horizon."  (Many
thanks to Jim Hickman of Skywatch for this report.)
     On Monday, June 1, 1998, at 9:30 p.m., Darryl P.
and his eight-year-old stepson "were skywatching...
within the city limits of Chattanooga" when they spied
a UFO.  Chattanooga (population 152,466) is a large
city on Interstate Highways 24 and 75 approximately
128 miles (205 kilometers) south of the state capital,
Nashville.
     "We had seen six airliners cross over," Darryl
reported, "then suddenly at a very high altitude we saw
what appeared to be a large 'star-like' object rising from
the south to the east at a very high rate of speed. At
first we thought it might be a satellite, but the object was
quite large and the way it moved so quickly across the
sky (not like a falling star), this object seemed to have a
destination or a path of movement.  We followed it until
it disappeared behind the treeline, and we were
astonished."  (Many thanks to Steve Wilson Sr. for this
report.)
(Editor's Note:  Chattanooga was the site of one of the
most notorious UFO incidents of the "airship era."  On
three succeeding nights in January 1910, a white oval
UFO repeatedly flew over the city and hovered over
nearby Lookout Mountain.  See the New York Tribune
for January 15, 1910.)

UFO SEEN ON LONG ISLAND

     At 9:30 p.m. on Monday, June 1, 1998, Robert Hanley
spotted a UFO over suburbs of Long Island, N.Y., just
east of New York City.
     Hanley, a U.S. Navy veteran with aviation service,
described the UFO as "a 'star-like' object moving very
fast...This must have been a very large object at an
extremely high altitude, as it was moving at a very high
speed."
     "I first picked it up toward the east from my backyard
on Long Island and viewed it moving south and climbing
until I lost it behind the treeline.  The color of it was white
light (probably reflected sunlight), and it was way too high,
way too large and way, way too fast to be" a conventional
aircraft.  "Most impressive!"  (See Filer's Files #22 for
1998.  Many thanks to George A. Filer, Eastern director
of MUFON, for this report.)

BIGFOOT STARTLES MOTORIST
IN SOUTH CAROLINA

     On Wednesday, May 13, 1998, at 11:50 p.m., Randy
Gibbs was driving north on Highway 521 near Sampit,
South Carolina (population 85), heading home to
Columbia when he noticed a peculiar odor, like "the
smell of gangrene."
     "It was around 12 a.m. when I saw something on the
side of the road," he reported.  "It was on the right side
of the road.  I saw what looked like a little fox running
along the side of the road and then ran across the highway,
followed by something big and shaggy in appearance."
     He described the strange creature as "about the size of
a large man, maybe a little larger, six to seven feet
(about 2 meters) tall."
     The hominid's "hair may have been a reddish-brown
color.  The hair wasn't real long, and it was kind of matted.
The hair under the arm of the animal may have been a
little lighter than the rest of the hair on its body...The
creature ran on two feet, striding upright and hopped
across the highway in a big stride, landing not quite clear
of the left side, and another stride took it into the trees.
What really freaked me was its eyes" which "caught and
reflected the headlights of my car, gleaming as it went by."
     Startled by its appearance, Randy "had to swerve a
little to the right because I was scared I might hit it.  It
went across right in front of me," as the car approached
at an estimated 60 miles per hour.  (Many thanks to
Erik Beckjord for posting this report on his list.)
(Editor's Comment:  From the "smell of gangrene," I'd
guess that the "little fox" was actually a skunk.  It
probably sprayed Bigfoot as it made its escape.)

SCIENTISTS DEBATE STRANGE
FEATURES FOUND ON MARS

     On Wednesday, May 27, 1998, geophysicist
Gerald Keating of George Washington University
unveiled yet another Martian mystery at a meeting
of the American Geophysical Union.
     Speaking at the Hynes Auditorium in Boston,
Massachusetts, USA, Dr. Keating "said Mars Global
Surveyor mapped an odd anomaly in the upper
atmosphere--dramatic fluctuations in air density
75 miles (120 kilometers) above the Martian highlands
that are unknown in Earth's atmosphere."
     "If not mapped and studied, the greater density
of the atmosphere at higher altitudes than expected
could pose a threat to rapidly descending spacecraft
that haven't braked sufficiently.  It would be like hitting
a wall."
     "'It's very exciting and it's critical to know this if
you're going to do aero-braking.  Every vessel is going
to have to go through it,' Keating said."  (See the
Boston, Mass. Herald for May 28, 1998., page 3.)
     Meanwhile, the debate continues over just what the
many Pathfinder and Mars Global Surveyor photos
actually show.  The July 1998 issue of Sky and
Telescope devoted a whole article to analyses of the
photos from the doomed Pathfinder, which landed
nearly a year ago.
     "Geologists offer conflicting ideas about the origins
of the rocks around the(Pathfinder) landing site.  Many
believe that most or all of the rocks are volcanic, based
on their shapes and textures.  Some rocks appear
redder and more rounded than others; these may be
the oldest.  Others are darker and more angular; these
may have been tossed onto the landing site in more
recent ages from an impact crater 2.2 kilometers
(1.5 miles) to the southeast."
     "Some rocks, however, show faint evidence of
layering or bedding, suggesting a sedimentary origin.
This view is supported by the small, rounded pebbles
and cobbles seen inside a few other rocks, which
some scientists interpret as evidence of running water
creating conglomerates--mixtures of pebbles and
fine-grained sediments.  Still other scientists believe
that some of the surface features may originate from
exotic weathering processes or even underwater
volcanism or weathering."
     "A 'super-resolution' close-up of South Peak (at the
Pathfinder site)  This image was constructed from 42
red frames with single blue or green frames added for
color rendition.  Note the apparent layering of the
hillside, possibly suggesting water-carved terraces."
     "The fine, highly-rusted Martian dust may have
formed in a much wetter (and perhaps warmer)
environment than prevails today."  (See Sky and
Telescope for July 1998, "Mars Pathfinder: Better
Science?" by Jim Bell, pages 36 through 43.)

SPACE SHUTTLE UNABLE TO
BROADCAST TV IMAGES

     On Tuesday, June 2, 1998, the space shuttle
Discovery lifted off from Cape Canaveral for NASA's
ninth and final trip to Mir, the Russian space station.
     "The countdown was tenser than usual, not
just because of the on-then-off anxiety about Mir
(which suffered a major computer breakdown the
previous weekend--J.T.) but because of the new
lightweight fuel tank bolted to Discovery.  This tank,
never before tested in flight, is 7,500 pounds lighter
when empty than the 65,500-pound tanks so that
NASA can haul heavier space cargo once space
station construction begins."  (See USA Today for
June 3, 1998, "Shuttle is off on its last run to Mir.")
     Discovery's mission this trip is to retrieve Andrew
Thomas, the American astronaut aboard Mir, and
deliver food, water, mail and other supplies to the
Russian space station.
     Shortly after takeoff, however, Discovery lost its
ability to send TV images back to Earth.
     "The problem appeared to be limited to the
transmitting end of the KU-band antenna, which is
normally used to send TV pictures and science data
back to Earth.  Engineers have no idea what's wrong,
although it could be electrical, said Lee Briscoe,
NASA's mission operations representative."
     "The problem also prevented the shuttle from
transmitting some scientific data back to Earth.
But the information was not lost; it was being stored
on board."
     "Mir held steady, its automatic steering system
working fine after a recent three-day breakdown, as
Discovery gently latched on 240 miles (384 kilometers)
above the Russian-Kazakh border near the Caspian Sea."
     "With Discovery's TV capability crippled by equipment
trouble, Mir managed to beam down live images of the
spacecraft at the moment of docking.  But it was a
shaky zooming-in-and-out picture.  Minutes after the
linkup, the picture disappeared altogether."
     "Mir's grainy black-and-white TV images one and
a half hours later of the hatch opening and welcoming
embraces faded in and out.  NASA had to settle for
audio when the six Discovery crew members and
three Mir occupants held their formal welcoming
ceremony.  When a video recording of the ceremony
finally was transmitted from the station later in the
day, it lacked sound."
     The shuttle's "KU-band system uses a dish-
shaped antenna out in the open cargo bay.  Engineers
suspected that the trouble was with an on-off circuit."
     "Discovery's S-band communication system was
working fine and allowing the crew to talk with ground
controllers as usual.  It also was sending back all the
necessary information involving shuttle systems."
(See the Providence, R.I. Journal-Bulletin for June 4,
1998, "Shuttle unable to transmit images of Mir
docking" and June 5, 1998, "Discovery, Mir link
flawlessly; astronaut prepares for ride home.")
(Editor's Comment:  First the Galaxy IV satellite
goes haywire.  Then Discovery loses its KU-band
transmitter.  And then Mir can't seem to keep its
TV camera in focus.  Kind of makes you wonder
what's up there in orbit with them, doesn't it?)

from the UFO Files...

1931: BIPLANE ENCOUNTERS
          A UFO OVER THE
          TASMAN SEA

     On June 10, 1931, the same week the Menger boys
saw their daylight disc in New Jersey, pioneering British
pilot Francis Chichester took off from Lord Howe Island,
east of Brisbane, Australia, in a deHavilland D.H.60
Gipsy Moth, a six-year-old biplane with a 100 horsepower
Cirrus engine.
     Chichester, dressed like the Red Baron in his goggles,
leather flying cap and jacket and white silk scarf, was
intent on making a long-distance flight across the Tasman
Sea to New Zealand.
     While avoiding a thunderstorm, Chichester flew a
bit off course.  As he headed east again, he found that
he wasn't exactly alone in the sky.
     "Suddenly, ahead and thirty degrees to the left,
there were bright flashes in several places, like the
dazzle of a heliograph.  I saw a dull grey-white airship
coming toward me.  It seemed impossible, but I
could have sworn that it was an airship, nosing toward
me like an oblong pearl.  Except for a cloud or two,
there was nothing else in the sky.  I looked around,
sometimes catching a flash or a glint, and turning
again to look at the airship I found that it had
disappeared."
     "I screwed up my eyes, unable to believe them,
and twisted the seaplane this way and that, thinking
that the airship must be hidden by a blind spot.
Dazzling flashes continued in four or five places,
but I still could not pick out any planes."
     "Then, out of some clouds to my right front, I
saw another, or the same, airship advancing.  I
watched it intently, determined not to look away for
a fraction of a second: I'd see what happened to
this one, if I had to chase it."
     "It drew steadily closer, until perhaps a mile
away, when suddenly it vanished.  Then in reappeared
close to where it had vanished.  I watched with angry
intentness.  It drew closer, and I could see the dull
gleam of light on its nose and back.  It came on, but
instead of increasing in size, it suddenly became its
own ghost--one second I could see through it, the
next it had vanished."
     "All this was many years before anyone spoke of
flying saucers.  Whatever it was I saw, it seems to
have been very much like what people have since
claimed to be flying saucers." (See THE LONELY
SEA AND THE SKY by Sir Francis Chichester,
Coward-McCann, New York, N.Y., 1964, page 165)

FUN UFO WEBSITES:
     There's a wide array of stories available at the
Mysterious Universe website.  Drop in at this URL...
http://www.MysteriousUniverse.com
     Kansas UFO sightings can also be found at
http://members.tripod.com/~o_l/main.htm
     Don't forget to check out our parent website,
UFO INFO, which is growing all the time.  Log on
at http://ufoinfo.com
     Back issues of UFO ROUNDUP can be
accessed and downloaded at our webpage, so
visit us at http://ufoinfo.com/roundup

     Tomorrow, June 8, is the birthday of Giovanni
Domenico Cassini, whose namesake spacecraft is
now on its way to Saturn.  Cassini was born on
June 8, 1625 in Perinaldo, Italy, near Genoa.  By
the time he was 44, he had racked up an impressive
list of astronomical achievements, measuring the
rotational periods of Mars and Jupiter.  In 1671, he
was appointed director of the Paris Observatory by
King Louis XIV of France.  Armed with their big
telescope, he discovered the moons around Saturn,
including Iapetus in 1671, Rhea in 1672, and Tethys
and Dione in 1684.  He also discovered a large gap in
Saturn's rings in 1675, now known as Cassini's
Division.  He died in Paris on September 14, 1712.
The spacecraft bearing his name will arrive at Saturn
in 2004 to begin close-up observation of the worlds
he originally found.

     And we'll be back next weekend with more saucer
news from "the paper that goes home--UFO ROUNDUP."
See you then.

UFO ROUNDUP: Copyright 1998 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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 7

                 Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 15:48:19 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 21:03:01 -0400
Subject: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General


>From: RTodd12191@aol.com
>Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 10:23:35 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General


>>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
>>Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 15:48:21 EDT
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General

>>>From: Robert Todd <RTodd12191@aol.com>
>>>Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 14:58:39 EDT
>>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General

><snip>


>>>And I ask again, why is it we haven't been told what Mrs. Marcel
>>>(Major Marcel's wife, and Jesse Marcel, Jr.'s mother) had to say
>>>when she was asked about the Roswell debris? As I undestand it,
>>>she said the debris was _not_ from an alien spaceship. This is
>>>just one of numerous examples where the promoters of the alien
>>>spaceship explanation have distoted, misrepresented, or hidden
>>>evidence that runs counter to the alien spaceship explanation.

>>When I spoke to Mrs. Marcel (Major Marcel's wife, and Jesse
>>Marcel, Jr's mother) she said that she had handled material from
>>an alien spacecraft. She also said that she had accompanied her
>>husband to the debris field. It was clear at the time I spoke to
>>her, that she did not have a clear memory of the events and
>>nothing positive would be gained from reporting what she said
>>then.

>Given the fact that Mr. Randle has distorted and misrepresented
>so many facts in the past, without corroboration in the form of
>a tape recorded interview, I am not willing to rely solely on
>Mr. Randle's claims.

Others have said the same thing. Dr. Marcel would, of course,
corroborate the statement as well. However, don't we have this
backwards? Mr. Todd wrote, "As I undestand it, she said the
debris was _not_ from an alien spaceship." There is no source for
this "understanding." I provided my reason for not mentioning
what she said, which is in conflict with what is alleged here.
Shouldn't Mr. Todd be required to explain where this information
came from, and if he has no source, then shouldn't we just ignore
it as irrelevant.

And can't we just say asked and answered. He might not like the
answer, but it explains why her testimony was not used.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 7

                              Re: Alien Baloney

From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 15:30:55 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time)
Fwd Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 21:03:26 -0400
Subject: Re: Alien Baloney


> Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 17:42:27 +0100
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Alien Baloney

> >Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 20:36:13 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time)
> >From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Alien Baloney

> <snip>

> >aborted plan to meet George Pantoulas who had promised us UFO
> >wreckage from a crash in Megas Platanos, Greece (see CSETI's web
> >page - it is one of 195 or so alleged UFO crashes reported so far
> >(who says that aliens are better drivers than us?).

> >       Nick Balaskas

> Hi Nick.

> I am currently researching a book on alledged UFO crashes and I
> am amazed that you quote "it is one of 195 or so". With the help
> of K Randle my list only stands at 166, perhaps you could
> enlighten me as to the other thirty or so? I would be extremely
> grateful.

> Or could you point me in the direction of where I could obtain
> further information please.

<snip>

Hi Sean,

If you check the CSETI web site that follows you will find the
195 or so alleged UFO crashes in the list maintained by Tony
Craddock.  Please let Tony know of any other UFO crashes that
are not on CSETI's list.

http://www.cseti.org/crashes/crash.htm

MUFON Ontario members, including "UFO Joe" (of London, Ontario)
have examined many Government of Canada, RCMP, etc. microfiche
records dealing with UFO sightings.  Several of these records
mention UFOs that crashed or exploded which have not yet been
added to the CSETI or other UFO crash lists.  In addition to
accounts of confirmed UFO wreckage that Wibert B. Smith and
others are alleged to have handled, there is also some dubious
UFO wreckage such as the 4 foot diameter saucershaped object
found in June of 1960 on the shore of the St. Lawrence River
at Les Ecureuils, Quebec (Mines Branch Investigation Report
IR 71-32).

Nick Balaskas









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 7

                 911/UFO Pursuit - A Partial Tape Transcript

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 21:03:14 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 21:03:14 -0400
Subject: 911/UFO Pursuit - A Partial Tape Transcript




I'd hoped that Kenny Young would send UpDates a copy of the
following - I guess he was holding back until he'd completed the
transcripts of the 9-1-1 Dispatch tapes of the December 14, 1994
Trumbull County UFO incident.

Having listened to Kenny and portions of the tapes on Jeff
Rense's June 4th 'Sightings On The Radio' show via Real Audio
this afternoon, I wanted to get this out to the List now.

It boggles my mind that these tapes (and who knows how many
other similar tapes) sat in a 911 archive for 3 years before
Kenny managed to winkle them out. Well done Kenny!

You really need to hear what I feel will become a ufological
classic.

If you have Real Audio go to:

http://www.audionet.com/shows/endoftheline/archive.stm

and click June 04. Once your player has loaded the show file, use
the scroll-bar to fast-forward to 01:29:09.7 - Kenny's segments
start there.

ebk
______________________________________________

Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 19:21:01 -0700
From: "Kenny Young" <task@FUSE.NET>
Subject: 911/UFO pursuit: TAPE transcription
To: CURRENT-ENCOUNTERS@LISTSERV.AOL.COM

Fran;

I am not finished with this yet, I have about 25-more minutes yet
to transcribe. But this may wet your appetite...

-- KENNY
--
UFO Research
http://home.fuse.net/task/
Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 16:45:04 -0700
From: "K. Young" <task@fuse.net>
To: task@fuse.net
Subject: Trumbull County TAPE transcript VERSION 2

This is a summation of the 9-1-1 Dispatch tapes regarding the December
14, 1994 Trumbull County UFO incident. It is not a word-for-word
transcript. At times, more specific quotes will appear when deemed
important. Special comments will appear in [brackets].

Many persons are part of this drama. Their names are not all known.
Police radio correspondence indicates a UNIT NUMBER to designate a
particular officer on duty. During later portions of the tape when
a more frantic climate arises, it is impossible to determine who is
talking. Unit numbers are not always known, as will be indicated.

        A prominent person is Central Dispatch for Liberty Township,
        Ms. Royanne Rudolph. The time is around or after midnight.
        A UFO report has already been received at the Liberty
        Township dispatch office, this is not reflected on the
        present tape (because tapes changed at midnight), but is
        referenced. Evidently, the first caller was a female, and
        hysterically reporting a low-level object near her home.

___________________________________________________________________

Begin summation:

County Dispatch (CD): 9-1-1, may I help you?

Male caller #1: What do you know of a strange object in the
sky? It is strange, like the back end of a fighter plane with flames
coming out the back. The object was descending at an angle.

        CD then reports to Unit # 996, advising him of vehicle in
        the sky near Samson Drive.

        #996 & #998 ask for description of object.

CD to Bob [perhaps a supervisor]: 4-calls were received regarding a
UFO over Liberty. This conversation is very lively, CD plays back
tape of previous call to Bob. CD laughs, Bob laughs.  Bob then
advises CD to call the airbase. CD says this will 'start a frickin'
panic.' Bob says 'Mr. Spock' is in town, laughs about being abducted.
CD again asserts that there were 4 or 5 UFO calls.

        #993 advisess he will be in the area of Samson Drive. He
        requests a specific locality where he should go.

        CD advises #993 of 4 different calls regarding UFO in the
        sky. At this point, the time is now 12:30 a.m. as the
        dispatcher announces.

    A phone call is received by CD from a news reporter from
    Channel 33 in Youngstown. Her name is Stacey. Channel 33 has
    received an additional call of a UFO at Samson Drive from a
    female caller to the newsroom.

CD to Ch.33: "Why are they in Liberty? There's no intelligent life
here!" She laughingly adds that a Star Trek sequel is being filmed in
Liberty. Ch. 33 tells CD that caller described a bluish-green object
with no noise, flying low. The big, glowing object, which came down
and 'zooped over' was now flying up the Fifth Avenue Extension. CD
tells Ch. 33 to do a story on the water in Liberty, because it is
making people crazy. CD laughs, and adds that 'jokers are on the force
tonight' CD tells Ch.33 that they will be given the exclusive about
the UFO, laughingly.

        A female caller phones in to ask for Liberty Police,
        reporting a strange airplane or something in the air on
        Samson Drive. The caller says it might be a flying saucer,
        and it is not an airplane. She says it is down 'awfully
        low.' This person was asked if she was the same person
        who called Ch.33, and she said: "No." She described the
        object as iridescent in color, bluish purple like a long
        streak with fire coming out the back of it.

Unit #993 to CD, explains that a civilian stopped him, saying the
object appeared to be hovering about 50-feet off the ground. The
civilian said it was a large object with many lights on it, and it
was heading toward the area of Sodom and Hutchins Road. The officer
advised that he would check the area.

CD to #993
Advises that another report near Samson Drive and call from media
referencing the blue-green object at Fifth Avenue Extension.

Unit #998: See's some lights about one block over, large object.

CD requests #996 backup, then #925.
#996 copies, enroute.

Unit #998 catches glimpse of UFO while driving on Samson Road.
The object is heading to Fifth Avenue. Lights seen in area.
Officer comments: "Should I set my phaser for stun?"

Unit #996 is now on Fifth Avenue Extension. Advises that the
object is "like a red, pulsating light."

CD to units: Object should be blue and green.

#996: "What I saw was red like a pulsating light, like to the bottom
of an airplane, but it was real big."

CD announces: "We will now contact the airbase at this time, stand by.

#996: "Maybe its a flying Christmas tree."

CD: "Any green men?"

CD advises that no more calls had been received.

        CD places a phone call to AF Base, no answer. CD then calls
        FAA control tower at Youngstown/Warren Municipal Airport
        (856-4541). CD advises FAA operator of UFO at Samson Drive
        and Fifth Avenue Extension, adds that the object is 'in our
        jurisdiction,' and that call is not a prank.

FAA: "I am looking at the radarscope, 60-mile diameter of Youngstown
and there is 'nothing' out there.

CD: "Oh shit."

FAA: "Not even anything up high, no airplanes."

CD advises of 5 calls, asks if FAA would be able to monitor a Cessna
airplane w/headlight on radar.

FAA replies: "Depends on how high & low. If low, radar coverage isn't
any good."

CD explains that she doesn't want to tell units that FAA has no track
of UFO on radar. She asks if FAA has a 'clause' used to dismiss
sightings.

FAA: "Could be, could be. Maybe it was a helicopter or something like
that, flying low. Are you close to a hospital?"

CD: "As low as they said it was from the ground, it would be
approximately 5-miles from the hospital." CD indicates that the area in
question is closer to the Vienna Township line, near the Vienna Airbase
area.

FAA: "We haven't had anything going on. About a half-hour ago a [took off]
out here northbound and climbed up high, but there's nothing now in that
direction."

CD: I'm advising you of this, file it in the "G-for garbage" can if
you want to.

CD puts FAA on hold, comes back to say 4 to 6 calls have now come in
regarding a UFO above Samson Drive and Fifth Avenue. The object is
low to the ground with no noise, and hovered for some time prior to
departure down Fifth Avenue Extension. Advises that a unit also
observed a red object.

FAA: "I can refer you to an 800-number for UFO reports during
business hours."

CD: "No."

FAA: "I don't see anything out there, nothing on radarscope and we
don't really do anything with the information."

CD: "Well, I thought I'd pass it on to you in case just so I'd do my
job."

        More Central Dispatch-to-Unit correspondence at this point

Unit #998: In clear now, doesn't see object anymore, but has no idea
what he saw. Says: "Might have been a light in the sky."

Unit #925: Surrounding jurisdictions advised to stop and interrogate
"if they come across that."

        Female caller to CD, asking about UFO. CD says dispatcher
        presently on phone with airbase at this time. Liberty thinks
        it is from the airbase.

CD to Units: We've contacted FAA, they have nothing nor communication
with private vehicles or helicopters.

Unit #998: Then they're not aware of anything?

CD: Negative. They have nothing nor communication with private
vehicles or helicopters.

Unit #998: OK.

CD: We are continually getting calls on this also. The last call was
two minutes ago.

Unit #998: What's the area?

CD: Still Samson & Fifth.

UNKNOWN UNIT #1: We're right there, there's nothing there now.

UNKNOWN UNIT #2: [jokingly] It's only visible to certain people.

Unit #998 to CD: If you get any more calls, I'd like an address. I'd
like to speak to people making the calls.

CD: Copy.

Unit #998: I will be out of service a couple of minutes, I have to
gather my thoughts.

CD: Copy gathering, 12:58 [time marker].

Unit #998: I'm ok now, I'm back in service.

CD: Back in service, 12:59 [time marker]

        This segment is a phone discussion between CD and Unit #998
        about the object. Unit #998 shaken, describes big red glow
        'bright as daylight on the ground.' Explains encounter with
        civilian on the road. Describes red object, noiseless, at
        treetop level.

Unit #429 advises CD that UFO is east of her location. She leaves post
to go look. #429 says that he has been watching the object for 10
minutes with binoculars, and the object has not moved. Unit #429 says
that there was a UFO sighting two weeks earlier, as well.

UNKNOWN UNIT A: We have a pretty good view out here near Kings Grave.
UNKNOWN UNIT B: Looks like I'm getting pretty close here.
UNIT #429: That bugger has not moved.
UNKNOWN UNIT B: I'm going over to Leven [Road?] right now and starting
to maybe get next to it here...
UNIT #429: It's just above the trees, yeah!
UNKNOWN UNIT: The airbase should know what this is.
UNIT #429: Mikey's up here now, he's looking through the binocs, it
looks like it might've moved. It moved from one side of the tree to
another.
UNKNOWN FEMALE VOICE: It's over around Leven.
UNKNOWN UNIT: Ridge already, Ridge at the airbase.
UNKNOWN UNIT: It's doing circles.

        Two units attempt to triangulate the position of the UFO from
        two different locations. #429 announces that he is 1/2 mile
        south of Kings Grave on Henheid, and the object is south of
        his location. CD Royanne returns, out of breathe, said she
        did not see object. Unit #429 announces that he is still on
        Henheid north of Caine [sp?], and near a house that is under
        construction. They are watching it over an empty field. The
        color of the UFO changes from whitish red to pulsating
        greenish lavender. #429 complains about a cheap set of
        binoculars.

CD: I'm calling the air base again.

        Unit #429 announces that he is coming to the dispatch office to
        pick up dispatcher Royanne to take her to see the object. She
        states that she will be taking a break to see it. Before taking
        the break, she places another call to the FAA tower.

CD to FAA [frantic]: The darn thing is in Howland Township now, hovering
over Henheid, about five minutes from the center. Do you show anything
on your radar screen over the Warren area? They're seeing it, 50-feet
from the ground with a red holding light. There are blue and green
lights, no noise. We've had this all night.

FAA: I'm looking to the west, and I don't see anything. I'm 70-feet in
the air.

        CD then gives the phone number of the Liberty Twp. dispatch
        office to the FAA operator to contact, and advises him that
        she is now going to go see the object.

TAPE BREAK

        Telephone conversation, 2 officers, one of them a controller
        at an unspecified department in Trumbull County

Person #1: The FAA didn't see it
Person #2: That is a joke, that is a joke.
Person #1: We got 8 calls about it.
Person #2: Liberty was telling us about it.
Person #1: We got calls on it last night, too.
Person #2: How's a UFO going to be detected on radar if it's Stealth?
Person #1: We got 8-calls earlier.
Person #2: It's hard to say. In winter months, you see alot more
shooting stars because the sky is clear.
Person #1: With the cold, they drag on.
Person #2: I saw one good one tonight that was bright. Pete was joking
about that.
Person #1: Beam me up, scotty [laughs]
Person #2: That's probably what they're seeing.
Person #1: We'll make a note of it.

        A gentleman at 'the jail' calls the dispatch office on the
        telephone to ask about the UFO situation. The controller
        explains that the UFO is presently being seen, and says that
        UFO reports were also received the previous evening. The
        controller explains that a Howland police officer is also
        a witness to the present UFO as well.

TAPE BREAK:

        A new, unidentified controller is now speaking with Unit
        #433.

Controller: Did the UFO move?
Unit #433: Negative, but I'm out at the air base here, standing here
watching it. It looks like he's just sitting here.

        A male respondant advises Unit #433 that a subject is enroute

[Special note: The sequence which is to follow contains the POLICE
PURSUIT of the UFO, and the rapid-fire action and radio traffic
cannot be easily charted. Dialogue will be listed below, frequently
without attribution, as it is not known what 'Unit' is speaking.]

Unknown Unit: I've got a visual on it! I'm east on Old [Rt.] 82 with
a visual on it by the 'S' curve! I can see a large red, blue and
green light. I am going east on Liberty. This thing's going so fast,
there's no way I can keep up with it. When I pulled in Liberty I could
see it in the distance, but I got closer and it started moving.

Unknown voice: Which Liberty?

Unknown Unit: Liberty off of Belmont. I don't see it now, I'm on
Logan now.

Voice: OK, 429, its south of Old 82, I'm moving east on it!

Unit #429: I'm still stationary at the airbase. Its pulsating.

Voice: Affirmative, I'm looking at it through binoculars. Its got
something protruding out the top of it.

Voice: I'm on Belmont now.

Voice: It's over [Railroad?] tracks now...

Voice: It's hovering now!

Voice: I see it now, too!

Voice: It looks like its flickering more now and its east of me now!
I'm heading east on Old 82...

Voice: I've got a pretty good view from here!

Voice: I'm dead east on it, it's slightly north of us!

        Two other officers corresond separately

Officer A: I heard that Liberty had some traffic regard to that, too...

Officer B: Voice: We know they definetely saw something, because we're
seeing it.

Voice: It's extremely bright, really bright.

Voice: It's all the way into Liberty now, into Hubbard now...

Unit #998 to RADIO: Is Howland reporting sightings?

RADIO: That is affirmative.

Voice: Hey Walter, chase it back north, I want to see this thing.

WALTER: From Howland and how far it's visible you should be able to
see it...

Voice: I'm going to head out to [Route?] 305 and get a glimpse of it
from there.

UNIT #2223: I've got a visual on both of them, I'm sure you know
what I'm talking about.

CONTROL: 10-4. We have multiple departments right now that has
sightings on it.

UNIT #2223:  OK, I've got them both. I've got Howland saying it looks
like its in the area of Warren Road, Liberty says its down near
Hubbard.

CONTROL: If you see anything close and can identify it, let us know.

UNIT #2223: Affirmative.

        TAPE BREAK

OFFICER X: I'm past 84-Lumber [hardware store] still eastbound, its
southeast of my location.

UNKNOWN UNIT: It doesn't seem like it moved at all from where I'm at.

VOICE: OK, are you by yourself, or is there someone documenting the
observation also?

UNKNOWN UNIT: I'm at the airbase, I've got the security guard out here,
he doesn't know what to make of it, either. We can see it from right
here.

VOICE #2: Did you ask Liberty Dispatch the outcome of the FAA
inquiry?

UNIT #433: Last check, radar at the airport was advising nothing on
their screens. They wouldn't tell us anyway if its anything to do
with the military. We've had another 'Hangar 7' happen in Trumbull
County.

UNKNOWN FEMALE CONTROLLER: It's in Brookfield, now.

UNIT #998: We can see it from Route 62, a large light with red in it!

UNIT #223: I'm going to go up in the tower!

UNIT #443: Did you hear from Liberty or Youngstown?

Male Controller: Everyone in the county has a visual on it that I can
hear.

2nd Voice: Right now, control is copying that it is somewhere in
Brookfield Township, east of 84-Lumber on Warren/Sharon Road. We've
got a unit at the old county home on Route 7 with a visual at this
time. Looks like its going southeast.

Officer C: I'm almost to Brookfield, I just pulled off and have it
under binocular observation, and there is definitely a structure
there, 429. What you saw... I can see an upper structure off the
main part of the lighting.

UNIT #429: Yeah, it almost looks like a little parachute hanging from
it.

Officer C: Yeah, something with a different colored lighting to it.

UNIT #429: Hey, 443, have you been looking at this through binoculars?

UNIT #443: I've been trying to run as far east to get as close and
get a clear visual through my old binoculars and stopped at Brookfield
Center, got a halfway decent look at it, the object you described on
top of it.

UNIT 2223: What unit is that?

Voice: UFO's near Courtland!

2nd Voice: Is anybody close to that thing?

Male voice: Last seen it was southeast from 84-Lumber, in that area.

Voice: If you come up on [Rt] 46, you should be able to see it without
any problems. I could pick it up on North Hill Road.

3rd Voice: I'm at [Rt] 305 & sitting on the overpass and I don't see
anything.

OFFICER: I'm at Fowler & Ridge, how high up are we talking here, above
the horizon?

Voice: Not very far. If you're in the treeline it'll block your view.

2nd Voice: Will I be able to see it if I go south on [Rt] 11?

OFFICER: Yeah, you should, just look out toward Kings Grave, toward
the airbase.

Voice: Allright, I'll take a shot down [Rt] 11.

UNIT 2223: I'm clear from the homes, I'm going to go closer to it.

CONTROL: What was your last location you saw it, where is it at now?

UNIT 2223: It looks like its right around 84 Lumber. I will head down
[Rt] 82 and will advise.

CONTROL: 10-4, give me a registration when you can.

UNIT #998: I don't know what this is... it's a large light in the sky,
changing colors. We tried to signal it... [tape break, then resumes]
It's in Brookfield now, pretty far from us.

FEMALE CONTROLLER: 10-4

Unidentified voice: We got this white light over the top of the airbase.

OFFICER: Yeah, that's probably it.

Unidentified voice: The light isn't pulsating or anything, it looks
like a star or something up there.

OFFICER: How far are you from the airbase?

Unidentified voice: I'm near the airbase on [Rt] 11, but it's
southeast of there, looks to be rather high, though, not just over
the treeline.

OFFICER: It's not much farther.

Voice: Have you heard from Wally or did he get beamed up?

        Controller repeatedly attempts to contact Howland Unit #433
        for status and receives no answer. Finally, #433 comes on
        and announces that he can't "get down in and was coming
        back."

Unknown Officer: I went down to [Rt] 82 to cross over North 82 on
[Rt] 11, and the only thing I see is a white star out there, looks
like either Jupiter or Sirius... nothing moving, nothing pulsating.
You might try getting a little more rest during the day...

        Officer then makes a joke about his decade of third shift
        duty and of shift rotation.

Unknown Officer:Unless I'm looking at the wrong thing, Walt, I
didn't see anything but a white light southeast of the airport.

Voice: Keep trying, Walt. You'll find something.

        TAPE BREAK: This next segment is a cellular telephone
        discussion recorded on the 9-1-1 channel because of the
        open phone line to the dispatch office. The conversation
        is between Controller Hutch and Officer Baker

BAKER: [jokes] I talked to these guys, everythings allright, they're
going to go back to where they came from.

HUTCH: Did you see anything?

BAKER: I can see them. I've got them right here. I'm looking at it.

HUTCH: What the hell is it?

BAKER: I can see it from Warren Road.


to be continued

--
UFO Research





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 7

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 18:46:27 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 21:49:36 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


>From: RobIrving@aol.com
>Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 13:48:43 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

>> From: "Greg Sandow" <gsandow@prodigy.net>
>>  To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net>
>>  Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs
>>  Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 14:31:11 -0400

<Oh, hell, in my arrogance, snip everybody!>

Let's cut to the chase: Mssrs. Irving, Rimmer, Brookesmith and
other unregenerate-like English types are always asking where, in
essence, are your ten best cases indicative of the ETH. Clark
(Sandow?) and others essentially respond by saying: read the
vast, voluminous literature and surely you will be enlightened
and informed as to your erroneous ways thereby, which is not
necessarily the same thing.

Yes, the British blokes are being both obnoxious and vexing,
aren't they? At the same time, their original question remains
unanswered. So, Jerry and Greg, take but a minute to tell us
which ten cases you would consider most indicative and evidential
of extraterrestrial visitation. That's all; just the ten specific
*cases* that you personally would want to defend in the court of
public (or scientific) opinion. You know, the ones that support
your case. Just ten.

No reference to a body of collective literature allowed. Just ten
cases. Not twenty or thirty, just ten.

Jerry, you've been in the business a lot longer than Greg, so I
would expect you to come up with ten convincing cases suggestive
of the ETH first. Greg, you're next. Ten UFO cases you want to
defend to intellectual death or victory. You're very eloquent
when it comes to theories and generalities, now give us ten
specific cases which you think support an extraterrestrial
interpretation of the UFO phenomenon.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 7

                                Re: John Ford

From: Michael Christol <mchristo@mindspring.com>
Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 17:06:02 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 21:41:09 -0400
Subject: Re: John Ford


>From: nick@the-den.clara.net (Nick Humphries)
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: John Ford
>Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 14:16:32 GMT

>>Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 02:46:54 -0500
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: John Ford [was: Alfred's Odd Ode #251]

><snip>

>>If this is true, that John Ford has been institutionalized
>>because of his belief in UFOs, then we all have _a lot_ to think
>>about.

Hi John.

I know you are going to like this, but what the heck... I was
told by someone who knows John Ford very well, that John was
actually put in Jail "in protective custody."

The charges, as silly as they sound...poisioning someone's
toothpaste, with radium, etc. were allegedly trumpted up just to
satisfy a certain group of people out to harm him, because he
would not give up on his Long Island Investigations of the Crash
at SouthHaven Park... He made many political enemies, it seems,
and they were going to take him out...Or so the person whom I
spoke to alleges....<shrug, who knows for sure.

>I'll jump in here and just say that if people were
>institutionalized purely on their belief in UFOs, then the
>institutions will be full to bursting point.
>There ARE insane people out there, and John Ford _appears_ to be
>one of them.

>His belief in UFOs is _probably_ irrelevant.

>But assuming he's an innocent victim of a worldwide conspiracy
>takes a LOT to beleive - independent QUALIFIED mental analysis
>would solve the issue either way. I haven't seen anyone on here
>claim that he shouldn't be instituationalized and be able to back
>it up properly.

>Restore John Ford - if he's confirmed sane and innocent.

If the above turns out to be true, then this may not be a viable
option. <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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 7

                                Re: John Ford

From: Andy Denne <aura.aa@wxs.nl>
Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 00:05:16 +0200
Fwd Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 21:47:17 -0400
Subject: Re: John Ford


> Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 02:46:54 -0500
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: John Ford [was: Alfred's Odd Ode #251]

> >Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 11:29:35 -0500
> >From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Alfred's Odd Ode #251

> Hello Al, hi All,

> A buddy sent me an "update" on the Ford case that I wanted to
> share with all of you. As I haven't asked permission to reprint
> a 'private' communique I am hiding any details that may reveal
> the identity of the person that sent it. The important/pertinent
> details are all there though.

<snip>

> If this is true, that John Ford has been institutionalized
> because of his belief in UFOs, then we all have _a lot_ to think
> about. I don't know about you guys (and I don't make a whole lot
> of money) but I'm going to send in a few bucks to this guys
> defense fund and maybe even send John a little note of support if
> I can find out which 'laughing academy' he is being detained in.
> After three years of the kind of medication that they usually
> make those poor bastards take he may not even be the same person
> anymore. That, my brothers and sisters is tantamount to punishing
> a person without due process or a jury conviction.

> Like I said in my first post,

> "Innocent until proven guilty,"  and . . .

> "there but for the Grace of God go you or I!"

> Peace,

> John Velez


Hi there John,

Thanks a lot for giving back the List that little touch of
humanity I was starting to miss!

I totally agree that if the fact that some one believes in UFOs
was just a tiny part of the reason they declare that person
"crazy", it would be sad.

Someone's personal belief leading to imprisoning him, now that's
a scenario that most Europeans watch with fear, because of our
history with these things.

If you have an address or something on the guys that raise the
defense-payment for Ford, lemme know, will ya?

@ndy Denne







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 7

                    Re: Any More News Regarding Roswell?

From: James Easton <pulsar@compuserve.com>
Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 21:51:28 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 22:04:23 -0400
Subject: Re: Any More News Regarding Roswell?

Regarding...

>Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 12:54:37 +0100
>From: Neil Morris <Neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: Any More News Regarding Roswell?

Neil wrote:

>The date on the documents shown in the CH4 Doc "Incident at Roswell
>was July 26th 1947 and from the date I observed it was fully typed.


Neil,

It's partially typed, the only clear typeface being the year,
"1947".

A CD of the 'Incident at Roswell' documentary has been available
for some time and I've uploaded to my web site a composite of the
letterheading and initial 'report' as shown in the program. It's
at URL:

http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/pulsar/kaufman2.jpg


Also placed on the site and mentioned some time back is a further
extract from Kaufmann's alleged report, showing the comparison
with a sketch which I believe was published in either one of the
aviation magazines or possibly 'Popular Mechanics'. It's at URL:

http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/pulsar/kaufman1.jpg

As evident, Kaufmann's three profile sketch of the supposed
'Roswell' craft is remarkably similar to an artists impression of
what the rumoured secret USAF TR-3A airplane may look like.

The head-on profile is practically identical.


The date does look as though it could be "26 Jul 1947", with the
initial "2" possibly a typeset character. It's not certain
though.

Kaufmann's report shown on 'Incident at Roswell' consists of a
few sketches on letterheaded paper, somewhat far removed from an
in-depth intelligence analysis.

Some of the brief, hand-written text, apparently accompanying
descriptions, has been blacked out as if this were a document
released under the FOIA. Ostensibly betraying his country, oath,
colleagues, etc. by releasing this 'report' he had somehow
obtained a copy of, what was he concerned about by hiding part of
the text?

The letterheading contains a typed reference, apparently
"S1CP/JAM/sfm", which is consistent with a standard format for
identifying 'file reference/originator/typist'. Did Kaufmann
complete his sketches on the letterheaded paper and then ask for
this to be put in a typewriter and have a secretary address these
'TOP SECRET' drawings to someone else at Roswell AAF (part of a
typed destination address, also at Roswell AAF, was visible in
the documentary).

Or did he have a secretary type up the address and reference and
then add his sketched recollections of the 'craft' and 'bodies'.

Or, could it conceivably be that Kaufmann's 'report' is a
fraudulent document, using a photocopied letterheading from a
letter that either he or someone else serving at the base in 1947
received as internal correspondence, which has had the date and
month altered by handwriting, which therefore doesn't contain
Kaufmann's initials, which draws on the published TR-3A
speculative sketch as a basis for the 'Roswell' craft and
masquerades as a still partly classified FOIA document.

I'm sure if some relevant questions were put to Kaufmann, much of
this might be clarified and further indicate the merit of
Kaufmann's entire story.


Kevin has mentioned some related aspects which I will reply to
shortly.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 7

                    Re: David Clarke & Jonathan Dagenhart

From: Andy Denne <aura.aa@wxs.nl>
Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 23:50:03 +0200
Fwd Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 21:37:57 -0400
Subject: Re: David Clarke & Jonathan Dagenhart


> From: Max Burns <AlienHype1@aol.com>
> Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 21:13:47 EDT
> To: updates@globalserve.net
> Subject: Re: David Clarke & Jonathan Dagenhart

> Well now David Clark is now about to be exposed as a liar, yes i
> said it a liar.

> May i remind everyone who does not know it but David Clark is
> the Bufora Press officer, and a journalist for the local paper
> In Sheffield, The Star. which happens to only get bought on the
> day the Jobs are advertised. Most people only by the local rag
> if they wish to buy a car, or find a job or just for the
> television guide.I lived in the area for three and a half years
> and my former girlfriend carried out the extensive market
> research for the star with others when she worked there for a
> short while. and those were the conclusions of the market
> research. True.

> David Clark is now claiming that it was him who got Jonathan
> Dagenhart to call me After he showed Mr Dagenhart my report and
> the way i was using his interview in my report, Mr Clark is also
> Claiming that I never informed Mr Dagenhart of my reasons for
> wanting to talk with him and once again this is completley
> untrue.

> After Jonathan Dagenhart Had informed me without prompting That
> the man he encountered was infact covered in aviation fuel and
> he had substanciated the above stated I informed Mr Dagenhart of
> what i believe had occurred and he was fully aware of the
> connotations intended it for my report.and i know post the full
> transcript of the conversation that took place which will place
> The Bufora press officer in his place as a liar

> here is the evidence may I also add that all Clark does is
> follow my witneses round like a demented schoolboy trying to get
> them to alter there recolections. Mr Clark you have no
> credibility you are a liar you represent the Bufora group as
> press officer, I urge Bufora to remove this compusive liar from
> there group as you can clearly see he has damaged your reputaion
> once again as i have now exposed him for the liar that he is ,un
> professional and has no credibility.

> please read the transcript

<snip>

> There yer go David Clarke upfromt and personal the liar.

> if anyone would like a full copy of the interview on tape then
> contact me. I am sorry to be so blunt but this group are
> desperate for no one to listern to me and there it is David
> Clark is a Liar, its got a nice ring to it though.

> regards v Liar catcher


Mr. Burns,

This all really doesn't sound so impressive to me. First of all
you claim you can proof your claims. Just imagine this case in
court, now I can only speak for the dutch law-system, but I'm
almost certain that also in your country "hear/say" is barely
regarded evidence, let alone proof. Now I have nothing to do with
either Bufora or Clark, but I would agree on the point that you
have yet to come up with any proof.

Instead of providing us with that you seem to focus all your
energy in accusing those asking for that proof. Imagine the
following. You're walking down the street, someone asks you for
the way and meanwhile he lights a cigarette. That same day, a
street away a house is burned down. Well if you'd go telling
people you can proof the guy who asked you the way did it,
because he had a lighter when he talked to you,It has to be him
'cause the house burned down was only one block away. Now who do
expect is going to buy that?

So I guess, instead of repeating yourself again, maybe it would
be nice to at least back up some of your claims to begin with.


Andy Denne
(A.U.R.A.)





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 7

                                Re: John Ford

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 16:33:17 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 21:26:02 -0400
Subject: Re: John Ford

> From: nick@the-den.clara.net (Nick Humphries)
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: John Ford

> >Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 02:46:54 -0500
> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: John Ford [was: Alfred's Odd Ode #251]

> <snip>

> >If this is true, that John Ford has been institutionalized
> >because of his belief in UFOs, then we all have _a lot_ to think
> >about.

> I'll jump in here and just say that if people were
> institutionalized purely on their belief in UFOs, then the
> institutions will be full to bursting point.

That's a fallacious leap to the absurd -- good buddy. The issue
is unlawful retaliation against lawful but inconvenient and
tiresome opposition -- using the UFO issue as *obvious*
supporting evidence of his (Ford's) lack of faculty, and criminal
behavior.

> There ARE insane people out there, and John Ford _appears_ to be
> one of them.

I think a valid question at this point is -- "Who says"? The
machine that put him there?

> His belief in UFOs is _probably_ irrelevant.

...So don't bet _everything_ that he deserves to be where he is?

> But assuming he's an innocent victim of a worldwide conspiracy
> takes a LOT to beleive -

That sounds like an opinion <g>.

> independent QUALIFIED mental analysis
> would solve the issue either way.

You have to _believe_ in them, too. I just finished up a twenty
page paper on debilitating mental illness (sent on request). The
_ethical_ money supports that psychologists and psychiatrists
(psy guys of _any_ stripe) don't have a clue what they are doing,
are groping in blacked out paradigms of process and convenience,
and serve harsh early century mores of protection of property
over individual rights. A broad brush, but a lot of the paint
sticks.

> I haven't seen anyone on here
> claim that he shouldn't be instituationalized and be able to back
> it up properly.

If there is a GRAIN of conspiracy in his incarceration everything
you just said is meaningless. There is no *news* regarding John
Ford, and some straight up people (as far as I can tell) who know
the particulars _will_ stand for him.

Elaine Douglass E-Mail: elaine26@juno.com (Washington D.C.)
Steve Iavarone (Vice president-Long Island UFO Network , New York)
Kelly Freeman (Florida)
Tony West (New York)
Joe Zuppardo (New York)
Don Jernigan (President-PIC-Phenomenon Investigation Committee, Ohio)
Jim Donohoe (Editor-Equinoxe UFO Newsletter, Ohio)
Richard Jones (New York)

These people indicate that the whole "John Ford" story strains
credulity to the breaking point, and is not set right by mere
pronouncments regarding the mental fidelity of one man when that
man was such a strident inconvenience to the machine that brought
him down...

> Restore John Ford - if he's confirmed sane and innocent.

John Velez has already pointed out that it may be too late for
that. If he's crazy now he was likely driven to it. I think _I_
would be a raving lunatic after being accused of heinous crimes I
did not commit, institutionalized for three years as a UFO loon
(for the protection of the community), intellectually paralyzed
by lobotomizing drugs, and lastly -- _forgotten_ by my peers. I'd
be flip city, dude! Foop Shooby! Crazy, man. Certifiable!

I don't know John Ford from a rusty door knob -- I understand
that he is abrasive, and unlikable ... it doesn't matter! The
situation smells, it doesn't hold together, and too many people
had to be *impossibly* crazy at the same time for there to be
even a _shred_ of believability to it. You assume institutional
fidelity where there may be none, sir. We ALL lose when that is
the case. And when it becomes convenient, any one of us could be
next. That's the issue.

Lehmberg@snowhill.com

Restore John Ford, no ifs, or buts, and at any cost -- though the
heavens fall (pardoning my penchant for hyperbole)!
--
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.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 7

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: "Greg Sandow" <gsandow@prodigy.net>
Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 18:45:41 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 21:57:08 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

> From: RobIrving@aol.com
> Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 13:48:43 EDT
> To: updates@globalserve.net
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


I'd better de-escalate, since I've also written quite a long
screed on the --  to me -- baffling misunderstanding here.

Rob, I know you agreed with me on my main point, and I should
have acknowledged that.

But when you brought Michael Hesemann into the discussion, you
lost me. And when you say:

> I essentially agreed with you. As you went on to say,
> conventional explanations may only be of limited use as more
> information arrives.

> My point was that this is dependant upon the quality of
> information; I don't think that in populist ufology we get much
> quality information.

> If we did, I think that more people - including the so-called
> scientific establishment - would take it more seriously. That's
> the challenge... all the time ufology yearns for scientific
> credibility, that is, which, by the way, I don't see that it
> necessarily has to (but evidently leading ufologists think so or
> they wouldn't keep harping on in those terms).

I think in all this you're responding to my thought that ufology
exemplifies the proper use of Occam. But what strikes me is that
you talk here about "populist" ufology. I remember saying in my
original post that I was talking about "responsible" ufology. I
didn't specify exactly what I meant, but if I were going to, I'd
start with Hynek, McDonald, Vallee's first books, Richard Hall,
Jerry Clark, and (on this list) Mark Cashman and Jerry Cohen. I'm
not including Kevin Randle, much as I respect his work and his
honest attitude, because he's best known for Roswell, and the
very subject seems to get people angry. So to keep things
"responsible" -- even "classical" -- I'm restricting my list to
people who talk about old-fashioned sightings. (I'm sure I've
forgotten a few obvious names.)

Where does "populist" ufology fit in what I was talking about? In
any case, I'm not very concerned with it. (Elsewhere I've
explained my belief that popular culture, despite its excesses,
will probably do more to bring scientists to UFOs than all the
responsible investigation we've ever done. It spreads new
paradigms, and a more open attitude toward things unknown,
particularly if they seem to touch on space and aliens. A
scientist who grew up on Star Trek and watches the X-Files will
be, on the average, more open to UFOs than an older generation
that grew up in the '50s, when science fiction was widely thought
to be childish. In any case, if Hynek and McDonald couldn't pull
the scientific community into the debate, what luck are
scientific ufologists now likely to have?)

As for the poor old ETH.....

> >  Which is why belief in it is called The Extraterrestrial [note
> >  the word that follows] Hypothesis.

> As you've drawn attention to it I should point out that
> 'hypothesis' usually implies some effort on the part of its
> proponents to show that it can make testable predictions. Mere
> belief, of course, does not carry that requirement. It's a small
> point, but as we're working through the scientistic terms used
> and abused in ufology it may be worth mentioning.

It's a small point, but a good one. So let me offer my three
cents or so. If UFOs are extraterrestrial craft, I'd expect them
to behave like physical objects. They should show up on radar,
leave traces when they reportedly land, and affect the physical
world in consistent ways (a line of thinking James McCampbell has
pursued). I wouldn't, though, expect them to behave "logically,"
or in other words as we imagine we would if we were scouting an
inhabited world. They'd be alien, after all, and we'd be foolish
to make that kind of assumption.

I guess I'd also think it likely that they'd be detectable in
space, though that's not a necessary deduction from the ETH.

Now, even if these criteria I'm tossing off here (somewhat off
the top of my head) are met, we wouldn't prove that UFOs are
extraterrestrial.
To completely prove that, I suppose we'd need lots of known UFO
hardware or debris, or (hey, it's time for the alien autopsy!)
biological samples of some of their occupants. And then we could
argue about what, even if we had stuff we could take to a lab,
would constitute proof.

Anyhow, this IS an interesting line of thought. Rather than toss
out combative bon mots (John Rimmer, this means you), why don't
we roll up our sleeves and -- following Rob's very helpful lead
-- specify what testable predictions each UFO hypothesis might
suggest?

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 7

                May 20 1957: Two USAF Fighters Intercept UFO

From: Stig Agermose <wanderer@post8.tele.dk>
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 02:20:36 +0200
Fwd Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 21:53:19 -0400
Subject: May 20 1957: Two USAF Fighters Intercept UFO

Thanks to Duncan Curtis (addresses at the end). URL:

http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Launchpad/8608/406th.html

Stig Agermose

*******


An Unusual Intercept?

There are many unexplained phenomena; it is not my purpose here
to explain what happened on the mission described below.
However, something unusual clearly happened during an
interception mission flown by two USAF aircraft, belonging to
406th Fighter Interceptor Wing (FIW). Aircraft involved were
North American F-86D Sabres. Fortunately, I was lucky enough to
get first-hand accounts from both pilots involved, first off,
Milton Torres;

"It was a typical English night in Kent. The 406th FIW had
committed to Met [Metropolitan] Sector (RAF) to have F-86Ds
stand alert as an operational requirement. The date was May 20,
1957, and our squadrons were considered combat qualified when
they committed us to the operational requirement. My
recollection seems to indicate that this function was rotated
about England between the various RAF and USAF units. This
particular night the 514th Fighter Interceptor Squadron [FIS}
had the alert duty. Two F-86Ds were on 5-minute alert at the end
of the runway at RAF Station Manston awaiting the signal to
scramble. The hour was late as memory serves me, and the weather
was IFR. Looking back at my log book, a total of 30 minutes of
night weather was logged on a 1-hour and 15 minute flight. The
details such as exactly what hour the scramble occurred or what
we were doing just prior to scramble totally escapes me,
however, the auxiliary power units (APU) were 'on', and the
power was transmitted to the aircraft. We were ready for an
immediate scramble and eager for flight time."

"I can remember the call to scramble quite clearly, however, I
cannot remember specifics such as the actual vector to turn
after take off. We were airborne well within the 5 minutes
allotted to us, and basically scrambled to about Flight Level
310. Our vector took us out over the North Sea just east of East
Anglia. Normally, Dave Roberson, the other member of the set of
two fighters would be lead ship. I can only suggest that I was
leading due to an in-place turn of some sort. I remember in
quite specific terms talking as lead to the GCI [Ground
Controlled Intercept] site. I was advised of the situation quite
clearly. The initial briefing indicated that the ground was
observing for a considerable time, a blip that was orbiting the
East Anglia area. There was very little movement and from my
conversation with the GCI all the normal procedures of checking
with all the controlling agencies revealed that this was an
unidentified flying object with very unusual flight patterns. In
the initial briefing, it was suggested to us that the 'bogey'
actually was motionless for long intervals."

"The instructions came to go 'gate' [select afterburner] to
expedite the intercept, and to proceed to an Initial Point at
about 32,000 feet. By this time, my radar was on, and I was
looking prematurely for the bogey. The instructions came to
report any visual observations, to which I replied "I'm in the
soup and it's impossible to see anything!" The weather was
probably high alto stratus, but between being over the North Sea
and in the weather, no frame of reference was available, i.e. no
stars, no lights, no silhouettes - in short nothing. GCI
continued the vectoring and the dialogue describing the strange
antics of the UFO."

"The exact turns and maneuvers they gave me were all predicated
to reach some theoretical point for a lead collision course type
rocket release. I can remember reaching the level-off and
requesting to come out of afterburner only to be told to stay in
afterburner. It wasn't very much later that I noticed my
indicated Mach number was about .92. This is about as fast as
the F-86D could go straight and level."

"Then the order came to fire a full salvo of rockets at the UFO.
I was only a Lieutenant and very much aware of the gravity of
the situation. To be quite candid, I almost shit my pants! AT
any rate, I had my hands full trying to fly, search for bogeys
and now selecting a hot load on the switches. I asked for
authentication of the order to fire, and I received it. This
further complicated my difficulty as the matrix of letters and
numbers to find the correct authentication was on a piece of
printed paper about 5 by 8 inches, with the print not much
bigger than normal type. It was totally black, and the lights
were down for night flying. I used my flashlight, still trying
to fly and watch my radar. To put it quite candidly I felt very
much like a one-legged man in an ass-kicking contest."

(Image:

F-86D 52-10012 of 514th FIS, Manston. The smoke trails indicate
that this aircraft has just fired a salvo of Mighty Mouse
rockets, and is flying through their wake. Note that the rocket
tray is already closed. Visible below the right wing is one of
the scoring cine cameras. (Roberson))

"The authentication was valid, and I selected 24 rockets to
salvo. I wasn't paying too much attention to Dave, but I clearly
remember him giving a 'Roger' to all the transmissions. I can
only suppose he was as busy as I was. The final turn was given,
and the instructions were given to look 30 degrees to port for
my bogey. I did not have a hard time at all. There it was
exactly where I was told it would be, at 30 degrees and at 15
miles. The blip was burning a hole in the radar with its
incredible intensity. It was similar to a blip I had received
from B-52s, and seemed to be a magnet of light. These things I
remember clearly. I ran the range gate marker over the blip, and
the jizzle band faded as the marker superimposed over the blip.
I had a lock on that had the proportions of a flying aircraft
carrier. By that, I mean the return on the radar was so strong
that it could not be overlooked by the fire control system on
the F-86D. I use in comparison other fighters and airliners. The
airliner is easy to get a lock on while the fighter, not being a
good return, is very difficult, and, on that type of aircraft, a
lock-on was only possible under 10 miles. The larger the
airplane, the easier the lock on. This blip almost locked
itself. I cannot explain to the lay person exactly what I mean,
save to say that it was the best target I could ever remember
locking on to. I had locked on in just a few seconds, and I
locked on exactly 15 miles [range], which was the maximum for a
lock on. I called to the GCI. 'Judy', which signified that I
would take all further steering information from my radar
computer [rather than the GCI site]".

At this point, it is worth describing the operation of the
F-86D's complex firce control system (FCS). In the F-86D, the
pilot had to do the work of the radar operator, as well as the
flying. After the pilot, with the help of GCI, located the
target on his radar scope, he closed to within 15 miles, where
he could 'lock on' the target, that is, lock his radar on the
target for automatic tracking. He then received steering
information on his scope, and could concentrate on flying the
aircraft to follow the steering signals (represented as a dot on
the 8-inch screen). At 20 seconds to go, a circle began
shrinking on the screen, and the pilot had to increase his
precision to keep the dot centered in the circle, while keeping
the trigger depressed. With 4=BD seconds to go, 'Phase III' of the
fire control system operation came into effect, during which the
computer corrected for any movement of the aircraft about the
vertical axis; the pilot then just had to attend to the attitude
of the aircraft. If the pilot was still flying onto his target,
at 2=BD seconds to go, the circuits in the firing section of the
computer were readied for the 'target' to be shot down. Twenty
four 2.75-inch unguided Folding Fin Aircraft Rockets (FFAR) were
the sole armament of the F-86D. Dubbed 'Mighty Mouse', they
weighed 18 pounds each and could be fired in salvos of 6, 12 or
24. As the rockets left the aircraft, they fanned out, to give a
'shot-gun' effect, increasing chances of a kill - each rocket
had the explosive power of a 75mm artillery shell, and traveled
at a speed of 2,600 feet per second. Optimum range for the
Mighty Mouse was around 4,500 feet, with a theoretical maximum
effective range of 9,000 feet.

"Now, back to the intercept of the UFO. I had an overtake of 800
knots and my radar was rock stable. The dot was centered and
only the slightest corrections were necessary. This was a very
fast intercept, and the circle started to shrink. I called '20
seconds', and the GCI indicated he was standing by. The overtake
was still indicating in the 7 or 8 o'clock position. At about 10
seconds to go, I noticed that the overtake position was changing
its position. It moved rapidly to the 6 o'clock, then 3 o'clock,
then 12 o'clock and finally rested about the 11 o'clock
position. This indicated a negative overtake of 200 knots (the
maximum negative overtake displayed). There was no way of
knowing of what the actual speed of the UFO was, as he [could
have been] traveling at very high Mach numbers, and I would only
see the 200 knot negative overtake. The circle, which was down
to about an inch-and-a-half in diameter, started to open up
rapidly. Within seconds, it was back to 3 inches in diameter,
and the blip was visible in the blackened jizzle band moving up
the scope. This meant that it was going away from me. I reported
this to the GCI site, and they replied by asking, "Do you have a
Tally Ho?" I reported that I was still in the soup and could see
nothing. By this time the UFO had broke lock and I saw him
leaving my 30 mile range. Again, I reported that he was gone,
only to be told that he was now off their scope as well."

"With the loss of the blip off their scope, the mission was
over. We were vectored back to home plate (Manston) and secured
our switches. My last instructions were that they would contact
me on the ground by land line."

"Back in the alert tent, I talked to Met Sector. They advised me
that the blip had gone off the scope in two sweeps at the GCI
site, and that they had instructions to tell me that the mission
was considered classified. They also advised me that I would be
contacted by some investigator. It was the next day before
anyone showed up."

"I had not the foggiest idea what had actually occurred, nor
would anyone explain anything to me. In the squadron operations
area, one of the sergeants came to me and brought me into the
hallway around the side of the pilot's briefing room. He
approached a civilian, [who] looked like an IBM salesman, with a
dark blue trench coat. He immediately jumped into asking
questions about the previous day's mission. I got the impression
that he operated out of the 'States, but I don't know for sure.
After my debriefing of the events, he advised me that this would
be considered highly classified and that I should not discuss it
with anybody, not even my commander. He threatened me with a
national security breach if I breathed a word about it to
anyone. He disappeared without so much as a good-bye, and that
was that, as far as I was concerned. I was significantly
impressed by the action and I have not spoken of this to anyone
until recent years."

(Image:

F-86D section view. The radar and fire control system occupies
the area forward of the cockpit. The Might Mouse rockets were
housed in a tray on the fuselage bottom, just forward of the
wing (seen here extended in dotted lines).)

And that would indeed be that, were it not for the back-up of
Milt Torres's element partner on that night, Dave Roberson.
Though Dave sees some details differently, it is clear that
something unusual did occur:

"As I recall, I was the flight leader, and we were on a training
mission making simulated attacks on each other. While on this
flight, we were contacted by someone (probably Manston), and
told to contact a GCI site. I believe it was the site in East
Anglia just north of the Thames (Bawdsey?). They queried me
about the weapons status of our aircraft. We were unarmed, as
was the usual status on training flights, and I so advised. We
were directed to land at RAF Bentwaters where our aircraft were
armed with live rockets."

"We received a briefing of some sort on the ground. I don't
recall by whom, but I believe it was by land line. I
specifically recall being advised that more than one GCI site
and multiple 'unknowns' were involved and that the area extended
into Scotland. I don't recall being advised of other RAF or USAF
aircraft being involved, but would seem probable that they
were."

"After launch, we were vectored independently. Normal procedure
would have been to receive an initial heading and altitude along
with a call-sign and frequency of the GCI site to contact. I
don't recall ever going above 10,000 feet, but Milton [Torres]
was sent to higher altitudes. I was vectored on several of the
unknowns and in spite of the ground clutter, I did get several
pretty good returns, but was unable to maintain radar contact
long enough to get a lock on. Information from the controller
indicated the unknowns were changing speed and altitude quite
frequently. Some of my runs were in the cloud and others were in
the clear. I don't recall how many attempts at radar and/or
visual contact I made, but it was several."

"One [run] I remember quite well was at 3,000 feet. I was told
that the 'bogey' was at angels 3 and at very slow speed. I
recall being told that the unknown was at 12 o'clock and I was
closing. Perhaps because of the ground clutter I never got a
positive radar contact of the unknown. At this point, I believe
I was in in the vicinity of Norwich. As directed, I attempted to
get a visual contact when I closed to less than 2 miles, but was
unable. If the unknown was lighted, he must have blended with
the ground lights. The bogey then either accelerated or
descended and the controller lost him."

"I don't recall whether we became low on fuel or the unknowns
left the area; but at some point the controller rejoined us and
we recovered to Manston. I do not recall being contacted
one-on-one by anyone about keeping the details quiet. However,
due to some of my later activities in the Air Force involving
close-kept operations, where I learned to blank out details in
my mind, this lack of recall does not surprise me. I do recall
Milton was rather excited and talked about getting a lock on one
of the unknowns, but I don't remember the details."

"I might add that during this time frame (spring of 1957), while
either standing cockpit alert or acting as runway control
officer, on two occasions I saw some activity to the south of
Manston [English Channel/North Sea area], which involved several
lighted objects moving in strange ways. They were sometimes
motionless and sometimes accelerating in various directions
which did not appear to be consistent with either fixed wing
aircraft or helicopters known to me at that time. I reported
these to control tower and/or Met Sector, but never requested or
received any explanation of what they were."

Any further comments on this episode would be most welcome. I am
currently working on completing a book solely concerned with the
USAF at Manston. If you can help in either direction, please
drop me a line at the address on my home page.

(That is

Telephone: (0)1249 814027
=A0
Postal address:

Duncan Curtis
69 Braemor Road
Calne, Wiltshire SN11 9DU
Great Britain
=A0
Electronic mail:DunxC@AOL.com
=A0
- 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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 8

                          Re: Guilt By Association

From: RobIrving@aol.com
Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 22:16:29 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 08:09:17 -0400
Subject: Re: Guilt By Association


>From: "Greg Sandow" <gsandow@prodigy.net>
>To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Guilt By Association
>Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 16:41:58 -0400

Hi Greg,

You appear to have had a problem with me saying this...

>>You seem to be saying that once these conventional explanations
>>have been eliminated Occam's Razor would require that we look to
>>unconventional explanations: Take, say, Michael Hesemann's claim
>>that the increased radiation he says he detected in crop circles,
>>as he has eliminated in his mind all conventional explanations,
>>must be proof that aliens made the crop circle.

>I've been pondering this comment from Rob Irving. Frankly, I'm
>baffled.

A simple misunderstanding, I'm sure.

Robert McKee will probably be turning in his jacuzzi, but I'll
try to make it clearer...

>>You seem to be saying that once these conventional explanations
>>have been eliminated Occam's Razor would require that we look to
>>unconventional explanations:

The point I was making here is that sometimes, especially if
influenced by a particular belief, we are a little too eager to
eliminate conventional explanations. We might simply not like
them, not believe them or maybe we are just not aware of them.

So, what did this remind me of?

The colon indicated that what was to follow was an example,
nothing more... I was not "throwing Hesemann at you". I wouldn't
wish that on anyone.

>>Take, say,

Take, for example...

>>Michael Hesemann's claim that the increased radiation he says
>>he detected in crop circles, as he has eliminated in his mind all
>>conventional explanations, must be proof that aliens made the
>>crop circle.

It was an example of the kind of extreme to which your
interpretation of Occam's razor might lead, and often does. Yes,
it was an extreme example. It was meant to be, but it wasn't
meant to be a reflection on you, or what you may or may not
believe.

My apologies if it ruined your weekend.

Rob







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 8

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: RobIrving@aol.com
Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 22:16:31 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 08:10:34 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

>Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 03:38:10 +0200 (MET DST)
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

>>Oh well... better me beating you over the head than
>>Brookesmith.

Henny,

>Why, I also don't agree with a word the good Duke says,
>- he usually doesn't know what he is talking about -,
>but he has a sense of humor.

I agree with everything he says, but usually when he's holding
one of his antique flintlocks to my head. Yes, one has to laugh.

>Since the field doesn't seem to be making much progress
>anyway we could at least try to have more fun. We need
>more Brookesmiths.

More like him, certainly. As the first-choice 'drummer' in his
air band, Alien Spawn (weddings, bar mizvahs, conferences R us)
I'm inclined to agree with you.

Rob





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 8

                         Roswell Photos Irrelevant?

From: SyntaX <wsawers@ihug.co.nz> [William Sawyers]
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 14:41:56 +1200
Fwd Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 08:14:09 -0400
Subject: Roswell Photos Irrelevant?

Greetings

In the whole Roswell mire, I find it very difficult to get past
Jesse Marcel Snr. My point being....

1. Roswell must have been one of _the_ Top Secret bases in the
US if not the world, even two years after the war ended, not
just anybody would be posted to Roswell? After being entrusted
with the Atomic Bomb, this base must have had, aurguably, the
best officers, pilots and crews in the US if not the world. Does
it not then follow that extremely competant and complex
intelligence procedures would be carried out by equally
competant intelligent staff. Now whether Marcel was at Roswell
during the time the bomb/s? was/were dropped, I don't know, but
is irrelevant, because the US Air Force isn't going to send
anyone but the best to such a strategicly important base as
this. So, in my mind Marcel Snr was a competant intelligence
officer. If we accept that of Marcel we must also accept that he
was a trusted member of the intelligence team.

Having come to this it seems to follow on with...

An Intelligence Officer is responsible for among other things,
keeping secrets! To keep these secrets they must know what the
secret is, or at least, that there _is_ a secret to be kept. So
for Project Mogul to have been kept secret, by whatever means,
has taken an extraordinary effort by the Intelligence Staff at
Roswell?, They must be commended, except of course Marcel Snr?,
who didn't recognise it, and thought it was a "Flying Saucer"??
Does this sound like the competant officer Marcel must have been
to be at Roswell in the first place. Surely he would have been
in the loop of such a Top Secret exercise, and even if he
wasn't, we have to credit the man for a few brains. He is not
going to cover up a Top Secret Test with something that would
draw more attention to them. There is, IMHO, NO grey area here,
Marcel is either a liar or is telling the truth. As the above
leads me,... I choose the later.

also

If we accept Marcel as truthful, he said... the objects
photographed with him were not the same things he found in the
debris field. What was photographed is therefore irrelevant, be
it a weather balloon, a Mogul Project device, or for that
matter, bits of a Flying Saucer. It was not what he saw at the
debris field

Does anyone else follow this train of thought... Kevin? anyone,
please help so I can move on, or am I off-track?

Regards

William (SyntaX)
The Truth is ....HIDDEN






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 8

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: RobIrving@aol.com
Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 22:16:26 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 08:06:51 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: "Jerome Clark" <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs
>Date: Sat, 06 Jun 98 13:33:02 PDT

Jerry,

>>Of course, I'm not trying to tell anyone that there aren't ETs
>>(or UTs and ITs, come to that), just that, as things stand, ol'
>>William's blade is more likely to lead us away from that
>>explanation than towards it.

>Ah, I don't think so, unless one holds that 50+ years of failed
>explanations for puzzling UFO cases demands another 50+.

I don't exactly follow what you're saying...

Are you suggesting that we accept one hypothesis over others by
way of attrition? I guess that's how things work sometimes, but
some sort of sensible explanation would be useful. I for one am
happy to spend the rest of my time not knowing. You're free to
jump to conclusions as much as you wish. The issue remains about
compelling evidence, and what we accept as compelling.

>Since ufologists have been asking questions, challenging each
>other's theories and conclusions, and arguing for as long as
>there has been a ufology, yours seems, uh, not to be the most
>accurate characterization, even of what goes on on this list,
>that I've ever heard.

Facetious already?

I referred to the relationship between general public and
ufological 'expert', rather than that purely between the latter.
However, even between 'experts' you'd be hard-pressed to
convince me that any reasonable standard of scientific argument
is generally applied.

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see it. Perhaps you can point me
in the right direction?

In saying that, it's not my belief that ufology necessarily has
to hold to scientific principles - those that feel there's a
need in their line of enquiry, will. Others that pretend to will
continue to be taken with a pinch of salt. More often it's the
latter that gravitate towards public attention, thus sullying
any serious research, in my opinion. But it's all grist for the
mill of myth, and I'm perfectly content either way.

Twisting Occam's razor in favour of the ET Hypothesis is a
brilliant ploy, though. To my mind at the present time (open to
arguments) it leads to no hard and fast conclusion either way.

I feel I should caveat all that by saying that I do see great
value in a fantasy. Every discovery depends on our faculty for
creativity, but that's perhaps a separate topic for discussion.
I usually save the ol' art argument for parties where there's
plenty of wine, and it doesn't matter who, or how much, or how
many finer points get wasted.

>And finally, as critics of Occam's razor have always pointed
out: >though the notion has its uses, it is in fact a principle
of >logic, not a law of nature.

And the reason it's criticized is because it is a useful tool
for flawed logic, as I said before. As Greg pointed out,
sceptics - or the type of thinkers who are generally known
around here as skeptics (another widely misunderstood term) -
are just as prone to flawed logic as the most irrational
believer, all (or most) being human.

To save you the pain of banging your knee on the desk again, I
agree that the most extreme cases of s_k_epticism amount to
irrational belief.

Rob






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 8

                      Press Report On The Area 51 Rally

From: Stig Agermose <wanderer@post8.tele.dk>
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 04:03:09 +0200
Fwd Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 08:02:39 -0400
Subject: Press Report On The Area 51 Rally

>From the Las Vegas Review-Journal. URL:

http://www.lvrj.com/lvrj_home/1998/Jun-07-Sun-1998/news/7636477.html

*******


Sunday, June 07, 1998


ALIEN CONSPIRACY

Believers of an American plot to unite the world against UFOs
say such a concept is being generated at Area 51 and the result
will be a fascist rule similar to Germany under Adolf Hitler.


By Joe Schoenmann

Review-Journal


RACHEL -- For the 150 people gathered at sunrise Saturday near
one of the most talked about classified military facilities in
the world, "Area 51" is home not to alien UFOs but to a good old
American conspiracy.

The alien-UFO story, most of them now say, is
government-concocted propaganda designed to throw people off the
real story behind Groom Lake, as the military prefers to call
Area 51.

If they doubted themselves before they got to this roadstop 150
miles north of Las Vegas, they likely left more-convinced as the
nearby rally fell under the steady gaze of federal park rangers,
security guards on distant hills and unmanned cameras and
microphones behind unmarked boundaries.

(Images:

Norio Hayakawa addresses the first People's Rally on Saturday
near Groom Lake. The rally drew about 150 people interested in
the classified Air Force military facility, also known as Area
51, near Rachel.

Michael Schratt shows on a schematic drawing Saturday how
anti-gravity devices would work in flying saucers that he
believes are already in operation at the Groom Lake classified
military base near Rachel. In the foreground are models of
several aircraft he said he constructed from information gleaned
from public documents. Photo by Ralph Fountain.)

Assembled at 6 a.m. on the sixth day on the sixth month --
symbolic admission to the devil's work many said is being done
here -- they came from as far away as New York, Illinois and
Oregon for the first People's Rally.

Organizer Norio Hayakawa, a funeral director from Gardena,
Calif., called it a historic event that will grow. His aim for
the rally was to bring attention to the plight of 39 former
workers who were denied in 1996 the right to sue the Air Force
facility for harm they say they suffered from exposure to toxic
chemicals.

"Three have passed away and the rest are still sick and not
treated yet," said Hayakawa, speaking with a bullhorn. "We
believe the workers have a right to be cured and treated for
their diseases."

He also proposed -- and figured he was being listened to and
recorded through the various devices propped on the hillsides --
that the government create a fence around the base and a guard
station at the fence.

"They have a $22 billion budget," he said, referring to the
"black budget" tax dollars that fund the research. "So building
a guard shack and fence should be no problem to them."

While he tiptoed on the issue of the purpose of the research, he
also cautioned that research at the base could be used against
the American public.

"We believe they have a right to build weapons for the national
defense," Hayakawa said. "But we believe they could also be used
for surveillance on us in the near future."

His words drew early morning applause from the group, which
included some insurance agents cum videographers from Las Vegas
hoping to package their footage into a TV pilot, and New York
Times columnist Phil Patton, who was mildly hawking his
soon-to-be-published book, "Dreamland."

There was also James Whistler, 30, a heavy-equipment mechanic
from Battle Mountain, who is simply a devout Christian convinced
that the billions of tax dollars spent at the base are not for
the protection of America but for its enslavement.

He wants to save as many souls as possible before that happens.

Sitting Friday night in the Little A'Le'Inn Cafe on state Route
375 in Rachel -- in the background Hayakawa plays country
western music on his electric organ -- Whistler exhausts himself
and overwhelms listeners with a barrage of fact and belief that
encompasses everything from the design of the nation's capital
to John Lennon's song "Imagine" as proof that a one-world
Luciferian government is the goal of elitist Americans.

"This," he said of Groom Lake, "is preparation for a deception
that will come upon the world."

In a nutshell, Whistler believes that elitists known as the
Illuminati control the United States through the Federal
Reserve, and with their fingers on the nation's purse strings,
they are using tax dollars to design UFOs to terrorize the world
for the distinct purpose of unifying it.

"Create a common enemy to unite people of the world," he said.

Once it's unified, the goal is to create a fascist rule, much
like Germany under Adolf Hitler, he said.

"If you were to take over the world, this is how it would be
done," Whistler said. "The population of the world will be
reduced drastically very soon."

Whistler wasn't hateful in his delivery, just impassioned.

Syndicated radio talk show host Anthony Hilder showed more
revulsion. Wearing a magenta shirt and pants, he made a big
impression in voicing his open distaste for the government under
President Clinton.

"Can you imagine 100 Bill Clintons?" he asked, finishing a
rapid-fire soliloquy on human cloning. "It would be the
establishment, literally, of hell on Earth."

Another talk show host, Victor Camacho, arrived from Los Angeles
with a bus load of listeners to his 1 to 5 a.m. radio program,
"A Little of Everything." The group drove nine hours, stopping
30 minutes in Las Vegas, and got to the rally site at 2:15 a.m.

Mauricio Ramirez said he's been interested in the UFOs since he
saw one as a boy in Tampico, Mexico, 20 years ago. He and the
others planned to stay overnight Saturday and hike with Hayakawa
today to a summit to view the base, which will be more than 20
miles away.

"I would like to see the base," he said. "I would like some
answers."

Michael Schratt, 29, a draftsman from San Diego, was versed on
the high-tech aircraft believed under construction at the
facility. He produced scale models of what he said were Air
Force flying saucers and other craft built upon information
gleaned from public documents.

His ultimate interest is less apocalyptic than it is curiosity.
He wants to get into the base to see for himself what he's only
been allowed to imagine.

"I'd like those guys to just carry me in there," said Schratt,
looking up to a white security truck on a nearby hill. "To get
in, you've got to convince them you've got something that they
need. That's what I'm trying to find."


Give us your FEEDBACK on this or any story.

Fill out our Online Readers' Poll

Brought to you by the Las Vegas Review-Journal.=A0=A0 Nevada's largest daily=

newspaper.

For comment or questions, please email

webmaster@lvrj.com

Copyright =A9Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997, 1998







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 8

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: Jerome Clar" <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Sun, 07 Jun 98 22:18:19 PDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 08:51:53 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs



----------
>Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 18:46:27 -0500 (CDT)
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

>>From: RobIrving@aol.com
>>Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 13:48:43 EDT
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

>>>From: "Greg Sandow" <gsandow@prodigy.net>
>>>To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs
>>>Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 14:31:11 -0400

><Oh, hell, in my arrogance, snip everybody!>

>Yes, the British blokes are being both obnoxious and vexing,
>aren't they?

I don't think so, and I can't imagine why you do. My impression
has always been that Greg and I are being so to them.

>At the same time, their original question remains
>unanswered. So, Jerry and Greg, take but a minute to tell us
>which ten cases you would consider most indicative and evidential
>of extraterrestrial visitation. That's all; just the ten specific
>*cases* that you personally would want to defend in the court of
>public (or scientific) opinion. You know, the ones that support
>your case. Just ten.

Oh, give me a break. If this is the style of argumentation --
and it certainly isn't the style of argumentation used in real
science -- we may as well give up. I suggest you look at the
Project 1947 list, on which just today Jan Aldrich addressed the
identical childish challenge, just issued from Phil Klass. Pace
Jan, here's a counterchallenge: name the top 10 cases that
conclusively prove the existence of ball lightning.

Obviously, a good deal of what gives the case for UFOs its power
is the weight of 50+ years of puzzling observations, recordings,
and patterns. (The same is true, except over a longer period of
time, about ball lightning, of which there are still, amusingly
and revealingly, some scientific skeptics.)  Of course along the
way there are individual cases, a fair number of them, that
stand out for one reason or another, usually because they were
well investigated or offered particular rich opportunity for
documentation. They are there in the literature, Dennis, even if
you and your pals can't bear to look them up. To save you too
much mental-muscle wear, though, let me recommend some books
where you can find them:

The UFO Evidence, by J. Allen Hynek
Scientific Study of Unidentified Flying Objects, ed. by
        Daniel Gillmor
The UFO Encyclopedia, 2nd Edition, by Jerome Clark
The UFO Evidence, ed. by Richard Hall
The Report on Unidentified Flying Objects, by
        Edward J. Ruppelt
"Science in Default: Twenty-two Years of
        Inadequate UFO Investigations," by James E.
        McDonald. In Sagan and Page, eds. UFOs -- A
        Scientific Debate
Project Blue Book Special Report No. 14, ed. by
        Bruce Maccabee
UFO Reports Involving Vehicle Interference: A Catalogue
        and Data Analysis, by Mark Rodeghier
Project Blue Book Exposed, by Kevin D. Randle


Then, after you've read all of these books and looked at all of
the data, you can (and, my psychic talents assure me, you will)
declare, without having to offer any supporting evidence
whatever, what Peter Rogerson pronounced in Magonia after
reviewing my recent The UFO Book (full of good cases recounted
in great detail): "Reading through the cases ... I suspect
several are radically misperceived astronomical objects, still
others probably psychological phenomena, still others hoaxes,
some military activity, some perhaps novel natural phenomena."

(John Rimmer a day or two ago played a variation on this theme
when Mark Cashman mentioned several intriguing cases. Note in
particular his comment on Sparks' RB-47 study, which John cannot
even yet have read; obviously, however, he is already struggling
to concoct a rhetorical strategy by which he can reduce its
significance.)

The poor saps who actually did the investigating, of course,
looked at these possibilities and offered concrete reasons for
rejecting them, but, hey, who cares about such boring
considerations when the game's about point-scoring and making
smug?

Frankly, the more I see the sorts of arguments employed here,
the more the adjective "disingenuous" looms to the forefront of
consciousness. I get the distinct impression that where the rest
of us are actually trying to make sense of an immensely
complicated problem, and being a hell of a lot more cautious and
modest about what can be inferred from it, you guys are just
playing a game. And a pretty boring one, I must say.


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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 8

                        Re: Burns, Clarke & Dagenhart

From: RobIrving@aol.com
Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 22:55:38 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 08:44:10 -0400
Subject: Re: Burns, Clarke & Dagenhart

>  From: Max Burns <AlienHype1@aol.com>
>  Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 21:13:47 EDT
>  To: updates@globalserve.net
>  Subject: Re David Clarke & Jonathan Dagenhart


>  Dagenhart         I'm a jet engine specialist

>  Burns                A jet engine specialist

>  Dagenhart         Yes

<snip>

> Burns         How old are you Jonathan

> Dagenhart          I'm 25 and a half

<snip>

>  Burns                What education have you got?

>  Dagenhart         I went to a little secondary school in the town
>                 where I lived in Swinton the local secondary
>                 school didn't do any A levels didn't go to
>                 college didn't do anything left school with all
>                 GCSE passes there all Ds and Es very low passes
>                 got a job working in Milton Keynes, worked there
>                 for 4 and a half years came back home did other
>                 little jobs, trained as an outdoor educating
>                 instructor then joined the Royal Air Force that's
>                 basically it

>  Burns                Well you're obviously intelligent because the air
>                 force dont take idiots

>  Dagenhart         No  I was travelling abroad as well in about 18
>                 months I mean in about three years I spent about
>                 18 months abroad...

Max,

Did it occur to you to ask Jonathan how long he trained to become
a jet engine specialist, and what qualifications it entails?

Rob     <all of a sudden concerned about UK defences>





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 8

                         New York MUFON Web Site Up

From: Larry Clark <lclark@ibm.net>
Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 23:58:13 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 08:47:59 -0400
Subject: New York MUFON Web Site Up

Hi:

The New York State Mutual UFO network now has a WEB site:
www.nymufon.org . Some items of interest are an online sightings
report form that fowards the reports to N.Y. Mufon members, a
table of contacts throughout the state, and postings on state
and regional ufo meetings. The site also maintains an online
compilation of sightings in New York, dated from before the
1950's though the present, as well as links to other sites
containing state specific sightings databases.

Though supporting the efforts of Mufon, the site welcomes
contributions by and encourages cooperation with all
researchers, and suppoprts the free exchange of information for
the benefit of all people interested in the ufo phenomenon.

Larry 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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 8

              Re: Vallee Hoaxed Corbin, UFO Sweden & Sightings

From: 'Jack Hudson' <true.x-file.news@n2news.com>
Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 21:25:02 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 08:41:31 -0400
Subject: Re: Vallee Hoaxed Corbin, UFO Sweden & Sightings


To Mr. Micheal Corbin, Director ParaNet Information Services,
Inc.:

>Michael Corbin wrote:
>To Whomever:

>Is this for real?  Usually legitimate press releases
>have contact information in them.  I have never heard
>of Marshall Barnes, nor the TRUE.X-FILE.NEWS Internet
>News Service.

We're new. Our e-mail address was attached. He's been around for
a while. See http://ufomind.com/people/s/strom for an example.

>What is more perplexing is the strong language that is
>used by whoever wrote this press release without
>sufficient information to make such radical claims.

The claims weren't "radical". We provided links to exact
evidence to substantiate the charges that Mr. Barnes made.
That's more than Vallee did or that you have done here so far.

>For example, I see nothing from Jacques Vallee or
>myself in response or refutation about these claims
>contained in the release.

If you could refute them, you would be doing it now. Vallee has
been silent on the issue and has refused attempts to defend
himself because he can't. You obviously haven't even looked at
the evidence or you wouldn't be referring to "claims". These are
"facts" based on the words and statements that Vallee and
Dudgeon made, that Vallee, the JSE, Bernhard Haisch, you (though
unwittingly)and others have promoted around the world in the JSE
and the internet. The statements that were made in the Vallee
article and promoted in part by you, have now been proven to be
false with evidence which we provided links to. What's so
radical about that? About telling the truth?

>It is usually customary, and professional, to make
>inquiries of those being accused before printing such
>outrageous allegations.

Again, your statements and those by Vallee, have been public and
were linked to in the release. Your statements and his are on
record. The only outrageous thing is that Vallee actually
thought that he wouldn't be caught and that you have the
audacity to act as if someone has said something without
substantiation. Yet you still have failed to quote one word from
our article to back your accusations up.

>Anyway, I am unable to take this seriously until we
>have some way to contact Mr. Barnes and can
>investigate him further to determine where he is
>coming from.

You can't take it seriously because you have egg on your face.
Otherwise, you wouldn't be making yourself appear more
ridiculous. The evidence cited in the article was compelling
enough for Jeff Rense of Sightings On The Radio to post the
article as a rebuttal, something that he wouldn't do, I'm sure,
if the claims were simply as you describe them. The way that
you're making these wild protests without any kind of examples
of the ridiculous charges that you're making is keeping me from
taking *you* seriously.

>At this particular point I can say that I do not take
>too kindly to the use of my name in connection with
>anything of this sort.

You're the one that connected your name to this matter when you
said that is was "good research". That's not our fault. You
chose to stand by it. You can walk away now.

>I have known Jacques Vallee for several years and have
>found him to be one of the most professional and
>thorough UFO researchers I have ever met.

What better a profile for someone to engage in such a deception?
Who would benefit from such an act? Certainly not Vallee. Ever
hear of "agent in place"?

>I have never known him to be dishonest or deliberate
>in anything underhanded or fraudulent.

Well you do now. There's a first time for everything. If Barnes
hadn't investigated it, Vallee would still be viewed that way by
most. But the evidence speaks for itself. Evidence which it
appears that you have failed to look at from an article that you
have failed to even quote from.

>It appears that Mr. Barnes is a rank amateur sleuth
>with an axe to grind as he has never contacted me or
>Dr. Vallee, as far as I know,

No Mike, you're obviously the rank amatuer here, not Mr. Barnes.
He put together a professional package of evidence that was 89
pages long and then took the time to try to find as much of it
as he could on the web so that an electronic document could be
assembled that would allow anyone to instantly link to the
evidence to see it for themselves. He even provided links to
various reproductions of the Vallee article so that no one would
think that he was quoting it out of context. That's
profesionalism of the highest order. Amateurism is claiming that
something that you hadn't even check-up on was "good research".
*Rank* amateurism is your coming in here making wild accusations
about evidence that you've obviously been too lazy or frightened
to face up to yourself. In addition, you're talking about things
that you know nothing about. We said in our article that Barnes
had contacted Haisch and that then Haisch and Vallee conspired
to suppress the knowledge that the article was fraudulent. What?
You mean they didn't let you in on it? What wasn't in the
article is that Haisch and Vallee have known about this for
nearly 6 months, and that Haisch even failed to notify SSE
founder and President Peter Sturrock that there was a problem
that would result in serious ramifications for the image of the
Society if it got out. Barnes initially sent Haisch an 8 page
letter outlining the evidence that shows the premeditation,
method, motive, opportunity and execution behind Anatomy Of A
Hoax as a di information project. He did so so that Haisch could
put a disclaimer on the JSE web page for the Anatomy article,
effectively distancing themselves from the fall-out to come.
Haisch refused to do so as we have already cited despite being
told that endorsement of the article would lead to questions of
ethics, etc. for him and the JSE. If the intent of this
scam(trying to prove the PE was a hoax) is so important that it
had to be attempted with fraud and lies, important enough for
Vallee and Haisch to not give a damn about protecting the
reputation of JSE and SSE, for Haisch to risk his own reputation
needlessly, what makes you think they'd give a damn about you?
You're just a casuality, Mike. You're evidence that there were
people decieved by what Vallee wrote. You're evidence as to why
Haisch should have done what over twenty of the world's top
scientific journal editors (JAMA, Surface Review Letters, The
Scientist and Nature, for starters)have now stated that they
would have done if evidence that they had nwittingly published a
fraudulent article had been presented to them - notify their
readers. You're evidence that instead of looking at the evidence
and evaluating it like Jeff Rense did, that you have acted like
an amateur and resorted to calling names and making entirely
unfounded cry baby accusations.  Why should Barnes bother to
contact you? What verification of anything could you provide?
You were one of the dupes! Barnes went to data bases and
historical archives that would support or condemn Dudgeon's
claims. Barnes did an investigation that, as far as I can tell,
completely kicks-ass and makes so-called researchers like
yourself look like wanna-be X-File detectives. You've made all
these charges and yet you haven't cited one example or quotation
from our article to back up the bull that you're slinging, so
I'd would just give it a rest. Evidence talks, Mike. You know
how the rest of it goes.

>to determine the veracity of any statements made in
>Vallee's article.

What was the need? You sure didn't determine the veracity of the
statements in the Vallee article before claiming that is was
"very good research by Jacques Vallee and others" (see
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/7354/Hoax.txt  see 3rd paragraph
under "Fowarded by:", 2nd line beginning with "I am...")and he
gave you the piece of trash himself!  We had links to various
other versions across the internet. Haisch tried to defend the
Anatomy article by saying it was peer reviewed.  Peer reviewed
or not, the evidence proves that the article is a fraud. No
one's being quoted out of context.Barnes took pains to be sure
to link to every statement that he refers to. Don't come crying
to us. You're Vallee's victim. He used you because he felt he
needed to. He played you like a CIA spook plays his field
operatives. He played you the way William Moore play Paul
Bennewitz, except not as bad. You should refer back to Vallee's
book Messengers of Deception where he learned how to do all this
stuff. At the top of page 189 where he says he still has a lot
to learn from his Major Murphy on how counter-intel ops work.
Better yet, go to the second and third paragraphs of page 203
where he shows how writers and editors with agendas could
accomplish disinformation cover-up objectives by hiding behind
rationalism and supposedly defending science with articles that
degrade UFOs and "other ridiculous subjects". Just insert the
JSE as the publication and Vallee and Haisch and their Aviary
pals over there as the editorial board, and you've got a
step-by-step description of what he tried to do with the JSE and
Anatomy Of A Hoax. The most incrimminating thing about all of
this is that he wrote of how he knew of this back in 1979. Looks
like Anatomy was supposed to be his dissertation, a deliberate
application of the disinformation skills that he admits that he
learned. Barnes is the one that sent us all of this stuff. All
the evidence is what Barnes found. We checked it out to see if
it was all true and it was. No, Barnes is no amateur. If the
whole deal hadn't been so simple, just checking out Dudgeon's
statements, I'd say Barnes is a genius. You're just one of
Vallee's gullible dupes, who isn't even man enough to stand up,
admit that he'd been fooled and demand an explanation from
Vallee. You're pathetic. Need a hanky?

>ParaNet posted the article, as it does with many
>articles, with a strict disclaimer and
>provides any information that it does with an
>understanding that it is provided as a public service
>to our readers, with no editorial control, therefore
>neither I, nor ParaNet, was "hoaxed" by Dr. Vallee.

Yes you were, when you backed it publically by saying it was
"good research." The article even had obvious logical flaws in
it. When Dudgeon's story was checked out against Navy records,
historical archives, WWII era photos, action reports, everything
that we provided links to and more, it completely fell apart.
It's the biggest sham that I've ever seen, even bigger than the
Hitler Diaries or the Alien Autopsy flick because it was so
easily disproven, so much so that Jeff Rense immediately
contacted us when he found out, to get permission to post it as
a rebuttal at his site. Rense is a man I can respect. You're the
one claiming to be an investigator and you got stung. Get over
it. This isn't your fight. Barnes is after Vallee, etc. and he
was even after the ONR and set-up one of their PR officers so
that the guy would lie to him in writing. Barnes isn't after
you. You don't *want* Barnes after you. All that's going to
happen if you get in the way is more bad publicity for you
because I've already been told that there is increasing media
interest in the story. We weren't even the first to break it. If
you try to defend Vallee, you're just going to do yourself more
damage. It's an OBVIOUS hoax. The evidence is overwhelming. It's
clear to everybody who looks at it. Get a clue.

>Finally, if anyone on this list knows how to contact
>Mr. Barnes, I would appreciate the information.


Hey, knowing what little that I know of Barnes now, I'd say he's
going to come looking for you!

>More to follow...

More b.s. I'm sure. I'll be sure to wear my thigh high fly
fishing boots next time.

>Michael Corbin
>Director
>ParaNet Information Service, Inc.
>303-863-0484 (Voice and FAX)

Jack Hudson, Publisher True.X-File.News








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 8

              Re: Vallee Hoaxed Corbin, UFO Sweden & Sightings

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 08:38:20 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 08:38:20 -0400
Subject: Re: Vallee Hoaxed Corbin, UFO Sweden & Sightings





From: Sightings On The Radio

http://www.sightings.com/ufo/philahoax.htm


Anatomy Of A Hoax: The Philadelphia Experiment

50 Years Later by Jacques F. Vallee From Skye Turell 12-10-97

REBUTTAL

[The text of this article has been removed by the webmaster following
a complaint that it was "libelous and defamatory" of Vallee.
We take no stand on the fairness of the article, but since
it was a direct reproduction of the one at the URL above, you can read
it there instead.  We have preserved the original contents of this 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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 8

                              Martian Anomalies

From: Rick Goldsmith" <rgoldsm@synapse.net>
Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 00:46:15 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 09:11:12 -0400
Subject: Martian Anomalies

Greetings List Members;

I am in the midst of creating a web page dedicated to weird
little things on Mars that were overlooked, everyone being so
busy with the face and wondering if martians even have faces,
etc. I would appreciate any contributions, serious or otherwise
as long as they do not include faces or references to Cosmic
Geometry, Space Brothers, etc. The main purpose here is to look
at the picture, say" Hmmm, pretty weird." and look some more. If
anyone could help me out with 3D shape from shading rendering,
that too would be greatly appreciated.

http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Nebula/1652/





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 8

                Re: ETH and Occam's Razor [was: Area 51 still

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 01:49:33 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 09:13:14 -0400
Subject: Re: ETH and Occam's Razor [was: Area 51 still

>Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 22:58:08 +0100
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: John Rimmer <johnr@magonia.demon.co.uk>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Area 51 Still Operational

>>Gee, John, how about Soccorro, Levelland, Exeter, Delphos...

>These are all, in ufological terms, "good" cases and there are
>puzzling factors about each of them. I think you will also find
>that each case has been "explained" by one researcher or another
>-- and I'm not talking about your usual-suspect skeptics here,
>but bona fide ufologists -- so that no one case can be quoted as
>the smoking gun.

Which "bona-fide ufologists" explained which of these?

>50 years' worth of
>disputed and inconclusive investigations is no more convincing
>that one disputes and inconclusive investigation.

Yeah, it's just like cosmology, and biology, and paleontology,
with all that disputing and controversy.

>Well, I have my doubts, and I've expressed them on another
>posting, about the accuracy of triangulations based on memories
>and guestimates, but the real point is distances and sizes of
>*what* exactly? I'm sure you're not implying that because two
>people saw something roughly the same size in roughly the same
>place it's got to be an extraterrestrial spacecraft.

You can have doubts, and there are a couple of things you can
do about them, one of which is to develop better methods rather
than sitting around tut-tutting about how bad the measurements are.
Personally, that's my main focus when it comes to this kind of
measurement.

The second thing is to substantiate how bad they are and what
effect that has on distance estimates. Let's take an example. A
baseline of 0.1 mi and a triangulation showing an object to be
670 feet from the baseline center. Now let's imagine that each
of the two sightlines are about 20 degrees off, each outward from
center - this being the worst case. The additional distance provided
is about 700 feet, for a total distance of about a quarter mile.

Further, the accuracy will be better when the witness can align
the object to a known landmark. This is often possible, and
can preclude even 20 degree errors.

Don't forget, we're not expecting to get results accurate to the
inch, or even the foot. All we need is reasonable accuracy to
eliminate natural causes. And we can derive some range of
sizes and energy outputs from the result. No, it's not perfect,
it's not like having a light meter or something other instrument,
but it's something.

And, what I am stating is that when you get a triangulation, like
it or not, it is a result implying the presence of an objectively
existent phenomenon, in the same way trace evidence does.

Now, your attempt to suggest someone as an ETH proponent
due to making field measurements and not automatically
discounting witness testimony or the results of such statistical
studies as Rodeghier's Vehicle Interference work, is no better
than guilt by association, and it really carries no weight. About
all I can claim is that the material accumulated over the years,
contentious and disputed though it may be, lacking in some of
the rigor I might prefer though it may be, definitely indicates
the presence of an objectively existent phenomenon worthy
of scientific attention - that is, the best investigation and
analysis we can mount given current resources. Sadly, this
sort of squabble is exactly what distracts many with the
potential to contibute from actually doing so.

Also, your insistence on a "smoking gun" for ETH is pointless
unless you or someone else may be prepared to identify the
predictions which the theory makes that a "smoking gun"
will support or refute.

The OEH (objectively existent hypothesis) is fairly
straightforward in its predictions. One of the most important
is that multiple independent observers (of whatever kind)
will observe a phenomenon to which they assign similar or
identical characteristics, within the limits of error of the
observer, and that those observations will not be able
to be correlated with any known natural or technological
phenomenon. This prediction, I venture to say, is supported
by 50 years of failure to successfully identify the natural
or technological phenomenon behind many incidents witnessed
by multiple independent persons and instruments.

ETH requires OEH be proven first. But what can ETH
require otherwise as a prediction?

First, it will predict that the source of UFOs is non-terrestrial,
and, therefore, since UFOs must come here from there, that
they will be detected in space. Currently, we have
very few candidate cases in this category. This can be explained
by our lack of available witnesses and instrumentation capable
of making such detections, and the possibility of intentional
evasion of any such observational capability. Nevertheless,
ETH proponents should necessarily focus their search in this
area.

An indicator that such cases will be found may be seen in the
number of events which describe the objects descending from
great altitudes and returning to such altitudes. In addition,
cases showing UFOs capable of escape velocity would also
be an indicator.

Secondly, ETH will predict that UFOs are technological in nature,
but operate according to engineering principles more advanced
than our own, and may apply physical principles with which
we are unfamiliar, or with whose engineering consequences
we are unfamiliar. This would appear to be supported by the
reports of metallic and structured objects displaying
unconventional performance and and appearance; these
tend to refute non-tech hypotheses such as the Earthlights
hypothesis.

Thirdly, it will predict that the behavior of UFOs will
demonstrate an unconventional interest in earth and in humanity.
Certainly the "loitering", "spying" and "drop-in" behaviors, as
well as sample or souvenir gathering, and apparent attempts to
communicate using lighting or gestures with isolated witnesses
seem to support this prediction, while denying other tech
hypotheses, such as the secret weapon hypothesis.

So of three major predictions of ETH, two seem to be
supported and one needs more focus.

Now it might be contended that predictions 2 and 3 could
be evidence of the TTH (Time Travel Hypothesis). This
is where Occam's Razor comes in. We have extensive
evidence that space travel is possible. We have no evidence
that any manipulation of time, other than slowing its rate,
is possible. Thus, when choosing between ETH and TTH,
Occam's Razor suggests that ETH should be preferred.

I hope this makes it clear that ETH is not an unreasonable
provisional hypothesis. It cannot be refuted by a priori
assumptions about the nature, behavior, or possible logistics
of an ETI. It can only be refuted by refuting prediction 1.

------
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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 8

                                Re: John Ford

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 03:11:31 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 09:21:17 -0400
Subject: Re: John Ford

>Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 00:05:16 +0200
>From: Andy Denne <aura.aa@wxs.nl>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: John Ford


>> Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 02:46:54 -0500
>> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>> From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
>> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: John Ford

>> >Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 11:29:35 -0500
>> >From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
>> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Alfred's Odd Ode #251

>> Hello Al, hi All,

>> A buddy sent me an "update" on the Ford case that I wanted to
>> share with all of you. As I haven't asked permission to reprint
>> a 'private' communique I am hiding any details that may reveal
>> the identity of the person that sent it. The important/pertinent
>> details are all there though.

<snip>

Hi Andy, hi All,

Andy wrote:

>Hi there John,

>Thanks a lot for giving back the List that little touch of
>humanity I was starting to miss!

<Smiling> Andy, I've had my ass kicked so many times on this
list over the years that you don't know how hard it is for me
to "throw back" your warm compliment! <G>

The truth is that Al Lehmberg is the guy that you should thank
and it is he who deserves it. Al has signed off on _every_post_
for more than a year now with his John Ford reminder. I put out
one or two posts about it and I have recieved several
complimentary e-mails. I was simply responding to Larry Hatch. Al
is the guy with the big heart and a _huge_ love/sense of fairness
and right and wrong. Larry called him, "Odd Al," we should _all_
be so "odd". The world would be a better place.

>If you have an address or something on the guys that raise the
>defense-payment for Ford, lemme know, will ya?

>@ndy Denne

I found out that John is being held at the Mid-Hudson Psychiatric
facility here in upstate NY. I guess you can access a mailing
address through regular channels. It's a NY State
Correctional/Penal Institution.

I just want to add a quick comment on Mid-Hudson. In the early
70's myself and one other guy used to conduct 'group counselling
sessions' at four State correctional institutions (prisons) for
inmates that were getting ready to re-enter society. Of the four
institutions that I visited on a weekly basis Mid-Hudson was
by far the worst. It is/was an old set of buildings. They were
antiquated back in the 70's. Mind you, I also used to work Attica
and Greenhaven so when I say Mid-Hudson was the worst it's
in comparison to some really nasty places!

The physical facility, and the staff left an awful lot to be
desired. Even for those being punished for crimes against
society. If the place hasn't been changed much since I was last
there, then John Ford is literally in Hell. Even if Johns' elevator
doesn't quite make it to the top floor, no-one deserves to spend
time in a hole like Mid-Hudson.

A little note of support from a few of his peers might go a long
way to ease the pain that that man must be in. Crazy or not, I'm
sending him a letter telling him that he hasn't been forgotten
and that some people _are_ following developments in his case.
It'll make the guy feel better.

I know if it was me in there a few letters like that would go a
long way and be re-read often. It's what you do when you have
nothing but time on your hands. _Anything_ that comes from
the "outside" is a cherished blessing and a gift. Also, if you
write to him, bear in mind that _all_ communications are opened
and read by staff first.

Peace,

John 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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 8

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith]
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 00:06:27 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 09:06:22 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

With the compliments of the Duke of Mendoza:

>From: "Greg Sandow" <gsandow@prodigy.net>
>To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Occam's Razor and UFOs
>Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 10:24:55 -0400

It's no great secret that I am deeply fond of the principle
enunciated by William of Occam that explanations (of
anything) should rely on as few presumptions as possible. He
put it slightly differently and more briefly: Entia non sunt
multiplicanda. Occam clearly relished the way Latin
encourages epigrams. Thinking in a language that can engage
in economy as pithy as "Bonus imperator, nisi imperasset"
may even have driven William toward his conclusion. Such
speculation about the cultural roots of ways of seeing is
not entirely without value. (He said ambiguously.)

Greg's post slightly misrepresented what I think Occam's
razor can do for - or to - ufology, although that may well
be my fault for not expressing my thinking more clearly on
previous occasions. Rather more to the purpose, I think he
caricatures the application of Occam's Razor to the case he
quotes - the discovery that neutrinos have mass. And this
caricature leads him into misunderstanding the significance
of the discovery, and after that there occurs a little bit
of a shambles. Let me first clarify what I think about
Occam's Razor & ufology, then go on to the wider issue -
that is, saving the best, as Mama always told me to, till
last.

Greg wrote:

>Well, skeptics like to invoke Occam's Razor as one of
>their many reasons for concluding that all UFO sightings
>have -- or probably have -- conventional explanations.
Peter Brookesmith has made that argument here; my very
>smart composer friend Scott Johnson suggested it in a
>conversation we had not long ago. In effect, they're
>saying: "Here we have all these reports of strange lights,
>metallic disks, you name it. Which is more likely, that
>they're all misinterpretations of known phenomena (or of
>course lies), or that they're ET visitors? Occam's Razor
>forces us to assume the former."

Occam *forces* one to do no such thing (as Greg went on to
say). He simply reminds us that, in considering "all these
reports", we will present what mathematicians call a more
elegant solution to the problem as presented, by
*preferring* the solution that depends upon fewer "givens"
in the theorem. (I assume you did read your Euclid in the
upper third/first form/sixth grade at school.) There is no
question - you only have to count - that concluding UFO
reports are reports of ET visitors requires many more
"givens" than concluding they do not.

Let's assume for the sake of this argument that both the
ETHer and the non-ETHer agree in a particular case on the
following: the witnesses are truthful, accurate in their
reporting and judgements, and that what they saw was a real
"something". (I doubt many real cases get as far as that,
but so what.) That something seems to defy explanation.

The non-ETHers - in this case - say: Sorry, can't explain
it, but perhaps it was an aircraft on an illegal or unfiled
flight path. The ETHers say: Can't explain it, so it must
have been an alien spacecraft. The non-ETHers have no
particular reason for offering their suggestion - let's say
the sighting was near no national borders, military bases,
cities with high immigrant populations, etc. But they *do*
know (a) that aircraft exist (b) that aircraft do fly when
and where they should not and (c) that under certain
conditions aircraft can look very weird indeed. The
suggested solution is just that: a provisional notion.

The ETHers, however, have to assume that the Green Bank
so-Equation's probability can be shown to amount to 1 to
make their solution work. That alone adds the seven
hypotheses involved in the equation - and presumes they have
been proven or solved - to the list. There are further
factors that Frank Drake did not take into account, possibly
because neither he nor any of his colleagues was a literary
critic or a librarian or an historian or an anthropologist,
but that demand consideration, too. Never mind; we are short
of space; the point is already made. We don't know the
answers to Drake's questions, whereas we do know that items
(a), (b), and (c) above are true.

I do not conclude that UFOs are one thing or another as a
consequence of applying Occam's Razor. Whatever I conclude,
Occam does not force me there. I do however *prefer* any
suggested solution, to any problem (whatever it may be in a
particular case), that entails the fewest entities. All
solutions in science are provisional - I assume you read
your Popper in sixth form or freshman year - and they are
even more provisional in fields - such as literary criticism
- where experiment, repeatability, falsifiability &c &c &c
are either not possible or exceedingly difficult. (Consider
meteorology....)

The non-ETH solution or suggested solution to a UFO sighting
will remain more elegant than the ETH-oriented one (or any
that involve time travel, inter- or ultra-dimensional
intrusions, or what have you) until it is known for sure
that ETI, or IDI, or UTI, or King Ubu, actually exist. This
doesn't mean the ETH is a load of codswallop or that every
LITS is the planet Venus. It simply means that the ETH is,
er, the weaker vessel, and until it gets some guts to its
assumptions and presumptions, I'll leave it to one side and
*prefer*, in this strictly intellectual sense - nothing to
do with "what I like" - the prosaic alternatives. Even
something as speculative as an "earthlight" - whatever that
may or may not turn out to be or mean - is preferable to the
ETH and its more nefarious relations, because it deals in
thing we know about and can test.

Which reminds me. As it's not pertinent to Occam's Razor I
won't address the other essential difficulty with the ETH,
its unfalsfiability, here, but it's a hare that's difficult
to resist starting.

So that's What I Think. Greg continues:

>If it did [i.e if Occam's Razor forced us to think in a
>certain way], today's New York Times headline would be
>impossible. It would have to read: "Japanese-American
>Scientific Team Says Neutrino Has Mass; Scientific
>Community Rejects Findings, Saying Occam's Razor Makes
>Them Unlikely."

This is a red herring and a straw man. It reminds me of the
Grand Fromage des OVNIs (not as far as I know a subscriber
to this list) who remarked to me not long ago that left to
the Razorites astronomy would have rejected Copernicus (or
words to that effect).

But first, let me say, neutrinos had not previously been
cast in mass-free concrete. Their mass was an open question,
though it was regarded as certainly exceedingly titchy and
*possibly* non-existent. (Scientists can tolerate
ambiguity.) Greg's was the first news I'd had of this
discovery. My first thought was not of ufology's
righteousness, but: "There goes 'dark matter'." Obviously,
if neutrinos have mass, the problem of "missing mass" (aka
dark matter) in the Universe at large becomes rather less
difficult. It was gratifying to read a day or so later when
I had time to scan the public prints that cosmologists had
reached the same conclusion. Self-congratulation is a
forgivable vice occasionally but a deeply irritating one
always, and my point here really is that Occam's Razor is a
double-edged tool, unlike the flashy things some people
carry one to a side in their weskit pockets.

Greg's mythical Occamist scientists would not reject the
finding that neutrinos have mass - provided the alternatives
had been thoroughly tested, and provided the work was
repeatable and testable - on Occamist grounds, because massy
neutrinos simplify the explanations (provide fewer entities
to account for) for *other* things they know exist and occur
but find problematic.

As it happens, Copernicus provides a very fine example of
this process, and it's easier to understand than the
twilight world of neutrinos, which hover between
relativistic and quantum interpretations of physics, and
cause all kinds of eyes to cross.

By proposing that the Earth was a planet circling a star,
and not the center of the Universe, Copernicus provided an
elegant explanation for why Venus & Mercury seemed to wander
only a little across the sky (they were nearer the Sun), and
why other planets seemed to behave rather strangely (they
were further away) and in ways that the Ptolemaic system
required many complications to explain. Copernicus also
explained the precession of the equinoxes by proposing that
the Earth's axis was tilted in relation to the plane of its
orbit around the Sun. Taken together, these two ideas also
accounted for the apparent motion of fixed stars across the
sky. He didn't get everything right: he assumed the planets
were in circular, not elliptical, orbits around the Sun,
which called for all kinds of non-Occamist assumptions, but
it was a damn' fine crack of the whip and the monk William
would have been proud of him.

The real resistance to Copernicus came not from scientists
who didn't understand Occam, but from the Roman Catholic
Church, which had its own species of the ETH to promote, and
kept Copernicus' work on its index of forbidden books from
1616 until 1835.

Greg comments on the injustice, as it seems, of the
conservatism of science, by way of research on brain cells.
Michael Polanyi has some interesting things to say about
this (he suffered in a like manner, but didn't resent it) in
"Knowing and Being". Scientists are necessarily cautious.
[E-mail me off-list & I'll send you this stuff if you cannot
get it, Greg.] It's a separate discussion really, one not
involving Occam in my opinion (let alone "taking Occam's
Razor too far"), but the nature of what Polanyi calls the
"republic of science". There is no room in that world for a
Pierre Boulez or an old fraud like Stravinsky (the Picasso
of sound).

Finally (really!) just in case anyone thinks I think all
problems of a vaguely scientific nature can be guided by the
good William, here's a case in which he's no help. Anyone
who's been around horses a bit has seen how foals and
younger horses "mouth" at their elders as a sign of...
respect (if you want to be anthropomorphic) or submission,
or at least of inoffensiveness. One interpretation is that
the young equine is mimicking eating grass, saying in sign
language: "My mouth's full, I'm a herbivore, no way would I
or could I attack you." Another interpretation says this
gesture is an offer to groom the older horse (engage in
mutual and pleasurable nipping and nibbling - horses do this
to people they trust, too, and if you don't understand it,
it can be slightly unnerving). Both explanations seem to me
to be equally simple and equally elegant, and equally
plausible. For all I know both are true, tho' that would not
be consistent with the strictest neo-Darwinism. But Occam
doesn't help me, anyway, to make a choice of interpretation.

I hope this post approaches the spirit of enquiry that I
think I detect in Greg's original. That isn't to say I
disagree with Rob Irving (I rarely do, and I don't share
Greg's apparent bemusement at Rob's comments). It's just an
expression of optimism that Greg & I are disagreeing, here
and there, but within the same language, or idiom. There has
been a lot of waffle on this thread.

best wishes
Palestrina D. Moussorgsky
Modish Exhibition








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 8

                                 Ford Fund?

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 10:09:37 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 10:09:37 -0400
Subject: Ford Fund?



In view of the interest in the John Ford on UFO UpDates I'm
re-posting the following. I don't know if the E-Mail addresses
still work - I've Cc:'ed the interested parties.

ebk
_________________________________________________________________


From: RSchatte@aol.com [Rebecca Schatte]
Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 11:00:25 -0400
To: updates@globalserve.net (ufoupdates-toronto)
Subject: FORD

A friend of mine received this and I thought it was interesting
enough to pass along. I'm not saying whether I support this or
not... This is just being forwarded for information only. --
Rebecca

-----

Forwarded Message:
Subj:   Ford
Date:   96-10-06 14:31:53 EDT
From:   pic@iwaynet.net (don jernigan)
To the concerned:

Mr. John Ford, President of the East Long Island UFO Network has
been jailed. We believe that he has been "Setup" by those
involved in the UFO coverup, and is being used as an "Example"
and "Warning" to all UFO researchers.  It was John Ford's
organization, that uncovered the shooting down of an "Aien
Mothership" over East Long Island on November 24th, 1992. They
were able to uncover evidence that seems to implicate
"Brookhaven National Laboratories" in this major incident. Right
now, and very pressed for time, we are try to raise donations
for Mr Ford's legal expenses.

We need a "Web Page," or some means to to obtain such donations.
We don't have anyone experienced enough, to create a Web page.
can you help us? We are working with Elaine Douglas in
Washington D.C., to bring this about. If you wish to contact
Her, Her E-mail is: elaine26@juno.com

We would greatly appreciate any assistance you can provide.

Don Jernigan
President of PIC
Phenomenon Investigation Committee of Columbus Ohio

<<<>>>


From: CNINews1@aol.com
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 17:51:24 -0400
Subject: CNI News -- Vol. 2, No. 15, Part 2 -- October 16, 1996

==+++===+++===+++===+++===+++===+++===+++===+++===+++==
      CNI News -- Vol. 2, No. 15, Part 2 -- October 16, 1996
      Global News on Contact with Non-human Intelligence
==+++===+++===+++===+++===+++===+++===+++===+++===+++==

This is part two of the two-part CNI News. If you did not
receive part one of this edition, please send email to:
CNINews1@aol.com

==+++===+++===+++===+++===+++===+++===+++===+++===+++==

THE ORDEAL OF JOHN FORD Was Long Island UFO Researcher Busted
For Making Waves?

[Several years ago CNI News became aware of investigations
undertaken by UFO activist John Ford. According to Ford, a
spacecraft had crashed on Long Island in 1992. Ford sought out
witnesses and began accusing public officials of a coverup.
Then, earlier this year, Ford was busted for allegedly
masterminding an outrageous scheme to murder some of those
officials. In the following text, writer Elaine Douglass
recounts the events leading up to John Ford's arrest and raises
the disturbing possibility that his crime was not conspiracy to
murder, but getting too close to the truth.]

by Elaine Douglass

The arrest June 12 of Long Island New York UFO activist John
Ford is deeply troubling. Founder in the mid-80s of the Long
Island UFO Network (LIUFON), Ford became known for his
relentless investigations of UFO events and for his startling
allegations that alien craft had come down on Long Island three
times in recent years and been retrieved by federal and local
authorities.

The Suffolk County Long Island Police Department is one of the
agencies John accused. John said the police helped recover a
fiery object witnesses told John came down in Long Island's
Southhaven Park in 1992. John made this claim at public meetings
up and down Long Island, and he held a demonstration at Police
Headquarters.

About a year ago scary things started happening to John Ford. He
repeatedly phoned friends and said someone was harassing him and
maybe, he thought, trying to kill him. Was there a campaign to
destabilize John Ford?

If so, it reached its climax June 12, 1996 when John was
arrested in a sting operation involving phone taps and a "wired"
paid informant. Police charged John with conspiracy to murder
and possession of radium without a license. Suffolk DA James
Catterson told news reporters John Ford planned to murder an
individual by the name of John Powell, head of the Suffolk
County Republican Party, by putting radioactive radium in his
toothpaste.

An improbable charge, to put it mildly. Nonetheless, the DA
seemed unable to restrain himself in the media following John's
arrest. He sponsored two press conferences, compared John to the
unibomber, and made additional charges against John for which no
indictments were subsequently returned. Amid a flood of
sensational news, John's bail was set at half a million dollars.
Naturally, he hasn't been able to raise it.

In the meantime, the UFO community, unused to investigators
being arrested and charged with crimes, has met this unsettling
drama with a stunned silence. Nor has John, on advice of his
attorney, issued any statement in his own defense other than his
plea of not guilty.

Not mentioned in the newspapers was John's claim of harassment,
of himself and others in LIUFON: auto accidents (too many),
vandalism of cars, and a physical attack on LIUFON member Joe
Mazzuchelli, who was arrested with John June 12. Mazzuchelli
says last winter four men dragged him out of John's truck, beat
him up, and warned him to "stay out of our business."

John founded LIUFON about 1985. From then on, he maintained a
hot line. He investigated sightings and abductions. He held
public meetings. He talked to the press. He sponsored
conferences. He held demonstrations, he published a newsletter,
he leafletted. John was tireless. I know John Ford, and he is
the most determined UFO investigator I ever met.

John believed that in 1989 Americans forced down an alien craft
over Moriches Bay Long Island. He believed that in 1992 an alien
craft crashed in Southhaven Park on the Island. And he
considered the possibility that in 1995 another mysterious
object came to earth in the Pine Barrens area of the Island and
that "diversionary fires" were set to distract public attention.
John further believed the Long Island police, fire, parks and
other local agencies were commandeered by the federals to assist
in these emergency operations and then, naturally, gagged. John
claimed he had "sources" in the Police and Fire Departments who
privately told him information on which he built his cases. The
details are too numerous to cover here, but one treatment of the
Moriches Bay case can be found in Len Stringfield's Status
Report VI.

John Ford's friends all attest he lived a moral life and never,
as far as anyone can remember, threatened another person with
bodily harm. Murder wasn't in John's character, people say, and
breaking the law wasn't John's style. John Ford was a law and
order advocate who spent most of his career as a Court Officer
in the Suffolk County court system. John knew the law and how to
use it. John was litigious, not violent. If John Ford had a
gripe against you, he'd sue you in a minute.

If John was going to kill someone, would he use radium? Readers
will recall the famous radium dial painters of the 1920s who
licked radium paint brushes for 40 years before they got cancer.
Yet the DA would have us believe that John's "murder weapon" was
radium. Would an individual who thought people were watching him
leave illegal radium in the back of a pickup truck in front of
his house. I repeat, John knew the law.

The charges against John strain credibility, but that didn't
seem to embarrass the DA. Catterson was so eager to incriminate
John that he made several serious charges at his press
conferences for which no indictments were returned. "This," says
attorney John Rouse, "is called poisoning the jury pool."

Catterson's overstep raises questions: Did the DA believe he had
more evidence against John than he ended up with? Is it possible
the DA never thought he had evidence to convict John of
anything, and that instead the purpose of the arrest is simply
to ruin John Ford's reputation and wipe him out financially with
legal bills?

The purported case against John rests on the taped conversation
made in John's house the night of his arrest. The tape has now
been released on discovery. "It's unintelligible," says Preston
Nichols, John's friend in LIUFON. Attorney John Rouse doesn't
disagree. He's waiting for an "enhanced" version of the tape to
see if the conversation becomes clearer. Rouse warns, however,
that John's situation is serious. If a jury believes the DA's
charges, John Ford could get 25-75 years at an upstate New York
prison.

As for the radium, it was allegedly found outside in John's
truck. Outside is where the police were, waiting and listening
to the informant talking with John and Joe. Could the police
have planted the radium?

I have in my files a letter from the Suffolk County Police
Department, dated April 1993. I wrote to them, at John's
request, complaining about police violations of LIUFON member's
civil rights. They had been leafletting near Southhaven Park and
going house to house looking for witnesses -- constitutionally
protected activity. The police stopped them and ordered them out
of the area. This was the kind of thing John did, and this was
the kind of response he got from the Suffolk Police, as far back
as 1993.

There is plenty of reason to think the Suffolk Police were "out
to get" John Ford. That is why John's colleagues, including
myself, have organized the John Ford Defense Committee. Our
purpose is (1) to give people true information on the arrest of
John Ford, and (2) collect funds and other resources essential
for John's defense.

My support for John Ford, and the support of the other members
of the Defense Committee, is based on our conviction that John
did not, would not, and could not conspire to murder anyone. On
this point our support is complete and total.

As for John's allegations, I speak only for myself and not for
other members of the Defense Committee. I always found John's
allegations hard to believe but impossible to dismiss. Taken as
a whole, what John's claims suggest is a low intensity military
conflict between the United States and the aliens. Is that
possible? Yes it is.

John Ford is the first UFO investigator to be seriously
persecuted by the authorities. Shall we sit idly by while our
colleague's life is destroyed? If John Ford is silenced, who is
next? Contact the John Ford Defense Committee at web site
www.iwaynet.net/~pic or email elaine26@juno.com.

The Committee needs funds for John's legal defense and donations
of several kinds: a psychiatrist expert witness; professional
audiotape analysis; and a Long Island-based legal investigator.

==+++===+++===+++===+++===+++===+++===+++===+++===+++==

<<<>>>






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 8

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: John Rimmer <johnr@magonia.demon.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 11:47:57 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 21:40:33 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


>From: "Greg Sandow" <gsandow@prodigy.net>
>To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs
>Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 18:45:41 -0400

>Anyhow, this IS an interesting line of thought. Rather than toss
>out combative bon mots (John Rimmer, this means you),

Wow, bon mots, that must be the result of being an English
major! Sorry to disappoint Jerry Clark, who always uses this
against me, but I'm *not* an English major, I'm not any sort of
major (or colonel, for that matter). In the North of England
tradition of gritty realism I was educated at the School of
Hard-Knocks and the University of Life!

>why don't
>we roll up our sleeves and -- following Rob's very helpful lead
>-- specify what testable predictions each UFO hypothesis might
>suggest?

Quite right. The problem with the ETH is that it is impossible
to formulate a testable hypothesis and make predictions about
it, for two reasons. Firstly, it is not really a hypothesis at
all. To be able to test it we would need at least some idea of
what the aliens are, and what they can and cannot do. And
secondly there is no way of *disproving* it, which is essential
for any scientific prediction.

Saying of the UFO phenomenon "it's aliens", is no more
scientific than saying "it's demons" or "it's magic" or "it's
the tooth-fairy". As we have no idea what extraterrestrials are,
or what they can or cannot do, they can be used to "explain"
absolutely anything:

* Aliens behave irrationally - well they would do wouldn't they,
  they're aliens.

* Aliens behave rationally - just proves they're scientific
  space explorers, boldly going...

* Aliens abduct people through solid walls - they're thousands
  of years ahead of us technologically and have absolute control
  over space, time and matter.

* Alien space craft keep crashing - well nobody's perfect!

I have been asking ETH proponents to come up with one case which
they would stand up as evidence for ET intervention on earth.
They seem reluctant to do this, and in a way it wouldn't matter
if they did. Because if any one case is explained conventionally
there is always another which can be pulled out until eventually
they arrive at one where the documentation is inaccessible or
incomplete, and it's impossible to come to any conclusion about
it. This then becomes part of the "vast weight of evidence
amassed over fifty years", and the whole thing begins again.

So maybe I should stop banging my head against a brick wall
trying to get ETH proponents to come up with the legendary "one
good case" and ask instead, how can anyone *disprove* the ETH?
That really is what determines whether its a scientific
hypothesis or a load of armwaving.

You ask about predictions for other hypotheses. Well I think as
far as the Psychosocial Hypothesis is concerned one has already
been made, and is in the process of being proven.

If the PH is valid it implies that the UFO is most widespread in
countries which share social and economic conditions, and have
similar cultural values. As the UFO phenomenon seems most
widespread in the USA we would expect it to be experienced most
often in similar societies. This does seem to be the case. The
countries with the greatest number of UFO reports, and public
interest in ufology, besides the USA are either those which
share its cultural and social background, e.g. the UK, Western
Europe, Canada; or those which have wide exposure to US cultural
and social values, e.g. Central and South America (and no,
Jerry, this isn't some sort of Ameriphobia, I actually quite
*like* most American social and cultural values).

We would expect the UFO phenomena to be least widespread in
those societies which either do not share this social
background, or are actually hostile to it, e.g. the Islamic
countries, most of Africa, Asia (except Japan), and this is
indeed the case. This is not, of course, to say that no UFO
reports at all come from those countries.

We predicted that with the fall of the Iron Curtain, and the
increasing penetration of western (predominantly US) culture
into the former Soviet Bloc countries, we would see a rise in
the level of UFO-related activity in those countries, and this
does seem to be happening. Hungary, which even before 1989 was
most open to the West, has developed its own crop- circle
culture. We are beginning to see more reports and film from the
Czech Republic for example, and elsewhere. And this is not
simply a factor of the freeing of press and other media in those
countries - even in the Communist era there seemed to be no
serious block to reports coming out of Eastern Europe. In the
Communist era the Eastern European country which seemed to have
the most UFO reports was Romania, which at the time was seen as
breaking from the Soviet Bloc.

Even within the US and Western Europe we see major differences
in the way the UFO phenomenon manifests itself, which would not
be the case if it was caused by a single, i.e. extraterrestrial,
source. Abductions are very few and far between on Continental
Europe, more widespread in the UK, but nothing like as many per
head of population as in the USA. Even our aliens are different,
with fewer Greys and more Nordics (and try and tell me there's
no racial element involved in that!). Even the postings on these
Updates demonstrate the cultural differences, with British
people seldom if ever commenting on Roswell, MJ12, Cydonia, etc,
tending to be more interested in flying triangles, which you
guys seem to have dropped a while ago!

I'll tell you what would disprove the Psychosocial Hypothesis: a
decent sized UFO wave, with abductions, in North Africa or the
Middle East, within the next few years. When that happens I'll
start watching the
skies!

Good Hunting
--
John Rimmer
Magonia Online
www.magonia.demon.co.uk
a wholly owned subsidiary of the P.L.A.Driftwood Organisation





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 8

             Re: The Ten Cases [was Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs]

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 03:05:01 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 21:20:10 -0400
Subject: Re: The Ten Cases [was Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs]

> Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 18:46:27 -0500 (CDT)
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

> take but a minute to tell us
> which ten cases you would consider most indicative and evidential
> of extraterrestrial visitation. That's all; just the ten specific
> *cases* that you personally would want to defend in the court of
> public (or scientific) opinion. You know, the ones that support
> your case. Just ten.

> No reference to a body of collective literature allowed. Just ten
> cases. Not twenty or thirty, just ten.

I thought it would be interesting to find the cases which I thought
supported ETH.

Obviously, each case tries to illustrate a different aspect of the
predictions I mentioned in my earlier e-mail. Any other method
of supporting ETH with cases frequently falls prey to actually
trying to prove OEH.

1.      Performance- Hill, 7/16/1952, Virginia, triangulated,
multiple witness, 120 g turns

2.      Performance- Marignane, 1952, 18G acceleration,
1 witness

3.      Structure-  Moreland, 7/13/1959, New Zealand,
1 witness

4.      Interest in and interference with vehicles- Levelland,
1957, 15 witnesses

5.      Unconventional physics- Beaver Falls, PA photo, 1965
(luminosity, non-visible EM emissions), 2 witnesses

6.      Escape velocity (25k mph)- 4/24/1949, White Sands,
theodolite tracking, 4 witnesses

7.      Departure to high altitude- Loch Raven Dam, 1958,
2 witnesses

8.      Beings in association with UFO- 1/1/70,  Vancouver
Isl., Canada, 2 witnesses

9.      Sample gathering- Valensole, 1965, 1 witness

10.     Interest in humans- Kelly-Hopkinsville, Aug. 21,
1955, several witnesses

------
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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 8

             Man-Made Flying Saucers - A Reply to Kevin McClure

From: Philip Mantle <el51@dial.pipex.com>
Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 22:46:39 +0000
Fwd Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 21:27:08 -0400
Subject: Man-Made Flying Saucers - A Reply to Kevin McClure



Kevin McClure's "Secrets Or Lies"! An Answer!
Tim Matthews, June 1998

Dear Colleague,

I received this morning the latest McClure missive on so-called
"Nazi UFOs" entitled "Secrets or Lies? Investigating the Nazi
UFO legends" which, true to form, erects a number of false
arguments in order to knock them down. Despite the fact that I
have sent Kevin McClure several detailed and informative letters
on the subject he has quite obviously failed to read them.

McClure has significant influence with 'Fortean Times' magazine,
the largest "paranormal" and "strange phenomena" journal in the
UK,  and will, no doubt, eventually use this forum to debunk my
work. What's the betting that he'll volunteer to debunk my book
when it comes out in several months time? Will future efforts be
so misleading?

Let's hope not!

Where are all the ethics and principles as noted in several
issues of "Abduction Watch" (which I subscribe to and actively
promote in my own magazine "UFO NEWS") here? They seem curiously
absent.

Just last week Kevin attempted to discourage the British UFO
Research Association from allowing Malcolm Robinson to speak at
their forthcoming London lecture.

This week I'm the target.

What a shame......

His letter, which runs into several unnecessary pages,
concentrates almost entirely upon debunking my latest fully
researched and referenced report entitled "Flying Saucers -
Secret History!" (in lower case) as well as having a pop at a
few other people including Bill Rose. McClure's main thesis
appears to be that the few of us interested in this subject
believe in a 'legend' that;

"depends on unproven claims, on individuals with extreme
right-wing beliefs, and on publishers and magazines keen to
profit from sensational material, even where there is no
evidence to suggest that it is true."

(The suggestion that there is money in researching man-made
flying saucers is a good joke.)

The first part of this statement is just nonsense, as are
Kevin's assertions about supposed 'standard' and 'conventional
history' texts - which might be better described as those which
tell people little of importance and which tell the half truth
and nothing like the truth.

Specifically, Kevin uses guilt by association to debunk my, and
others, research. His letter, no doubt mailed to all and sundry
(and to whom I have little chance of a gaining a fair hearing)
at a cost that I cannot hope to equal deliberately misrepresents
my report.

The FACTS are that in my "Flying Saucers - Secret History!"
report:

 - there is only the briefest and negative mention made of the
author Renate Vesco.

 - there is NO interest shown in either the so-called
"feuerball" or "kugelblitz" aerial devices.

 - there is but the briefest - and negative mention - made of
the occult and paranormal lunacy surrounding the "Nazi" UFO
topic.

 - there is NO use of extreme right-wing material.

 - NO interest is shown in the Nazi Polar/Antarctic myth.

 - the information, theories and other material made available
through "Vanguard Sciences" are NOT referred to at all.

 - only a minority of the document actually deals with supposed
"Nazi" UFOs (!).

 - the main part of the document deals with postwar developments
including those that are supported by, amongst other things,
declassified Intelligence documents.

 - contrary to the misleading information  put out by McClure,
there is no attempt to erect a specific theory that there is a
"secret history of the development of black and secret weapons
development under the cover of UFO sightings and explanations"
even though this might indeed be the case.

Other points:

Both Robert Jungks' acclaimed "Brighter Than a Thousand Suns"
(Harcourt and Brace 1970) and David Masters' "German Jet
Genesis" (Jane's Publications, 1982) note the existence of
German flying discs. This should not be taken as an indication
that I support the inclusion of the material ONLY that it is in
books that according to McClure "have only ever existed in the
occult, paranormal and Ufological fringes". So he's wrong.

He's hopelessly wrong about other things too. US Air
Intelligence Report 100-203-79, released in 1948, notes that the
Horten flying wing aircraft (advanced German technology) most
closely resembled the flying objects reported in the early
postwar period. This is but one document that says the same
thing and these points are made in my report and deliberately
ignored by McClure. He is NOT interested in an investigation or
in asking questions. It is more than clear that he has already
answered them in his own mind and that he retreats into out and
out debunking again and again. His interest in such trashy
publications as Michael X's "The German Saucer Story" (as
requested by him in a "search for reference material" booklist
towards the end of his letter) indicates once again that he is
attempting to debunk our work by falsely associating it with
such rubbish. Anyone who has bothered to read my report will
note that only one of the books in his list is referred to
(negatively) in my report.

'Sufficient caution' has certainly been exercised by Bill Rose,
myself and John Locker in our research into this subject.

Over 300 pages of US Army documents (released 1994 I think?) on
the subject of "UFOs" make it clear that German origins are of
the greatest importance. I can quote ad nauseam from these for
anybody who is interested but just one quotation from a Counter
Intelligence Corps (region 6) document dated 10th November 1947
is enough to be going on with:

"It is further suspected that the flying objects seen [in 1946/7
- TM] have been developed from original plans and experiments
conducted by the Germans prior to the capitulation."

(The document also says that "At the present time, construction
models are being built for wind tunnel tests" and that "This
canvass is to be made discreetly and to conceal our interest in
this subject". No wonder this information did not appear in any
of the much-vaunted 'standard' or 'conventional' texts!!!)

Incidentally, the AS6 V1 was a German circular wing aircraft
that flew in 1943/44. A photograph of this is shown in hard
copies of my report - again available upon request!

What about this from a declassified CIA document dated 19th
October 1955:

"Project Y is being directed by John Frost. Mr.Frost is reported
to have obtained his original idea for a flying disc from a
group of Germans just after World War Two".

(Projects Y/Y2, P724 and the WS606 were variants of flying discs
developed as part of a joint US-Canadian-British effort under
the influence of Dr.Walter Miethe, who worked at the BMW plant
near Prague associated with flying saucer developments during
World War Two).

So much for all the evidence for our supposed "claims" being
entirely taken from the occult, paranormal and Ufological
fringes!

I could go on, but I don't see why I should. This kind of
debunking is so typical of a UFO 'movement' that it is
increasingly difficult to take seriously - unless a massive
change in attitude takes place. It would seem that participants
are happy with their sad little "aliens or not" arguments and
occasional diversions into earth lights research. The TRUTH is
that our research is right on the mark.

Perhaps that's why it's so unpopular with some.

The questions should be:

1 - Could the US and its' colleagues have developed various
    advanced/unconventional aircraft from 1946 onwards?

2 - Would the secrecy surrounding them have anything to do with
    their ultimate use?

The answers to both these questions would appear to be YES. This
information does not necessarily exist on Waterstones'
bookshelves or on Microsoft Encarta '98. That doesn't mean that
we have no evidence or that new evidence cannot come to light.
Under Kevin's proposals, that no meaningful information on the
subject could emerge before perhaps the 1950s, then we should
all give up. Luckily, this is not the case and I suggest that
the answers are there.

For 50 years the majority of UFO "researchers" have been pissing
in the wind with alien stories on the one hand and personal
attacks, Mosleyesque scandal-mongering and debunking on the
other whilst a range of circular and delta-wing aircraft have
been flown under their noses. Perhaps THIS is the real story.
The big question now is;

Has the UFO community been actively discouraged from looking
into this or has it just taken no interest?

I suspect the latter to be the case and I suggest to the reader
that UFO 'research' and wishful thinking go hand-in-hand all too
often. In Kevin's case perhaps "wishing it away" might be a
better description.

No doubt UFO skeptics will rally to his defence.

Who really cares? I think we know the real truth of the
matter.................

Tim Matthews, June 1998.

RESEARCH NOTICE

Tim Matthews is a secret military aircraft researcher currently
seeking decent information on the joint AVRO-USAF Projects
variously known as P724,

WS606, Project Y/Project Y2.

All information handled discretely - confidentiality assured.

Information to:

matthews@zetnet.co.uk

or via:

The Secretary,
P.O.Box 73,
Lancaster LA1 1GZ.

----------






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 8

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: Stanton T. Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 07:49:34 -0300
Fwd Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 21:40:38 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

> Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 18:46:27 -0500 (CDT)
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

> >From: RobIrving@aol.com
> >Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 13:48:43 EDT
> >To: updates@globalserve.net
> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

> >> From: "Greg Sandow" <gsandow@prodigy.net>
> >>  To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net>
> >>  Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs
> >>  Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 14:31:11 -0400

> <Oh, hell, in my arrogance, snip everybody!>

> Let's cut to the chase: Mssrs. Irving, Rimmer, Brookesmith and
> other unregenerate-like English types are always asking where, in
> essence, are your ten best cases indicative of the ETH. Clark
> (Sandow?) and others essentially respond by saying: read the
> vast, voluminous literature and surely you will be enlightened
> and informed as to your erroneous ways thereby, which is not
> necessarily the same thing.

> Yes, the British blokes are being both obnoxious and vexing,
> aren't they? At the same time, their original question remains
> unanswered. So, Jerry and Greg, take but a minute to tell us
> which ten cases you would consider most indicative and evidential
> of extraterrestrial visitation. That's all; just the ten specific
> *cases* that you personally would want to defend in the court of
> public (or scientific) opinion. You know, the ones that support
> your case. Just ten.

> No reference to a body of collective literature allowed. Just ten
> cases. Not twenty or thirty, just ten.

> Jerry, you've been in the business a lot longer than Greg, so I
> would expect you to come up with ten convincing cases suggestive
> of the ETH first. Greg, you're next. Ten UFO cases you want to
> defend to intellectual death or victory. You're very eloquent
> when it comes to theories and generalities, now give us ten
> specific cases which you think support an extraterrestrial
> interpretation of the UFO phenomenon.

> Dennis

How about looking at Dr. James E. McDonald's 71 page congressional
testimony of July 29, l968, Jim was a professor of Physics at the
University of Arizona, and interviewed over 500 witnesses. This paper
has 41 separate cases. It is truly amazing how debunkers ignore Jim's
work and such other sources as Project Blue Book Special Report 14.
Perhaps it is not surprising in view of the basic rule "What the public





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 8

                Abductee Conference In August In NY 08-08-98

From: Steve Neeley <stneeley@mail.bright.net
Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 08:12:50 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 22:08:40 -0400
Subject: Abductee Conference In August In NY 08-08-98


From: UFOSSI@aol.com
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 02:49:22 EDT
Subject: Abductee Conference In August In NY Aug 8.1998

From: Rosebuds6@aol.com
To: UFOSSI@aol.com
Subject: ABDUCTEE CONFERENCE IN AUGUST IN NY AUG 8.1998
Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 08:48:34 EDT

Hi Steve,

I told my friend that I would contact you hopefully you can
anounce this important conference here in LI well here goes

BRIDGES
Abductee Support Group Network presents
Everyday People :::A Workshop For and By Abductees

Speakers::::Melanie Green, Daryl Stangl, Kent Steadman, Maria
Cuccia, Eve Lorgen, and an abductee panel

You may notice that we don't have any big name speakers, that is
because WE have a story to tell. Please join us for a day of
sharing and experiencers. We plan to allow lots of time for
questions and comments with each speaker and we will finish the
day with an abductee panel disscusion. COME AND BE HEARD

Saturday August 8, 1998
9:30AM-6:30PM

Lido Firehouse
Lido Blvd. Lido Beach NY

Cost:$30 includes a Luncheon Buffet
RESERVE EARLY , ROOM ONLY FOR 100

For More detailed information or to Register Contact:

Michelle Guerin
POBox 383
Point Lookout, NY 11569
516-431-8061
email ZDNF48C@prodigy.com

Steven J. Neeley, Director
Ohio Skywatch International

http://www.geocities.com/soho/5782

stneeley@bright.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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 8

                 Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General

From: Stanton T. Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 07:32:23 -0300
Fwd Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 21:40:13 -0400
Subject: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General


> From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
> Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 15:48:19 EDT
> To: updates@globalserve.net
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General

> >From: RTodd12191@aol.com
> >Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 10:23:35 EDT
> >To: updates@globalserve.net
> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General

> >>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
> >>Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 15:48:21 EDT
> >>To: updates@globalserve.net
> >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General

> >>>From: Robert Todd <RTodd12191@aol.com>
> >>>Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 14:58:39 EDT
> >>>To: updates@globalserve.net
> >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General

> ><snip>

> >>>And I ask again, why is it we haven't been told what Mrs. Marcel
> >>>(Major Marcel's wife, and Jesse Marcel, Jr.'s mother) had to say
> >>>when she was asked about the Roswell debris? As I undestand it,
> >>>she said the debris was _not_ from an alien spaceship. This is
> >>>just one of numerous examples where the promoters of the alien
> >>>spaceship explanation have distoted, misrepresented, or hidden
> >>>evidence that runs counter to the alien spaceship explanation.

> >>When I spoke to Mrs. Marcel (Major Marcel's wife, and Jesse
> >>Marcel, Jr's mother) she said that she had handled material from
> >>an alien spacecraft. She also said that she had accompanied her
> >>husband to the debris field. It was clear at the time I spoke to
> >>her, that she did not have a clear memory of the events and
> >>nothing positive would be gained from reporting what she said
> >>then.

> >Given the fact that Mr. Randle has distorted and misrepresented
> >so many facts in the past, without corroboration in the form of
> >a tape recorded interview, I am not willing to rely solely on
> >Mr. Randle's claims.

> Others have said the same thing. Dr. Marcel would, of course,
> corroborate the statement as well. However, don't we have this
> backwards? Mr. Todd wrote, "As I undestand it, she said the
> debris was _not_ from an alien spaceship." There is no source for
> this "understanding." I provided my reason for not mentioning
> what she said, which is in conflict with what is alleged here.
> Shouldn't Mr. Todd be required to explain where this information
> came from, and if he has no source, then shouldn't we just ignore
> it as irrelevant.

> And can't we just say asked and answered. He might not like the
> answer, but it explains why her testimony was not used.

> KRandle


When I visited Mr. and Mrs. Jesse Marcel Sr in Houma, Louisiana,
in 1979, it was certainly my impression that Mrs. Marcel thought
the material was very strange indeed.

It is my impression that Mr. Todd hasn't met with any of the
people involved in this story except Captain McAndrew.

Armchair Theorizing isn't the same as the kind of field
investigation that Kevin and I have been doing for many years on





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 8

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: "Jerome Clark" <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Mon, 08 Jun 98 08:16:23 PDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 22:16:12 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


> From: RobIrving@aol.com
> Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 22:16:26 EDT
> To: updates@globalserve.net
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

> >To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
> >From: "Jerome Clark" <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs
> >Date: Sat, 06 Jun 98 13:33:02 PDT

> Jerry,

> >>Of course, I'm not trying to tell anyone that there aren't ETs
> >>(or UTs and ITs, come to that), just that, as things stand, ol'
> >>William's blade is more likely to lead us away from that
> >>explanation than towards it.

> >Ah, I don't think so, unless one holds that 50+ years of failed
> >explanations for puzzling UFO cases demands another 50+.

> I don't exactly follow what you're saying...

> Are you suggesting that we accept one hypothesis over others by
> way of attrition? I guess that's how things work sometimes, but
> some sort of sensible explanation would be useful. I for one am
> happy to spend the rest of my time not knowing. You're free to
> jump to conclusions as much as you wish. The issue remains about
> compelling evidence, and what we accept as compelling.

You've lost me, my friend.  As one who has a long printed track
record of warning people not to jump to conclusions (your friend
Peter Brookesmith recently accused me of being a "pathological
fencesitter" or somesuch), you are addressing the wrong man.
My point was that if UFO history demonstrates one thing, it is
the failure of conventional explanations to account for the most
puzzling UFO cases.  To anyone who knows the UFO literature and
evidence, or who doesn't regard Phil Klass as guru, this can
hardly be a startling or revolutionary observation.
See, for example, the forthcoming statement by a panel of
American scientists who have examined UFO data.

> I referred to the relationship between general public and
> ufological 'expert', rather than that purely between the latter.
> However, even between 'experts' you'd be hard-pressed to
> convince me that any reasonable standard of scientific argument
> is generally applied.

> Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see it. Perhaps you can point me
> in the right direction?

For a start, I urge you to subscribe to IUR and the Journal of
UFO Studies, neither of which you read, as far as I know.
(Inquire at J. Allen Hynek Center for UFO Studies, 2457 West
Peterson Avenue, Chicago, Illinois 60659.) My UFO Encyclopedia
chronicles many of the debates within ufology about theories,
cases, and so on and, moreover, provides an extensive
bibliography.

> Twisting Occam's razor in favour of the ET Hypothesis is a
> brilliant ploy, though. To my mind at the present time (open to
> arguments) it leads to no hard and fast conclusion either way.

My position -- let me repeat, yet again -- is simply that the ETH
is, "right or wrong, a reasonable reading of the most evidential
UFO reports" (The UFO Encyclopedia, 2nd Edition, p. xiii).
Unlike psychosociologists and other believers, I make no larger
claims about the ultimate origin of the UFO phenomenon.  I do
object to the trivialization of the subject in so much ufological
discourse, including demands for, a la Letterman, the top 10
cases on which we are asked to believe the case rises or falls.
Michael Swords, whom I suspect you have not read either, lays out
a compelling  ersion of the ETH in a number of papers which show
why,  right or wrong, it is a perfectly respectable scientific
theory.

I am at a loss to understand the reference to "twisting Occam's
razor in favor of the ET Hypothesis."  Maybe you have me confused
with somebody else.

> To save you the pain of banging your knee on the desk again, I
> agree that the most extreme cases of s_k_epticism amount to
> irrational belief.

Intellectually I'm influenced most in my thinking in these areas
by Charles Fort, David J. Hufford, and Marcello Truzzi. Truzzi
defines the skeptic as one who doubts, the debunker as one who
denies.  And I appreciate your concern about my knee.  Actually,
I have always been more worried about the condition of yours.  I
guess that makes us a couple of considerate guys.

Cordially,

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 8

                          Re: Guilt By Association

From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 09:39:36 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 23:15:22 -0400
Subject: Re: Guilt By Association

> From: RobIrving@aol.com
> Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 22:16:29 EDT
> To: updates@globalserve.net
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Guilt By Association

> Hi Greg,

> You appear to have had a problem with me saying this...

> >>You seem to be saying that once these conventional explanations
> >>have been eliminated Occam's Razor would require that we look to
> >>unconventional explanations: Take, say, Michael Hesemann's claim
> >>that the increased radiation he says he detected in crop circles,
> >>as he has eliminated in his mind all conventional explanations,
> >>must be proof that aliens made the crop circle.

> >I've been pondering this comment from Rob Irving. Frankly, I'm
> >baffled.

> A simple misunderstanding, I'm sure.

> Robert McKee will probably be turning in his jacuzzi, but I'll
> try to make it clearer...

> >>You seem to be saying that once these conventional explanations
> >>have been eliminated Occam's Razor would require that we look to
> >>unconventional explanations:

> The point I was making here is that sometimes, especially if
> influenced by a particular belief, we are a little too eager to
> eliminate conventional explanations. We might simply not like
> them, not believe them or maybe we are just not aware of them.

Ahhh.....yep, I've seen that happen, more than once. Very
unfortunate, and more than a little silly. (Footnote: Allen
Hendry's book on UFO investigation. Invaluable, to show how often
conventional interpretations really do apply.)

I'm still not sure what that had to do with my post. I guess we
have the classic half full/half empty glass here. I saw it as
half full, Rob as half empty.

> My apologies if it ruined your weekend.

Had a lovely weekend, thanks. See the Beach Boys' greatest hits
for what I did on Sunday, and Elvis's "One Night" (the unreleased
version) for what I did on Saturday.  <VERY big grin>

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 8

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 10:04:42 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 23:09:21 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Jerome Clar" <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs
>Date: Sun, 07 Jun 98 22:18:19 PDT

>Oh, give me a break. If this is the style of argumentation --
>and it certainly isn't the style of argumentation used in real
>science -- we may as well give up. I suggest you look at the
>Project 1947 list, on which just today Jan Aldrich addressed the
>identical childish challenge, just issued from Phil Klass. Pace
>Jan, here's a counterchallenge: name the top 10 cases that
>conclusively prove the existence of ball lightning.

Yes, and I'd have to say that even though I submitted here a list
of 10 cases that I think are suggestive cases for the ETH for the
reasons given there, I and every other serious researcher realize
that all we have is a probability that what is reported in those
10 cases (or any other 10 that have survived the years) is a true
representation of what occurred.

Furthermore, as I pointed out on the P-47 list, 10 cases are
insufficient statistically and scientifically to derive patterns
or other deep conclusions from. No scientist in any other field
would be taken seriously basing conclusions on only 10 data
points with potentially significant error bars.

Pattens from the Rodeghier Vehicle Interference study and the
Vallee 1954 wave study are more compelling than any patterns
derivable from 10 cases.

------
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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 8

                       Re: Roswell Photos Irrelevant?

From: "Greg Sandow" <gsandow@prodigy.net>
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 09:45:23 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 23:21:16 -0400
Subject: Re: Roswell Photos Irrelevant?


> Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 14:41:56 +1200
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> From: SyntaX <wsawers@ihug.co.nz> [William Sawyers]
> Subject: Roswell Photos Irrelevant?

> Greetings

> In the whole Roswell mire, I find it very difficult to get past
> Jesse Marcel Snr. My point being....

> 1. Roswell must have been one of _the_ Top Secret bases in the
> US if not the world, even two years after the war ended, not
> just anybody would be posted to Roswell? After being entrusted
> with the Atomic Bomb, this base must have had, aurguably, the
> best officers, pilots and crews in the US if not the world. Does
> it not then follow that extremely competant and complex
> intelligence procedures would be carried out by equally
> competant intelligent staff. Now whether Marcel was at Roswell
> during the time the bomb/s? was/were dropped, I don't know, but
> is irrelevant, because the US Air Force isn't going to send
> anyone but the best to such a strategicly important base as
> this. So, in my mind Marcel Snr was a competant intelligence
> officer. If we accept that of Marcel we must also accept that he
> was a trusted member of the intelligence team.

A day or so ago we had someone saying that the Florida
scoutmaster was probably a trustworthy sort, because scoutmasters
are carefully chosen by, well, the Boy Scouts, one of the most
squeaky clean groups anyone can think of.

And now this. Can we please have an end to this kind of argument?
Humans can act very strangely, even highly qualified, respectable
humans charged with caring for boy scouts or atomic bombs.  The
Catholic Church, remember, seems to have a problem with priests
who molest young boys (see a recent NY Times story on the
resignation of the Archbishop in Palm Beach, for a current
example). Jesse Marcel Sr. may or may not have been a fine and
trustworthy man, but we can't presume that he is just because he
held the job he did.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 8

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 09:31:07 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 23:11:21 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

> Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 18:46:27 -0500 (CDT)
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

> Yes, the British blokes are being both obnoxious and vexing,
> aren't they? At the same time, their original question remains
> unanswered. So, Jerry and Greg, take but a minute to tell us
> which ten cases you would consider most indicative and evidential
> of extraterrestrial visitation. That's all; just the ten specific
> *cases* that you personally would want to defend in the court of
> public (or scientific) opinion. You know, the ones that support
> your case. Just ten.

OK, Dennis....number one....the Linda Cortile case!

Just kidding. And this is not the discussion I'm trying to have.
I'm talking about how we discuss these things. Jerry and John
Rimmer have been discussing the substance here, and I'll let them
do it. I'm NOT discussing what UFOs are, just how we discuss
them.

In other post, I'd given some quick criteria for making the ETH
plausible (proving it would be quite a different story, for
reasons I menitoned). But now I'd be curious to know from Dennis,
and even more from John Rimmer, the following:

What might falsify the ETH? What would be criteria for proving
the psychosocial hypothesis?

The ETH is easy, really. Hard to prove, maybe, but easy to
understand what would be proof. Proponents of other hypotheses
have been getting an easy ride. They seem to think it's enough to
throw rocks at the ETH. ("No, this case -- whichever one you just
mentioned -- does NOT tend to establish it.") Now it's their turn
to say what evidence would establish their own theories, and to
provide that evidence.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 8

                       Mini UFO flap in Quebec, Canada

From: Gilles Milot <milotg@Magnola.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 12:49:52 -0400=20
Fwd Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 23:25:13 -0400
Subject: Mini UFO flap in Quebec, Canada

Hi Errol and list members

Since May 12/98, we (Association Qu=E9becoised'Ufologie/Quebec
Association of Ufology), and other groups have received many
reports of ufo sightings along the St-Lawrence river from the
city of Three Rivers (pop:48419) 150km (90 miles) east of
Montreal to the city of Chateauguay(pop: 41423) 10 km (6 miles)
south  west of Montreal.

The sightings are mainly described as horizontal light beams and
large balls of light manoeuvring in a intelligent manners. In one
case, in the city of Berthierville (pop:4300) 60 km (36 miles)
east of Montreal the witness took one picture of a triangular
formation of lights. This picture is presently under
development.

These reports being preliminary, we are investigating more deeply
the sightings. We expect that many of them could be attributed to
natural causes due to events that occured during the same period.
We had a big air show in Mirabelle airport 35 km/21miles north of
Montreal during the long week-end of Queen Victoria's Day (15 to
18 may 98), The starting of the International Firework
Competition  and the Canada Grand Prize of Formula 1 this last
week-end (Goodyear or similar airship blimp). Believe me, there
is no reason to be bored in Montreal during the summer time.

The investigation goes on and we will keep this List posted on
any developments. A copy of the unexplained sightings will also
be sent to Chris Rutkowski to be includes in his annual Canadian
Survey Report.

A.Q.U./Q.A.U. is also announcing that two ufo groups have decided
to join the Association. These groups are:

S.P.I.(Sciences et Ph=E9nom=E8nes Insolites)
Resp: Patrick Tremblay 418-549-9872
         e-mail: tremblay@netrover.com
S.P.I. is located in the Saguenay-Lac St-Jean area
approx. 525 km/315 miles north east of Montreal.

R.P.I.(Recherche sur l'Inexpliqu=E9 et le Paranormal)
Resp: Jean and Alain Soucy 418-868-1523
         e-mail:casoucy@icrdl.net
R.P.I. is located in the Quebec city area

These two new additions are joining the actual members
of the A.Q.U./Q.A.U. (UFO-Qu=E9bec, G.E.R.O., C.U.H.L.)
to offer quality investigations and researchs in the ufology
field and related topics.

Gilles Milot






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 8

                    Chat with Karl Pflock, UFO Researcher

From: Yvonne Hedenland <vonni_h@email.msn.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 12:42:59 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 23:57:50 -0400
Subject: Chat with Karl Pflock, UFO Researcher

Skeptic Believer?

Most recently known for his support of the Project Mogul theory
on Roswell, Pflock has quite a few surprises up his sleeve. Join
this UFO researcher June 9th at 6pm PT, for a look at some UFO
cases that pass the acid test and are worth serious
consideration, including the Betty & Barney Hill abduction case.
This chat is available at http://forums.msn.com

The Briefing Room chat can be accessed by any IRC client. The
chat server name is publicchat.msn.com and the room or channel
name is #briefing.

The Netshow Audio interview with Karl Pflock is available now at
http://forums.msn.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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 8

                 Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General

From: Robert Todd <RTodd12191@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 12:55:33 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 23:47:06 -0400
Subject: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General

> From: "Steven Kaeser" <steve@konsulting.com>
> To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General
> Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 22:14:07 -0400

> >From: Robert Todd <RTodd12191@aol.com>
> >Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 14:58:39 EDT
> >To: updates@globalserve.net
> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General

> <Robert Todd response deleted for brevity>

<snip>

> >Perhaps Mr. Kaeser could tell us at which "numerous events"
> >Prof. Moore has "share[d] his 'truth'"?

> His comments offered at the New Mexico Institute of Mining and
> Technology (NMIMT) were posted to the Internet several years ago,
> and the book you mentioned that he co-authored was released about
> a year or so after that. It seems that Prof. Moore felt the need
> to speak about the subject at some level, but I certainly
> wouldn't compare his involvement to that of UFO proponents.

So, according to your information, the "numerous events" total
two. Impressive.

I would like to think I had something to do with Prof. Moore
agreeing to co-author the book. I thought the information he put
in that book was important, and should be on the record for the
public to find somewhere. It also was an opportunity to clear up
some of the mistakes that crept into the Air Force's first
Roswell report. I see absolutely nothing wrong with Prof.
Moore's motivations in deciding to do the book, which, even
then, was done reluctantly. Contrary to the picture you paint of
Prof. Moor'e activities, he is quite disinterested in the
subject of Roswell, and he feels he has said all he can and
needs to say on the subject.

<snip>

> >The fact is that Prof. Moore has never contacted Dr. Marcel.
> >Dr. Marcel called Prof. Moore,  twice as Prof. Moore recalls,
> >and asked for copies of some of the NYU reports. Prof. Moore
> >furnished these reports to Dr. Marcel. While driving through
> >Socorro on his way to Roswell, Dr. Marcel contacted Prof. Moore
> >and asked to see a radar target. Prof. Moore met with Dr.
> >Marcel and his associate at Dr. Marcel's motel and showed him a
> >radar target and balloon. Presumably this is the "dog and pony
> >show" to which Mr. Kaeser referred, a "show" put on at the
> >specific request of Dr. Marcel.
>
> That is not the way Dr. Marcel portrayed the meeting during a
> presentation in Roswell last year, but how the meeting came about
> isn't really an issue.

Neither I nor Prof. Moore exercises any control over how Dr.
Marcel portrays any of the facts, real and imagined, he chooses
to discuss in public. Prof. Moore was quite emphatic that he had
never contacted Dr. Marcel. I know Captain McAndrew contacted
Dr. Marcel, but not Prof. Moore. Perhaps he or you are confusing
the two.

Robert Todd






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 8

                 Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General

From: Robert Todd <RTodd12191@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 13:01:32 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 23:53:13 -0400
Subject: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General


> Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 08:32:41 -0300
> From: Stanton T. Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General

> > From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
> > Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 15:48:21 EDT
> > To: updates@globalserve.net
> > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General

> > >From: Robert Todd <RTodd12191@aol.com>
> > >Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 14:58:39 EDT
> > >To: updates@globalserve.net
> > >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General

> > <snip>

<snip>

> Somebody put a big and FALSE spin on the meeting between Don
> Berliner and myself with Charles Moore and later the same day
> with Duke Guildenberg in "Case Closed". Perhaps it was McAndrew.

I went back and re-read that portion of Captain McAndrew's
report that discusses the meetings Messrs Friedman and Berliner
had with Prof. Moore and Mr. Gildenberg. If indeed McAndrew put
"a big and FALSE spin on the meeting[s]," then he wasn't the
only one. Karl Pflock spoke with Mr. Friedman and apparently
came away with an identically "big and FALSE spin" on what Mr.
Friedman told him. Mr. Pflock was interviewed recently by Diana
Botsford, MSN UFO Forum Manager, and Mr. Pflock also claimed
that Mr. Friedman had indicated that the effort of Prof. Moore
and Mr. Gildenberg was nothing more than a government
"disinformation" effort to distract everybody from the "truth"
about Roswell. Ms. Botsford's interview of Mr. Pflock can be
heard at the MSN UFO Forum, at:

   http://forums.msn.com/ufo/guestchat.htm

Of course, we all know Mr. Pflock was a former employee of the
CIA, and an official with the Department of Defense, so we can
comfortably dismiss anything he has to tell us.

I asked Prof. Moore if Captain McAndrew's treatment of his
meeting with Messrs. Firedman and Berliner was a fair and
accurate portrayal, and Prof. Moore responded saying:

[BOQ]

My memory of the exchange with Friedman and Berliner was that,
after I told them about the  NYU flights from Alamogordo in
early June 1947 and how, after reading the RDR July 9, 1947
clipping you sent me, I thought our balloons had caused the
debris. In support of this I think I told them about Major
Pritchard's  July 9, 1947 press conference at Alamogordo using
our balloons and targets whereupon Berliner exclaimed something
to the effect of "Aha! So the coverup of the Roswell affair had
already begun using what you were doing at Alamogordo".

When I responded that I thought Pritchard was covering up the
Long Range Detection Program, Berliner and Friedman ignored me
and began and [sic] an excited exchange with themselves. They
did not accuse me of helping in a Roswell coverup but they
dismissed immediately most of what I told them.

McAndrew's statement more-or-less encapsulates the way I felt
after the meeting with Friedman and Berliner. Since they
recorded my visit with them, it may be possible to determine
exactly what was said.

[EOQ]

> It was perfectly clear that both were aware of the July 9 RDR
> article (apparently provided by Bob Todd) but NOT aware of the
> July 8 articles including such details as "found last week" or
> the many other articles that had already been published, or
> Marcel's testimony.... Selective choice of data....
>
> STF

After I furnished Prof. Moore with the July 9, 1947 article from
the RDR, he went to the University of New Mexico microfilm
archive in Albuquerque where he read and copied all of the
flying saucer and related stories from early June, 1947 until
September from most of the New Mexico papers. Incidentally, the
July 8 RDR article does _not_ say the debris was discovered
"last week," as might be assumed from Mr. Friedman's statement.
So certainly Prof. Moore cannot be accused of examining only a
"selective choice of data."

I am always amused by Friedman's accusation of "selective choice
of data . . . ."  Where conflicting stories exist, it is
impossible not to choose data. Mr. Friedman himself does it, and
so does Mr. Randle. Obviously, all the claims cannot be true.
Mr. Friedman's use of that pithy little phrase essentially is
nonsense intended to dismiss information that conflicts with
what he believes, or pretends to believe about the Roswell case.

I furnished Prof. Moore with the article from the Roswell Daily
Record that contained Mac Brazel's descriptions of the Roswell
debris, which, not incidentally, jibe with the descriptions the
other witnesses gave of the same debris. Except, of course, that
Roswell promoters like Messrs. Randle and Friedman contend that
Mac Brazel was lying, and the balsa wood wasn't balsa wood, and
the aluminum foil wasn't aluminum foil, and the debris had those
magical alien properties that made it indestructible.

Long ago I recognized the futility of debating the subject of
Roswell. I have tried, as best I can, to avoid the debate. I
would not have involved myself with the debate on the UFO
Updates list had Mr. Kaeser not implied that Prof. Moore either
was a fool or a co-conspirator in the alleged "Cosmic
Watergate." Mr. Randle's most recent attempt at deceiving the
UFO Updates list members was close by, and was relatively easy
to debunk, so I did. I'm sure this won't stop Mr. Randle from
raising the issue yet again at some future date, and claiming it
proves the pilots at Roswell Army Air Field knew all about the
"Mogul balloons."

This is, for me, my last posting regarding Roswell. I am
satisfied that the explanation for the case can be found in the
materials that were being flown by New York University in
support of Project Mogul. Messrs. Randle and Friedman will never
agree with this explanation, and almost certainly will continue
to deceive the public in their writings about the case. They
both have misinformed, disinformed and lied outright about the
case a number of times in the past, with Mr. Randle's most
recent example being his posting to this list concerning the
supposed requirement that notification of "Mogul balloon"
flights be reported in the NOTAMs. While notifications were
necessary _eventually_, it wasn't until _after_ the Roswell
incident had already occurred.

If either Mr. Randle or Mr. Friedman chooses to respond to this
posting, he'll get a free ride in that they can say anything
they like, because I don't plan on reading their responses, let
alone responding to them. I've had more than my fill of Roswell.
They may resume their misinforming, disinforming, and lying.
I've got more important things to do. For me, the Roswell
incident is "CASE CLOSED." Like Prof. Moore, I have nothing
more to say on the case.

Robert Todd






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 9

                       Re: Help Wanted - Ghost Fliers

From: Bruno Mancusi <Bruno.Mancusi@com.mcnet.ch>
Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 20:51:28 +0200
Fwd Date: Tue, 09 Jun 1998 00:13:10 -0400
Subject: Re: Help Wanted - Ghost Fliers

> Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 18:57:52 -0400
> From: David Clarke <dclarke14@compuserve.com>
> Subject: Help Wanted: Ghost Fliers
> To: UFO Updates <updates@globalserve.net>

> From: Dave Clarke, Sheffield.

> Ghost Planes/Ghost Fliers/Phantom Airplanes and Helicopters

> Help wanted for an on-going research project into flexible
> phantoms of the sky: mystery aircraft associated with UFOs and
> UFO flap areas.

There was a flap of an "avion fantome", also called the "Baron
Noir", in August 1988 in Paris (and after, in Munich). If you are
interested, I can send you some news clippings.

Bruno





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 9

                          Re: X-Files Movie Preview

From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 19:05:18 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 09 Jun 1998 00:22:53 -0400
Subject: Re: X-Files Movie Preview

Sorry List Members,

The date for the X-Files Movie Preview is next
Monday the 15th @ 8:00 p.m. on FOX.

CNN said next Monday on the weekend so I
assumed they meant today.  Oops.

Sue






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 9

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: Jean van Gemert <jeanvg@dds.nl>
Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 22:19:54 +0200
Fwd Date: Tue, 09 Jun 1998 00:16:45 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

>Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 00:06:27 -0400
>From: Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith]
>Subject: Occam's Razor and UFOs
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

<snip>

>*preferring* the solution that depends upon fewer "givens"
>in the theorem. (I assume you did read your Euclid in the
>upper third/first form/sixth grade at school.) There is no
>question - you only have to count - that concluding UFO
>reports are reports of ET visitors requires many more
>"givens" than concluding they do not.

Stop for one moment here, Peter, one important aspect just flew
over your head. It's not enough that a hypothesis be "simple", It
must also explain *all* the evidence to which it is directed.
E.g., you argue earthlights are preferred to the ETH but in many
of the cases that would require deliberately *filtering* out
aspects of the observations the earthlight theory wouldn't be
able to cope with.

In other words, you'd be omitting part of the problem domain, and
if the more "simple" explanation can account for only *part* of
the evidence then it's not a sound application of Occam's Razor.

The razor is just a logical tool which favors simplicity of
complexity, but *not* in the face of contradictory evidence. That
is, if the evidence suggests phenomena are more complex than one
would like you can't call on the Razor to dismiss the
contradictory evidence.

>Let's assume for the sake of this argument that both the
>ETHer and the non-ETHer agree in a particular case on the
>following: the witnesses are truthful, accurate in their
>reporting and judgements, and that what they saw was a real
>"something". (I doubt many real cases get as far as that,
>but so what.) That something seems to defy explanation.

Here's that "they saw something" again, and you seem afraid to
more precisely describe this "something". Many of the reports do
not start and abruptly end with witness(es) saying "I saw a real
something" but give descriptions with lots more detail
(anomalous, metallic-appearing, structured, luminous, high
performance objects).

>The non-ETHers - in this case - say: Sorry, can't explain
>it, but perhaps it was an aircraft on an illegal or unfiled
>flight path. The ETHers say: Can't explain it, so it must
>have been an alien spacecraft. The non-ETHers have no

That's absolutely *not* what reasonable ETH proponents would say.
You seem to believe the ETH interpretation comes from nowhere and
is bunk because people only report "something". That's a silly
strawman and a stereotype.

>we know (a) that aircraft exist (b) that aircraft do fly when
>and where they should not and (c) that under certain
>conditions aircraft can look very weird indeed.

<snip>

>of space; the point is already made. We don't know the
>answers to Drake's questions, whereas we do know that items
>(a), (b), and (c) above are true.

More horrifying logic. The items are true, yes, but wether
they're actually *applicable* in a specific case is a very
different matter. More so, we also know (a) that intelligent life
in the universe does exist (I think Peter must have missed the
point that we ourselves are proof of the concept of the ETH) and
(b) that space travel is very possible.

>The non-ETH solution or suggested solution to a UFO sighting
>will remain more elegant than the ETH-oriented one (or any

It will hardly be "more elegant" if it omits important parts of
the observation, but then, it seems Peter isn't too bothered with
that.

>that involve time travel, inter- or ultra-dimensional
>intrusions, or what have you) until it is known for sure
>that ETI, or IDI, or UTI, or King Ubu, actually exist. This

Ball lightning must be people's hallucinations until it's know
for sure that ball lightning exists? (Gee, how could I have been
so foolish to think the reports themselves where evidence for the
phenomenon!). SETI can never attribute a signal to ETI until they
know for sure ETI exist? C'mon, Peter.

You're arguing, fallaciously I might add, that we should know
beforehand wether X or Y exists before we assign causes. That's
*not* how science discovers novel phenomena, with you missing the
point that "proving" X or Y tends to be done with those
observations in the first place.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 9

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: RobIrving@aol.com
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 23:40:29 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 09 Jun 1998 00:30:04 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


> From: "Greg Sandow" <gsandow@prodigy.net>
>  To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net>
>  Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs
>  Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 18:45:41 -0400

Greg,

>  I think in all this you're responding to my thought that ufology
>  exemplifies the proper use of Occam.

Yep. I don't see how it does. It may be a quantum subtlety, but I
essentially agreed that Occam's razor is too easy a justification
for non-believers in the ETH to fall back on, probably due to the
type of laziness induced by excessive yawning.

Praise Ptaah that William's neighbour Nigel of Ockham's advice,
'Pull the other one, it's got bells on' isn't more widely used
here.

>  But what strikes me is that  you talk here about "populist" ufology.
>  I remember saying in my original post that I was talking about
>  "responsible" ufology.

Off the cuff... responsible ufology would be to cast a suspicious
eye on populist ufology, to perhaps create some distance from it.
Then you'd have to get used to being classified a sceptic, with a
'k', as opposed to a believer, and to enjoy many idle hours,
days, months, years, even decades in Rimmer's case, educating
those who never seem able to grasp the full concept of
scepticism.

>  Where does "populist" ufology fit in what I was talking about?

Maybe I've been mixing with the wrong company, but I referred to
the loudest, the ones with the boldest claims, those that reach
the biggest audience, who create the mythologies that you say
could prove so beneficial to science in the long run.

Like it or not, rather like the apathetic downtrodden, all the
time no mutually agreed standard of evidence exists you are stuck
with the likes of Hesemann, Greer, Simms and Leir, etc., as
representing the ETH, as much as anyone.

Basically I'm reiterating a point Rebecca made here some time
ago.

>  (Elsewhere I've explained my belief that popular culture, despite
>  its excesses, will probably do more to bring scientists to UFOs
>  than all the responsible investigation we've ever done.

What do you hope scientists will be attracted by that they aren't
already? The British Defence Research Establishment spent
millions developing a gun-mount system from an idea they got from
the movie 'Alien II'. Theoretical physicist David Deutsch was
inspired to enlarge the possibilities of time travel by watching
the BBC's 'Dr Who'. It's not hard to imagine what modern
archetypes flash through the minds of 'anti-gravity' or
artificial intelligence specialists, etc=85 The valuable insight
that came out of Kip Thorn's assistance to Carl Sagan, when he
was writing 'Contact'... there must be many such examples.

But if for some strange reason a respected body were to perform a
sensible and thorough investigation into say, the 'alien
autopsy', or cattle mutilations, the 'abduction' syndrome or crop
circles, how would proponents of this 'evidence' of ET visitation
take to prosaic conclusions? I expect the same as now - they
wouldn't, because, let's face it, how many ETHers are really
interested in applying any sort of scientific method?

The ETH is driven by belief, with little if any evidence to
support it, and is itself influenced by popular culture,
simultaneously feeding and suckling off it.

>  It spreads new paradigms, and a more open attitude toward things
>  unknown=85

Perhaps the Kuhnian picture of scientific knowledge held back by
a blind adherence to existing paradigms is itself a myth? I've
changed my mind on that recently - broadened my world-view you
could say - having realised that there aren't that many examples
to support it.

>  particularly if they seem to touch on space and aliens.

Why are aliens so particularly important? How much of your answer
to that would you honestly put down to yearning?

>  A scientist who grew up on Star Trek and watches the X-Files will
>  be, on the average, more open to UFOs than an older generation
>  that grew up in the '50s, when science fiction was widely thought
>  to be childish.

Take a stroll over to www.webleyweb.com/tle/le970401-10.html for
an interesting article on Star Trek and our response to
child-likeness.

>  In any case, if Hynek and McDonald couldn't pull
>  the scientific community into the debate, what luck are
>  scientific ufologists now likely to have?)

With sufficient and clearly presented evidence I can't see much
of a problem. What exactly is the problem, in your opinion? I
personally don't accept the line that scientists are too worried
about reputation to involve themselves in ufology - that argument
doesn't hold water.

>  If UFOs are extraterrestrial craft, I'd expect them to behave
>  like physical objects. They should show up on radar, leave
>  traces when they reportedly land, and affect the physical
>  world in consistent ways=85

Not necessarily. They may be interference from parallel universes
for all we know... mere mirror matter. It sounds to me like you
might need to update your paradigm. Science is way ahead of you.

>  Anyhow, this IS an interesting line of thought. Rather than toss
>  out combative bon mots (John Rimmer, this means you), why don't
>  we roll up our sleeves and -- following Rob's very helpful lead
>  -- specify what testable predictions each UFO hypothesis might
>  suggest?

I always presumed that combative 'bon mots' were an integral part
of ufology. I'll let John or Pete answer that; they may have one
and besides, they're better versed in, um... displacement
activity.

best,

Rob








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 9

                                     Re:

From: Pamela Stonebrook <galactic_diva@mail.telis.org>
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 20:43:06 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Tue, 09 Jun 1998 00:35:54 -0400
Subject: Re:


AN OPEN LETTER FROM PAMELA STONEBROOKE
TO THE MEMBERS OF THE UFO COMMUNITY

I'm writing this in response to John Velez' comments about the
news item that appeared in a recent issue of The New York Post
about my forthcoming book, Experiencer: A Jazz Singer's True
Account of Extraterrestrial Contact.

Since the article unfortunately conveyed the impression that the
book would be sensationalistic, it seems appropriate that I
share some thoughts with you, and set the record straight about
the book I am writing. I know that The New York Post piece
seriously misrepresented the true nature of the book.

The book is multi-faceted, and treats the abduction phenomenon,
in all of its complexity, with the sensitivity, respect and
seriousness it deserves, presenting not only my own experiences,
but those of other experiencers as well. The editor of the book
is Leslie Meredith, one of the most highly respected editors in
New York. She was the senior editor for the Bantam New Age
paperback series of books, and has worked on many books that
have been instrumental in raising people's consciousness. I'm
extremely grateful to be working with her, and also with Sandra
Martin, who is a wonderful human being and a visionary among
literary agents. I believe that Leslie wishes to publish the
book because I'll be examining and exploring my contact
experiences in light of their transformative aspects,
recognizing that the phenomenon is, and can be, an incredible
catalyst for expanded self-awareness. Interaction with
extraterrestrial intelligence has many aspects, of course, but
the transformational aspect is fundamental to me.

The book will tell about my reptilian encounters, a subject that
very few women are prepared to go public with or speak openly
about. I praise the courage of the few that already have - and
endured public ridicule as a result. Reptilians are not a
politically correct species in the UFO community, and to admit
to having sex with one - much less enjoying it - is beyond the
pale as far as the more conservative members of that community
are concerned. But I know from my extensive reading and
research, and from talking personally to dozens of other women
(and men) that I am not unique in reporting this kind of
experience. I am the first to admit that this is a vastly
complex subject, a kind of hall of mirrors, where dimensional
realities are constantly shifting and changing. Certainly, the
reptilians use sex to control people in various ways. They have
the ability to shape-shift and to control the mind of the
experiencer, as well as to give tremendous pleasure through
their mental powers. I have wrestled with all of these
implications and the various levels of meaning and possibilities
represented by my encounter experiences. I will say, however, as
I have said before, that I feel a deep respect for the reptilian
entity with whom I interacted, and a profound connection with
this being. In a past life regression I did recently, I went to
a very remote period in earth's history (perhaps hundreds of
thousands of years ago), and saw myself as one of a brotherhood
of reptilian warriors facing a catastrophic event in which we
perished together (it was possibly nuclear in nature, since I
saw a red cloud and felt tremendous heat). I believe that on one
level, I may be meeting these entities again, perhaps fellow
warriors from the past warning us of an impending,
self-inflicted doom - or perhaps they are different aspects of
myself. I don't really know; I'm just trying to unravel this
puzzle like everyone else.

Following my initial Art Bell interview, I received hundreds of
letters and e-mails, many from people describing similar
encounters to mine. I know that there are people out there who
are suffering in isolation and silence, thinking they are going
crazy. I have been able to give some of these people strength
and courage, so that they can move through their fear and come
out the other side, empowered and still able to celebrate life
as the incredible adventure that it truly is. I know that when I
was processing my Grey experiences, if it had not been for
people like John Mack, Budd Hopkins, Kim Carlsberg, Whitley
Strieber, John Carpenter, and other researchers and experiencers
who have been courageous enough to come forward, putting their
lives and reputations on the line, I would have stayed in fear a
lot longer, cowering in a corner, my self-esteem and identity
shattered. Thanks to them and to the wonderful members of my
support group, I am still standing, intact and whole.

I believe that the alien abduction experience is profoundly
linked to the momentous shift in consciousness that is occurring
as we enter the new millennium. We are witnesses to and
participants in the most fantastic era in human history. And
contrary to the mood of pessimism from some individuals
regarding the way mainstream media treats the UFO phenomenon,
and the trepidation that is felt regarding its ultimate impact
on the human race, I am unashamedly a "Positive." Everywhere I
turn, I find much greater public acceptance of the alien
abduction/UFO phenomenon, and active curiosity from enormous
numbers of people. I am also encouraged by the fact that many
more experiencers are coming forward, no longer hiding behind
the cloak of anonymity. I believe that within ten years the
reality of alien abduction will be accepted as a fact by the
majority of people on this planet, and ridicule of the subject
by the media or anyone else will be regarded as naive and
irresponsible.

I think the problem that exists between ufology and the media
stems from the fact that the UFO community has been so sadly
wounded in the past fifty years by rejection and ridicule that
it has been somewhat demoralized as a movement. It has been a
long, uphill battle, with many martyrs shedding their blood
along the way, but I believe that we are winning the battle for
public acceptance and are closer than ever before to solving the
mystery of the alien presence itself. I am looking forward to
appearing on major TV talk-shows, and to bringing the message
directly to the public about this phenomenon. This is a subject
that must - and will - be taken seriously, even, eventually, by
the likes of Leno and Letterman. I was amazed, I might add, by
the number of editors in the New York publishing community who
are "believers," and I predict that within the next few years,
UFO and abduction books will routinely top the bestseller lists
as the public hungers to learn more about what our encounters
mean, and their implications for the human race.

If my book is successful, everyone in the UFO community will
benefit. The floodgates are about to open, and when they do, all
experiencers, UFO investigators, writers and researchers will
find wider acceptance for their work. The days and years ahead
are going to be full of challenges and opportunities, but we
need to change ourselves in order to change the world. We need
to work together harmoniously with mutual understanding and
respect.

I want to thank everyone who is willing to cut me some slack
with regard to the article in The New York Post. I'm sure it
won't be the last test of my strength or your discernment.
Please keep those stones in hand until you read my book. I am
confident that if and when you do, you will be able to recommend
it to experiencers and non-experiencers alike.

I would also like to thank everyone in the UFO community who has
assisted me on my journey to awareness these past five years.

Peace,

Pamela Stonebrooke







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 9

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Mon, 08 Jun 98 22:11:16 PDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 09 Jun 1998 00:40:02 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


> Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 11:47:57 +0100
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> From: John Rimmer <johnr@magonia.demon.co.uk>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

> >From: "Greg Sandow" <gsandow@prodigy.net>
> >To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net>
> >Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs
> >Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 18:45:41 -0400

> >Anyhow, this IS an interesting line of thought. Rather than toss
> >out combative bon mots (John Rimmer, this means you),

> Wow, bon mots, that must be the result of being an English
> major! Sorry to disappoint Jerry Clark, who always uses this
> against me, but I'm *not* an English major, I'm not any sort of
> major (or colonel, for that matter). In the North of England
> tradition of gritty realism I was educated at the School of
> Hard-Knocks and the University of Life!

John, you sure could have fooled me.  Let's call you an honorary
English major. I was an actual English major, and I assure you, I
won't lord it over you.

> >why don't
> >we roll up our sleeves and -- following Rob's very helpful lead
> >-- specify what testable predictions each UFO hypothesis might
> >suggest?

The only serious testable psychosocial hypothesis, and I admire
him for having the guts to propose it, was offered by Peter
Rogerson in the July 1986 issue of Magonia, wherein he predicted,
"ALL contactees and abductees will be [found to be] fantasy-
prone personalities. The vast majority of CE3 percipients will
be CE3s."  As we know now -- actually, have known for a while
now -- this has not proven to be the case.  Nice try, though,
Peter, and I don't mean that sarcastically.  Would that your
colleagues, including John (who proposes an amazingly
fuzzy claim to a testable hypothesis in his current posting),
had your courage and precision.

In any event, Mark Cashman and Greg Sandow have shown ways in
which the ETH can be used to make predictions. Apparently John
has not read their contributions.

> Saying of the UFO phenomenon "it's aliens", is no more
> scientific than saying "it's demons" or "it's magic" or "it's
> the tooth-fairy". As we have no idea what extraterrestrials are,
> or what they can or cannot do, they can be used to "explain"
> absolutely anything:

Actually, that's a whole lot of nonsense.  I guess I am going to
have repeat myself: Mike Swords has shown, in a series of
splendid papers, the scientific foundations of the ETH. Mark
Cashman has also written lucidly on the subject. When I see
arguments like the above, I get the depressing suspicion that the
arguers believe that if they repeat them enough, somehow they'll
begin to make sense.  Alas, no such luck.  Has, incidentally, any
PSHer ever admitted to being wrong about anything?

> * Aliens behave irrationally - well they would do wouldn't they,
>   they're aliens.

> * Aliens behave rationally - just proves they're scientific
>   space explorers, boldly going...

Reminds me of PSH advocate Hilary Evans (who is a good
guy -- as is John Rimmer, by the way; nothing in any of this
is intended to be a personal slam).  I can't think of a better
example of the unfalsifiability of the Purely Speculative
Hypothesis than the following, and pardon me if I quote
from my recently published UFO Encyclopedia (p. 757):

"Evans's one claim to experimental confirmation of the
psychosocial hypothesis [Alvin Lawson's amateurish `imaginary
abductions' experiments] is almost certainly unfounded. Yet while
Lawson's hypothesis appears to have been falsified, at least it
IS falsifiable -- unlike Evans's own hypotheses. For example, he
proposes that entity- generating psychological states include
relaxation and excitation, boredom and ecstasy, isolation and
participation in a group, concentration and distraction,
questioned faith and unquestioning faith, concentration and
distraction, anxiety and peace of mind. When none of these
conditions obtains -- if that is conceivable -- the weather, the
phase of  the moon, or the individual's diet may trigger the
imaginary encounter.  Evans may as well have argued that the
psychological state in which one is most likely to have an entity
encounter is being alive [also the state, of course, in which one
could conceivably have an experience with actual
extraterrestrials].

"If nothing else, Evans can be counted on to cover all his bases.
 In another instance of base-stretching -- one of a number that
could be cited -- he informs us that CE3s could not involve true
extraterrestrials because the alleged ETs' behavior is
`illogical, no matter how much allowance we make for the
possibility ET logic may be different from ours.' Scarcely 50
pages of [his book Gods, Spirits, Cosmic Guardians) later, Evans
remarks that such reports cannot be interpreted as alien
encounters because the supposed ETs' patterns of behavior are
`humanlike in so many ... ways.'"

> * Aliens abduct people through solid walls - they're thousands
>   of years ahead of us technologically and have absolute control
>   over space, time and matter.

I wasn't aware that those of us on this list who have been
advocating an open-minded approach to the ETH have been bringing
abductions prominently into the discussion.  I have stated
repeatedly, and I think my colleagues will not disagree with me
here, that -- with very rare exception -- abduction claims are
minimally evidential at best, and so beset with problems,
ambiguities, and the like that no thoughtful person would declare
them proof of anything at this very early stage of the
investigation.

We need to know a whole lot more about this phenomenon before we
start making extraordinary claims for it.  (I urge John to read
the discussion of this issue on pp. 388-90 of the new
Encyclopedia.  It concludes, "Until more is known with much
greater certainty, efforts to incorporate abduction material into
a revised ETH are necessarily speculative under the best of
circumstances.")  As I have stated over and over again, in all
kinds of forums, it is the hard evidence -- radar/visuals, CE2s,
multiply witnessed daylight discs, and so on -- that comprises
the core of the case for UFOs as well as the beginning of any
rational discussion about the possible origins of the UFO
phenomenon.  This phenomenon, international in scope and to all
appearances not culture bound, continues to resist conventional
explanation.

> * Alien space craft keep crashing - well nobody's perfect!

I wasn't aware that anybody involved in this discussion was
contending that "space craft keep crashing."  I know such folk
are out there, but they are not participating in this
conversation. It's this sort of caricature of opponents' views
that persuade me that in their heart of hearts the Purely
Speculative Hypothesizers know they are treading shaky ground
indeed.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 9

                 Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General

From: Karl T. Pflock <Ktperehwon@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 18:03:31 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 09 Jun 1998 00:11:41 -0400
Subject: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General

GREETINGS TO ALL LIST SLAVES -- In a recent post, Bob Todd wrote:

>From: RTodd12191@aol.com
>Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 13:01:32 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General

>If indeed McAndrew put "a big and FALSE spin on the meeting[s],"
>then he wasn't the only one.  Karl Pflock spoke with Mr. Friedman
>and apparently came away with an identically "big and FALSE spin"
>on what Mr. Friedman told him..., that Mr. Friedman had indicated
>that the effort of Prof. Moore and Mr. Gildenberg was nothing
>more than a government "disinformation" effort to distract
>everybody from the "truth" about Roswell.

I was told independently by both Stan Friedman and Don Berliner
soon after the trip to New Mexico during which they met with
Prof. Moore and Mr. Gildenberg that they believed M & G were
involved in a disinformation effort, either wittingly or
unwittingly (not-so-subtle emphasis on the former).

>Of course, we all know Mr. Pflock was a former employee of the
>CIA....*

"IS," Bob, "IS"!!!  But as you say, all X-Heads can comfortably
dismiss anything I have to say, including the use of the past
tense in re my days (1966-72) as a junior cog grinding away in
the vast Langley machine.

BTW, I've just recovered from a MAJOR software collapse (thank
the ghods for computer-whiz offgesprunggen), so I wasn't able to
join in on the Florida Scoutmaster exchange on an timely basis.
I will have a few tidbits to offer, likely on the morrow. --
Cheers, MJ-/CIA-NAUGHT

*Gad!  Sure hope my spousal associate doesn't see this.  She'll
start asking for the damn' Swiss bank account number again.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 9

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: RobIrving@aol.com
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 00:37:39 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 09 Jun 1998 01:07:31 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

> To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
> From: "Jerome Clark" <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs
> Date: Mon, 08 Jun 98 08:16:23 PDT

Jerome,

>  See, for example, the forthcoming statement by a panel of
>  American scientists who have examined UFO data.

Available where?

>  > Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see it. Perhaps you can point me
>  > in the right direction?

> For a start, I urge you to subscribe to IUR and the Journal of
> UFO Studies, neither of which you read, as far as I know.
> (Inquire at J. Allen Hynek Center for UFO Studies, 2457 West
> Peterson Avenue, Chicago, Illinois 60659.) My UFO Encyclopedia
> chronicles many of the debates within ufology about theories,
> cases, and so on and, moreover, provides an extensive
> bibliography.

Thanks. The trouble is, those envelopes over there are way out of
reach of this armchair, and, moreover, the stamps are buried
under all my copies of UFO Reality. Only joking. No, I'm serious.
It's difficult to tell.

>  I am at a loss to understand the reference to "twisting Occam's
>  razor in favor of the ET Hypothesis."  Maybe you have me confused
>  with somebody else.

Maybe I was talking more generally, or indeed about someone else.
I may have written it just after reading Bruce's message. Don't
jump to conclusions - as in, seemingly, your swan-dive response
to Greg:

>>  An excellent point, Greg, and a rhetorical strategy on the part
>>  of the ETHphobes that's getting not only boring but irritatingly
>>  transparent.  Simply deny that any good evidence exists, point to
>>  the most absurd beliefs as if even the most conservative
>>  proponents were answerable for them, and declare the subject
>>  closed.

You really read my initial message that way? Or maybe you were
talking generally too?

>  And I appreciate your concern about my knee.  Actually,
>  I have always been more worried about the condition of yours. I
>  guess that makes us a couple of considerate guys.

Or perhaps a little wary of progressive cartilage problems.

Rob







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 9

                     Open Letter From Pamela Stonebrooke

From: Pamela Stonebrook <galactic_diva@mail.telis.org>
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 20:43:06 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Tue, 09 Jun 1998 02:31:43 -0400
Subject: Open Letter From Pamela Stonebrooke


AN OPEN LETTER FROM PAMELA STONEBROOKE
TO THE MEMBERS OF THE UFO COMMUNITY

I'm writing this in response to John Velez' comments about the
news item that appeared in a recent issue of The New York Post
about my forthcoming book, Experiencer: A Jazz Singer's True
Account of Extraterrestrial Contact.

Since the article unfortunately conveyed the impression that the
book would be sensationalistic, it seems appropriate that I
share some thoughts with you, and set the record straight about
the book I am writing. I know that The New York Post piece
seriously misrepresented the true nature of the book.

The book is multi-faceted, and treats the abduction phenomenon,
in all of its complexity, with the sensitivity, respect and
seriousness it deserves, presenting not only my own experiences,
but those of other experiencers as well. The editor of the book
is Leslie Meredith, one of the most highly respected editors in
New York. She was the senior editor for the Bantam New Age
paperback series of books, and has worked on many books that
have been instrumental in raising people's consciousness. I'm
extremely grateful to be working with her, and also with Sandra
Martin, who is a wonderful human being and a visionary among
literary agents. I believe that Leslie wishes to publish the
book because I'll be examining and exploring my contact
experiences in light of their transformative aspects,
recognizing that the phenomenon is, and can be, an incredible
catalyst for expanded self-awareness. Interaction with
extraterrestrial intelligence has many aspects, of course, but
the transformational aspect is fundamental to me.

The book will tell about my reptilian encounters, a subject that
very few women are prepared to go public with or speak openly
about. I praise the courage of the few that already have - and
endured public ridicule as a result. Reptilians are not a
politically correct species in the UFO community, and to admit
to having sex with one - much less enjoying it - is beyond the
pale as far as the more conservative members of that community
are concerned. But I know from my extensive reading and
research, and from talking personally to dozens of other women
(and men) that I am not unique in reporting this kind of
experience. I am the first to admit that this is a vastly
complex subject, a kind of hall of mirrors, where dimensional
realities are constantly shifting and changing. Certainly, the
reptilians use sex to control people in various ways. They have
the ability to shape-shift and to control the mind of the
experiencer, as well as to give tremendous pleasure through
their mental powers. I have wrestled with all of these
implications and the various levels of meaning and possibilities
represented by my encounter experiences. I will say, however, as
I have said before, that I feel a deep respect for the reptilian
entity with whom I interacted, and a profound connection with
this being. In a past life regression I did recently, I went to
a very remote period in earth's history (perhaps hundreds of
thousands of years ago), and saw myself as one of a brotherhood
of reptilian warriors facing a catastrophic event in which we
perished together (it was possibly nuclear in nature, since I
saw a red cloud and felt tremendous heat). I believe that on one
level, I may be meeting these entities again, perhaps fellow
warriors from the past warning us of an impending,
self-inflicted doom - or perhaps they are different aspects of
myself. I don't really know; I'm just trying to unravel this
puzzle like everyone else.

Following my initial Art Bell interview, I received hundreds of
letters and e-mails, many from people describing similar
encounters to mine. I know that there are people out there who
are suffering in isolation and silence, thinking they are going
crazy. I have been able to give some of these people strength
and courage, so that they can move through their fear and come
out the other side, empowered and still able to celebrate life
as the incredible adventure that it truly is. I know that when I
was processing my Grey experiences, if it had not been for
people like John Mack, Budd Hopkins, Kim Carlsberg, Whitley
Strieber, John Carpenter, and other researchers and experiencers
who have been courageous enough to come forward, putting their
lives and reputations on the line, I would have stayed in fear a
lot longer, cowering in a corner, my self-esteem and identity
shattered. Thanks to them and to the wonderful members of my
support group, I am still standing, intact and whole.

I believe that the alien abduction experience is profoundly
linked to the momentous shift in consciousness that is occurring
as we enter the new millennium. We are witnesses to and
participants in the most fantastic era in human history. And
contrary to the mood of pessimism from some individuals
regarding the way mainstream media treats the UFO phenomenon,
and the trepidation that is felt regarding its ultimate impact
on the human race, I am unashamedly a "Positive." Everywhere I
turn, I find much greater public acceptance of the alien
abduction/UFO phenomenon, and active curiosity from enormous
numbers of people. I am also encouraged by the fact that many
more experiencers are coming forward, no longer hiding behind
the cloak of anonymity. I believe that within ten years the
reality of alien abduction will be accepted as a fact by the
majority of people on this planet, and ridicule of the subject
by the media or anyone else will be regarded as naive and
irresponsible.

I think the problem that exists between ufology and the media
stems from the fact that the UFO community has been so sadly
wounded in the past fifty years by rejection and ridicule that
it has been somewhat demoralized as a movement. It has been a
long, uphill battle, with many martyrs shedding their blood
along the way, but I believe that we are winning the battle for
public acceptance and are closer than ever before to solving the
mystery of the alien presence itself. I am looking forward to
appearing on major TV talk-shows, and to bringing the message
directly to the public about this phenomenon. This is a subject
that must - and will - be taken seriously, even, eventually, by
the likes of Leno and Letterman. I was amazed, I might add, by
the number of editors in the New York publishing community who
are "believers," and I predict that within the next few years,
UFO and abduction books will routinely top the bestseller lists
as the public hungers to learn more about what our encounters
mean, and their implications for the human race.

If my book is successful, everyone in the UFO community will
benefit. The floodgates are about to open, and when they do, all
experiencers, UFO investigators, writers and researchers will
find wider acceptance for their work. The days and years ahead
are going to be full of challenges and opportunities, but we
need to change ourselves in order to change the world. We need
to work together harmoniously with mutual understanding and
respect.

I want to thank everyone who is willing to cut me some slack
with regard to the article in The New York Post. I'm sure it
won't be the last test of my strength or your discernment.
Please keep those stones in hand until you read my book. I am
confident that if and when you do, you will be able to recommend
it to experiencers and non-experiencers alike.

I would also like to thank everyone in the UFO community who has
assisted me on my journey to awareness these past five years.

Peace,

Pamela Stonebrooke







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 9

                         London [UK] UFO Conference

From: Graham William Birdsall <106151.1150@compuserve.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 05:44:11 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 09 Jun 1998 08:10:33 -0400
Subject: London [UK] UFO Conference

Dear Colleagues,

A.J. Gevaerd (Brazil) and James Courant (USA) will be among the
speakers at a special one-day conference sponsored by UFO
Magazine (UK) at the Great Hall, Imperial College, London, on
Saturday 20th June 1998.

Other speakers include:

* Author and UFO researcher Nick Redfern (UK), speaking about his
  new book, 'The FBI UFO Files'.

* UFO Magazine editor Graham W. Birdsall (UK).

* Ananda Sirisena (Sri Lanka), discussing the latest Mars Global
  Surveyor images gleaned from Cydonia.

PLUS!! In a "world exclusive", we will also be screening segments
from a forthcoming major British TV documentary, to be screened
later this Autumn, featuring the Varginha incident.

Admission is just =A312.50 (concessions =A310.00).

Doors Open: 9.30am

First Lecture commences at 10.30am

Close at 7.00pm

Advance tickets can still be obtained through Quest Publications
International Ltd on ++01943 850860 (Mon - Fri  9.00am - 6.00pm)
or through our Conference Web Site: http://www.ufomag.co.uk

Tickets can also be reserved for payment at the door up to and
including Thursday, 18th June, by dialling ++01943 850860

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 9

                 Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General

From: "Steven Kaeser" <steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 06:45:54 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 09 Jun 1998 08:16:15 -0400
Subject: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General

>From: Robert Todd <RTodd12191@aol.com>
>Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 12:55:33 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General

>> From: "Steven Kaeser" <steve@konsulting.com>
>> To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General
>> Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 22:14:07 -0400

>> >From: Robert Todd <RTodd12191@aol.com>
>> >Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 14:58:39 EDT
>> >To: updates@globalserve.net
>> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General

>> <Robert Todd response deleted for brevity>

><snip>

>> >Perhaps Mr. Kaeser could tell us at which "numerous events"
>> >Prof. Moore has "share[d] his 'truth'"?

>> His comments offered at the New Mexico Institute of Mining and
>> Technology (NMIMT) were posted to the Internet several years ago,
>> and the book you mentioned that he co-authored was released about
>> a year or so after that. It seems that Prof. Moore felt the need
>> to speak about the subject at some level, but I certainly
>> wouldn't compare his involvement to that of UFO proponents.

>So, according to your information, the "numerous events" total
>two. Impressive.

Indeed. Moving from obscurity to the level of speaker, and then
to writer. This appears to show a pattern that indicates that he
no longer can truly be considered to be a dis-interested
scientist examining the evidence.  No, I'm not claiming that he
is now a flaming skeptic who seeks out forums to spread his
"truth".

>I would like to think I had something to do with Prof. Moore
>agreeing to co-author the book. I thought the information he put
>in that book was important, and should be on the record for the
>public to find somewhere. It also was an opportunity to clear up
>some of the mistakes that crept into the Air Force's first
>Roswell report. I see absolutely nothing wrong with Prof.
>Moore's motivations in deciding to do the book, which, even
>then, was done reluctantly. Contrary to the picture you paint of
>Prof. Moor'e activities, he is quite disinterested in the
>subject of Roswell, and he feels he has said all he can and
>needs to say on the subject.

From what I've seen, Prof. Moore has led an exciting life and
should be given every opportunity to pursue whatever he wants at
this stage of his life.  I've no idea why he would want to expose
himself to, or become involved in, the crazy genre of ufology.

<snip>

>> That is not the way Dr. Marcel portrayed the meeting during a
>> presentation in Roswell last year, but how the meeting came about
>> isn't really an issue.

>Neither I nor Prof. Moore exercises any control over how Dr.
>Marcel portrays any of the facts, real and imagined, he chooses
>to discuss in public. Prof. Moore was quite emphatic that he had
>never contacted Dr. Marcel. I know Captain McAndrew contacted
>Dr. Marcel, but not Prof. Moore. Perhaps he or you are confusing
>the two.

I have forwarded a query to Dr. Marcel, and will correct my
statement if you are correct.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 9

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: John Rimmer <johnr@magonia.demon.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 13:26:12 +0100
Fwd Date: Tue, 09 Jun 1998 10:07:19 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs
>Date: Mon, 08 Jun 98 22:11:16 PDT

>> Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 11:47:57 +0100
>> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>> From: John Rimmer <johnr@magonia.demon.co.uk>
>> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

>The only serious testable psychosocial hypothesis, and I admire
>him for having the guts to propose it, was offered by Peter
>Rogerson in the July 1986 issue of Magonia, wherein he predicted,
>"ALL contactees and abductees will be [found to be] fantasy-
>prone personalities. The vast majority of CE3 percipients will
>be CE3s."  As we know now -- actually, have known for a while
>now -- this has not proven to be the case.  Nice try, though,
>Peter, and I don't mean that sarcastically.  Would that your
>colleagues, including John (who proposes an amazingly
>fuzzy claim to a testable hypothesis in his current posting),
>had your courage and precision.

Before we reject Peter's prediction totally, I wonder just how
many abductees _have_ undertaken the necessary psychological
tests to prove that one way or the other?

--
John Rimmer






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 9

                             Astronauts & UFOs?

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
Date: Tue, 09 Jun 1998 10:26:58 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 09 Jun 1998 10:26:58 -0400
Subject: Astronauts & UFOs?





At the risk of setting off _another_ firestorm.....

While reading Nick Redfern's book on a subway train yesterday,
(one of the few opportunities to read hardcopy <g>) I came
across the following. Leading a relatively sheltered life
in 'The Great White North', I don't recall having heard of
this one before.

Perhaps a Canadian colleague 'out-west' would care to check
it out?

ebk
______________________________

Excerpt from:

The FBI Files
by
Nicholas Redfern

Published by Simon & Schuster (1997)
ISDN 0-684-85148-2

Chapter 6
Soccorro and Beyond
pages 132-135

A heavily censored Bureau memorandum of 2 September 1965 gives
an indication that a source within the National Aeronautics and
Space Administration (NASA) had access to incredible UFO data,
and Furthermore that the same individual was covertly passing it
on to persons without official clearance. According to the
memorandum, 'a source' had advised the FBI office at Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania, that two people (one of whom was a graduate
student at Pittsburgh University were 'acquainted with a NASA
employee, [name censored], and have stated that he furnishes
them information by mail about unidentified flying objects (UFO)
which he obtains from NASA files. The source believes that the
information furnished may be classified'.

The document continued: 'The source said, for example, that
[censored] had seen a motion picture film showing a missile
separation and an UFO appearing on the screen. Prior to the
flight of Gemini 4, [censored] said to watch out for something
interesting because the space ship had devices aboard to detect
UFOs.'

Proof that the information imparted by the NASA employee was
considered somewhat sensitive is shown by a further extract from
the document: '[The NASA mole] posts his letters in a mail box
away From NASA and puts hairs in the glue on the envelope so
that the addressee can determine if the envelope was opened.
This source stated he had no reason to believe that the
information was going to any foreign power.'

Claims that US astronauts have seen unusual phenomena outside
the confines of Earth's atmosphere have never been denied by
NASA; however, there is a public belief on its part that such
sightings are of no particular significance, as the following
statement issued by NASA's Public Service Branch shows: 'During
several space missions NASA astronauts reported phenomena not
immediately explainable. However, in every instance NASA
satisfied itself that what had been observed was nothing which
could be termed abnormal in the space environment.' Despite
this, rumours have long persisted that NASA is concealing from
the public data which, if released, would confirm that some UFOs
are extraterrestrial in origin.

In a question-and-answer session following a lecture at the
planetarium in Calgary, Canada, in the late 1960s, Dr Garry
Henderson, a research scientist with General Dynamics, told John
Hopkins, a feature writer with the Calgary Herald, that US
astronauts have not only viewed UFOs, but on occasion have
succeeded in obtaining both still and motion-picture film of
UFOs in flight, and that, 'NASA has instructed the astronauts
never to breathe a word of their UFO encounters'." Henderson's
revelations that NASA has in its possession actual movie footage
of UFOs tend a great deal of credence to the claims of the NASA
individual cited by the FBI in September 1965.

I do not know what became of the NASA source, but there can be
no doubt from reading the relevant FBI records that his name was
known to the Bureau. Presumably, therefore, the FBI would have
informed NASA that one of its employees was talking out of turn.
That the FBI was apparently not tasked with this matter again
(at least, this is the inference one gets from reading the
available papers) suggests that, whoever the source was, he was
swiftly and effectively silenced.

[End of excerpt]

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 9

                            Cosmonauts and UFOs?

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
Date: Tue, 09 Jun 1998 10:33:13 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 09 Jun 1998 10:33:13 -0400
Subject: Cosmonauts and UFOs?





From: The CSETI Website

http://www.cseti.org/position/addition/russian.htm

Cosmonaut Shadowed By Structured UFO


In April of 1979, Cosmonaut Victor Afanasyev lifted off from
Star City to dock with the Soviet Solyut 6 space station. But
while en route, something strange happened. Cosmonaut Afanasyev
saw an unidentified object turn toward his craft and begin
tailing it through space.

"It followed us during half of our orbit. We observed it on the
light side, and when we entered the shadow side, it disappeared
completely. It was an engineering structure, made from some type
of metal, approximately 40 meters long with inner hulls. The
object was narrow here and wider here, and inside there were
openings. Some places had projections like small wings. The
object stayed very close to us. We photographed it, and our
photos showed it to be 23 to 28 meters away."

In addition to photographing the UFO, Afanasyev continually
reported back to Mission Control about the craft's size, its
shape and position. When the cosmonaut returned to earth he was
debriefed and told never to reveal what he knew, and had his
cameras and film confiscated.

Those photos and his voice transmissions from space have never
been released.

It is only now, with the collapse of the Soviet Union that
Afanasyev feels that he can safely tell his story.

"It is still classified as a UFO because we have yet to identify
the object."

From: "Sightings" TV
___________________________

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 9

                 Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General

From: "Stanton T. Friedman" <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Tue, 09 Jun 1998 09:29:43 -0300
Fwd Date: Tue, 09 Jun 1998 10:14:53 -0400
Subject: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General


> From: Robert Todd <RTodd12191@aol.com>
> Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 13:01:32 EDT
> To: updates@globalserve.net
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General

<snip>

> After I furnished Prof. Moore with the July 9, 1947 article from
> the RDR, he went to the University of New Mexico microfilm
> archive in Albuquerque where he read and copied all of the
> flying saucer and related stories from early June, 1947 until
> September from most of the New Mexico papers. Incidentally, the
> July 8 RDR article does _not_ say the debris was discovered
> "last week," as might be assumed from Mr. Friedman's statement.
> So certainly Prof. Moore cannot be accused of examining only a
> "selective choice of data."

> I am always amused by Friedman's accusation of "selective choice
> of data . . . ."  Where conflicting stories exist, it is
> impossible not to choose data. Mr. Friedman himself does it, and
> so does Mr. Randle. Obviously, all the claims cannot be true.
> Mr. Friedman's use of that pithy little phrase essentially is
> nonsense intended to dismiss information that conflicts with
> what he believes, or pretends to believe about the Roswell case.

> I furnished Prof. Moore with the article from the Roswell Daily
> Record that contained Mac Brazel's descriptions of the Roswell
> debris, which, not incidentally, jibe with the descriptions the
> other witnesses gave of the same debris. Except, of course, that
> Roswell promoters like Messrs. Randle and Friedman contend that
> Mac Brazel was lying, and the balsa wood wasn't balsa wood, and
> the aluminum foil wasn't aluminum foil, and the debris had those
> magical alien properties that made it indestructible.

> Long ago I recognized the futility of debating the subject of
> Roswell. I have tried, as best I can, to avoid the debate. I
> would not have involved myself with the debate on the UFO
> Updates list had Mr. Kaeser not implied that Prof. Moore either
> was a fool or a co-conspirator in the alleged "Cosmic
> Watergate." Mr. Randle's most recent attempt at deceiving the
> UFO Updates list members was close by, and was relatively easy
> to debunk, so I did. I'm sure this won't stop Mr. Randle from
> raising the issue yet again at some future date, and claiming it
> proves the pilots at Roswell Army Air Field knew all about the
> "Mogul balloons."

<snip>

> If either Mr. Randle or Mr. Friedman chooses to respond to this
> posting, he'll get a free ride in that they can say anything
> they like, because I don't plan on reading their responses, let
> alone responding to them. I've had more than my fill of Roswell.
> They may resume their misinforming, disinforming, and lying.
> I've got more important things to do. For me, the Roswell
> incident is "CASE CLOSED." Like Prof. Moore, I have nothing
> more to say on the case.

> Robert Todd

The first three July 8, 1947, front page Roswell related
articles which I picked up all include the line "the public
information officer of the Roswell Army Air Field announced the
find had been made "sometime last week". These were the Spokane
Daily Chronicle, The Sacramento Bee, and the Chicago Daily News..
Obviously when the original wire service story went out, there
were calls to Roswell and more details were added throughout the
day.

I certainly wish to thank Bob Todd for making it clear that C.B.
Moore hadn't been aware of other details than those in the July 9
article. But of course there were other details in The Roswell
Incident and in a host of papers..

I repeat: Berliner and I had cordial meetings with Moore and
Duke. In our discussions later it was clear that the 2 had only
limited knowledge of the events and descriptions. Anybody who
wants my free 5 page review of Captain McAndrew's CASE CLOSED
volume can send an SASE to me at

POB 958, Houlton,
ME 04730-0958
USA

Stan Friedman





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 9

                              Re: The Ten Cases

From: RobIrving@aol.com
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 10:50:42 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 09 Jun 1998 12:33:00 -0400
Subject: Re: The Ten Cases

> From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
> Subject: UFO UpDate: The Ten Cases [was Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs]
> Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 03:05:01 -0400
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

Mark,

>  1.   Performance- Hill, 7/16/1952, Virginia, triangulated,
>  multiple witness, 120 g turns

>  2.   Performance- Marignane, 1952, 18G acceleration,
>  1 witness

>  3.   Structure-  Moreland, 7/13/1959, New Zealand,
>  1 witness

>  4.   Interest in and interference with vehicles- Levelland,
>  1957, 15 witnesses

>  5.   Unconventional physics- Beaver Falls, PA photo, 1965
>  (luminosity, non-visible EM emissions), 2 witnesses

>  6.   Escape velocity (25k mph)- 4/24/1949, White Sands,
>  theodolite tracking, 4 witnesses

>  7.   Departure to high altitude- Loch Raven Dam, 1958,
>  2 witnesses

>  8.   Beings in association with UFO- 1/1/70,  Vancouver
>  Isl., Canada, 2 witnesses

>  9.   Sample gathering- Valensole, 1965, 1 witness

>  10.  Interest in humans- Kelly-Hopkinsville, Aug. 21,
>  1955, several witnesses

The thing that stands out is how old these cases are, the latest
a mere 28 years ago. I'm not implying anything by that, but it
does seem strange considering all the razzmatazz we currently
hear.

Anyway, out of all of these cases what is the most compelling
physical evidence available? Did any of these witnesses produce
photographs, or report physiological effects that were confirmed
later by doctors, etc?

Or are they purely witness accounts? If that's the case, why are
these accounts more compelling to you than, say, a CSETI lights-
fest, resulting in a "near-landing" of a "metallic structured
craft"?

Re. 4... sounds interesting. Can you or anyone forward more
info?

Re. 5... 'PA Photo' What does this mean? That the image
eventually ended up with the PA library? Where can I get easy
access to this image... do you have a scan of it that you can
send for me to see?

Re. 8... What exactly did the witnesses report the beings as
doing?

Genuinely interested. I'd save you the trouble of telling me to
"read the literature" by doing it, except that I have a pile of
books to read on other, perhaps more pressing matters. I'm sure
you understand.

As an aside, all the hoo-ha about the so-called Sheffield
'incident' makes me wonder about how that might read in 28
years. Judging from the sudden upsurge in private messages
arriving in my inbox after my raising a question here, it seems
its main proponent, Max Burns, is intent on ensuring the story
doesn't die, probably 'til long after David Clarke has moved on
(if he hasn't already).

See what I'm getting at here? Even the hokiest stories have a
way of being the most persistent...

>  9.   Sample gathering- Valensole, 1965, 1 witness

Excuse my ignorance - but wasn't that the French farmer with, if
I recall correctly, the lavender field; an early crop circle
case? That relevant book on the shelf over there is way out of
reach, so I may be wrong on this.

Thanks Mark,

Rob





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 9

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: "Jerome Clark" <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Tue, 09 Jun 98 10:36:51 PDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 09 Jun 1998 16:43:24 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

John,

The best overview of this subject is Stuart Appelle's "The
Abduction Experience: A Critical Evaluation of Theory and
Evidence," JUFOS 6 (n.s., 1995/1996): 29-78.  See in particular
the discussion on pp. 35-37.  Appelle surveys the various studies
and finds that the fantasy-prone hypothesis has not survived
testing.  Among others he cites a study conducted by the late
Nicholas Spanos and associates, who reported that their findings
"clearly contradict the hypothesis that UFO reports -- even
intense UFO reports characterized by such seemingly bizarre
experiences as missing time and communication with aliens --
occur primarily in individuals who are highly fantasy-prone."

Cheers,

Jerry Clark


----------
> Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 13:26:12 +0100
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> From: John Rimmer <johnr@magonia.demon.co.uk>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs
>
> >To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
> >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs
> >Date: Mon, 08 Jun 98 22:11:16 PDT
>
> >> Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 11:47:57 +0100
> >> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> >> From: John Rimmer <johnr@magonia.demon.co.uk>
> >> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs
>
> >The only serious testable psychosocial hypothesis, and I admire
> >him for having the guts to propose it, was offered by Peter
> >Rogerson in the July 1986 issue of Magonia, wherein he predicted,
> >"ALL contactees and abductees will be [found to be] fantasy-
> >prone personalities. The vast majority of CE3 percipients will
> >be CE3s."  As we know now -- actually, have known for a while
> >now -- this has not proven to be the case.  Nice try, though,
> >Peter, and I don't mean that sarcastically.  Would that your
> >colleagues, including John (who proposes an amazingly
> >fuzzy claim to a testable hypothesis in his current posting),
> >had your courage and precision.
>
> Before we reject Peter's prediction totally, I wonder just how
> many abductees _have_ undertaken the necessary psychological
> tests to prove that one way or the other?
>
> --
> John Rimmer
>
>
>
> \_______________________________________________/
>
>  UFO UpDates - Toronto - updates@globalserve.net
>  A UFO & Related Phenomena E-Mail List operated
>  by Errol Bruce-Knapp - 416-691-0716
>
>  UFO UpDates Archives are available at
>  http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates

>
>  MUFON Ontario's Home Page:
>  http://www.globalserve.net/~updates/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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 9

                 Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 12:03:49 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 09 Jun 1998 12:49:03 -0400
Subject: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General


>From: Robert Todd <RTodd12191@aol.com>
>Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 13:01:32 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General


>> Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 08:32:41 -0300
>> From: Stanton T. Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
>> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General

>> > From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
>> > Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 15:48:21 EDT
>> > To: updates@globalserve.net
>> > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General

>> > >From: Robert Todd <RTodd12191@aol.com>
>> > >Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 14:58:39 EDT
> >> >To: updates@globalserve.net
> >> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General

<snip>

> Long ago I recognized the futility of debating the subject of
>Roswell. I have tried, as best I can, to avoid the debate. I
>would not have involved myself with the debate on the UFO
>Updates list had Mr. Kaeser not implied that Prof. Moore either
>was a fool or a co-conspirator in the alleged "Cosmic
>Watergate." Mr. Randle's most recent attempt at deceiving the
>UFO Updates list members was close by, and was relatively easy
>to debunk, so I did. I'm sure this won't stop Mr. Randle from
>raising the issue yet again at some future date, and claiming it
>proves the pilots at Roswell Army Air Field knew all about the
>"Mogul balloons."

My point was that a CAA requirement did exist. My point was that
Mogul wasn't all that secret, though the purpose behind the project
was. Todd said they "didn't get legal" until September which means
they were in violation of the rules that had been set down.

Charles Moore told me that a number of the NYU team had gone
to Roswell in June to enlist their aid in tracking and recovering their
balloons but the officers had no time for a bunch of "college boys."

In other words, even if the NYU team did not issue the required
NOTAM until September, members of the team had still gone to
Roswell BEFORE the events of July 4, in an attempt to enlist
aid. There were men at Roswell who know about the balloon
launchings.

More importantly, the launchings were of common weather
balloons and radar targets. There was nothing classified about
the equipment. It would have been recognizable to anyone who
saw it... not meaning they could say, this is a rawin target, but
could realize that it was something terrestrial, as happened in
Circleville, Ohio early in July.

The Mogul arrays also carried a card asking for the return of the
material... Oh, that's right, all the flights had the card EXCEPT
No. 4 because it was the first.

Besides, it wasn't necessary for all the pilots at Roswell to know
about the Mogul flights, which is not what I said. I was suggesting
that a mechanism existed to provide that data to the pilots. Moore
confirmed communication with Roswell prior to the launchings.

> This is, for me, my last posting regarding Roswell. I am
> satisfied that the explanation for the case can be found in the
> materials that were being flown by New York University in
> support of Project Mogul. Messrs. Randle and Friedman will never
> agree with this explanation, and almost certainly will continue
>to deceive the public in their writings about the case. They
>both have misinformed, disinformed and lied outright about the
>case a number of times in the past, with Mr. Randle's most
>recent example being his posting to this list concerning the
>supposed requirement that notification of "Mogul balloon"
>flights be reported in the NOTAMs. While notifications were
>necessary _eventually_, it wasn't until _after_ the Roswell
>incident had already occurred.

>If either Mr. Randle or Mr. Friedman chooses to respond to this
>posting, he'll get a free ride in that they can say anything
>they like, because I don't plan on reading their responses, let
>alone responding to them. I've had more than my fill of Roswell.
>They may resume their misinforming, disinforming, and lying.
>I've got more important things to do. For me, the Roswell
>incident is "CASE CLOSED." Like Prof. Moore, I have nothing
>more to say on the case.

> Robert Todd

Please note that neither Stan nor I reduced our arguments here to
name calling. Please note that we couldn't be disinforming
because that refers to government action. Please note that Prof.
Moore can't be a disinterested third party any more because he
had published a book on the topic and has taken a public stand.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 9

                     Re: TV Show Looking For Your Input

From: Neil Morris <Neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 09 Jun 1998 18:00:42 +0100
Fwd Date: Tue, 09 Jun 1998 16:49:19 -0400
Subject: Re: TV Show Looking For Your Input

Philip Mantle wrote:

> Today I was contacted by one of Britain's cable TV channels, LIVE TV.
> They have a show called 'The Y Files' which looks into the paranormal and
> UFO's.


Philip (and All),

We have "Live TV" on cable here in Manchester, most of it's
absolute crap!, even "Topless Darts" and "Exotica-Erotic", my
wife won't let me watch that<g>.

The Y Files is about the only thing near decent on it, but I
wonder if appearing on the channel would do much for anyone's
street-cred at the end of the day.

Just thought people who havn't got cable might like to know what
they would be getting into.

Neil.



--
*        *         *         *         *         *         *         *
Neil Morris.       /101101101 Virtual Bumper Stickers Inc 10110101010\
Dept of Physics.   1                                                 1
Univ of Manchester 0                                                 0
Schuster Labs.     1  Computer Programmers DO IT with BITS of BYTES  1
Brunswick St.      0                                                 0
Manchester.        1                                                 1
UK.                \0101010110010110110010110101101011011110101011010/
G8KOQ


             E-mail: neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk

Roswell and Alien Autopsy Archive->   http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/
Dave Willetts Home Page->     http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/dave_willetts/
Mike Sterling Home Page->     http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/mike-s/
Tim Morgan Home Page   ->     http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/tim-m/

*        *         *         *         *         *         *         *





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 9

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: "Keith Woodard" <qwoodard@worldnet.att.net>
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 08:38:06 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 09 Jun 1998 12:37:04 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

> Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 22:19:54 +0200
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> From: Jean van Gemert <jeanvg@dds.nl>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

> >Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 00:06:27 -0400
> >From: Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith]
> >Subject: Occam's Razor and UFOs
> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

> <snip>

> >*preferring* the solution that depends upon fewer "givens"
> >in the theorem. (I assume you did read your Euclid in the
> >upper third/first form/sixth grade at school.) There is no
> >question - you only have to count - that concluding UFO
> >reports are reports of ET visitors requires many more
> >"givens" than concluding they do not.

> Stop for one moment here, Peter, one important aspect just flew
> over your head. It's not enough that a hypothesis be "simple", It
> must also explain *all* the evidence to which it is directed.
> E.g., you argue earthlights are preferred to the ETH but in many
> of the cases that would require deliberately *filtering* out
> aspects of the observations the earthlight theory wouldn't be
> able to cope with.

> In other words, you'd be omitting part of the problem domain, and
> if the more "simple" explanation can account for only *part* of
> the evidence then it's not a sound application of Occam's Razor.

> The razor is just a logical tool which favors simplicity of
> complexity, but *not* in the face of contradictory evidence. That
> is, if the evidence suggests phenomena are more complex than one
> would like you can't call on the Razor to dismiss the
> contradictory evidence.

<snip>

I'm not sure it's quite that simple.

Occam's Razor is actually the principle underlying the dictum
Carl Sagan paraphrased from Marcello Truzzi: extraordinary claims
require extraordinary evidence.

Better evidence would be needed for someone's claim of traveling
to Chicago by teleportation than by plane.  In the absence of
remarkable support for the novel "entity" of teleportation,
explanations involving confusion, lying, false memory, altered
states or even mental illness would have a strong appeal.

Eyewitness claims are evidence, but it is sometimes unreasonable
to accept them at face value.  Whether they justify a radical
revision of our worldview depends on their quantity and, more
importantly, their quality.  As one who has recently moved from
soft skepticism to soft "belief," my sense is that, in the case
of UFO's, this remains a judgment call.

I'm still skeptical about crashes, contacts, and abductions.
However, I don't think an occasional swoop through our atmosphere
-- limited perhaps by some sort of "prime directive" -- would be
nearly as extraordinary as, say, Al Bielek being teleported to
Montauk. Astronomers expect myriad solar systems in our part of
the galaxy, some capable of supporting life.  Theoretical
physicists like Professor Michio Kaku give wormhole-mediated
faster-than-light travel a decent chance of viability, and, if it
is possible, it should be accessible to Type II civilizations.
My impression is that many astronomers take the "Fermi Paradox"
("Where the hell are they?") quite seriously.

So to conclude that we are at least probably being visited by
ET's should not require evidence as extraordinary as most
skeptics insist. Certainly physical evidence seems unreasonable
to demand of infrequent fly-by's.  (This is especially true if
Kent Jeffrey is in the ballpark regarding saucer reliability.
And my information is that the Grey's are held to exacting safety
standards by the Reptilian Astronautics Administration.)

Fermi's Paradox is also the reason Occam's Razor favors the ETH
over the extradimensional theory.  The only other dimensions
physicists think likely to exist are believed curled up to
something like Planck length.  There is no reason to think any
contain solar systems, much less life.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 9

                 Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General

From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 11:50:42 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 09 Jun 1998 12:38:38 -0400
Subject: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General

Just a related question.  Has anyone who ordered prints from
the U of T gotten them yet?

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 9

                        UK TV Show Looking For Input

From: Philip Mantle <el51@dial.pipex.com>
Date: Tue, 09 Jun 1998 06:33:27 +0000
Fwd Date: Tue, 09 Jun 1998 16:46:25 -0400
Subject: UK TV Show Looking For Input

Today I was contacted by one of Britain's cable TV channels, LIVE
TV. They have a show called 'The Y Files' which looks into the
paranormal and UFOs.

They are on the look out for people to appear on the show,
realter their sighting or experience.

If you are interested in contacting the show they are not on-line
but you can phone or fax Julian Corner at Live Tv on:

telephone: 0171 293 3900 exte 2375.
Fax:       0171 293 3820.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 9

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: "Greg Sandow" <gsandow@prodigy.net>
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 09:48:34 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 09 Jun 1998 12:18:15 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


> From: RobIrving@aol.com
> Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 23:40:29 EDT
> To: updates@globalserve.net
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

> Off the cuff... responsible ufology would be to cast a suspicious
> eye on populist ufology, to perhaps create some distance from it.
> Then you'd have to get used to being classified a sceptic, with a
> 'k', as opposed to a believer, and to enjoy many idle hours,
> days, months, years, even decades in Rimmer's case, educating
> those who never seem able to grasp the full concept of
> scepticism.


> >  Where does "populist" ufology fit in what I was talking about?

> Maybe I've been mixing with the wrong company, but I referred to
> the loudest, the ones with the boldest claims, those that reach
> the biggest audience, who create the mythologies that you say
> could prove so beneficial to science in the long run.

Wow. I'd better play that unreleased Elvis cut once more, just
to get my feet back on the ground.

This still doesn't explain what populist ufology, by any
concept, had to do with what I talked about in my original Occam
post. I referred to "responsible ufology." Rob's concept of it
might be different from mine, but I'd say he's still very far
from the ground zero of what I wrote.

Nor did I say scientists were influenced by UFO mythology. I
said they were influenced by science fiction, now that it's
taken a dominant position in popular culture. (However, I now
begin to understand Rob's rhetorical style.)

>
> Like it or not, rather like the apathetic downtrodden, all the
> time no mutually agreed standard of evidence exists you are stuck
> with the likes of Hesemann, Greer, Simms and Leir, etc., as
> representing the ETH, as much as anyone.
>

If I were British, I would respond with a quick, dry "Really."
But since I'm from New York, with affectionate ties to Brooklyn,
I'll say (with a tone of utter, derisive desbelief), "According
to you!"

The proof of this particular kugel (New York reference, Jewish
culture subdivision) lies in the eating. As I explained
elsewhere, nobody I meet, however skeptical, has ever associated
me or ETH believers in general with Greer, et al -- with one
variety of exception. That exception is Rob, and others who make
his present point. Which is indeed ironic. Rob tells me what's
going to happen to me in life, and lo! it does happen, but only
with him. If I were British, I'd mutter something here about
solipsism, but nobody from Brooklyn knows the word.

I've debated UFOs with skeptical debunkers, in public and
private, including a four-hour discussion with Phil Klass. Not
even he made Rob's point.

> >  (Elsewhere I've explained my belief that popular culture, despite
> >  its excesses, will probably do more to bring scientists to UFOs
> >  than all the responsible investigation we've ever done.

> What do you hope scientists will be attracted by that they aren't
> already? The British Defence Research Establishment spent
> millions developing a gun-mount system from an idea they got from
> the movie 'Alien II'. Theoretical physicist David Deutsch was
> inspired to enlarge the possibilities of time travel by watching
> the BBC's 'Dr Who'. It's not hard to imagine what modern
> archetypes flash through the minds of 'anti-gravity' or
> artificial intelligence specialists, etc=85 The valuable insight
> that came out of Kip Thorn's assistance to Carl Sagan, when he
> was writing 'Contact'... there must be many such examples.

> But if for some strange reason a respected body were to perform a
> sensible and thorough investigation into say, the 'alien
> autopsy', or cattle mutilations, the 'abduction' syndrome or crop
> circles, how would proponents of this 'evidence' of ET visitation
> take to prosaic conclusions? I expect the same as now - they
> wouldn't, because, let's face it, how many ETHers are really
> interested in applying any sort of scientific method?

> The ETH is driven by belief, with little if any evidence to
> support it, and is itself influenced by popular culture,
> simultaneously feeding and suckling off it.

Notice how Rob changes direction between the first of these
paragraphs, and the other two. In the first, he dazzles us by
knowing more about my point than I do (for which I thank him).
In the second paragraph, he heads off on a journey of his own.
What would be relevant here, I'd say, would be something more
like this:

"But if for some strange reason a respected body were to perform
a sensible and thorough investigation into UFOs in general...."

What's most important, though, is that paragraph one sticks
directly to my point, which was the influence of popular culture
on science. Paragraphs two and three are about something
entirely different, namely how ETH proponents (me and Steven
Greer, separated at birth) would react should scientists
investigate and reject the televised alien autopsy. This is
amusing, but irrrelevant. (Unless, of course, one's belief in
the foolishness of the ETH and those who espouse it has a fatal
magnetic attraction, and somehow drags one's prose in that
direction, regardless of where one started.)

> >  It spreads new paradigms, and a more open attitude toward things
> >  unknown=85
>
> Perhaps the Kuhnian picture of scientific knowledge held back by
> a blind adherence to existing paradigms is itself a myth? I've
> changed my mind on that recently - broadened my world-view you
> could say - having realised that there aren't that many examples
> to support it.
>

As I typed "paradigms," I thought to myself: "Hmmm...not really
the word I want. Too fancy." And yo! [New York variant of lo!]
Rob pounces on it. I wasn't thinking of Kuhn, or of science
blinded by a belief in older world-views. In fact, I was just
using a two-dollar word for "world view." Though I'm grateful
for the update on Rob's intellectual progress.

> >  particularly if they seem to touch on space and aliens.
>
> Why are aliens so particularly important? How much of your answer
> to that would you honestly put down to yearning?

Here's the full sentence Rob is responding to. "[Popular
culture] spreads new paradigms, and a more open attitude toward
things unknown, particularly if they seem to touch on space and
aliens." By this I meant something very simple -- popular
culture is suffused by images of aliens and space travel, and
simply because there are so many images of those things, popular
culture has a profound subliminal influence on our thinking
about them. My own beliefs don't come into play here, any more
than they would if I said that popular culture has influenced
more people to have or accept tattoos and piercings. (Though
maybe in the interest of full disclosure I should mention that I
have a tattoo.)

As for my own yearning...would someone who's up to his neck in
Budd Hopkins and Dave Jacobs be yearning, exactly, for visits by
aliens?

> >  In any case, if Hynek and McDonald couldn't pull > >  the
scientific community into the debate, what luck are > >
scientific ufologists now likely to have?) > > With sufficient
and clearly presented evidence I can't see much > of a problem.
What exactly is the problem, in your opinion? I > personally
don't accept the line that scientists are too worried > about
reputation to involve themselves in ufology - that argument >
doesn't hold water. >

What Rob or I personally care to accept is beside the point. What
matters is what scientists think. David Pritchard said recently that
peer pressure was pushing him away from UFOs, and John Mack was
publicly questioned by an official Harvard invesitgation. There we
have two gentlemen with professional scientific credentials who
organized a scientific conference on abductions, and paid for it. I
know of two other scientists who take part in abduction research, but
prefer to be anonymous, fearing what their colleagues would think.
Would Rob care to quote some UFO-involved scientists with contrary
views?

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 9

                          Florida Scoutmaster Case

From: Karl T. Pflock <Ktperehwon@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 16:33:13 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 09 Jun 1998 18:28:14 -0400
Subject: Florida Scoutmaster Case


GREETINGS LIST SLAVES--

I see my complete COPYRIGHTED paper on the subject case, "The
Best Hoax in UFO History?" (note well the question mark) is now
posted as planned on the Microsoft Network UFO site
< www.forums.msn.com/ufo/hoax1.htm >, so I'm saved a bit of
work here.

In their earlier posts on this case, Gary Alevy (GA)
and Kevin Randle (KR) wrote:

GA: The name of the scoutmaster in question was Sonny
GA: Desverges. This case was discussed within the past 6 months
GA: on a television documentary broadcast on a television
GA: station in New York City.

Actually, his name was D. S. [Dunham Sanborn] Desvergers (with
an "r"), pronounced DeVERges. "Sonny" was his nickname.

The TV show in question was a 2-hour "Sightings" special, "UFOs
-- The 100 Year Cover Up" [sic], on which I appeared on location
interviewing one of the Boy Scouts involved in the case plue two
other previously unknown witnesses with potentially very
important corroborating testimony (I'm still working on this).

GA: Curiously none of the locals, still living in the same
GA: locale, had anything negative to saw about the scoutmaster.
GA: They seemed to indicate that he had been railroaded by the
GA: military in the investigation of the UFO sighting.

In point of fact, only one of the locals, a delightful lady
named Vicki Oaks (one of the witnesses mentioned above) spoke
positively about Desvergers and suggested he'd been done wrong
by Uncle Sam. Fact is, everyone else I talked with
considered/knew him to have been a ne'er-do-well and a
tall-tale-telling publicity seeker, completely consistent with
what Ruppelt and company learned in spades in 1952. No one who's
looked into this case in any depth has any doubt Desvergers was
just that and likely more.

KR: Ruppelt (p. 241) wrote: 'I thought that we'd collected
KR: all the items that could be analyzed in a lab until
KR: somebody thought of one I'd missed, the most obvious of all
KR: - soil and grass samples from under the spot where the UFO
KR: had hovered. We'd had samples, but in the last-minute rush
KR: to get back to Dayton they had been left in Florida.'

"Later he suggested that the samples had been under the control
of the intelligence officer, but there is no documentation that
the samples were locked in a safe and inaccessible except by
authorized personnel. In other words, the chain of custody is
broken because we have no clue about where they were left, how
they were stored, or who might have had access to them.

Truth is, careful study of documents in the Bluebook case file
establishes with little room for doubt that the chain of custody
was NOT broken. The air force-collected samples were under the
control of the intelligence office of the 1707th Air Base Wing
at West Palm Beach International Airport from the time they were
collected. It is true we don't know who all MAY have had access
to the samples during the brief time they were in the local air
force intelligence office, but it is unlikely in the extreme
this intriguing physical evidence was accessible in such a way
and long enough for a hoaxer to do what was necessary to create
the highly unusual results. (Hey, Kevin, usetawas you were an
air force reserve intel. officer. Were you in the habit of
leaving evidence or other senstive material lying around where
just anyone could lay hands on it, remove it from your office,
muck about with it, and sneak it back in, all undetected?)

That said, however, there's no need for a hoaxer to have had
access to the samples during that period to have been able to
char the roots of the grass but not the above-ground portions of
the plants, thus creating the huge question mark which has hung
over this case for almost 46 years. There IS a way it could have
been done before the samples were collected, and the record
suggests who might have done it (see my above-ref'd.
paper)--although this still doesn't prove the evidence was
hoaxed. Fact is, absent anything definite one way or the other,
the only honest position one can take on this physical evidence
is to suspend judgment.

KR: (paraphrase; I lost the original during my recent
KR: software crisis):  "None of the other physical evidence
KR: stood up to scrutiny."

Not so, Kevin, although none of it--Desvergers' scorched and
burned cap, the hair singed off his arms--was of the sort that
could prove the scoutmaster was attacked by a flying saucer.
This physical evidence was undeniable, and although plausible
mundane, hoax-connected explanations were suggested by air force
investigators, nothing was found to back them up. In fact, such
evidence (e.g., flare residue) was completely lacking.

KR: "But why are we even talking about this case. It just
KR: doesn't deserve our attention."

Come on, Kevin, of course it does. It was one of the most highly
publicized and, because of the puzzling grass samples and the
scoutmaster's questionable- at-best character and antics, both
intriguing and frustrating cases of the "golden age of UFOs."
It is at the very least historically interesting and important,
and if further credible supporting information can be developed
(I'm working on it), it could re-emerge as an evidentiarily
significant incident. Hey, you included it in your PROJECT
BLUEBOOK EXPOSED, and you certainly know all about the latter
point, having turned a few bits of earthly tinfoil into a saucer
of gold yourself. Not, I hasten to add, that I'm suggesting
anything underhanded on your part (or that Roswell is
evidentiarily significant) and most certainly not that I would
do anything of that sort myself in re the Desvergers or any
other case.

As noted above, I continue to work on this case and will publish
more about it in the near future. In November, I hope to present
a paper with additional findings at the 1998 National UFO
Conference in New Jersey, sponsor resources permitting.
Meanwhile, those as may be interested can check out my paper on
the Microsoft site. Or, for those who like me prefer the real
thing in their hands, AUTOGRAPHED copies are available for $3.00
from Arcturus Books, 1443 S.E. Port St. Lucie Blvd., Port St.
Lucie, FL 34952, and, of course, the much shorter version can be
found along with many other very interesting and informative
articles in the hard-cover book UFOS:  1947-1997, edited by
Dennis Stacy and Hilary Evans, still available from Dennis,
<dstacy@texas.net> for ordering info.

-- Cheers and ad astra per ufologia (maybe), KARL





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 9

                     Re: TV Show Looking For Your Input

From: Jon Dyton <jon@wibble.powernet.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 23:24:26 +0100
Fwd Date: Tue, 09 Jun 1998 21:39:58 -0400
Subject: Re: TV Show Looking For Your Input

>Date: Tue, 09 Jun 1998 18:00:42 +0100
>From: Neil Morris <Neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: TV Show Looking For Your Input


>Philip (and All),

>We have "Live TV" on cable here in Manchester, most of it's
>absolute crap!, even "Topless Darts" and "Exotica-Erotic", my
>wife won't let me watch that<g>.

>The Y Files is about the only thing near decent on it, but I
>wonder if appearing on the channel would do much for anyone's
>street-cred at the end of the day.

>Just thought people who havn't got cable might like to know what
>they would be getting into.

>Neil.

We have it in Milton Keynes. They only have 3 shows. The one from
the pub, the one in a hotel and the one in a stately home, all 3
in need of the cash and exposure....

They have associations with Encounters magazine to further count
against them...

Cheers Jon






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 9

                  Re: Chat with Karl Pflock, UFO Researcher

From: Sean Jones <Tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 21:32:57 +0100
Fwd Date: Tue, 09 Jun 1998 21:02:43 -0400
Subject: Re: Chat with Karl Pflock, UFO Researcher


>From: Yvonne Hedenland <vonni_h@email.msn.com>
>To: <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Chat with Karl Pflock, UFO Researcher
>Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 12:42:59 -0500

>Skeptic Believer?

>Most recently known for his support of the Project Mogul theory
>on Roswell, Pflock has quite a few surprises up his sleeve. Join
>this UFO researcher June 9th at 6pm PT, for a look at some UFO
>cases that pass the acid test and are worth serious
>consideration, including the Betty & Barney Hill abduction case.
>This chat is available at http://forums.msn.com

>The Briefing Room chat can be accessed by any IRC client. The
>chat server name is publicchat.msn.com and the room or channel
>name is #briefing.

>The Netshow Audio interview with Karl Pflock is available now at
>http://forums.msn.com

Hi Yvonne

Is there any chance you could post the log of the chat? Or a url
from where it can be read please.

---
      People can have it any colour, as long as its black!
                       Sean Jones
 Homepage--http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Zone/1745/index.htm
         Research 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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 9

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: Jeff King <Boroimhe@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 19:22:23 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 09 Jun 1998 21:49:18 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


Greetings to the list:

>From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net
>Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 09:31:07 -0400
>Fwd Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 23:11:21 -0400
>Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

>> Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 18:46:27 -0500 (CDT)
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>> From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

>What might falsify the ETH?

Isn't this a question proponents of the ETH, rather than the PH,
should answer?  After all, this is the nub of most criticism of
the ETH.  John the Magonian, the Laughing Duke  and the
Sasquatch, have posed this question precisely because (I assume)
they cannot think of a way to falsify the ETH.  So far, no ETH
proponent on this list has offered even the hint of a reasonable
answer.

Your own caveat regarding the significance of the vindication of
your ETH predictions (listed in your earlier response to Rob
Irving) are well taken.  As Hendry, and others, have demonstrated
IFOs can show up on radar, leave traces at reported landings and
affect the physical world.  I'm not sure lots of alien artifacts
and bodies are needed to prove the ETH, however. One properly
authenticated piece of alien hardware or dead alien and that's
it, break out the champagne.

Regards,

Jeff







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 9

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 18:07:59 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 09 Jun 1998 21:28:25 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


> Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 00:06:27 -0400
> From: Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith]
> Subject: Occam's Razor and UFOs
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

Peters's reply to my Occam's Razor thoughts is, quite simply,
one of the best posts I've ever seen here on UpDates. I disagree
with much of it, but that's another story. If we're going to
have debate, we're going to have disagreement.

And what I liked about the post is that it really WAS a
contribution to debate. Rather than score points with irrelevant
chatter, as we so often see here, Peter engaged what I actually
wrote, and took it further, teaching me a lot about Occam's
Razor and about why he said the things that got me going in the
first place. I'd like to think we're all enlightened by that.
The issues become much clearer, and all of us can find better,
deeper reasoning to support our views. Some of us -- and how
often does THIS happen? -- might even change our minds!

On to specifics.

> It's no great secret that I am deeply fond of the principle
> enunciated by William of Occam that explanations (of
> anything) should rely on as few presumptions as possible. He
> put it slightly differently and more briefly: Entia non sunt
> multiplicanda. Occam clearly relished the way Latin
> encourages epigrams. Thinking in a language that can engage
> in economy as pithy as "Bonus imperator, nisi imperasset"
> may even have driven William toward his conclusion. Such
> speculation about the cultural roots of ways of seeing is
> not entirely without value. (He said ambiguously.)

C'mon, Duke....you don't think ufology give us training in
compact thinking? <big horselaugh>

> Greg's post slightly misrepresented what I think Occam's
> razor can do for - or to - ufology, although that may well
> be my fault for not expressing my thinking more clearly on
> previous occasions. Rather more to the purpose, I think he
> caricatures the application of Occam's Razor to the case he
> quotes - the discovery that neutrinos have mass. And this
> caricature leads him into misunderstanding the significance
> of the discovery, and after that there occurs a little bit
> of a shambles. Let me first clarify what I think about
> Occam's Razor & ufology, then go on to the wider issue -
> that is, saving the best, as Mama always told me to, till
> last.

> Greg wrote:

> >Well, skeptics like to invoke Occam's Razor as one of
> >their many reasons for concluding that all UFO sightings
> >have -- or probably have -- conventional explanations.
> Peter Brookesmith has made that argument here; my very
> >smart composer friend Scott Johnson suggested it in a
> >conversation we had not long ago. In effect, they're
> >saying: "Here we have all these reports of strange lights,
> >metallic disks, you name it. Which is more likely, that
> >they're all misinterpretations of known phenomena (or of
> >course lies), or that they're ET visitors? Occam's Razor
> >forces us to assume the former."

> Occam *forces* one to do no such thing (as Greg went on to
> say). He simply reminds us that, in considering "all these
> reports", we will present what mathematicians call a more
> elegant solution to the problem as presented, by
> *preferring* the solution that depends upon fewer "givens"
> in the theorem. (I assume you did read your Euclid in the
> upper third/first form/sixth grade at school.) There is no
> question - you only have to count - that concluding UFO
> reports are reports of ET visitors requires many more
> "givens" than concluding they do not.

Euclid, or what's left of him after distillation into geometry
textbooks, comes at us in the 10th grade over here, and for all
I know that alone accounts for the sometimes sorry shape of
American ufology. (Populist ufology, of course.)

But there are two problem with what Peter wrote. The first is
that UFO reports -- at the moment we set Occam to work on them
-- have nothing to do with ET visitors. As Mark Cashman so
eloquently put it in a recent post, we're dealing only with the
"Objectively Existent Hypothesis" -- whether there's some new
phenomenon, or more concretely, some new physical object
creating the reports, or whether the reports are due only to
conventional stimuli.

So then there's only one new hypothesis we need to form, if we
come to that conclusion -- that there's something new under the
sun (or moon, as the case may be). Taken no further, that's a
remarkably modest assertion. Its implications, of course, are
another story, as we see from all the fast and furious UFO
debate.


> Let's assume for the sake of this argument that both the
> ETHer and the non-ETHer agree in a particular case on the
> following: the witnesses are truthful, accurate in their
> reporting and judgements, and that what they saw was a real
> "something". (I doubt many real cases get as far as that,
> but so what.) That something seems to defy explanation.

> The non-ETHers - in this case - say: Sorry, can't explain
> it, but perhaps it was an aircraft on an illegal or unfiled
> flight path. The ETHers say: Can't explain it, so it must
> have been an alien spacecraft. The non-ETHers have no
> particular reason for offering their suggestion - let's say
> the sighting was near no national borders, military bases,
> cities with high immigrant populations, etc. But they *do*
> know (a) that aircraft exist (b) that aircraft do fly when
> and where they should not and (c) that under certain
> conditions aircraft can look very weird indeed. The
> suggested solution is just that: a provisional notion.

But as I've said, this shouldn't be about the probabilities of
ET visits versus the certainty that planes appear where no one
expects them to. Once we understand that, the playing field is
leveled, and what stands out in sharp relief are the many new
hypotheses that may sometimes be required to explain a sighting
conventionally.

For the unconventional explanation, we form just one new
hypothesis -- that there's something out there we haven't
previously known about. Note that we're not required at this
point to say what, exactly, it might be. Is it an alien
spaceship, a secret military vehicle, an atmospheric animal, or
something even stranger still? That doesn't matter. Nor is it
kosher for those inclined toward a conventional explanation to
say "Well, if you can't tell me what it is, we can't accept that
it could be anything new." Science can't be advanced like that.
New experimental data doesn't have to wait for a theory that
explains it -- and above all can't be thrown out just because no
explanation for it yet exists. (The neutrino discovery
demonstrates precisely this, as I'll later show.)

And certainly those inclined to conventional explanations can
NOT say: "It's not likely to be an ET spaceship, because here's
why that's improbable...it's not likely to be an experimental
military craft, because here's why that's improbable...it's not
likely to be some new kind of air-borne animal, because that's
improbable...." And so on through every conceivable explanation.
That's simply circular reasoning. "It can't be, therefore it
isn't." Phil Klass actually tried to use that on me once, when
he defended a conventional explanation for the Chiles-Whitted
sighting in 1948 as follows: "Since there is no evidence for
anomolus structured craft in the atmosphere, I conclude that
what these pilots saw was a meteor." Clearly, you can throw
every purported UFO sighting out with "reasoning" like that,
disposing of them one by one until there aren't any left. How
many sightings -- how much evidence -- you need before you're
convinced of a new phenomenon is quite another story. But if we
reduce the matter to basic logic, good sense, and scientific
candor, you can't proceed in the way I've just described.

But I said that explaining UFO sightings conventionally would
require new -- and, conceivably, Occam-unfriendly -- hypotheses.
That's easy to demonstrate. Suppose I say I saw a light in the
sky at night, and that I first thought it was a plane. But it
couldn't have been a plane, I continue, because it zigzagged
freely, making right angle turns, and stopping dead, to hover.
Finally it descended straight toward the ground, ending up
behind some trees. I add, of course, that it made no noise.

To explain this as a plane, don't you have to form a few
hypotheses? For instance, that I'm not describing what I really
saw. That the light really didn't zigzg; that was simply the
autokinesis generated by the movements of my eyes (even if I
said the light zigzagged over half the sky). That the light
didn't descend, but simply continued in a straight line toward
the horizon, thereby appearing to descend, if I wanted to
interpret it that way. That the light didn't land behind the
trees, but that a car's headlights shone from that direction,
but that by now I was so spooked by my conviction that I was
seeing a UFO that I'd believe almost anything.

Or you might add other hypotheses. That I'm lying. Or that I'm
hallucinating.

Now, I'm not saying that explanations like these I've proposed
are never correct. I'm only pointing out that they, too, involve
hypotheses. Peter mentioned that Occam favors the elegant
explanation, the one that requires the fewest (and, of course,
least convoluted) new assumptions. I submit that in the case
I've invented above, the conventional explanation requires more
and more awkward new theories than the simple possibility that
something new was out there.

And if you think real skeptics don't behave this way, consider
Philip Klass's "explanation" of the Soccoro sighting. Here we
had a policeman, deemed trustworthy by everyone investigators
spoke to, who said he saw a landed craft, which took off with
flame belching behind it, and a roar. Signs of burning and other
marks were found on the site.

After lengthy inquiries by Hynek and others, the simplest -- and
surely most elegant -- explanation would have been that
something was really out there. Klass, though, reasoned
differently. He found someone who lived not too far away who
said he hadn't heard a roar. So he formed his first
Occam-twisting hypothesis: That this person, rather than the
witness, was believable, even though (as Hynek pointed out) the
man lived near a noisy highway.

Klass also talked to someone (unnamed) in the town, who said the
whole thing was a hoax. His second Occam-deforming hypothesis:
That THIS person, not even named, was more believable than the
witness, even though Klass gives no reason why, and doesn't tell
us anything at all about what kind of person this was. (I might
add that -- as Klass has to know from his normal journalistic
work -- it's not hard to find someone to take any conceivable
point of view, when you're dealing with anything controversial.
So the mere fact that someone asserts something doesn't mean a
thing.)

Finally, Klass noted that the Mayor of Soccoro owned the land
which the sighting occured, and on that slim reed rested his
final Occam-astounding hypothesis: That the Mayor and his
employee, the policeman, had staged a hoax to give the town
publicity, and presumably make the land more valuable. This,
even though the alleged plot would have ended with the sighting,
and no further steps were ever taken! Almost needless to say,
Klass never asked either the policeman or the Mayor (or anyone
else in town, save his anonymous informant, who in any case was
only theorizing) whether this was true. Thus, in Lewis Carroll's
terms, he chose to believe three impossible things before
breakfast, instead of merely one, as the "Objectively Existent"
hypothesis would have required him to do. Occam lies confounded.
("Objectively Existent" is Mark Cashman's phrase for the theory
that some up to now unknown physical phenomenon lies behind
some UFO reports.)

> The ETHers, however, have to assume that the Green Bank
> so-Equation's probability can be shown to amount to 1 to
> make their solution work. That alone adds the seven
> hypotheses involved in the equation - and presumes they have
> been proven or solved - to the list. There are further
> factors that Frank Drake did not take into account, possibly
> because neither he nor any of his colleagues was a literary
> critic or a librarian or an historian or an anthropologist,
> but that demand consideration, too. Never mind; we are short
> of space; the point is already made. We don't know the
> answers to Drake's questions, whereas we do know that items
> (a), (b), and (c) above are true.

And now, Peter, we're playing word games. Really!

Peter is referring to the famous Drake Equation, propounded by
SETI astronomer Frank Drake, who thought he could estimate the
number of intelligent civilizations in the galaxy. He had to
factor in such variables as the number of stars that have
planets, the number of these planets that can support life, the
number of those planets in which technological civilizations
developed, and, if I remember correctly, the number of those
civilizations that didn't blow themselves up. There were other
variables as well.

Since none of these numbers are known, Drake's Equation is
necessarily approximate. Its true value lay in the fact that
Drake formulated it at all -- that he tried to put a number on a
concept that, up to then, science didn't want to deal with. In
that way, it was a brave attempt, even if the result is likely
to make most of us giggle. As I remember, Drake concluded that
there were between 10,000 and 10,000,000 civilizations in the
galaxy, which leaves a considerable margin for error!

But I digress. Peter counts each factor in the Drake Equation as
one new hypothesis. (We must assume that other stars do have
planets. We must assume that some of those planets support life.
We must assume that life actually evolved. We must assume that
it developed intelligence....and so on.) But some one else would
more simply say that there's one hypothesis overall, that
intelligence lift exists beyond the earth. And some third
person, just as Peter says, might find still more components to
the process, so there now were 10 or 25 or 76 hypotheses, not
seven.

Besides, Drake goes on to give reasons why interstellar travel
is unlikely. It consumes too much power, takes too long, and (my
favorite of the bunch, because now he's simply guessing) the
travellers would get fried by cosmic rays. Do we add yet another
hypothesis for each reason Drake gives, each reason why he says
we'll never have interstellar visitors? Do we add more
hypotheses when other scientists think of still more reasons?

Now we're getting truly ridiculous. The number -- the actual,
countable number -- of hypotheses involved on either side of any
Occam's Razor problem is subject to vast intepretation.
Eventually it comes down to a linguistic question -- how many
separate parts can any question be divided into? Sensible people
won't want to go down that road, and therefore won't want to
follow Peter down the road where we meet Frank Drake. Common
sense, I believe, will lead us to  a simpler, far more
comprehensible approach. If we want to think about alien visits,
we allow for only one hypothesis -- that such visits do or don't
occur, with all the subsidiary reasoning (the seven or 15 or 95
hypothesis that later come into play) assigned only to the
calculation of whether alien visits are likely. More generally,
when we face an Occam's Razor problem, we simply observe the
intellectual contotions required for various conclusions, and
note which ones our instinct tells us are simpler. We don't try
to count hypotheses, because that way lies madness.

> The non-ETH solution or suggested solution to a UFO sighting
> will remain more elegant than the ETH-oriented one (or any
> that involve time travel, inter- or ultra-dimensional
> intrusions, or what have you) until it is known for sure
> that ETI, or IDI, or UTI, or King Ubu, actually exist.

My good Lord....he actually said that! I'd forgotten, when I
started writing this reponse.

If we take Peter absolutely literally, then it's impossible --
or radically difficult -- to gather evidence for any new
phenomenon. And especially for any new phenomenon that defies
conventional understanding! Each new piece of evidence would be
subjected to Peter's test of elegance. "Hmm. Do neutrinos have
mass? My measurements say they do, but....can't be, because we
don't know that they do!"

I'm purposely taking Peter's reasoning to extremes, to show what
it's really made of. Essentially it's the same point Phil Klass
made to me. It works in one kind of situation, the kind when we
already know the probabilities on both sides. For instnace,
Klass at one point asked me which was more likely to cause my
computer not to work, a hard drive crash or evil spirits. There
the answer is easy, because we know about computers. Once we
deal with any new phenomenon, however, we can't make such easy
assumptions. Take ET visits. As I've insisted many times before,
we can't know their probability, because we don't know enough
about the universe. If aliens are plentiful, near us, and do
travel between stars, then these visits would be very probable;
under the opposite conditions, they'd presumably be much less
likely. Since we don't know which condition applies, we can't
weigh the probability at all. Which does NOT mean we then
believe in them, simply because we choose to. It does mean,
though, that we don't rule them less likely -- or more likely!
--  in advance of any concrete evidence. Any reading of Occam
that says we have to is either perverting the principle, or
revealing a weakness in it.

And now for neutrinos.

>Greg continues:

> >If it did [i.e if Occam's Razor forced us to think in a
> >certain way], today's New York Times headline would be
> >impossible. It would have to read: "Japanese-American
> >Scientific Team Says Neutrino Has Mass; Scientific
> >Community Rejects Findings, Saying Occam's Razor Makes
> >Them Unlikely."

> This is a red herring and a straw man. It reminds me of the
> Grand Fromage des OVNIs (not as far as I know a subscriber
> to this list) who remarked to me not long ago that left to
> the Razorites astronomy would have rejected Copernicus (or
> words to that effect).

> But first, let me say, neutrinos had not previously been
> cast in mass-free concrete. Their mass was an open question,
> though it was regarded as certainly exceedingly titchy and
> *possibly* non-existent. (Scientists can tolerate
> ambiguity.) Greg's was the first news I'd had of this
> discovery. My first thought was not of ufology's
> righteousness, but: "There goes 'dark matter'." Obviously,
> if neutrinos have mass, the problem of "missing mass" (aka
> dark matter) in the Universe at large becomes rather less
> difficult. It was gratifying to read a day or so later when
> I had time to scan the public prints that cosmologists had
> reached the same conclusion. Self-congratulation is a
> forgivable vice occasionally but a deeply irritating one
> always, and my point here really is that Occam's Razor is a
> double-edged tool, unlike the flashy things some people
> carry one to a side in their weskit pockets.

> Greg's mythical Occamist scientists would not reject the
> finding that neutrinos have mass - provided the alternatives
> had been thoroughly tested, and provided the work was
> repeatable and testable - on Occamist grounds, because massy
> neutrinos simplify the explanations (provide fewer entities
> to account for) for *other* things they know exist and occur
> but find problematic.

Neither Peter nor I is really qualified to discuss this matter.
At best, we're at the mercy of whatever news reports we read.

But today's New York Times confounds Peter's comfort, as
follows.

"Elusive Particles Continue to Puzzle Theorists of the Sun,"
reads the headline. As the story explains, neutrinos come, like
quarks, in more than one "flavor," and -- for reasons I won't
try to explain -- their various flavors are involved in
understanding mysteries in how they're emitted from the sun.

Having established this, the story goes on to say:

"The same team claiming the existence of neutrino mass may have
also cast doubt on the most elegant verion of the
changing-flavor hypothesis, in favor of an alternative that many
theorists find ugly and contrived."

Later, we also read:

"Adding another twist to the seemingly endless story, results
from [the recent experiments on neutrino mass] suggest the
jarring possibility that the three kinds of neutrinos now
believed to exist might have to be joined by a fourth, and even
a fifth and sixth." These new neutrinos would be "sterile," or
in other words "sealed off in their own phantom zone, apparent
only by their gravitational pull. 'I think sterile neutrinos are
a very ugly concept,' lamented Dr. John Bahcall, a theorist at
the Institute for Advanced Study in Pirnceton, NJ, who has
spesnt most of his career trying to solve the solar neutrino
mess. 'I hope they will not be needed when all of the
experiments now going on are complete. If they are present, they
will greatest complicate the efforts to get a unique solution."

Or, as the story itself says:

"While [Bahcall] and other theorists long for a mathematically
elegant explanation of the Sun's obstinacy, the experimenters
almost seem to delight in finding more loose ends to be tied
together."

In other words, neutrino mass will have to be accepted even
though it isn't nearly as elegant as Peter thought. Sometimes,
new data blows up even elegant theories -- and if we're not
ready to accept that, then how open are our minds?

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 9

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: "Stanton T. Friedman" <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Tue, 09 Jun 1998 20:28:06 -0300
Fwd Date: Tue, 09 Jun 1998 22:32:29 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


> From: "Greg Sandow" <gsandow@prodigy.net>
> To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net>
> Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs
> Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 09:48:34 -0400

> > From: RobIrving@aol.com
> > Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 23:40:29 EDT
> > To: updates@globalserve.net
> > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

<snip>

> > In any case, if Hynek and McDonald couldn't pull
> > the scientific community into the debate, what luck are
> > scientific ufologists now likely to have?)

> With sufficient and clearly presented evidence I can't see much
> of a problem.  What exactly is the problem, in your opinion? I
> personally don't accept the line that scientists are too worried
> about reputation to involve themselves in ufology - that argument
> doesn't hold water.

> What Rob or I personally care to accept is beside the point. What
> matters is what scientists think. David Pritchard said recently that
> peer pressure was pushing him away from UFOs, and John Mack was
> publicly questioned by an official Harvard invesitgation. There we
> have two gentlemen with professional scientific credentials who
> organized a scientific conference on abductions, and paid for it. I
> know of two other scientists who take part in abduction research, but
> prefer to be anonymous, fearing what their colleagues would think.
> Would Rob care to quote some UFO-involved scientists with contrary
> views?

I think Rob's comments are so much horse manure.

I have lectured to over 100 professional groups in many
locations.. Los Alamos National Lab, Engineering Societies in
Baltimore, Cincinnati, Detroit, Management clubs at Houston Space
Center, McDonnel Douglas, Lockheed, and a host more. The title is
Flying Saucers ARE Real. I certainly claim that SOME UFOs are ET
Spacecraft, that the subject is a Cosmic Watergate, that no
anti-UFO arguments stand up to careful scrutiny and that this is
the biggest story of the millenium.

In over 700 lectures (mostly colleges)over 31 years I have had 11
hecklers.. 2 of whom were drunk. I use facts, data, raise the
tough questions and always have an open question and aswer
session.. It is interesting that in several of my UK lectures in
l995, NOBODY in the audience had read any of the 5 large scale
scientific studies I discuss.No tomatoes or eggs. I, of course,
do NOT use comments from Tabloids or contactees as Mr.
Brookesmith tried to at Oxford. It is no wonder 60% of the
listeners agreed with the affirmative side despite an obvious
lack of audience knowledge at the start.

It is of course not a surprising that the first dozen or so
debunking boks don't even mention Blue Book Special Report 14 and
its quality evaluations, cross comparisons between UNKNOWNS and
knowns, physical trace cases and other facts.

A serious ufologist has to be almost  as patient as the gold
miners at Homestake Mine where they find 1 ounce of gold per 5
tons of ore.

The essence of science involves asking the right questions,
maintaining a large gray basket and going after the relevant
data, not in raising theoretical arguments which obscure reality
but waste loads of time.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 10

                      New Mars Face and Alien Beer Can

From: Bill Stanley <bstanley@citicom.com>
Date: Tue, 09 Jun 1998 18:49:26 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 06:47:29 -0400
Subject: New Mars Face and Alien Beer Can

Sorry to intrude,

But these images are worth a look!

http://rush.digitalchainsaw.com/marspage.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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 10

               Barnes Answers Corbin's Charges With Challenge

From: Jack Hudson <true.x-file.news@n2news.com>
Date: Tue, 09 Jun 1998 17:25:47 -0700
Fwd Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 06:52:29 -0400
Subject: Barnes Answers Corbin's Charges With Challenge


"If The Truth Is Out There...We'll Find It!"

For Immediate Release from True.X-File.News

On June 7, 1998 True.X-File.News found a message from Michael
Corbin, President of ParaNet Information Services charging
True.X-File.News and Marshall Barnes, an investigator we had
written a story about concerning his investigation into the
nature of an article written by Dr. Jacques F. Vallee entitled
Anatomy Of A Hoax, with making "radical claims", "outrageous
allegations", "without sufficient information", and nearly came
close to libeling investigator Barnes by calling him a "rank
amateur sleuth with an axe to grind". In reality it is Corbin
who made the wild allegations without sufficient evidence
because he had been supplied with our story which contained
information that Barnes had painstakingly assembled into an
electronic package with links to evidence that proved that the
Anatomy article was a fraud due to the false testimony of its
one and only witness, Edward Dudgeon, upon whose testimony the
article's main thesis is based. This evidence was compelling
enough so that when Jeff Rense of Sighting On The Radio saw it,
he placed the entire article as a rebuttal to the portion of the
Vallee article that he had previously featured at his web site
at http://www.sightings.com/ufo/philahoax.htm Also, someone has
since sent a html sensitive copy of this web page to the UFO
Updates mailing list so that members can click on the extensive
evidence that Barnes supplied and see for themselves that Mr.
Dudgeon's testimony was fraudulent, simultaneously showing Mr.
Corbin's accusations and insults to be completely baseless and
without merit.

During Mr. Corbin's diatribe against us and Mr. Barnes, he
insinuated that he would "investigate him further to determine
where he is coming from". In a reply to his message I intimated
that Mr. Barnes would probably come "looking for him". I was not
wrong. Choosing our service as the delivery medium for his
response, I now present Mr. Barnes' official statement and reply
to the baseless accusations of Michael Corbin:
------------------------------------------------------- To Mr.
Michael Corbin:

For the past four years I have taken upon myself and with the
urging of others wanting to know the truth, an investigation of
the so-called Philadelphia Experiment. Seeing the vast wasteland
of rumor, tall tales, half-baked research and utter garbage from
all parties involved up until the time of 1994, I felt that the
only way to conduct a true investigation was to start where the
Experiment would have started, as an idea of military
significance to a nation at war. If the evidence that the US
Navy would not attempt such a project or could not attempt such
a project existed, it would prove that the event probably was a
hoax. However, if there existed evidence that the military was
indeed interested in such capability, that said capability was
based in sound science, and that said capability was
technologically possible at that time, it would go a long way
toward establishing a plausible basis for the event to have
actually taken place in some form. The only capability that I
was interest in, pertaining to s id Experiment, was optical
invisibility, because that is what has been vehemently denied by
the US Navy and Office of Naval Research. The issue of radar
invisibility has not been denied as having been possible at the
time by a number of people including Jacques Vallee and a Public
Affairs officer from ONR officially assigned to deal with
inquiries that I had made there. I have determined through my
investigation that the issue of radar invisibility as a possible
explanation for the events described is part of the Official
cover story that when pressed, those engaged in the cover-up
have consistantly fallen back to.

Once that I had determined that there was extensive evidence in
support of the idea that there was indeed a military motivation,
a scientific basis and a technological capability to pursue a
project that would make a ship invisible to sight, I turned my
full attention to the article by Jacques F. Vallee that has been
known as Anatomy Of A Hoax. I found the article to be a pale and
pathetic attempt at propaganda which employs tactics of charater
assassination, has lapses in logic, errors in fact, and that a
senior high school class in political science at any decent prep
school could deconstruct into the obvious morass of
contradictions that it is upon proper analysis. Example: Vallee
says that all the other witness' have been proven to be
"fraudulent", taking an extensive portion of the article to try
to prove that Carl Allen was not a reliable witness. Yet, he
does absolutely no such thing to establish that Edward Dudgeon
is a reliable witness. If he had, he would have determined that
Dudgeon in fact was n t, unless of course, Vallee was in on it
with Dudgeon. That Vallee leads the reader to believe that he
has determined that Dudgeon is a reliable witness, lends
credibility to suspect Vallee's motives. That Dudgeon says that
he partied with the crew of the Eldridge in 1944 in the Pacific
and that none of them said anything about the Experiment, is
another obvious misrepresentation because of the fact that if
the Experiment had taken place in August, that would have been a
skeleton crew and not the official commissioned crew used and so
they would have had nothing to say at parties in the Pacific
about it anyway. However, that is what anaylsis of some of the
article shows when the article is taken at face value.

When the statements are investigated they reveal themselves to
be "fraudulent", using Vallee's own criteria for the use of the
word, because the Eldridge didn't go out on shakedown until
September of 1943 not the first week of July of 1943 the way
Dudgeon claims and the official US Navy records show that the
Eldridge crew wasn't even in the Pacific in 1944 so Dudgeon
couldn't have partied with them then the way that he claimed.
That's just part of the myriad of inaccuracies and
misrepresentations that appear in what has been lauded by some
as the "best research on the subject" and the story of "what
really happened in Philadelphia".

But I'm not here to give a full lecture on why Anatomy of a Hoax
is the biggest piece of garbage that has been pawned off as
legitimate research that I have ever seen or the results of my
investigation into the Philadelphia Experiment. Why Anatomy *is*
a Hoax that proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that all it takes
to hoax people like yourself and even avowed skeptics is to bait
the hoax with the right worm and you all will swallow and hang
on for dear life. I'm writing you because you had the
unmitigated gall to call me a "rank amateur sleuth" after I
surpassed every level for evidence that Vallee had set-up to
sucker you, UFO Sweden, and others into believing his hoax. So
I'm going to show you just what kind of rank I have by settling
it this way once and for all:

1)You will get Jacques F. Vallee, Bernhard M. Haisch, Edward
Dudgeon, and William Moore along with myself on your radio show.

2)We will all be sworn under oath to testify to our involvement
in the matters pertaining to and of the Philadelphia Experiment
by duly appointed and authorized officers of the courts in the
states in which we are located at the time of said program.
These officers will supply their names and pertinent
identification as persons authorized and bestowed with the power
to swear witnesses under oath with the penalties for perjury
binding prior to the program, to insure that at the time of the
program, all those duly sworn in shall in fact be under oath
with the liabilities for the penalties for perjury in place.

3)The line of questioning shall pertain to our prospective
involvement in the matters pertaining to the Philadelphia
Experiment. Cross-examination limited to the established area of
testimony will be allowed by any other party against any other
party.  If any of us is found to perjure ourselves, that person
will be duly prosecuted under the criminal laws governing
perjury in the state where they were sworn in.

4)If any or all of the persons that I have stipulated, fail to
agree to this arrangement, I want a sworn affidavit from you
saying why they failed to comply with these conditions, or if
you failed to be able contact them.

5)In the case that any or all of these persons fail to comply
with these conditions, and upon receiving from you sworn and
separate affidavits for each person's failure to comply, I will
still appear on your program, under oath and testify to what I
know and have discovered with the addition of your being
supplied with a full and documented account, complete with 13
pages of accusations and supportive statements, 89 pages of
labled and numbered evidence color coded to match each set of
accusations, and 10 minutes of audio, constituting evidence
against Jacques Vallee, Edward Dudgeon, and Bernhard Haisch,
plus 27 pages of statements showing that Bernhard M. Haisch
acted in a manner not in keeping with the expected behavior of a
science journal editor as set forth by 23 of his peers from the
world of scientific journalism. Together this will constitute
direct evidence that the Anatomy of a Hoax article was a
deliberate, premeditated, disinformation work executed using the
foreknowledge of propaganda, disinfor ation and
counter-intelligence tactics by Jacques F. Vallee and how in
fact this work mislead and decieved people through its promotion
and dissemination on the World Wide Web and Internet with the
full support of Bernhard M. Haisch. It will also provide
complete, verifiable evidence that my testimony under oath is
truthful which you wil be able to confirm to your listening
audience.

If you no longer have a radio program, I suggest that you
attempt to make arragements for this to take place on the Jeff
Rense or Art Bell program. Let the record show that I don't care
whose show it is, but if it isn't yours, YOU STILL HAVE TO BE
THERE. And if it's not your show, YOU have to be sworn under
oath as well because I want to know exactly how, when, and under
what circumstances, and what was said between you and Jacques
Vallee when he gave you permission to distribute that garbage
across the internet.

Let it be known that if Jacques F. Vallee, Bernhard M. Haisch,
Edward Dudgeon and William Moore, voluntarily fail to comply
with these conditions, that they have failed to show themselves
to be innocent of the things for which I will accuse them and
will present evidence thereof, and that they have allowed those
accusations to stand since appearing on your program will cause
them no undue expense or hardship.

Let it also be known, Mr. Corbin, that if you fail to carry out
*this* investigation, you are guilty of obstructing an inquiry
into the truth of this matter for which you made
unsubstantiated, unwarranted, and erroneous accusations against
my character and methods, and that I am loathe to even consider
you as a man of honor, let alone an investigator anywhere near
deserving the reputation of someone who tries to find the Truth.
Any other unsubstantiated claims against my methods, intent, or
investigative abilities will be grounds for my accumalating
evidence for libel and slander actions against you or any other
legally allowed actions that I can take against you. And there
are plenty, and I will.

In conclusion, I better not EVER hear of you trash talking me
again after your pitiful display and being duped by Vallee, who
has proven himself to be his own Messenger Of Deception. As far
as I can see, you're just a hot bag of wind, Orsen Welles
look-alike poser,who makes the bogus claim of "Answering
Questions, questioning anwers!" which you sure didn't do in the
matter of Vallee's fraudulent article before you referred to it
as "good research" and subsequently attacked my character. And
just so this isn't an "unsubstantiated claim", readers can link
to this: http://www.xxedgexx.com/paranet where they can see you
and your proclamation for themselves!

You may respond to my challenge care of the True.X-File.News
news service. And I am expecting a prompt response of your
acceptence or denial of this challenge. If you accept, I'm
giving you 30 days to get back to me with the results of who you
could or could not get to appear on your program. At that point
a scheduling arrangement will be made.

Sincerely, and with All Due Intentions Enforce,

Special Civilian Investigator Marshall Barnes.
-------------------------------------------------------
This ends the official statement from Mr. Barnes. I feel that it
is now very clear who is truly *serious* about this matter. It
will now be up to Mr. Corbin to show if he can get these men to
comply or will be left with only questioning Mr. Barnes. Of
course, Corbin could always ignore this challenge, which will
speak volumes about the nature of *his* character and resolve in
getting to the bottom of this matter once and for all.

The ball's in your court now, Mr. Corbin. Actually, I do believe
that it has hit you full in the face. Need a hanky? ;-)


- Jack Husdon, publisher True.X-File.News


NEXT TIME: MORE INFORMATION ON THE INVESTIGATION AGAINST
BERNHARD M. HAISCH OF THE JOURNAL OF SCIENTIFIC EXPLORATION.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 10

                        Re: Florida Scoutmaster Case

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 20:46:08 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 07:01:10 -0400
Subject: Re: Florida Scoutmaster Case


>From: Karl T. Pflock <Ktperehwon@aol.com>
>Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 16:33:13 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Florida Scoutmaster Case


>GREETINGS LIST SLAVES--

 <snip>

>Truth is, careful study of documents in the Bluebook case file
>establishes with little room for doubt that the chain of custody
>was NOT broken. The air force-collected samples were under the
>control of the intelligence office of the 1707th Air Base Wing
>at West Palm Beach International Airport from the time they were
>collected.

Truth is, the Blue Book documents don't prove that the samples
were under the control of the intelligence officer. They imply it
but don't prove it. The chain of custody is, in fact, broken
because we don't have the details about how the samples were
stored. We don't know how important they were considered. All we
know is that, according to Ruppelt, the samples were accidentally
left in Florida and there where sent on to Dayton. I saw nothing
in the file that there were sent by courier, that they were
considered classified, or that they weren't simply mailed on to
Dayton. In any case, once they left Florida, the chain of custody
was broken once again.

>It is true we don't know who all MAY have had access
>to the samples during the brief time they were in the local air
>force intelligence office, but it is unlikely in the extreme
>this intriguing physical evidence was accessible in such a way
>and long enough for a hoaxer to do what was necessary to create
>the highly unusual results. (Hey, Kevin, usetawas you were an
air force reserve intel. officer. Were you in the habit of
>leaving evidence or other senstive material lying around where
>just anyone could lay hands on it, remove it from your office,
>muck about with it, and sneak it back in, all undetected?)

All we know here is that the samples were left behind. If they
had been considered to be that important, someone would
have taken better care of them. The cavalier treatment of the
samples suggest that, by the time Ruppelt et.al. left Florida
they weren't terribly impressed with the case.

>That said, however, there's no need for a hoaxer to have had
>access to the samples during that period to have been able to
>char the roots of the grass but not the above-ground portions of
>the plants, thus creating the huge question mark which has hung
>over this case for almost 46 years. There IS a way it could have
>been done before the samples were collected, and the record
>suggests who might have done it (see my above-ref'd.
>paper)--although this still doesn't prove the evidence was
>hoaxed. Fact is, absent anything definite one way or the other,
>the only honest position one can take on this physical evidence
>is to suspend judgment.

Meaning that we are left with the testimony of the scoutmaster
whose character was even worse than I remembered. I reviewed the
file and found that he bounced checks, attempted to steal an
engine from his bosses and other things that don't suggest a
sterling character.

>KR: (paraphrase; I lost the original during my recent
>KR: software crisis):  "None of the other physical evidence
>KR: stood up to scrutiny."

>Not so, Kevin, although none of it--Desvergers' scorched and
>burned cap, the hair singed off his arms--was of the sort that
>could prove the scoutmaster was attacked by a flying saucer.
>This physical evidence was undeniable, and although plausible
>mundane, hoax-connected explanations were suggested by air force
>investigators, nothing was found to back them up. In fact, such
>evidence (e.g., flare residue) was completely lacking.

So, the physical evidence does not establish that there is
anything of value to the case. All of it had mundane
explanations. There is no reason to assume anything
extraordinary, except for the testimony of the scoutmaster.

>KR: "But why are we even talking about this case. It just
>KR: doesn't deserve our attention."

>Come on, Kevin, of course it does. It was one of the most highly
>publicized and, because of the puzzling grass samples and the
>scoutmaster's questionable- at-best character and antics, both
>intriguing and frustrating cases of the "golden age of UFOs."
>It is at the very least historically interesting and important,
>and if further credible supporting information can be developed
>(I'm working on it), it could re-emerge as an evidentiarily
>significant incident. Hey, you included it in your PROJECT
>BLUEBOOK EXPOSED,

Yes, but now we are beginning to speculate about how the Air
Force officers hid the important information. Yes, I included it
because I thought that access to the whole story should be
available, but not because I thought we should resurrect the
case.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 10

                          Alien Encounters Magazine

From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 21:32:33 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 07:22:19 -0400
Subject: Alien Encounters Magazine

I have been informed that Nina Pendred has left Alien Encounters
Magazine, is this true?. Can anyone shed some light on this. Did
she leave or was she pushed?.

I believe that since she became editor of the magazine, she was
responsible for actually getting the right balance, which had
slightly more appeal for the serious ufologist.

I have been informed by a colleague not to bother purchasing this
months edition as there is not one good story inside, but
actually gives more space for sc-fi than anything.

Will we be seeing the demise of another UFO magazine which over
the last few months showed some promise of making an impact on
the ufo subject. We have already seen a brilliant mag hit the
wall, 'UFO Reality'. Lets hope Alien Encounters does not
go the same way.

Any info would be welcome concerning the above.


Regards
Roy 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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 10

                              Re: The Ten Cases

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 23:43:29 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 07:17:15 -0400
Subject: Re: The Ten Cases

>From: RobIrving@aol.com
>Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 10:50:42 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: The Ten Cases [was Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs]

>>From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
>>Subject: UFO UpDate: The Ten Cases [was Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs]
>>Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 03:05:01 -0400
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>The thing that stands out is how old these cases are, the latest
>a mere 28 years ago. I'm not implying anything by that, but it
>does seem strange considering all the razzmatazz we currently
>hear.

Personally, I like cases that last. Yes, there are good,
credible, well investigated recent cases - or so it seems. In 10
years some of those may fall by the wayside, others will
survive.

What surprises me about the rest of your comments is that you
are apparently not familiar with these cases. Yes, there are a
couple which are obscure, such as Vancouver Isl, and the White
Sands case, but the rest of these have been cited in major
references (Vallee, Hill, etc.), and some are classics.

>Anyway, out of all of these cases what is the most compelling
>physical evidence available? Did any of these witnesses produce
>photographs, or report physiological effects that were confirmed
>later by doctors, etc?

>Or are they purely witness accounts? If that's the case, why are
>these accounts more compelling to you than, say, a CSETI lights-
>fest, resulting in a "near-landing" of a "metallic structured
>craft"?

You see, this is why 10 cases are a futile exercise. The
question was, which cases are the most suggestive of ETI? ETI is
suggested by structured objects, unconventional performance,
escape velocity, vertical departure to high altitude, non-human
beings, unusual physics, and unconventional interest in
humanity. These cases present that sort of material.

As I mentioned, cases which prove OEH (UFOs are objectively
existent) are not necessarily the same cases which suggest ETI.

>Re. 4... sounds interesting. Can you or anyone forward more
>info?

This is one of the most famous and important vehicle
interference cases ever. It can be found in any reference on
UFOs. I'd recommend The UFO Evidence, though I imagine Jerry has
a section on it as well.

Basic information is available at

http://www.geocities.com/~mcashman/ufo/report/571102.htm

>Re. 5... 'PA Photo' What does this mean? That the image
>eventually ended up with the PA library? Where can I get easy
>access to this image... do you have a scan of it that you can
>send for me to see?

This image was the cover of the original edition of John
Fuller's Incident At Exeter. It was investigated by NICAP, the
local newspaper, and Fuller.

The image is featured in my paper on UFO luminosity at

http://www.geocities.com/~mcashman/ufoextlu.htm

However, the best quality copy of the image of which I am aware
is the Look special on UFOs from 1966. The image on the web site
is a moderate quality scan from that reference.

>Re. 8... What exactly did the witnesses report the beings as
>doing?

The basics of the case are at

http://www.geocities.com/~mcashman/ufo/report/700101.htm

Hilary Evans forwarded me the material he had on the case.

BTW, this case and the Moreland case are two exemplars of the
classification which Richard Hall is calling Dyad. I have a
section on that type of case in my correlated catalog at

http://www.geocities.com/~mcashman/ufocorr.htm

Personally, I find the Moreland case fascinating from the point
of view of understanding UFO luminosity, also, because of the
clear description and sequence of events provided by the
witness, wife of a RNZAF officer.


>See what I'm getting at here? Even the hokiest stories have a
>way of being the most persistent...

I'm not really impressed if you are trying to suggest that these
fundamental cases are in the same category.

>> 9.   Sample gathering- Valensole, 1965, 1 witness

>Excuse my ignorance - but wasn't that the French farmer with, if
>I recall correctly, the lavender field; an early crop circle
>case? That relevant book on the shelf over there is way out of
>reach, so I may be wrong on this.

No, it's not a crop circle case, but the lavender field part is
correct, and traces were found (a hole, and a moistened area of
ground which became very hard, according to Vallee).

------
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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 10

               UFO Exhibit At Syracuse's Museum Of Science And

From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose)
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 03:37:07 +0200
Fwd Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 07:02:36 -0400
Subject: UFO Exhibit At Syracuse's Museum Of Science And

>From Syracuse OnLine. URL:

http://www.syracuse.com/leisure/content/entertainment/0609FMOST.html


Stig


*******


It's out of this world


What's a UFO exhibit doing at the MOST?


Published June 09, 1998, in The Post-Standard.

By Jim Reilly, Staff Writer


Don't let the black drapes, spooky sounds and flashing lights fool you:
"The UFO Phenomena" exhibit at Syracuse's Museum of Science &
Technology is pretty tame - even lame - stuff.

The aliens and flying saucers are so obviously fake, it's unlikely even
a jittery 5-year-old will be scared.

But kids of a certain age are sure to think parts of the exhibit, such
as the eerie "Alien Examination" room, the big lighted model of the
Roswell saucer crash and the bog "close encounter" (with smoke and
lights and a vibrating bridge) are pretty cool.

Those determined to believe will find evidence in dozens of
declassified formerly "secret" UFO documents on display.

Even the most skeptical will find photos of intricate crop circles
intriguing. Taped cockpit conversations of pilot encounters with UFOs
are fun to listen to, as are tapes of alleged sightings by average
folks and the continually replayed recording of the Mercury Theater's
1938 Halloween hoax that scared a nation - "The War of the Worlds."
When all the tapes are talking at once, the exhibit becomes sort of a
hall of babble. Which, in a way, is wryly appropriate somehow.

Some of the most interesting stuff is the exhibit on hoaxes, ranging
from tin plates to a photo of a button superimposed on streets and
trees, and photos of physical phenomena that have been mistaken for
alien spaceships, from deflating weather balloons to saucer-shaped
lenticular clouds.

The exhibit claims to be the largest of its kind and to have cost $1.1
million to assemble. Despite the strobe lights, resident aliens and
other special effects, its cheesier aspects - misspelled, clumsily
worded text; an alien "power source" that looks like three plastic
light fixture globes; a toy saucer that creaks out on a track, pauses,
then wobbles back into the dark - reveal it for what it is: a mostly
handmade UFO sideshow whipped up by a couple of guys from Long Island.

The two questions likely to pop into people's minds before and after
visiting "The UFO Phenomena" are: Why do we have to pay $2.50 extra to
see it, and what is an exhibit on UFOs doing in a legit science museum
like the MOST?

It costs extra because most of that money goes to the owners of the
traveling exhibit, not to the MOST. The arrangement enabled the MOST to
bring the exhibit here cheaply. And, MOST staffers are quick to point
out, members do not pay extra for the UFO show, an incentive for
visiting families to become member families.

Anticipating the second question, Executive Director Steve Karon
focuses on the practical side of UFOs in the current MOST newsletter:
"UFOs are not alien spaceships. UFOs simply are Unidentified Flying
Objects - something you see in the sky that you can not identify. ...
In fact, more than 99 percent of all unusual sightings are eventually
identified as ordinary objects or natural phenomena."

Besides, it gives the MOST an excuse to sell neat stuff in its science
store and from a display case outside the UFO exhibit: Alien Orbiters
($10.75), Ben D. Aliens ($2.25), Alien Glasses ($10.75) and
pocket-sized plastic aliens whose eyes glow in the dark ($1).

If nothing else, adults who bring kids to the exhibit can impress
teen-agers later by explaining where the pop band Foo-Fighters got its
name: Foo-fighters are fiery balls of light seen by military pilots
since World War II. Explanations range from pops of static electricity
to light reflecting off ice crystals.

But don't push it. If you want to retain your cool status, don't go on
to explain that the name originally derived from the old "Smokey
Stover" comic strip. Smokey was fond of saying "Where there's foo,
there's fire." Go figure.


If you go


What: "The UFO Phenomena," an exhibit of UFOs, aliens, hoaxes,
explanations and the unexplained.

Where: Milton J. Rubenstein Museum of Science & Technology, 500 S.
Franklin St., Syracuse.

When: Now through Oct. 31.

How Much: $2.50 per person, in addition to $4.75 or $3.75 (children 2
to 11) museum admission. Members get in free.

What Else: The MOST, in Armory Square, features the Bristol
Omnitheater, New York's only domed IMAX theater; the Silverman
Planetarium; and permanent and traveling exhibitions, many of them
hands-on. It is open 9:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. seven days a week, and Fridays
until 9 p.m.

Phone: (315) 425-9068.


Copyright (c) 1998 The Herald Company. All rights reserved. The
material on this site may not be reproduced, except for personal,
non-commercial use, and may not be distributed, transmitted or
otherwise used, except with the prior written permission of Syracuse
OnLine.


*Talkback! Tell us what you think.


Syracuse OnLine contains only a portion of the text, photos and
advertising published daily in The Syracuse Newspapers. Subscribe to
The Syracuse Newspapers.

Copyright (c) 1998, The Herald Company
www.syracuse.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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 10

                   Nazca's "Lady Of The Lines" Dead at 95

From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose)
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 04:28:59 +0200
Fwd Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 07:11:00 -0400
Subject: Nazca's "Lady Of The Lines" Dead at 95

Associated Press via CNN. URL:

http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/americas/9806/08/peru.reiche.ap/#1

Links are preceded by asterisks.


Stig


*******


'Guardian Angel' of Peru's Nazca Lines dead at 95


June 8, 1998

Web posted at: 10:45 p.m. EDT (0245 GMT)


LIMA, Peru (AP) -- Maria Reiche, a German mathematician who spent more
than half a century studying and protecting Peru's enigmatic Nazca
Lines, died Monday of cancer. She was 95.

Reiche died at a military hospital in Lima. She had been diagnosed with
ovarian cancer on May 8.

Also known as "the Lady of the Lines," Reiche was captivated by the
vastness and solitude of the Nazca plains, which cover a 35-mile
(60-km) stretch of desert and are Peru's major tourist attraction after
Machu Picchu.

"When I do die, I want to be buried in this fascinating place, which I
love so much," she said.

Threats to the lines have included vandalism, a government project to
"reconstruct" the drawings, acid rain from mining operations in nearby
mountains and even a plan to flood the plains for agriculture.

Reiche fought them all alone.



'A very fragile manuscript'


"This precious thing should be treated like a very fragile manuscript
that is guarded in a special room in a library," she once said.

Her death left many Peruvians wondering about the fate of the lines,
which she protected by paying guards with money she earned from the
sale of her book about the drawings.

"Maria Reiche's death saddens all Peruvians, particularly
archaeologists, because, with her, we had the certainty that this
ancient legacy of Peru would be preserved " said Federico
Kauffmann-Doig, one of Peru's leading archaeologists. "And now that she
is dead, all this work is in danger."

After years of study, Reiche concluded that the designs represented a
giant calendar linked to the movements of the sun, moon and
constellations, which told ancient desert dwellers when to plant and
irrigate crops.

The shallow lines were made more than a thousand years ago -- hundreds
of years before the Inca empire -- by clearing the stony surface of the
plains and exposing the whitish soil underneath.

Thousands of lines, some more than five miles (9 km) long, cross the
plains straight as arrows and climb distant hills. Others zigzag or
spiral over the desert surface.

Scattered among the lines are dozens of figures, including a
hummingbird, monkey, heron, whale, cat with a fish's tail, spider and
flower, ranging from four yards (meters) to 900 feet (300 meters) in
length.



'I like solitude'


In 1946, armed with a broom and a rake, Reiche began cleaning the lines
of small rocks and other debris, revealing to the world their
dimensions. She spent weeks at a time on the desert, living off a
meager diet of fruit and nuts and slept under the stars.

"I like solitude," she said once. "As a little girl I used to close
myself up in the dark basement of my house. God kept me company."

Residents in Nazca, the small town on the edge of the lines, 250 miles
(400 kms) south of Lima, initially thought she was "crazy," she liked
to recall with a chuckle.

In time, they admired her for putting their town on the world tourist
map and bringing in badly needed dollars.

Her birthday became an annual event celebrated with street dances and
ceremonies. In 1993, the government honored her with the Order of the
Sun, its highest award.

"The people of Nazca are in mourning. We are all with her," Nazca Mayor
Luz Torres said.


Copyright 1998 =BF The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This
material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

=BF
Related sites:

Note: Pages will open in a new browser window

*Ancient Astronauts: The Nazca Lines
*A visitor's photographs of the Nazca lines
*Ethno Magazine: The Nazca Lines
*UNESCO: The World Heritage list

External sites are not
endorsed by CNN Interactive.


=A9 1998 Cable News Network, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Terms under which this service is provided to you.
Read our privacy guidelines.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 10

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: RobIrving@aol.com
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 22:13:24 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 07:09:06 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

>From: "Greg Sandow" <gsandow@prodigy.net>
>To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs
>Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 09:48:34 -0400

Greg,

>The proof of this particular kugel (New York reference, Jewish
>culture subdivision) lies in the eating.

Heh, heh. Yah, as my friend Burnsy might say, that's a good one.
It reminds me... no, weren't you chiding me for drifting away from
the point? Quite right too! But what is one to do when one's butler
is on his annual hols and the replacement they send can't type? It
means one has to type one's replies oneself! So surely you aren't
expecting me to do that and observe what is on the screen at the
same time, what?

Perhaps one should pay more attention to your messages. But he
has no arms you see? And no legs either! And for heaven's sake it
was me that introduced the Equal Opportunities for Butlers Bill
to the House in the first place. Hoisted by my own petard, I ask
you.

Now, what were we saying? Oh, yah...

>Nor did I say scientists were influenced by UFO mythology. I
>said they were influenced by science fiction, now that it's
>taken a dominant position in popular culture.

And what is UFO mythology if it's not 'science fiction, now that
it's taken a dominant position in popular culture'? It may be
many things, but it's also that.

Where's that butler? Jerry? Ah, there you are... get up from the
floor... I'm having to deal here with damn bloody colonials.

Did I say cretins?

>(However, I now begin to understand Rob's rhetorical style.)

Good, it might help.

>> apathetic downtrodden

Heh, heh. "Apathetic downtrodden", what?

>If I were British, I would respond with a quick, dry "Really."
>But since I'm from New York, with affectionate ties to Brooklyn,
>I'll say (with a tone of utter, derisive desbelief), "According
>to you!"

Really.

>As I explained elsewhere, nobody I meet, however skeptical,
>has ever associated me or ETH believers in general with Greer,
>et al -- with one variety of exception.

That's heartening. You should hear some of the crap I hear.

>That exception is Rob, and others who make his present point.
>Which is indeed ironic. Rob tells me what's going to happen to
>me in life, and lo! it does happen, but only with him. If I were
>British, I'd mutter something here about solipsism, but nobody
>from Brooklyn knows the word.

Except for one variety of exception. That exception is Greg. He
- third person everyone..... he knows solipsically and therefore
he is, or something like that. Yah, very droll.

>I've debated UFOs with skeptical debunkers, in public and
>private, including a four-hour discussion with Phil Klass. Not
>even he made Rob's point.

My point was that when you talk about the influence of the lore
that makes up our subject on popular culture you have to accept
that the type of story told by the Greers and Hesemanns, and at
one time the Von Danikens, amounts to much of that influence as
far as UFOs are concerned. You're saying that you can't tie that
in with what you said at all? Klass is getting on a bit. Perhaps
he forget to draw your attention to this.

>Notice how Rob changes direction between the first of these
>paragraphs, and the other two. In the first, he dazzles us by
>knowing more about my point than I do (for which I thank him).
>In the second paragraph, he heads off on a journey of his own.
>What would be relevant here, I'd say, would be something more
>like this:

"But if for some strange reason a respected body were to
perform >a sensible and thorough investigation into UFOs in
general...."

In popular cultural terms, Greg, the subjects I mentioned are as
much a part of the so-called ETH, if not more, than, say, the
rather obscure witness reports offered by Mark Cashman as his
ten best examples, which much less people are apparently aware
of.

All I'm saying here, as Rebecca said earlier, is that if ETH
proponents want to be taken seriously, maybe by way of increased
awareness of the subject through popular culture, as I think you
are suggesting, it would be a good idea to create some distance
from the fools and hucksters.

>What's most important, though, is that paragraph one sticks
>directly to my point, which was the influence of popular culture
>on science. Paragraphs two and three are about something
>entirely different, namely how ETH proponents (me and Steven
>Greer, separated at birth) would react should scientists
>investigate and reject the televised alien autopsy. This is
>amusing, but irrrelevant. (Unless, of course, one's belief in
>the foolishness of the ETH and those who espouse it has a fatal
>magnetic attraction, and somehow drags one's prose in that
>direction, regardless of where one started.)

You've become confused. Please address the points I've made and
stop taking things so personally.

>> Perhaps the Kuhnian picture of scientific knowledge held back by
>> a blind adherence to existing paradigms is itself a myth? I've
>> changed my mind on that recently - broadened my world-view you
>> could say - having realised that there aren't that many examples
>> to support it.

>As I typed "paradigms," I thought to myself: "Hmmm...not really
>the word I want. Too fancy." And yo! [New York variant of lo!]
>Rob pounces on it.

So write what you mean. In another post you talked about how
scientists seemingly habitually reject revolutionary ideas. I
took it that you were still continuing along this path, and my
answer addressed what I currently think of that.

>I wasn't thinking of Kuhn, or of science blinded by a belief in
>older world-views. In fact, I was just using a two-dollar word
>for "world view." Though I'm grateful for the update on Rob's
>intellectual progress.

Really.

So the man - still third person folks... the man who suggests
that his correspondent only talks in terms of what _he_ was
thinking accuses that correspondent of solipsism. Nice.


>> >particularly if they seem to touch on space and aliens.

>> Why are aliens so particularly important? How much of your answer
>> to that would you honestly put down to yearning?

>My own beliefs don't come into play here, any more
>than they would if I said that popular culture has influenced
>more people to have or accept tattoos and piercings. (Though
>maybe in the interest of full disclosure I should mention that I
>have a tattoo.)

Jerry, my temporary butler, has piercings on his nipples, so he
tells me. You should perhaps mention it to him.

>As for my own yearning...would someone who's up to his neck in
>Budd Hopkins and Dave Jacobs be yearning, exactly, for visits
>by aliens?

You've just made me blow warm milk all down the front of my
jacket. To whom shall I send the bill? Budd perhaps. Er, by 'up
to your neck', what exactly do you mean?

>What Rob or I personally care to accept is beside the point. What
>matters is what scientists think. David Pritchard said recently that
>peer pressure was pushing him away from UFOs, and John Mack was
>publicly questioned by an official Harvard invesitgation. There we
>have two gentlemen with professional scientific credentials who
>organized a scientific conference on abductions, and paid for it. I
>know of two other scientists who take part in abduction research, but
>prefer to be anonymous, fearing what their colleagues would think.
>Would Rob care to quote some UFO-involved scientists with contrary
>views?

Surely. I can quote John Mack, from my interview with him in
Helsinki in late 1996, not long after his problems with Harvard
(which was not an investigation, by the way). Lacking in class
as it is to quote ones own writings - especially all the time,
don't you agree Jerry? (Jerry agrees) - I'll make an exception,
as it's relevant. From Fortean Times 96 3/97:

'Mack's well publicised appearance before a Special Faculty
Committee at Harvard medical School, to answer "many, many
complaints" arising from the 1994 publication of his book,
Abduction: yadayada, developed into something of a cause celebre
for ufologists.'

'Some of his colleagues were unhappy that the school had become
associated with stories of flying saucers and sexual
experiments. Moreover, Mack seemed to be taking what his
'experiencers' were saying literally. Ostensibly an issue of
academic freedom, the case set standards for criticism of
perceived 'pseudo-scientific' idealogy.'

'I asked Mack whether he thought this had more to do with a
natural tendency to err on the side of caution when faced with
novel ideas. "The senior dean for academic affairs told me that
I wouldn't have been in trouble if I hadn't said that we might
be required to change our notions of reality," Mack explained.
"Of course, that closes the issue right there..."'

Quite! Then he talked about how complex crop formations couldn't
be man-made.  Anyway... Mack was allowed to continue his work
uncensured. Which, coupled with his curious drifts into
cerealogy, rather supports the points I've made to you... which
you appear to have clumsily avoided.

Rob







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 10

                 Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force Genera

From: "Steven Kaeser" <steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 06:47:10 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 08:01:19 -0400
Subject: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force Genera

>Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 11:50:42 -0400
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General

>Just a related question.  Has anyone who ordered prints from
>the U of T gotten them yet?

>Bob

Don Berliner with the Fund for UFO Research was in touch with the
University of Texas last week and enlargements of the enhanced
images have been ordered.  It is hoped that they will arrive this
week, but these images have been enhanced, enlarged, and examined
to death before and no one is expecting much.


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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 10

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: RobIrving@aol.com
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 08:09:47 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 08:21:16 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


>Date: Tue, 09 Jun 1998 20:28:06 -0300
>From: "Stanton T. Friedman" <fsphys@brunnet.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

Stanton,

>I think Rob's comments are so much horse manure.

You appear to be referring to the following comments, but your
reply didn't really address why, nor answer the question I
posed...

>>With sufficient and clearly presented evidence I can't see much
>>of a problem.  What exactly is the problem, in your opinion? I
>>personally don't accept the line that scientists are too worried
>>about reputation to involve themselves in ufology - that argument
>>doesn't hold water.

I maintain that if the ETH were ever presented in a manner that
didn't rely on anecdotal and bogus documentary evidence, it
wouldn't face the stonewalling from the scientific community
that many imagine.

If such evidence doesn't exist at present, so be it. Keep on
with the quest, but whining that you are not getting the
validation you feel you deserve, or perhaps simply crave, won't
help matters.

Other revolutionary leaps in understanding have successfully
made it to acceptance; Evolution, Relativity, Quantum theory and
others - their main proponents achieving general validation in
their lifetime.

That's not to say that others haven't had problems, or that
there are not good examples of the contrary, but it seems to me
that imagining that some kind of subtle or not so subtle
conspiracy exists to deny your 'truth' is indicative of the
classic descent into paranoia, usually occurring when belief is
dominant.

So, Stanton, what exactly is the problem in your opinion? Why
can't we read your paper 'Flying Saucers ARE Real' in a science
journal?

Rob







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 11

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: Stanton T. Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 11:38:10 -0300
Fwd Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 17:24:07 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


> From: RobIrving@aol.com
> Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 08:09:47 EDT
> To: updates@globalserve.net
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

> >Date: Tue, 09 Jun 1998 20:28:06 -0300
> >From: "Stanton T. Friedman" <fsphys@brunnet.net>
> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

> Stanton,

> >I think Rob's comments are so much horse manure.
>
> You appear to be referring to the following comments, but your
> reply didn't really address why, nor answer the question I
> posed...
>
> >>With sufficient and clearly presented evidence I can't see much
> >>of a problem.  What exactly is the problem, in your opinion? I
> >>personally don't accept the line that scientists are too worried
> >>about reputation to involve themselves in ufology - that argument
> >>doesn't hold water.
>
> I maintain that if the ETH were ever presented in a manner that
> didn't rely on anecdotal and bogus documentary evidence, it
> wouldn't face the stonewalling from the scientific community
> that many imagine.
>
> If such evidence doesn't exist at present, so be it. Keep on
> with the quest, but whining that you are not getting the
> validation you feel you deserve, or perhaps simply crave, won't
> help matters.
>
> Other revolutionary leaps in understanding have successfully
> made it to acceptance; Evolution, Relativity, Quantum theory and
> others - their main proponents achieving general validation in
> their lifetime.
>
> That's not to say that others haven't had problems, or that
> there are not good examples of the contrary, but it seems to me
> that imagining that some kind of subtle or not so subtle
> conspiracy exists to deny your 'truth' is indicative of the
> classic descent into paranoia, usually occurring when belief is
> dominant.
>
> So, Stanton, what exactly is the problem in your opinion? Why
> can't we read your paper 'Flying Saucers ARE Real' in a science
> journal?
>
> Rob


The problem is that you and Peter constantly ask the wrong
question (What are UFOs.. as opposed to "Are any UFOs ET
Spacecraft"). You  often make pronouncements not based on
evidence, you constantly ignore the fairly obvious national
security aspects of UFOs, you presume on other people's
motivation (Did I say my goal was to publish "Flying Saucers ARE
Real" in  a science journal?.. though I gather you haven't read
my items in Physics Today and Aeronautics and Astronautics or my
congressional testimony.

I mention my lectures to professional groups because the
responses clearly indicate that they will pay attention to facts
and data.

You are wasting people's time with theoretical
claptrap.

The simplest explanation for the best observations(by competent
observers, investigated by competent investigators like Jim
McDonald, Bruce Maccabee, John Schuessler etc) whose appearance,
texture, protuberances clearly indicate they were manufactured,
and whose behavior-- high speed and no speed, sharp turns, lack
of noise, exhaust, visible external engines indicates they were
not made on earth, because if they had been in the 1940s, 1950s,
we Earthlings would be using them as military craft. They would
make wonderful weapons delivery and defense systems, able to fly
circles around anything we have been flying.

Since we are still building F-16,17,18, MIG 29, Mirage 5 etc,
what was built back then wasn't built by us, therefore it was
built at some Extraterrestrial location. Of course that doesn't
answer all the questions. It just says "not made here". Occam's
razor applies. ET vehiciles. Have any of you splendid writers
done field investigations, visited archives, had a security
clearance? Talk is cheap.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 11

                              Re: The Ten Cases

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 10:56:18 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 17:29:57 -0400
Subject: Re: The Ten Cases


>From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
>Subject: UFO UpDate: The Ten Cases [was Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs]
>Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 03:05:01 -0400
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>> Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 18:46:27 -0500 (CDT)
>> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>> From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
>> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

>> take but a minute to tell us
>> which ten cases you would consider most indicative and evidential
>> of extraterrestrial visitation. That's all; just the ten specific
>> *cases* that you personally would want to defend in the court of
>> public (or scientific) opinion. You know, the ones that support
>> your case. Just ten.

>> No reference to a body of collective literature allowed. Just ten
>> cases. Not twenty or thirty, just ten.

>I thought it would be interesting to find the cases which I thought
>supported ETH.

>Obviously, each case tries to illustrate a different aspect of the
>predictions I mentioned in my earlier e-mail. Any other method
>of supporting ETH with cases frequently falls prey to actually
>trying to prove OEH.

<snip 10 cases>

Ahh,the problem of the "embarrassment of riches."  Well, anyway,
let me add a couple without getting "too" controversial (no
McMinnville, No New Zealand, No Japan Airlines, No Kenneth
Arnold, etc.)

May 24, 1949 - Rogue River, Oregon, multiple witness, reported
to security office at Ames Research Lab (and apparently nowhere
else!), flat disc or  pancake shaped object with a "fin"; part
of surface looked "wrinkled and dirty" , observed for couple
minutes through binoculars by 5 people, 20 of which worked at
Ames, approached, hovered, turned on axis, accelerated to speed
of jet and departed...was probably within 1 mile of witnesses,
but no noise heard.  (This is Blue Book Special Report #14 case
#10)

May 24, 1950 (note odd "coincidence, 1 year after previous) at
White Sands, TRIANGULATION ACCOMPLISHED....with cinetheodolites,
objects flew over and were determined to be at altitude 150,000
ft, diameter about 30 ft, undetermined but high speed (this
observation was mentioned in the Project Twinkle Final Report,
but the Final report says nothing about the SUCCESS of filming
unknown objects and the report ignores the triangulation., Cover
up?)

And then there are the other balloon observer sightings of the
early days (Kalisewski, et al) who complement the April 24, 1949
sighting by CHARLES MOORE (he of MOGUL fame, folks; his sighitng
was called "the best" by Dr. Donald Menzel in his first
debunking book FLYING SAUCERS) which is in Cashman's list.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 11

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: Brian Straight <brians@mdbs.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 09:34:18 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 17:24:37 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


While I subscribe to the tenets of Occam's Razor, it is worth
noting that, from the point of view of deconstructionist
philosophy, it is a concept that can be quite easily
deconstructed, i.e., Occam's Razor claims that the 'simplest'
explanations are always the best, because they likely to accord
more closely with 'reality.'

The Deconstructionist, who is not likely to be gainfully
employed, and therefore has lots of time to think about this
kind of thing, is likely to reply to this assertion with the
observation that it is precisely the 'simplest' explanations
that are, on the contrary, likely to be the most culturally
complex.  In other words, Occam's Razor makes all kinds of
assumptions about the nature of 'reality' and empiricism which
arise directly from a highly complex cultural continuum and from
a lengthy ideological history.  "Simple' is only simple with
reference to this rich backgound (wich has little to do with
external reality, whatever that is).

What's the moral of all this?  Always be aware of the
assumptions that go into any attempt to structure what we call
reality.  Ufology requires us to think 'outside the box.'

Brian







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 11

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 09:34:50 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 17:12:45 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

>From: RobIrving@aol.com
>Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 22:13:24 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

> In popular cultural terms, Greg, the subjects I mentioned are as
> much a part of the so-called ETH, if not more, than, say, the
> rather obscure witness reports offered by Mark Cashman as his
> ten best examples, which much less people are apparently aware
> of.

This seems clearly to show Rob, that you are focused on popular
culture while knowing little about UFOs. Of the ten cases I
cited, at least 5 are classics, cited in multiple references.
Kelly-Hopkinsville is one of the most well known occupant cases,
Levelland the exemplar EM case. Marignane has been referenced
several times, as has Loch Raven Dam and Valensole.

ETH isn't part of popular culture. Ideas about ETs are. ETH is a
hypothesis and is part of the scientific investigation of
possible causes for UFO reports.

You can't shift the base from considering the actual cases that
lead to consideration of ETH (and which helped stimulate the
interest in ETI among the public) to merely considering popular
culture in a vacuum. Some of these cases were key in establishing
the possibility of ETI for the public, though, not being aware of
their fame, you would be unaware of their role.

Trying to attribute interest in ETI and acceptance of it as a
popular explanation for UFOs to popular culture is placing the
cart in primacy to the horse. Serious cases such as those listed
and many others have had a profound impact on the willingness of
the public to consider ETH.

Perhaps you didn't realize that in the 1940s, ETH was not even in
the running as a theory for UFOs, as far as the public was
concerned. It was only cases like those I listed, which became
famous in the press, that caused the change in opinion.

> All I'm saying here, as Rebecca said earlier, is that if ETH
> proponents want to be taken seriously, maybe by way of increased
> awareness of the subject through popular culture, as I think you
> are suggesting, it would be a good idea to create some distance
> from the fools and hucksters.

The truth is that ETH is far more accepted by the public as a
theory of UFO report causation than any other. This despite the
lack of credibility of the charlatans and the hucksters. Jerry
can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the public at large
wouldn't know Sims and Leir from any other two guys, or Greer if
he appeared in a puff of green smoke and waving lights. The
modern charlatans just don't get the press of Adamski and the old
contactees. They do, however, generate a lot of heat in the "UFO
community", which is where they get most of their attention.

I think public awareness and acceptance of ETI comes down in
large part to the following factors:

1) Well-known cases suggestive of ETH.

2) MHH proponents, especially the AF, being unable to
   successfully explain important cases, and making general
   fools of themselves with clearly contrived "explanations".

In short, the public uses Occam's Razor a bit themselves.

------
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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 11

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 08:53:27 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 17:24:26 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


>From: Jeff King <Boroimhe@aol.com>
> Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 19:22:23 EDT
> To: updates@globalserve.net
> Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

> Greetings to the list:

> >From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net
> >Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 09:31:07 -0400
> >Fwd Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 23:11:21 -0400
> >Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

> >> Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 18:46:27 -0500 (CDT)
> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> >> From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
> >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

> >What might falsify the ETH?

> Isn't this a question proponents of the ETH, rather than the PH,
> should answer?  After all, this is the nub of most criticism of
> the ETH.  John the Magonian, the Laughing Duke  and the
> Sasquatch, have posed this question precisely because (I assume)
> they cannot think of a way to falsify the ETH.  So far, no ETH
> proponent on this list has offered even the hint of a reasonable
> answer.

> Your own caveat regarding the significance of the vindication of
> your ETH predictions (listed in your earlier response to Rob
> Irving) are well taken.  As Hendry, and others, have demonstrated
> IFOs can show up on radar, leave traces at reported landings and
> affect the physical world.  I'm not sure lots of alien artifacts
> and bodies are needed to prove the ETH, however. One properly
> authenticated piece of alien hardware or dead alien and that's
> it, break out the champagne.

It's not easy to falsify the ETH, just as it's not easy to prove
it.
Its opponents attack it in the simplest way possible -- they try
to refute suggestive evidence. ("That sighting you mention CAN be
explained!" Or, more slyly: "You claim this sighting defies
conventional explanation, but your claim has been disputed.")

But this evidence, as Mark Cashman pointed out, doesn't really
support the ETH. It supports the OEH, as he calls it, the
Objectively Existent Hypothesis.

So let's see. If a UFO crashed, beyond any dispute, and the
wreckage was stamped "Made in Zeta Reticuli"....well, you get the
idea. So, on the other side of the question, if one crashed and
on the debris we read "Made in Wales by Peter Brookesmith"....of
course you see what I mean there.

Of course, if a UFO crashed and turned out, disturbingly, to be
made in North Korea (in what would later be revealed as an
attempt to spread Kim Il Sung thought throughout the universe),
we still wouldn't have refuted the ETH. Someone could always say,
"Ah, yes, but all the other UFOS are really alien!"

Maybe then we're reduced to another scenario. Aliens land --
right out in the open, just outside an African village (to
demonstrate that all beings are equal, and they could give a spit
about the White House lawn). Their ship looks nothing like any
reported UFO, and when John Mack -- who happens to be on the
scene, looking for more African abduction reports -- asks them if
they're the ones we've been seeing in the skies and in our
bedrooms, their skin flashes purple in what we learn is the alien
equivalent of giggles. "Oh, Goddess, no!" they chortle (turning
out to be feminists as well as egalitarians, though it's later
revealed that they have six sexes). "Your nonsense about UFOs --
just as your skeptics say -- is the result of fantasies of hope
and fear, all caused by your arrival on the verge of serious
travel into space. We see this on nearly every planet we visit."

Though of course they could be lying!

Back to the drawing board. I think we're left with Mark's and my
straightforward notion that if UFOs are alien craft, they'll have
stable, discernable physical characteristics (though perhaps
other traits that seem like magic to us). Once those
characteristics are definitively pinned down, we can go on to
theorizing about where the craft come from, and perhaps derive
testable predictions from theories that they're time travellers,
interdimensional, and so forth.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 11

                          Writers For U.K. Magazine

From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 06:48:49 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 17:15:15 -0400
Subject: Writers For U.K. Magazine

"Down to Earth" the bi- monthly publication of the Essex & London UFO
Network are looking for articles covering the whole spectrum of the
ufo subject. If you are a researcher of ufos and write the odd article
and would like it published then read on.

"Down to Earth" is a serious
research magazine dedicated to the investigation of the ufo phenomena.
We already have a number of writers but we always welcome fresh input.
As mentioned the mag covers as wide a spectrum as possible seeming
that there are many avenues to explore regarding the whole ufo
subject.

If you are interested in submitting an article/story etc,
and would also like more details on ELUFON please write to the
following address or direct by e-mail. Details below.

Any
submissions will be fully credited to the author,and they will also
receive a copy of the issue containing there work. You can send
articles in pre-typed format or on a floppy disk compatible with
Microsoft publisher 97.

Kindest regards to all.
Roy Hale

For moreinfo or submissions please write to the following address or e-mail.

Roy Hale
21 Sparrow Green Bull Lane
Dagenham
Essex
RM10 7EU

: E-mail: Roy_Hale@Hotmail.com.uk
  E-mail: ELUFON@Yahoo.com.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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 11

                        Re: Alien Encounters Magazine

From: Mel Donovan <Melempire@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 11:22:02 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 17:39:58 -0400
Subject: Re: Alien Encounters Magazine


>Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 21:32:33 -0700 (PDT)
>From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
>Subject: RE: Alien Encounters Magazine u.k.
>To: Updates@globalserve.net

>From Roy_Hale@Yahoo.com.uk Essex & London UFO Network
>I have just recently been informed that Nina Pendred has
>left Alien Encounters UK, is this true?.

Roy,

Hi,

The magazine in question is dead, and yes Nina was good at her
job.

Do not took for dark shadows on this one.

The mag was obviously not financially viable any more, as public
interest in the Ufo phenomena has declined over the past 12
months. Maybe they got bored, maybe they got the shift in
conciousness they needed to send them on their journey.

Who knows..... Who cares is really the question.

I also agree that UFO Reality was a brilliant mag, but sadly Dave
can't run it at the moment. He has far more important things to
take care of.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 11

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: Jean-Luc Rivera <PSaintc798@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 12:42:20 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 18:03:56 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


>From: "Greg Sandow" <gsandow@prodigy.net>
>To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs
>Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 18:45:41 -0400

<snip>

>If the PH is valid it implies that the UFO is most widespread in
>countries which share social and economic conditions, and have
>similar cultural values. As the UFO phenomenon seems most
>widespread in the USA we would expect it to be experienced most
>often in similar societies. This does seem to be the case. The
>countries with the greatest number of UFO reports, and public
>interest in ufology, besides the USA are either those which
>share its cultural and social background, e.g. the UK, Western
>Europe, Canada; or those which have wide exposure to US cultural
>and social values, e.g. Central and South America (and no,
>Jerry, this isn't some sort of Ameriphobia, I actually quite
>*like* most American social and cultural values).

>We would expect the UFO phenomena to be least widespread in
>those societies which either do not share this social
>background, or are actually hostile to it, e.g. the Islamic
>countries, most of Africa, Asia (except Japan), and this is
>indeed the case. This is not, of course, to say that no UFO
>reports at all come from those countries.

We don't know how widespread the UFO phenomenon is in these
parts of the world: the lack of investigators or just of
channels to receive the reports maybe the reason of the absence
or quasi-absence. In Malaysia, thanks to the work of Ahmad
Jamaludin, we have learned of the existence of UFO waves which
would have gone unreported otherwise.

Furthermore the works of Bertrand Meheust (in Algeria and Gabon)
and Thierry Pinvidic (in Algeria) published in France show that
the UFO phenomenon exists in different cultures and apparently
awaits to be reported. These 2 french researchers cannot be
suspected of deep ETH bias in their investigations as the list
members not familiar with french ufology must know that they are
supporters of the PH.

<snip>

>We are beginning to see more reports and film from the
>Czech Republic for example, and elsewhere. And this is not
>simply a factor of the freeing of press and other media in those
>countries - even in the Communist era there seemed to be no
>serious block to reports coming out of Eastern Europe. In the
>Communist era the Eastern European country which seemed to have
>the most UFO reports was Romania, which at the time was seen as
>breaking from the Soviet Bloc.

If you really believe that, please read Boris Shurinov history
of the UFO movement in the former USSR. Don't you remember also
how at one point only Juri Lina was able to translate for the
FSR some UFO samizdats smuggled out of the country. You are
right only for Romania with Ion Hobana.

<snip>

>I'll tell you what would disprove the Psychosocial Hypothesis: a
>decent sized UFO wave, with abductions, in North Africa or the
>Middle East, within the next few years. When that happens I'll
>>start watching the skies!

Do you really think that if there was a wave of " alien
abductions " in Ahghanistan or in some middle eastern or african
country torn by war and closed to foreigners we would hear about
it?

>Good Hunting
--
>John Rimmer

I am sure that the remarks above will not end the debate: it can
always be argued anyway that western cultural contamination is
spread via the investigator( for example Cynthia Hind in
Zimbabwe ....) or that if the " natives " think about making a
report they are already culturally contaminated. It is a no win
situation ( the same kind of debate has been raging
inconclusively in the anthropological fields for many years ).

In the mean time I will keep enjoying reading your posts which
are always stimulating.

Jean-Luc Rivera







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 11

                              Re: The Ten Cases

From: RobIrving@aol.com
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 14:16:32 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 18:14:28 -0400
Subject: Re: The Ten Cases

>  Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: The Ten Cases
>  From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
>  Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 23:43:29 -0400
>  To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

Mark,

Thanks for the info, I'll check it out.

>  You see, this is why 10 cases are a futile exercise. The
>  question was, which cases are the most suggestive of ETI? ETI is
>  suggested by structured objects, unconventional performance,
>  escape velocity, vertical departure to high altitude, non-human
>  beings, unusual physics, and unconventional interest in
>  humanity. These cases present that sort of material.

Fair enough, as long as one remains aware of our tendency to
impose order, meaning and therefore value on what we see; ie
'escape' velocity... escape being a rather subjective term.

>  As I mentioned, cases which prove OEH (UFOs are objectively
>  existent) are not necessarily the same cases which suggest ETI.

Of course.

>  >See what I'm getting at here? Even the hokiest stories have a
>  >way of being the most persistent...

>  I'm not really impressed if you are trying to suggest that these
>  fundamental cases are in the same category.

It was a general comment. As I'm not as au fait with specific
cases I'm not in a position to judge, not that I'm that prone to
judge specific cases. I tend to shrug my shoulders a lot when I
hear stories.

>  No, it's not a crop circle case, but the lavender field part is
>  correct, and traces were found (a hole, and a moistened area of
>  ground which became very hard, according to Vallee).

Yeah, I remember reading about this. On what basis do you include
it in your 'ten best' - because of the physical evidence? Also,
what were the results of the samples gathering, or was it the ETs
taking samples? If the latter, do you include this purely on the
basis of the farmer's story?

Having extensive experience of the conclusions people reach from
'field' research, so to speak, you'll appreciate my scepticism.
Once I saw some iron filings miraculously transmogrify into
'meteoric dust', just because a scientist said it was so.  Jerry
was amazed when I told him.

Rob







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 11

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: "Greg Sandow" <gsandow@prodigy.net>
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 14:00:36 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 18:12:50 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

> From: RobIrving@aol.com
> Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 22:13:24 EDT
> To: updates@globalserve.net
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

> >From: "Greg Sandow" <gsandow@prodigy.net>
> >To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net>
> >Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs
> >Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 09:48:34 -0400

> >What Rob or I personally care to accept is beside the point. What
> >matters is what scientists think. David Pritchard said recently that
> >peer pressure was pushing him away from UFOs, and John Mack was
> >publicly questioned by an official Harvard invesitgation. There we
> >have two gentlemen with professional scientific credentials who
> >organized a scientific conference on abductions, and paid for it. I
> >know of two other scientists who take part in abduction research, but
> >prefer to be anonymous, fearing what their colleagues would think.
> >Would Rob care to quote some UFO-involved scientists with contrary
> >views?

> Surely. I can quote John Mack, from my interview with him in
> Helsinki in late 1996, not long after his problems with Harvard
> (which was not an investigation, by the way). Lacking in class
> as it is to quote ones own writings - especially all the time,
> don't you agree Jerry? (Jerry agrees) - I'll make an exception,
> as it's relevant. From Fortean Times 96 3/97:

> 'Mack's well publicised appearance before a Special Faculty
> Committee at Harvard medical School, to answer "many, many
> complaints" arising from the 1994 publication of his book,
> Abduction: yadayada, developed into something of a cause celebre
> for ufologists.'

> 'Some of his colleagues were unhappy that the school had become
> associated with stories of flying saucers and sexual
> experiments. Moreover, Mack seemed to be taking what his
> 'experiencers' were saying literally. Ostensibly an issue of
> academic freedom, the case set standards for criticism of
> perceived 'pseudo-scientific' idealogy.'

> 'I asked Mack whether he thought this had more to do with a
> natural tendency to err on the side of caution when faced with
> novel ideas. "The senior dean for academic affairs told me that
> I wouldn't have been in trouble if I hadn't said that we might
> be required to change our notions of reality," Mack explained.
> "Of course, that closes the issue right there..."'

> Quite! Then he talked about how complex crop formations couldn't
> be man-made.  Anyway... Mack was allowed to continue his work
> uncensured. Which, coupled with his curious drifts into
> cerealogy, rather supports the points I've made to you... which
> you appear to have clumsily avoided.

Well, let's see.

The committee at Harvard considered formal academic censure. If I
remember correctly, it also considered stripping away Mack's
tenure, a serious and almost unheard of punishment at American
universities.

Sure, in the end Mack was neither censured nor demoted. But to
use him as an example of how free scientists are to pursue UFO
research seems more than a little grotesque. Let's say I'm a
younger scientist at Harvard. I look at Mack and what do I see?
An example of how academic freedom protects my right to do any
research I like. Or an example of how much trouble I can get into
if my colleagues don't like what I do?

Suppose I don't have tenure yet. Am I encouraged to throw myself
into ufology, and to publish ufological papers? Wouldn't I be
more than likely to think: "If there are people at Harvard
powerful enough to threaten a tenured full professor who's won
the Pulitzer Prize, what could they do to me? Wouldn't they be
powerful enough to deny me tenure? They wouldn't even have to
make a public fuss."

Then there's the issue of government funding. Many scientists get
grants for their research David Pritchard told me he worried that
his funding might get cut off because of his abduction work. When
I interviewed him, he asked me not to use his name in print, and
insisted we only talk when he was home. He didn't want anyone to
accuse him of doing ufology on MIT's time.

Would our young scientist imagine his path to funding would be
smoothed by his UFO research?

Let's remember James McDonald, who in his capacity as a top
atmospheric physicist was asked to testify before Congress on a
matter unrelated to UFOs. Congressmen who disagreed with his
position taunted him, declaring his views worthless because he
believed in "little green men."

Is that something other scientists would welcome? Would they like
their UFO research to interfere, not just with faculty promotions
and funding for their research, but with outside activities,
including chances for employment as consultants?

So, as I said, let's see. Rob and I are debating whether
scientists are discouraged from pursuing UFO research. I
challenge him to quote a scientist who says he or she isn't, and
he picks the one who got in the most dangerous -- and public --
trouble. (Thus demonstrating one good reason why scientists would
shy away from UFOs.)

There ought to be a name for that. May I suggest "rhetorical
suicide"?

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 11

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 17:35:53 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 18:20:28 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


>Date: Tue, 09 Jun 1998 20:28:06 -0300
>From: "Stanton T. Friedman" <fsphys@brunnet.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


I jus thought this was worthy of repetition:

>The essence of science involves asking the right questions,
>maintaining a large gray basket and going after the relevant
>data, not in raising theoretical arguments which obscure reality
>but waste loads of time.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 11

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: "Jerome Clark" <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 98 12:34:54 PDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 18:17:25 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


> From: RobIrving@aol.com
> Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 08:09:47 EDT
> To: updates@globalserve.net
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

> >Date: Tue, 09 Jun 1998 20:28:06 -0300
> >From: "Stanton T. Friedman" <fsphys@brunnet.net>
> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


> >I think Rob's comments are so much horse manure.

I am afraid, sadly, that I must agree here with Stan.

> >>With sufficient and clearly presented evidence I can't see much
> >>of a problem. What exactly is the problem, in your opinion? I
> >>personally don't accept the line that scientists are too worried
> >>about reputation to involve themselves in ufology - that argument
> >>doesn't hold water.

> I maintain that if the ETH were ever presented in a manner that
> didn't rely on anecdotal and bogus documentary evidence, it
> wouldn't face the stonewalling from the scientific community
> that many imagine.

It is getting harder and harder to take Mr. Irving seriously. He
is notably long on attitude and sweeping, dismissive waving of
hands and short on basic knowledge. Like Mark Cashman, I had
begun to wonder how somebody who knows so little about this
subject should have such strong opinions on same (not to mention
those of us who have bothered to educate ourselves on it; or
maybe he holds the Orwellian view that ignorance is strength). I
am genuinely disappointed. I had expected rather more of someone
who wrote "The Henry X File" (Fortean Times, September 1996),
one of the sharpest, wittiest pieces I've ever encountered in
this field. Maybe I'll have to reconsider my assessment of Henry
A. (that's a JOKE, Rob).

The notion that scientists investigate UFOs at their own
professional peril is false staggers the imagination.
Scientists' resistance, for reasons not always strictly
rational, to anomalous claims is the subject of a considerable
literature in the sociology and philosophy of science, e.g.,
Mauskopf's The Reception of Unconventional Science
(AAAS/Westview, 1979) and Bauer's The Enigma of Loch Ness
(University of Illinois Press, 1986; see Chapter 7 in
particular). (I have a bulging file of papers, mostly from
social- science journals, on this and related matters.)
Sociologist of science Marcello Truzzi has written lengthily and
eloquently on this subject, most recently in the forthcoming
essay "On Some Unfair Practices Towards Claims of the
Paranormal." (By the way, Truzzi, though skeptical, holds the
view that rational, critical-minded persons can look at UFO data
and see, rightly or wrongly, an ETH there. He admirably resists
the temptation to rhetorical inflation so beloved of Rob and
some others on this list, who regularly tell us we are religious
fanatics, gullible true believers, and even [see below]
clinically paranoid.)

Those of us who know a great deal more than Irving does about
James McDonald's ordeal can laugh or cry (your call) at his
strange claim. McDonald's correspondence with fellow scientists,
to whom he presented meticulously investigated cases and who
(with a handful of honorable exceptions) clearly had no interest
in letting evidence contaminate their biases (their replies
indicate they had not even read the case material), serves to
validate Allen Hynek's famous observation that science is not
always what scientists do (for explication, see Chapter 12 of
The UFO Experience). One might add that an Allen Hynek speaks on
this subject with rather more authority than Rob Irving.

Many cases speak to the point, but this one comes to mind at the
moment:

When it sought to get out of the UFO business, the Air Force
tried to get a university interested in taking up an
investigation. No university wanted anything to do with so
disreputable a subject, and even the University of Colorado took
it on reluctantly, mostly because it needed the money (it was
suffering from recent cutbacks in funding mandated by a
conservative state legislature). In fact, after Colorado was
approached, assistant dean Robert Low consulted several
prominent scientists for their views. As Low later reported to
the university, he was told that even to consider the
POSSIBILITY that UFOs may exist was not "respectable." And keep
in mind that Low was every bit as skeptical as the scientists he
was addressing. Even so, they thought he and the university were
flirting with heresy.

Anyone who's ever investigated a case and found an item of
evidence (in, say, a CE2) for evaluation by a scientist can
testify to the extraordinary skittishness even of interested
professionals. Few will allow their names to be published, for
fear of what their colleagues or deans will say (or of being
attacked and ridiculed in the journal of scientistic law
enforcement, Skeptical Inquirer). (See the discussion on "CE2s
and Failed Science" on pp. 196-97 of The UFO Encyclopedia, 2nd
Edition.)

Bruce Maccabee, a scientist who is open about his UFO interests,
tells some amazing tales of scientism's resistance to even the
most thoroughly documented UFO data in his eye-opening paper
"Still in Default," MUFON 1986 UFO Symposium Proceedings,
131-60. The title, incidentally, harks back to McDonald's
"Science in Default: Twenty-two Years of Inadequate UFO
Investigations," in the Sagan/Page UFOs -- A Scientific Debate,
52-122.

> That's not to say that others haven't had problems, or that
> there are not good examples of the contrary, but it seems to me
> that imagining that some kind of subtle or not so subtle
> conspiracy exists to deny your 'truth' is indicative of the
> classic descent into paranoia, usually occurring when belief is
> dominant.

This is utter rot. No one is talking "conspiracy" except Rob here.
(Whatever else might be said, the guy does have a fertile
imagination.) Maybe, my friend, you really ought to find a subject
you know something about to denounce. What we're seeing
from Rob, I fear, is more indicative of the classic descent into
the sort of arrogance usually occurring when ignorance is
dominant.

Jerry Clark




                             Shop at Amazon.com

          [ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
               [ This Month's Index | UFO UpDates Main Index ]

           UFO UpDates - Toronto - ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
                        Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp

      A Hand-Operated E-Mail Subscription Service for the Study of UFO
                             Related Phenomena.
            To subscribe please send your first and last names to
                       ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
           Message submissions should be sent to the same address.
     __________________________________________________________________

         Archive programming by Glenn Campbell at AliensOnEarth.com

   /FONT> >marks were found on the site.> >After lengthy inquiries by
   Hynek and others, the simplest -- and >surely most elegant --
   explanation would have been that >something was really out there.
   Klass, though, reasoned >differently. He found someone who lived not
   too far away who >said he hadn't heard a roar. So he formed his first
   >Occam-twisting hypothesis: That this person, rather than the >witness,
   was believable, even though (as Hynek pointed out) the >man lived near
   a noisy highway.> >Klass also talked to someone (unnamed) in the town,
   who said the >whole thing was a hoax. His second Occam-deforming
   hypothesis: >That THIS person, not even named, was more believable than
   the >witness, even though Klass gives no reason why, and doesn't tell
   >us anything at all about what kind of person this was. (I might >add
   that -- as Klass has to know from his normal journalistic >work -- it's
   not hard to find someone to take any conceivable >point of view, when
   you're dealing with anything controversial. >So the mere fact that
   someone asserts something doesn't mean a >thing.)> >Finally, Klass
   noted that the Mayor of Soccoro owned the land >which the sighting
   occured, and on that slim reed rested his >final Occam-astounding
   hypothesis: That the Mayor and his >employee, the policeman, had staged
   a hoax to give the town >publicity, and presumably make the land more
   valuable. This, >even though the alleged plot would have ended with the
   sighting, >and no further steps were ever taken! Almost needless to
   say, >Klass never asked either the policeman or the Mayor (or anyone
   >else in town, save his anonymous informant, who in any case was >only
   theorizing) whether this was true. Thus, in Lewis Carroll's >terms, he
   chose to believe three impossible things before >breakfast, instead of
   merely one, as the "Objectively Existent" >hypothesis would have
   required him to do. Occam lies confounded. >("Objectively Existent" is
   Mark Cashman's phrase for the theory >that some up to now unknown
   physical phenomenon lies behind >some UFO reports.) Once again I must
   congratulate Greg for an excellent discourse on the application of the
   Razor to ufology. He has correctly illustrated the Klassic Anti-Razor
   Attack. (KARA) in which two or more hypotheses are combined in order to
   explain a single observation rather than accept the hypothesis that "he





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 11

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 15:25:13 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time)
Fwd Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 18:26:23 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

Greetings,

To all those who participated in this on going discussion on
Occam's Razor and UFOs (and those who did not but might like
to), can anyone tell me who correctly applied Occam's Razor to
the two very similiar E.T. related cases below?

The first case deals with the recently reported results that
unEarthly silicon isotope ratios have been found in a unusual
shaped specimen (July 1997, Dr. Russell VernonClark) which there
is reason to suspect originated from outside our solar system.
Since this specimen could have been produced here on Earth,
applying Occam's Razor, we conclude that this was nothing more
than a wonderful hoax. All unEarthly isotope ratios found in
different specimens by others could also be considered to be
hoaxes. There is little scientific basis for thinking otherwise.


The second case deals with the recently reported results that
unEarthly silicon isotope ratios have been found in an unusual
shaped specimen (December 1997, Physics Today) which there is
reason to suspect originated from outside our solar system.
Since this specimen can also have been produced here on Earth,
applying Occam's Razor, we conclude that this was a wonderful
scientific discovery. All other unEarthly isotope ratios found
by others then verifies that our belief that we are all made up
of elements which were produced by a supernova or two in our
distant past is a sound scientific one.

Can we really conclude that one specimen is of E.T. origin while
another is not if the assumptions made and the tests performed
are identical? This Physics Today article may turn out to be a
very important one for ufology. If not, at least it does show
that interstellar visits are possible (after all, unintelligent
rock particles can do it).

Nick Balaskas







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 11

              Who Is Jerome Clark? [was: Corso, Stacy & Birnes]

From: The Duke of Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith]
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 19:54:16 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 18:31:57 -0400
Subject: Who Is Jerome Clark? [was: Corso, Stacy & Birnes]


With the compliments of the Duke of Mendoza:

>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: "Jerome Clark" <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Stacy, Corso & Birnes
>Date: Fri, 05 Jun 98 09:59:53 PDT


>> There are even people who have thought that Phil Klass
>> would chuck them into the Chesapeake Bay riddled with
>> bullets, or some such thing, should they take up an
>> invitation to go sailing with the Dread Debunker.

>Don't know that guy, I'm afraid, though once Klass made
>a "joke" to that effect to me, in the course of a fairly
>abusive communication.

Presumably then it is some other Jerome Clark entirely, of whom
no one but Klass - obviously suffering one of his habitual
delusions - has previously heard, but of whom Klass writes in
SUN #51 (May 1998), page 7 [see note below]:

"I concluded my letter [of 8 April 1984] to Clark as follows:
'If business or pleasure should bring you to the DC area, I
invite you to join me aboard the "Hanky Pank," but warn you of
the dangers of the mysterious Chesapeake Quadrangle in which
many UFOPs (UFO Promoters) have disappeared mysteriously. A few
have been found with their bodies riddled with bullet holes.
Some who are anxious to keep the Cosmic Watergate under cover,
will stop at nothing.

"Clark responded in friendly fashion, indicating that he
recognized the foregoing was intended as a joke. So my May 14,
1984 letter to Clark concluded: 'The yacht Hanky Pank made her
maiden voyage of 1984... Perhaps you will join us someday (and
your body will be found floating in the Chesapeake).'

"Clark replied on May 21, saying that he considered my May 14
letter to be a 'death threat,' and not a joke. 'Unless you make
a full, immediate and unqualified apology, all communication
between us wil cease and I will have nothing further to do with
you.'

"I replied on May 25: 'If you honestly believe that ma letter of
May 14 contained a serious "death threat," then I would urge you
immediately to bring it to the attention of the FBI and the US
Coast Guard--the latter because the foul deed would be performed
in its waters. However, if you fear that the FBI and USCG might
think you a dum-dum and a kook, then perhaps you may not wish to
do so. The choice is yours and I will not venture any advice...'

"If Clark reported my 'death threat' to the FBI, the agency did
not pursue it with me. And Clark terminated our correspondence."

[Note: I've made no attempt to reproduce Klass's
idiosyncratic typography, and in the original the last four
paragraphs here appear as one paragraph. I have broken it up
purely for ease of reading on-screen]

Now, I don't think this is a particularly funny joke. But, even
if it were true that "[n]obody... has ever accused Phil of
possessing a sense of humor that rises above the
pre-adolescent", if this report's accurate, we may be forgiven
for wondering - some people may make a book - if Jerome will
*ever* be accused of having a sense of humor again. However, the
Jerome Clark, ufological historian & scholar, English major &
foremost citer of his own deathless prose that we know on this
List, claims not to know the person named "Clark" referred to in
this item. So perhaps we need not fear for the integrity of
*our* Jerome's memory & general accuracy as he approaches old
age.

It's conceivable, of course, that Klass is selectively quoting
*our* Jerome and misrepresenting his meaning. Perhaps the Jerome
Clark *we* know would enlighten us with further details of his
side of the correspondence - if, of course, Klass is indeed
referring to him. (If he's not, perhaps Jerome could do us a
little piece on this doppelganger.)

It would be ironic, or poetic justice, or a case of squabbling
pot and kettle, were Klass to be misrepresenting through
selective quotation and distortion. Because in this very same
post, we find Jerome repeating an ancient canard about Klass.
Here it is:

>Speaking of believing anything:
>Klass believes that ufology is tantamount to Communism,
>among other odd and idiosyncratic notions.  Ah, what
>one has to believe to be a Dread Debunker.

And what economy with the truth one has to practise to demonize
Philip J. Klass successfully.

I see from the latest edition of Fortean Times (No 112), which I
had cause to confiscate from a malingering tweenie-maid this
morning (No 112), that in its correspondence columns as well,
Jerome is repeating his carefully warped and essentially
inaccurate version of the incident on which this slur is based.
If you repeat not-quite-truths often enough, you end up
believing them yourself.

But I must admire Jerome's sheer brass bollocks in repeating
this in a post responding to one of mine, for this is a matter
up on which I took him with some acerbity but a few weeks ago on
another list. Surely, he cannot be twitting me? Wouldn't that be
ad-hominem? Might it even bespeak an inkling of mischievous
humor? Whatever can this mean?

If it means Jerome wants to go through the whole thing again,
then I'm game, and this time I'll finish the job. In the course
of a spate of Klass-bashing - which included a vast deal of
vacuous ad-hominemery, plus silly wagers and even one anonymous
post: but not a single instance of Klass's allegedly legion
wicknednesses - Jerome commended a list member to his 1991
article "The Debunkers vs the UFO Menace; Or, Is Ufology
Tantamount to Communism?"

In that piece, Klass and his statements are variously
represented as "peculiar", "ludicrous", "desperate", a member of
the "debunking thought police", "scurrilous", "McCarthyite", and
(by implication) "irrational", "crazy", "lunatic" and "nutty",
for (allegedly) maintaining that ufology is tantamount to
Communism.

Ironically, the whole article is weakened somewhat by its
author's incapacity to distinguish between the notion that fans
of a UFO cover-up lend support to the Communist movement (which
Klass maintained) and the notion that *ufologists as a class* do
so (which Jerome maintains Klass maintained). Without knowing
who were the cover-up artists to be featured at the Lincoln
conference in question, a detail omitted by Jerome, it's
impossible to judge just how eccentric Klass was being in this
instance.

In the course of following exchanges, Jerome failed to identify
the cover-up artists in question, although he managed to say
quite a lot else. But the difference between a bunch of
conspiracy addicts and ufologists at large ought to be plain
enough. And it ought to be as clear as a curly red hair in a
glass of warm gin to Jerome, given his general outlook on
conspiracy theories in ufology.

I think (for what it's worth) that Klass in this case was
overstating the case by a large margin [this is called "meiosis"
by literary critics, Jerry], and stirring up trouble to no good
purpose. Part of the exchange between Jerome and me that
followed went as follows:

>>Do you, Mr. Brookesmith, think it not peculiar, ludicrous,
>>desperate, or McCarthyite to equate ufologists with Soviet
>>agents?

>If Klass had actually done that, Mr Clark, I might. As it
>was, you spent a great many words dancing on a distortion
>of Klass's position. Which was - let us spell it out
>again, the way we have to with everything - that
>ufological cover-up artists undermine the credibility
>of the US Government, and that as there is "no scientific
>evidence to support the claims of the presenters... these
>organizations, by publicly questioning the government,
>lend support to the Communist movement." However eccentric
>that position is - and, please note, I don't quibble with
>your calling Klass meddlesome, etc - it is patently not
>the same as the generalization that ufologists are to be
>equated with Soviet agents. But, having put the idea into
>Klass's head, you granted yourself licence to plaster
>Klass with such epithets as "peculiar", "ludicrous",
>"desperate", "scurrilous", "McCarthyite", as well as -
>most temperately, of course - "irrational", "crazy",
>"lunatic" and "nutty".

>The ad-hominemery here is inextricable from the
>distortion, for the one follows from the other. So,
>if I were you, I should worry more that those who
>were capable of observing how you travestied Klass's
>position might wonder to what extent your other writings
>are built on misrepresentation and factitiousness. I say
>that without regard for our ufological differences, too.
>You may like to think about that.

To judge from his somewhat dyspeptic and ad-hominem response to
this, and his blithe repetition here of this hoary old canard,
Jerome did not think about it much at all.

I've long found it interesting too that in his treatment of the
RB-47 case in his UFO "Encyclopedia", which is so admirable in
so many other ways, Jerome dismisses Klass's interpretation of
the data as a series of unlikely coincidences. But he doesn't
mention that Klass presented that interpretation to the RB-47
crew, who agreed that the "UFOs" were the product of human error
& excitement combined with ghost echoes on the radar. This is a
key item in Klass's analysis. Surely it was not just dislike for
the man that led Jerome to omit it?

I am greatly looking forward to reading Brad Sparks's treatment
of this case in the second edition of the UFO Enc., given that
Jerome has hinted that the article will bolster the argument for
the ETH. Meanwhile, I am genuinely saddened to find my respect
for Jerome's claims to true scholarship edging, with no help
from me, toward my opinion of Michael Bolton's excruciating
demonstrations of his claim to be a tenor.

best wishes
Paracetamol D. Megawatt
Head Banger





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 11

               Re: No Luck Yet In Search For Extraterrestrial

From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose)
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 07:28:17 +0200
Fwd Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 20:53:39 -0400
Subject: Re: No Luck Yet In Search For Extraterrestrial

From: Florida Today.

URL: http://www.flatoday.com:80/space/today/061098h.htm

Stig

*******


FLORIDA TODAY Space Online
"Planet Earth's best source for online space news"

For June 10, 1998


No luck yet in search for extraterrestrial signals


Copyright =A9 1998, The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This
material may not be published, broadcast or re-distributed directly or
re-directly.


SAN DIEGO, Calif. (AP) - If there is an ET out there, astronomers on
Earth haven't heard from him.

Hollywood may have had extensive communication with aliens in the movie
"Contact," but University of California, Berkeley researchers report
that the most sensitive search for extraterrestrial radio signals ever
conducted has turned up no evidence of anybody trying to call Earth.

"Nothing has been found as yet, but we are still searching," Sabine A.
Airieau, a Berkeley team member, told the American Astronomical
Society's national meeting. "We believe it is a worthwhile project."

The Berkeley survey, called the Search for Extraterrestrial Radio
Emissions from Nearby Developed Intelligent Populations, analyzed more
than 500 trillion signals over the last six years, but found no pattern
suggesting the signals came from an intelligent outer space source.

Airieau said the survey focused in part on nine stellar objects thought
to be extrasolar system planets, but there were no recognizable,
intelligent signals.

Dan Werthimer, co-director of the project, said that doesn't mean there
aren't civilizations somewhere out there. He said the ET radio searches
are covering only a small part of the total radio spectrum.

The Berkeley effort uses a detector mounted on the world's largest
radio telescope, the dish at Arecibo, Puerto Rico. The searchers have
no control over where the telescope is pointed, but wherever it looks
they listen for signals.

Listening for intelligent radio signals is a growing activity, despite
a congressional decision a few years back not to spend federal money on
the project. Other ET searches are being conducted by the Search for
Extraterrestrial Intelligence Institute, which was once funded by NASA,
and by teams at Harvard University and Ohio State University.

The searches also are increasing in sophistication. A new Berkeley
system will sample 168 million radio frequencies every 1.7 seconds. The
signals are analyzed by computer immediately and certain signals are
separated out for later analysis.

About a third of the sky is scanned every six months.

They are looking for repeating signals, such as those from a radio
beacon.

Experts hypothesize that if a signal were detected, it would most
likely come from an advanced civilization that was sending the signal
intentionally, and not from an extraterrestrial version of the random
"leakage" from ordinary radio and television communications on Earth.

The space radio survey equipment cannot pick up such random signals,
Airieau said.

"The first civilization Earthlings detect is likely to be more advanced
than ours - perhaps 10,000 to billions of years old," Werthimer said.

Listening for a signal that may never come takes great patience, said
Airieau.

"Sometimes it is really exhilarating," she said. "But it can be really
disappointing."

She's not giving up.

"This is very worthwhile," said Airieau, noting that listening for ET
addresses one of the basic cosmic questions: Are humans alone in the
universe?


More online services from FLORIDA TODAY
Search Space Online | Find your Florida dream home | Post your resume
online



Use of this site signifies your agreement to the Terms of Service
updated February 1998.

Please e-mail comments or questions about Space Online to Editor Mark
DeCotis.

Contact Space Online Manager Jim Banke to inquire about becoming a
sponsor.

This World Wide Web site is copyright =A9 1998 FLORIDA TODAY.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 11

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: Geoff Price <Geoff@CalibanMW.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 18:00:56 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 20:39:42 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


>Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 11:47:57 +0100
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: John Rimmer <johnr@magonia.demon.co.uk>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

[...]

>Quite right. The problem with the ETH is that it is impossible
>to formulate a testable hypothesis and make predictions about
>it, for two reasons. Firstly, it is not really a hypothesis at
>all. To be able to test it we would need at least some idea of
>what the aliens are, and what they can and cannot do. And
>secondly there is no way of *disproving* it, which is essential
>for any scientific prediction.

If we cannot test it, says the critic, why even raise the
question?  (It will just get the little people excited.)

There is a grain of fairness here, of course.  We don't have any
means of specifically and unambiguously testing the ETH given
the data at hand and the non-repeatability of the phenomenon,
therefore we have no practical reason to adopt ET as an
assumption for purposes of immediate experiment (i.e. make it a
scientific hypothesis.)

It is _in principle_ testable, however, and in that sense there
isn't a damn thing wrong with it, despite all the goofy
chortling and tut-tutting that comes out of critics on this
point.

At the moment, the ETH is a broad epistemological question
provoked by the UFO experience.  It gives us a sense of what is
potentially at stake here. And it provides a broader framework
for investigation for its supporters. Clearly, impressive
documentation of an objective and physical new phenomenon would
move us quite a ways down the path.  Not unambiguously in the
direction of ETH, of course.  Still, on a strictly logical
level, it can be easily and reasonably argued that the ETH is
the most parsimonious explanation for the UFO problem given what
we know, if you do accept the existence of a new phenomenon or
class of phenomena with some of the observed behaviors (i.e.
Unidentified in the sense of Unidentifiable).

Of course this is a totally intractible question; someone else
may argue that the "secret technology hypothesis" is more
parsimonious (including less complete unknowns, but forcing
other assumptions which we know we don't find palatable) and
still someone else may say that, in the wake of this or that psi
experiment, psi-shared hallucinations and manifestations are now
"more parsimonious" etc.  As I think all understand, only better
data would resolve such competing speculation.

The implicit political point -- that the act of forming the ETH
provokes public hysteria and is therefore bad -- is
understandable but just plain wrongheaded.  The fact is, the
public has been perfectly capable of jumping to "wild"
speculation about these objects entirely on its own.  The core
experiences tend to have a pretty pointed effect on witnesses.
Certainly it did on me (and I assure you, there isn't a
conventional explanation I can screw my head around that could
touch it, or else I wouldn't be here.)

If you want a real culprit in the whole UFO hysteria problem, a
real villain to burn, I respectfully suggest cursing the things
themselves, directly.

>Saying of the UFO phenomenon "it's aliens", is no more
>scientific than saying "it's demons" or "it's magic" or "it's
>the tooth-fairy"

"No more scientific" in the sense of being a specific, testable
hypothesis for experimental purposes, yes sure ho hum.  But of
course, you're trying to leverage the term to create a broader
sense of being "unscientific" in the sense of irrational or
impractical.  In fact, "aliens" are obviously considerably more
parsimonious (in a quite practical scientific sense) than demons
or the tooth-fairy, despite widespread and curious confusion on
this point.

[...]

>If the PH is valid it implies that the UFO is most widespread in
>countries which share social and economic conditions, and have
>similar cultural values. As the UFO phenomenon seems most
>widespread in the USA we would expect it to be experienced most
>often in similar societies. This does seem to be the case. The
>countries with the greatest number of UFO reports, and public
>interest in ufology, besides the USA are either those which
>share its cultural and social background, e.g. the UK, Western
>Europe, Canada; or those which have wide exposure to US cultural
>and social values, e.g. Central and South America (and no,
>Jerry, this isn't some sort of Ameriphobia, I actually quite
>*like* most American social and cultural values).

>We would expect the UFO phenomena to be least widespread in
>those societies which either do not share this social
>background, or are actually hostile to it, e.g. the Islamic
>countries, most of Africa, Asia (except Japan), and this is
>indeed the case. This is not, of course, to say that no UFO
>reports at all come from those countries.

Quick lesson in real science:  to test a hypothesis, you must be
able to provide evidence which _unambiguously_ isolates your
proposed explanation. For example, the radically different
cultures in some societies might act to suppress the reporting
of UFO-type events, thereby _alternatively_ explaining your
reported frequency distinction.  Or there may be other
explanations entirely, correlated with geography for some
unknown reason, for example.

This _specific_ testability is what really distinguishes a
scientific hypothesis from a lot of hokey armwaving.

Ah well, just trying to be helpful... for all the appreciation
it gets me. (sigh)


Geoff Price
Software Engineer
Caliban Mindwear
Geoff@CalibanMW.com
http://www.CalibanMW.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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 11

                       Pittsburgh Sighting - 08-06-98

From: Steve Neeley <stneeley@mail.bright.net>
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 16:33:02 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 21:01:08 -0400
Subject: Pittsburgh Sighting - 08-06-98


From: "SPIKE157" <spike157@email.msn.com>
To: <stneeley@bright.net>
Subject: UFO
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 09:03:44 -0400

I took 2 photos of a round bright white light over Pittsburgh
last night. The object moved very fast. this was not an airplane
or anything like that, the photos clearly show that it could not
have been. I would like to know if anyone else reported it.

Sincerely, Cory Sykes

---

Steven J. Neeley, Director
Ohio Skywatch International

http://www.geocities.com/soho/5782

stneeley@bright.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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 11

                 Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General

From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 00:05:17 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 20:46:54 -0400
Subject: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General


>  From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
>  Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 15:48:19 EDT
>  To: updates@globalserve.net
>  Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General

>  >From: RTodd12191@aol.com
>  >Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 10:23:35 EDT
>  >To: updates@globalserve.net
>  >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General

>  >>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
>  >>Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 15:48:21 EDT
>  >>To: updates@globalserve.net
>  >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General

>  >>>From: Robert Todd <RTodd12191@aol.com>
>  >>>Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 14:58:39 EDT
>  >>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>  >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General

>  ><snip>

>  >>>And I ask again, why is it we haven't been told what Mrs. Marcel
>  >>>(Major Marcel's wife, and Jesse Marcel, Jr.'s mother) had to say
>  >>>when she was asked about the Roswell debris? As I undestand it,
>  >>>she said the debris was _not_ from an alien spaceship. This is

<brevity snip>

>  Others have said the same thing. Dr. Marcel would, of course,
>  corroborate the statement as well. However, don't we have this
>  backwards? Mr. Todd wrote, "As I undestand it, she said the
>  debris was _not_ from an alien spaceship." There is no source for
>  this "understanding." I provided my reason for not mentioning
>  what she said, which is in conflict with what is alleged here.
>  Shouldn't Mr. Todd be required to explain where this information
>  came from, and if he has no source, then shouldn't we just ignore
>  it as irrelevant.

>  And can't we just say asked and answered. He might not like the
>  answer, but it explains why her testimony was not used.

>  KRandle

I agree with Kevin. As for understandings, see below:

The Air Force's understanding of Roswell:   balloon, balloon,
crash test dummys.

Air Force on most every UFO sighting and witness:  Venus, Venus,
Swamp Gas, unreliable witness, hoax, ..."

Phil Klass's understanding of UFOs:  Hoax, Hoax,
misidentification, space debris.

So we see that sometimes "understanding" is not based upon fact,
evidence, or reality.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 11

                  East Kent MEP: Demands UFO Investigation

From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 22:09:43 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 20:51:17 -0400
Subject: East Kent MEP:  Demands UFO Investigation


I thought the following news might interest some of you:

Mark Watts, Member of European Parliament for East Kent, has
demanded an investigation into UFO sightings in the Hythe area
Kent England. He said that there were many independent sightings
of strange flying objects in the weeks leading upto the General
Election last May. They all occurred close to the home of former
Home Secretary Michael Howard. When the MP stood for the
conservative party leadership last summer fellow Tory Anne
Widdicombe made accusations that he had "having something of the
night about him".

Thus far, calls for a probe have been resisted by the
authorities. Watts will continue his campaign until someone in
the establishment wakes up to his constituents demands for
action!!!.

Regards,

Roy







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 11

                              More Ice On Mars?

From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose)
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 08:16:28 +0200
Fwd Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 20:55:36 -0400
Subject: More Ice On Mars?

From: The Knoxville News-Sentinel June 8.

URL: http://www.knoxnews.com/060898/health/5438.htm

Stig

*******


More ice on Mars?


Knoxville geologist may have found southernmost site of subsurface ice


By Fred Brown, News-Sentinel staff writer


(Image: Mars surface - Cydonia region)


Using images sent from NASA's Mars Global Surveyor, Harry Moore, a
Knoxville geologist, has found what may be a major discovery on the red
planet's surface.

Moore, supervisor of the geotechnical engineering section of the
Tennessee Department of Transportation and a member of an international
scientific think tank, has located a huge crater north of the Mars
equator that appears to have frozen water ice on its floor.

If Moore's find is accurate, the implications are enormous for future
missions to Mars.

Moore, 49, and the Society for Planetary Search for Extraterrestrial
Intelligence Research, a group of scientist in the U.S. and Europe,
have been studying Mars for more than two decades.

Last week, Moore posted the results of his study in a scientific paper
to the American Geophysical Union meeting in Boston. The paper has
created a stir within the scientific community.

Essentially what Moore found by studying the images of the Cydonia
region of Mars is a crater whose football field size floor appears to
be wall-to-wall ice. The floor's surface even reflects on the crater's
wall.

Moore thinks the ice is frozen water and not frozen carbon dioxide,
which is known to exist south of the Mars equator.

Moore says that while studying the NASA images (captured in April by
the surveyor) he noticed several unusual craters clustered together
north of a large ridge.

Four of the craters, he says, had an "unusual floor surface."

They were reflective and seemed to have "either fluid or some smooth
solid on their floors. Being that the surface temperature on Mars is
usually below the freezing boundary for water, frozen water would be
the likely solid if water were present. Molten rock material would also
be a source of fluid," he wrote.

Planetary scientists suspect that a tremendous amount of water covered
Mars' surface millions of years ago. It is also thought that water ice
could exist now at very shallow depths in areas north of the equator.

Moore says there are a couple of explanations for the shiny surface on
the crater's floor.

The impact of either a meteor or a comet could have generated enough
heat to melt frozen water in the permafrost. The melted water could
then have filled the crater to its current water table. Or it could
have filled in cracks in the bedrock.

In Mars' cold, thin atmosphere, it would not take long for the water to
refreeze. Another explanation says Moore is that a meteor or comet may
have penetrated into the Mars crust, cracking it open and releasing
molten material.

The molten material would have then flowed into the crater's floor and
solidified.

"If this is water ice," Moore says, "it would help support the idea
that the planet was once covered with water, and water supports life.
I'm not going to push it any farther than that," he says.

If the crater's floor is frozen water, then the ingredients for oxygen,
hydrogen and liquid water are present. If that is the case, it could be
possible for future explorers to Mars to live on the planet.

The other significance of Moore's discovery is that the only other
place water ice has been found on Mars is the planet's north pole. The
Moore crater is the southernmost site yet for the possibility of
subsurface ice.

Also last week, a NASA consultant released a photo of a crater 30 miles
across with a darker area 12 to 18 miles wide at the floor.

Mike Malin, who designed NASA's cameras for the Mars surveyor,
announced one day before Moore's paper to the geophysical group that
the dark area in the crater 2,400 miles south of the equator was some
sort of frozen mud or sand. This could indicate ice.

The Global Surveyor has been in orbit around Mars since last fall.


Copyright =A9 1998, The Knoxville News-Sentinel Co. 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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 11

                        OVNI Chapterhouse and STS-80

From: JJ Mercieca <mufor@maltanet.net>
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 10:20:01 +0200
Fwd Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 21:03:24 -0400
Subject: OVNI Chapterhouse and STS-80

Does anyone know at what address the OVNI Chapterhouse (Tom King)
has moved to?  The url I have is giving me an error 404.

Also, if anyone knows where the STS-80 ufo video .avi clips
are available on the web, let me know.

Thanks.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 11

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: Geoff Price <Geoff@CalibanMW.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 17:56:59 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 20:37:07 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

>From: RobIrving@aol.com
>Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 23:40:29 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

[...]

>Off the cuff... responsible ufology would be to cast a suspicious
>eye on populist ufology, to perhaps create some distance from it.

To my eyes, responsible "ufologists" routinely do more than cast
one suspiciously, they positively roll them with some frequency.

Yet it never seems to bze enough.  I find, in discussion, that
when pressed for specific points of criticism UFO skeptics often
return to the point that UFO proponents "fail to distance
themselves" from the looneys -- "if you purged the kooks and
nuts you'd get more respect" etc etc.   Honestly now, how many
times have all of us -- even those of you repeating it now --
heard this refrain?

It always becomes an issue of practicality to me.  I assume
things are similar in the UK, but certainly here in the US there
are considerable protections in place that prevent, say, a
responsible ufologist from spontaneously shutting down the Art
Bell program on the grounds that it reflects poorly on a topic
in which the ufologist might have a more sober interest.

I can imagine some end-runs around these regrettable legal
protections -- mail bombs, dark-tinted Subarus and mysterious
disappearances, etc. -- but my gut feeling is that such things
would only fuel some of the ET cover-up paranoia out there.

Other ideas?

>Then you'd have to get used to being classified a sceptic, with a
>'k', as opposed to a believer, and to enjoy many idle hours,
>days, months, years, even decades in Rimmer's case, educating
>those who never seem able to grasp the full concept of
>scepticism.

One can only slack-jawedly admire such heroic efforts of
advocacy in the face of the widespread and American-spawned
collapse of classical Western rationalism.

>>  Where does "populist" ufology fit in what I was talking about?

>Maybe I've been mixing with the wrong company, but I referred to
>the loudest, the ones with the boldest claims, those that reach
>the biggest audience, who create the mythologies that you say
>could prove so beneficial to science in the long run.

>Like it or not, rather like the apathetic downtrodden, all the
>time no mutually agreed standard of evidence exists you are stuck
>with the likes of Hesemann, Greer, Simms and Leir, etc., as
>representing the ETH, as much as anyone.

Such people never even use the term "ETH", in my experience.
They speak of ET reality, ET cover-ups, and alien implants.  It
seems frankly bizarre and quite arbitrary to declare them the
representatives of the ETH.  Some clearer use of terminology
might help here.

[...]

>>  In any case, if Hynek and McDonald couldn't pull
>>  the scientific community into the debate, what luck are
>>  scientific ufologists now likely to have?)

>With sufficient and clearly presented evidence I can't see much
>of a problem. What exactly is the problem, in your opinion? I
>personally don't accept the line that scientists are too worried
>about reputation to involve themselves in ufology - that argument
>doesn't hold water.

Agreed.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 11

                 UFO Sweden Disconnects Vallee'S "Anatomy"!

From: "true.x-file. news" <true.x-file.news@n2news.com> [Jack Husdon]
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 17:38:34 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 20:34:16 -0400
Subject: UFO Sweden Disconnects Vallee'S "Anatomy"!


---
"If The Truth Is Out There...We'll Find It!"

June 10, 1998
For Immediate Release:

UFO Sweden Disconnects Vallee's "Anatomy"!
by Joe Rosenberger

In another apparent defeat for the once respected UFOlogist,
Jacques Vallee's much lauded Anatomy Of A Hoax recieved an
additional blow recently as UFO Sweden, the Swedish UFO research
group, disconnected their link to the abstract of the now
discredited work. Formerly located at
http://www.algonet.se/~ufo/philadelphia_exp.html the Swedish UFO
web page now has the link indicated at
http://www.algonet.se/~ufo/english/philadelphia_exp.html when
you place your curser at the "Philadelphia Experiment:50 Years
Later" statement located still at the center of their web page
at http://www.algonet.se/~ufo/english.html . Now, when you click
on it a big "File Not Found" appears with the statement "The
requested URL /~ufo/english/philadelphia_exp.html was not found
on this server." which is similar for the other disconnected
link for the Anatomy abstract.

This is the second web site that has now reacted to the news,
first reported by this service, that the article intended to
prove that the popular Philadelphia Experiment legend was a
hoax, was itself a hoax. Jeff Rense of Sightings On The Radio
was the first to react when, upon reading our initial story, he
immediately requested permision to post our article at his web
site for his version of the Vallee fraud as a rebuttal.
ParaNet's Michael Corbin, who has no web page for it but who had
endorsed the article as "good research" (this can be seen at a
separate location http://www.geocities.com/Area51/7354/Hoax.txt )
was the second to react, with a diatribe of unsubstantiated
accusations and personal attacks against this service and the
investigator who brought us the story with extensive web links
to evidence discrediting it, Marshall Barnes. Corbin's reaction
was an obvious attempt at saving face in view of the fact that
it was Jacques Vallee himself that personally gave the ParaNet
President and so-called " nvestigator", direct permission to
distribute the flawed and fraudulent work across various
internet newsgroups.

In an angry counter-attack, Barnes has issued a bold, direct
challenge through this service to Corbin, who had refered to
Barnes as a "rank amateur sleuth with an axe to grind", by
challenging Corbin to produce Jacques Vallee, Bernhard Haisch,
Edward Dudgeon and William Moore and Barnes on Corbin's radio
show where they would all be sworn under oath with "the
penalties for perjury in effect" to debate the issue once and
for all. Barnes indicated that prior to his appearance he would
send Corbin extensive documentation and audio recordings as
evidence that he would be telling the truth and that Corbin
could in fact indicate as much to his listening audience. As of
this time, two days later, there has been no response from
Corbin to Barnes' challenge. Nor has Corbin responded to the
rebuttal to his accusations from this news service's publisher,
Jack Hudson's. In the wake of UFO Sweden's apparent distancing
themselves from what is now a Vallee debacle, it is clearer than
ever that Corbin's behavior was not th t of a man defending an
article unjustly accused, but that of a man betrayed by another,
whom he had trusted.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 11

                        Re: Alien Astronomer Website

From: "Mark LeCuyer" <randydan@wavetech.net>
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 02:14:48 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 21:02:18 -0400
Subject: Re: Alien Astronomer Website

Hello fellow subscribers,

I invite you to visit Alien Astronomer:
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/6583

Come and explore the exciting and mysterious worlds of ufology,
astronomy and secret societies. Analyze the beautiful color
photos and thought provoking articles. Open your mind to the
infinite wonders of our universe and it's alien lifeforms.

I also have a great Art Bell (Best of) Radio Program Archives
section. There's a lot to see so enjoy your visit. Your opinions
will be appreciated.

Mark
randydan@wavetech.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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 11

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 10:31:04 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 23:18:07 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

> Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 11:47:57 +0100
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> From: John Rimmer <johnr@magonia.demon.co.uk>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


> >From: "Greg Sandow" <gsandow@prodigy.net>
> >To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net>
> >Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs
> >Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 18:45:41 -0400

> You ask about predictions for other hypotheses. Well I think as
> far as the Psychosocial Hypothesis is concerned one has already
> been made, and is in the process of being proven.

> If the PH is valid it implies that the UFO is most widespread in
> countries which share social and economic conditions, and have
> similar cultural values. As the UFO phenomenon seems most
> widespread in the USA we would expect it to be experienced most
> often in similar societies. This does seem to be the case. The
> countries with the greatest number of UFO reports, and public
> interest in ufology, besides the USA are either those which
> share its cultural and social background, e.g. the UK, Western
> Europe, Canada; or those which have wide exposure to US cultural
> and social values, e.g. Central and South America (and no,
> Jerry, this isn't some sort of Ameriphobia, I actually quite
> *like* most American social and cultural values).

> We would expect the UFO phenomena to be least widespread in
> those societies which either do not share this social
> background, or are actually hostile to it, e.g. the Islamic
> countries, most of Africa, Asia (except Japan), and this is
> indeed the case. This is not, of course, to say that no UFO
> reports at all come from those countries.

John, many thanks for this.

I see two problems with it.

1. Beneath your reasoning lies an assumption that, if UFOs are
real objects, they'd be seen equally often in all parts of the
world. How can we assume that? (And yes, I could invent reasons
why they would or wouldn't be, but I'd simply be speculating.)
Aren't you putting the cart before the horse? That is, aren't you
making declarations about how real UFOs would behave, before
we've even proved that such things exist?

2. You need to control for something fairly obvious. This is the
possibility that, in your global survey, you're measuring
something you don't consider in what you wrote here -- how likely
people in various countries are to report UFOs. Yes, we have far
more UFO reports from the US than from North Korea. Does that
mean that cultural factors in the US are generating UFO reports,
or that cultural (and political!) factors in the US make people
more likely to report the UFOs they see?

Suppose we substituted "spousal abuse" for "UFOs" in what you've
written here:

> If the PH is valid it implies that spousal abuse is most widespread
> in countries which share social and economic conditions, and have
> similar cultural values. As concern about spousal abuse seems most
> widespread in the USA we would expect it to be experienced most
> often in similar societies. This does seem to be the case. The
> countries with the greatest number of spousal abuse complaints, and
> public interest in spousal abuse, besides the USA are either those which
> share its cultural and social background, e.g. the UK, Western
> Europe, Canada; or those which have wide exposure to US cultural
> and social values, e.g. Central and South America (and no,
> Jerry, this isn't some sort of Ameriphobia, I actually quite
> *like* most American social and cultural values).

> We would expect reports of spousal abuse to be least widespread in
> those societies which either do not share this social
> background, or are actually hostile to it, e.g. the Islamic
> countries, most of Africa, Asia (except Japan), and this is
> indeed the case. This is not, of course, to say that no spousal
> abuse reports at all come from those countries.

Would this suggest that spousal abuse isn't real, and that
complaints about it are generated simply by cultural factors?
Hardly.

> We predicted that with the fall of the Iron Curtain, and the
> increasing penetration of western (predominantly US) culture
> into the former Soviet Bloc countries, we would see a rise in
> the level of UFO-related activity in those countries, and this
> does seem to be happening. Hungary, which even before 1989 was
> most open to the West, has developed its own crop- circle
> culture. We are beginning to see more reports and film from the
> Czech Republic for example, and elsewhere. And this is not
> simply a factor of the freeing of press and other media in those
> countries - even in the Communist era there seemed to be no
> serious block to reports coming out of Eastern Europe. In the
> Communist era the Eastern European country which seemed to have
> the most UFO reports was Romania, which at the time was seen as
> breaking from the Soviet Bloc.

But, John....I, as an advocate of physically-existing UFOs, would
have predicted the same thing. If UFOs are really up there, and
we've had scattered reports of them from the Communist bloc, I'd
expect more reports once those countries were politically free.
That is, my working assumption would be that UFOs were in fact
seen there, but the full extent of the sightings was masked by
political tyranny, and the lack of a free press.

What evidence would we need to tell which of our assumptions is
correct?

You also, I think, need to be more careful in discussing the
nature of these Communist countries. You say that Hungary was the
Soviet-bloc country most open to the West (true), but then it
turns out that Romania had the most UFO reports! You explain that
by saying it was breaking from the Soviet bloc, but that ignores
two factors.

1. Romania had the most vicious tyranny of any Soviet-bloc
nation.
It's no accident that Caeucescu, the Romanian leader (whose name
I may be misspelling) was the only Eastern-bloc tyrant to be shot
the moment he was overthrown.

2.  Albania and Yugoslavia broke with the Soviet Union long
before Rumania did. If breaking with the Soviet Union is a factor
in UFO reports, why weren't there more from these countries? And,
yes, I know that Albania was the most isolated and least Western
of any Eastern European Communist state, but Yugoslavia (which
for most of its existence wasn't a member of the Soviet bloc at
all) was by far the most open and most Western. Why did Romania
have more UFO reports than Yugoslavia?

One more point. Your reasoning requires you, I think, to predict
that searches of government archives in formerly Communist
countries wouldn't reveal a large number of UFO reports we
haven't known about. That prediction would appear to be false.
George Knapp was acquired voluminous UFO reports from the former
Soviet military.

> Even within the US and Western Europe we see major differences
> in the way the UFO phenomenon manifests itself, which would not
> be the case if it was caused by a single, i.e. extraterrestrial,
> source. Abductions are very few and far between on Continental
> Europe, more widespread in the UK, but nothing like as many per
> head of population as in the USA. Even our aliens are different,
> with fewer Greys and more Nordics (and try and tell me there's
> no racial element involved in that!). Even the postings on these
> Updates demonstrate the cultural differences, with British
> people seldom if ever commenting on Roswell, MJ12, Cydonia, etc,
> tending to be more interested in flying triangles, which you
> guys seem to have dropped a while ago!

Again, you need to control here for cultural differences in
general. You have free medical care, we can barely even discuss
it. You have more dance music on your pop charts, we have more
hiphop. You stand politely to the right on escalators, we stand
anywhere we like, blocking the way for those who want to pass
others. You have a monarchy, and, much as we adore your royals,
we'd never institute such a thing. Etc. You may, for all I know,
have your own style in academic disciplines like physics or
economics. How do you know that the willingless to discuss
certain types of UFO reports -- quite apart from their reality --
isn't influenced by culture?

If you think reports of aliens have a racial component, here's an
experiment you might try. In London, where there are large
numbers of non-white people, is there also the same percentage of
Nordic reports?

One final question. When you say "we predicted," are professional
historians and sociologists among the "we"?

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 11

               More Than 100 ET Radio Signals Collected During

From: virginia@ping.be, Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose)
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 13:05:48 +0200
Fwd Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 23:10:17 -0400
Subject: More Than 100 ET Radio Signals Collected During


Received from the UASR list via Lieve (virgiania@ping.be) June 10 1998.

Stig

-----

Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 12:05:35 +0200
From: Lieve <virginia@ping.be>
To: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk
Subject: re-send

^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~
[U A S R]> UFO's-, ALIEN's-, SPACE- RESEARCH   MAILING LIST <[U A S R]
^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~
Posted by : Dave Pigott <davep@harlequin.co.uk>

Sunday Times of London,
by Steve Farrar & Alex McGregor,
7 June 1998

Some of the world's leading astronomers revealed last week that
they have collected more than 100 unexplained radio signals
during routine surveillance of space.

These faint, pure tones have no natural origin and could have
been created artificially, the scientists said. They do not rule
out the astonishing possibility that this strange radio traffic
could have extra-terrestrial origins.

Most of the signals have been picked up by American radio
telescopes managed by the Search for Extra-Terrestrial
Intelligence Institute (SETI) in Mountain View, California, set
up in 1988 to study radio static in space and scan it for
material that could be evidence of alien contact. A few have
also been logged by British astronomers studying stars and
galaxies with the Lovell telescope at Jodrell Bank, near
Macclesfield in Cheshire.

"It's tempting to hypothesise that at least some of these
seductive signals were truly from ET and that they vanished from
the ether when the extra-terrestrials turned off their
transmitters or otherwise went off air before we could verify
the message," said Dr Seth Shostak, SETI's public programmes
scientist.

Alternatively, he said, it was possible they were simply the
product of some kind of local interference that did not repeat
when the astronomers tried to relocate the rogue signals.

SETI, which was formed by scientists including Carl Sagan and
received funding from Nasa until 1993, has yet to discover any
clear, repeated radio pattern that might hint at the existence
of alien intelligence in the universe.

The short, indistinct signals that have been detected are a far
cry from the resounding pulses featured in the movie Contact, in
which Jodie Foster played a SETI astronomer who deciphered radio
contact with aliens. Foster's signed photograph is pinned to a
wall in SETI's Silicon Valley office. None of the signals has
been heard by human ears - they were all picked up by computers
monitoring radio telescopes.

"If you could hear the signal at the frequency it is received,
it would sound like a faint whistle, a pure tone which could
only be made by a transmitter. As far as we know, nature can't
make a pure sound," said Shostak. Each time one of these signals
is detected by a radio telescope, an alarm alerts SETI
astronomers, who work around the clock. None has yet been
pinpointed or recorded a second time, so that scientists have
been denied the chance of making a study of their source or
composition.

SETI is stepping up efforts to increase its chances of
relocating one of these signals and has secured agreement to use
the world's largest radio telescope - which was featured in the
James Bond film GoldenEye - at Arecibo in Puerto Rico.

The Americans are also negotiating with British astronomers to
launch a five-year project to allow speedy verification and
tracking of these elusive noises.

Whenever SETI identifies a suspect signal, radio telescopes at
Jodrell Bank will scan the same section of the sky to locate it.
In this way the scientists can rule out possible terrestrial
interference from radar, traffic and even electric fences as a
cause.

"I'm sure there are signals that have come and gone that we
couldn't get to the bottom of. That's not to say it's little
green men trying to communicate with us, but we just don't
know," said Dr Tom Muxlow, an astronomer at the British radio
astronomy observatory. He disclosed that Jodrell Bank had picked
up about six rogue signals.

The possibility that the signals have extra-terrestrial origins
cannot be ignored, according to Nobel laureate Tony Hewish,
emeritus professor of radio astronomy at Cambridge University.
In 1967 Hewish and Jocelyn Bell, a student, believed they had
found evidence of an alien first contact when they detected a
regular pulse of radio signals coming from a distant star.

"It all had an air of unreality about it, but for a month we
thought it was possible that the signals were coming from
intelligent life on another planet. When radio astronomers pick
up signals that are very peculiar they take it with a big pinch
of salt, but you cannot remove the possibility," said Hewish.
Instead, they had found a pulsar, a rapidly spinning neutron
star, a discovery for which Hewish won a Nobel prize in 1974.

Shostak is not put off by the prospect that any signal from an
alien world would probably be indecipherable. "If we heard from
an ET, it would be from a civilisation that is a long way ahead
of us, maybe even a million years more advanced than we are," he
said.


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

        Hyperborea Online News Service
                                 __H_O_N_S__
      Copyright 1998, All Rights Reserved

This material may be forwarded throughout Cyberspace, provided
only that this signatory trailer is attached.  Material may
contain prior and/or current copyright registrations.  HONS
assumes no responsibility for any misuse of material that is
copyrighted by other persons or organizations. __H_O_N_S__









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 11

              'Fortean Times' article on Mexican UFO flap/wave

From: Steve Woods <S.Woods@elsevier.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 13:26:19 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 23:14:07 -0400
Subject: 'Fortean Times' article on Mexican UFO flap/wave

Greetings from Oxford, England
11 June 1998

Those of you who read this item might be interested in a letter
I sent to FT which they didn't print. Using this
enhanced-democracy medium it will now see the light of day, so
to speak ! Here it is ............

"RE: 'MEXICAN WAVE'   by R.Irving

Mr Irving, in his hatchet debunk job that generations of the US
military would be proud of (cf 'Blue Book' etc) conveniently
ignores several features of this UFO flap :

1. Eyewitness testimony of pilots and air-traffic controllers at
Mexico City airport - interviewed in the 'Masters of the Stars'
video. Oh, I suppose this was faked/misidentification ; the
debunkers have always got a negative explanation.

2. Footage of multi-UFO manoevres eg about 20 UFOs moving in
formation. Oh yes, they were seagulls as per 'Blue Book' !!!
Also, generation of many UFOs from one, amoeba-like.

3. At least two close-ups/magnifications indicate the trad,
fried-egg, saucer shape, pulsing a bead/beam of light -
NOT the hockey-puck shape at all.

What Mr Irving has done (a common technique) is to highlight a
few ambiguities/mistakes and extrapolate that the whole range of
phenomena are likewise.

FT should do the right thing and publish a 'pro' article. My
apologies if you have already done this (I am not a regular
reader). FT is normally quite unbiased - a great mag I think !!

Regards,

SW

"I suppose a lot of this 'is-it-real/Occam's razor/ETH' etc
debate boils down to what actually constitutes 'proof'.
My cynical alter-ego thinks that this could be only when the
tabloid press of the world 'accept' 'it'. Only then will the
un/under-educated masses and mainstream job/reputation-clinging
so-called scientists admit belief.


aU RevOIR,
S.Woods






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 11

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: Sean Jones <Tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 18:31:48 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 23:33:58 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


>From: Jeff King <Boroimhe@aol.com>
>Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 19:22:23 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

>Greetings to the list:

>Your own caveat regarding the significance of the vindication of
>your ETH predictions (listed in your earlier response to Rob
>Irving) are well taken.  As Hendry, and others, have demonstrated
>IFOs can show up on radar, leave traces at reported landings and
>affect the physical world.  I'm not sure lots of alien artifacts
>and bodies are needed to prove the ETH, however. One properly
>authenticated piece of alien hardware or dead alien and that's
>it, break out the champagne.

>Regards,

>Jeff

Jeff

I can only assume that you are innocent in the ways of the world.

For one person to come forward with any evidence of alien
hardware or whatever there will be at least ten to say that it is
fake, falsified or just plain not alien enough.

For some there can be no irrefuteable proof no matter what you
_give_ them.

The bold Duke of Dozing and I discussed this very subject months
ago (check the archives) and there are certain people "out there"
who claim to have proof and some of it could well be a genuine
alien artifact BUT how has it been received? With scorn and
ridicule for the most part I believe.

---
      People can have it any colour, as long as its black!
                       Sean Jones
 Homepage--http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Zone/1745/index.htm
         Research 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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 11

                              Re: The Ten Cases

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 23:07:07 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 23:46:58 -0400
Subject: Re: The Ten Cases


>From: RobIrving@aol.com
>Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 14:16:32 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: The Ten Cases

>  Fair enough, as long as one remains aware of our tendency to
>  impose order, meaning and therefore value on what we see; ie
>  'escape' velocity... escape being a rather subjective term.

I'm sure this must be some odd rhetorical thing, because escape
velocity is, of course, completely objective and is the speed
required for an object to escape the gravity of the earth and
enter non-orbital space. Observing a UFO operating at escape
velocity is, of course, suggestive of ETH, since attaining that
velocity is necessary to leave the vicinity of the earth for
interplanetary travel.

> >No, it's not a crop circle case, but the lavender field part is
> >correct, and traces were found (a hole, and a moistened area of
> >ground which became very hard, according to Vallee).

>  Yeah, I remember reading about this. On what basis do you include
>  it in your 'ten best' - because of the physical evidence? Also,
>  what were the results of the samples gathering, or was it the ETs
>  taking samples? If the latter, do you include this purely on the
>  basis of the farmer's story?

These are the (once again) 10 cases I chose as representative of
those cases suggestive of the ETH, not the 10 best cases of all
time regardless of whether they are suggestive of ETH. Remember,
I only need physical evidence to prove OEH. Once OEH is proven,
and I move on to ETH, physical evidence is only interesting to
the extent it is suggestive of an extraterrestrial source for the
phenomenon.

This case illustrates sample gathering, something unlikely to be
a part of the behavior of terrestrial aviators, and it is a well
known, well-investigated and frequently republished case that has
stood the test of time. It's nice that it has trace evidence,
though.

------
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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 11

                        Re: Alien Encounters Magazine

From: Robert Irvine <roberti@www2.paragon.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 17:08:59 GMT
Fwd Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 23:30:55 -0400
Subject: Re: Alien Encounters Magazine

>I have been informed that Nina Pendred has left Alien Encounters
>Magazine, is this true?. Can anyone shed some light on this. Did
>she leave or was she pushed?.

Yes, Nina has left Alien Encounters. And no, she wasn't pushed.
Basically, Nina was offered a new (non-paranormal) title to
develop and launch here at Paragon Publishing. There is nothing
remotely sinister about her departure (in spite of some of the
ludicrous conspiracy stories and theories that have ended up on
my desk regarding this matter).

>I believe that since she became editor of the magazine, she was
>responsible for actually getting the right balance, which had
>slightly more appeal for the serious ufologist.
>I have been informed by a colleague not to bother purchasing this
>months edition as there is not one good story inside, but
>actually gives more space for sc-fi than anything.

Nina did a great job during her tenure as editor on Alien.
However, since the magazine is published by a proft-orientated
company, its existence is reliant entirely upon sales figures.
The latter of which have been less than encouraging. This has
means that some reprint material will find its way into the mag's
(unfortunately) reduced page count. But perhaps more importantly,
the mag will undergo a change in direction.

There will still be the same extensive coverage of the latest UFO
and alien-related news, as well as exclusive features by the
likes of Nick Redfern, Irene Bott, Philip Mantle, Richard Conway
and Matthew Williams. However, in a shameless attempt to attract
new readers and open the mag up to a wider audience, Alien will
also include features on sci-fi and other paranormal/conspiracy
malarky.

>Will we be seeing the demise of another UFO magazine which over
>the last few months showed some promise of making an impact on
>the ufo subject. We have already seen a brilliant mag hit the
>wall, 'UFO Reality'. Lets hope Alien Encounters does not
>go the same way.

Although publishing is never a certain industry, Alien's future
is okay at the moment -- and if the sales figures improve, it
will be around for a while yet. Incidentally, for those of you
lamenting the passing of UFO Reality, the mag's editor Jon King
is interviewed about his new book in Alien Encounters #28 (on
sale 23rd July).

Oh, by the way, the Alien Encounters webpage is currently
undergoing a shake-up, which will hopefully spread the word
across the world. The new and improved version (with a preview of
issue 27) should go online within the next week:
www.paragon.co.uk/alien

All the best,

Stuart Taylor
Acting Editor
ALIEN ENCOUNTERS








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 11

                              Re: The Ten Cases

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 22:13:09 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 23:48:36 -0400
Subject: Re: The Ten Cases


>>  Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: The Ten Cases
>>  From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
>>  Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 23:43:29 -0400
>>  To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

<snip>

>>  You see, this is why 10 cases are a futile exercise. The
>>  question was, which cases are the most suggestive of ETI? ETI is
>>  suggested by structured objects, unconventional performance,
>>  escape velocity, vertical departure to high altitude, non-human
>>  beings, unusual physics, and unconventional interest in
>>  humanity. These cases present that sort of material.

<snip>

Mark, J. Clark, et al:

Contrary to the opinion that top ten lists represent little more
than an idle exercise in Lettermania, I find them quite
instructive. Either one has something to talk about when one
raises the subject of UFOs, or one doesn't.
If one does, then one ought to be able to come up with at least
ten convincing cases illustrative of the phenomenon, as it were.

But that's exactly the rub, isn't it? And Cashman is right to
hint that you need ten cases in ten categories.

But why should that be the case? After all, if every reported
abduction were accompanied by an implant, missing fetus and time,
scoop mark, burnt ring of grass in the backyard, radar
confirmation, multiple independent witnesses, dramatic
acceleration to high altitude, unconventional physics and so on
-- all routinely captured on 35mm film and videotape -- then we
probably wouldn't be having this discussion, would we?

So is the ET hypothesis the result of even ten consistent cases
over time, or merely an afterthought based on some sort of
collective body of evidence, specific examples of which may or
may not be related to one another, and therefore may or may not
be indicative of extraterrestrial origin(s)?

For example: the ability (or is it liability) of UFOs to be
detected by Earth-based radar was once thought to be one of the
weightiest pieces of evidence in favor of their extraordinary
nature. But times and technologies change. Now it's almost an
axiom: if you don't want to show up on radar, you don't have to.
So one might just as well make the following contorted argument:
it's only those cases in which UFOs *don't* show up on our radar
screens that indicate true advanced intelligence, viz., anyone
who had already solved the problem of interstellar travel would
long before that have solved the problem of an unwanted radar
return.

I raised the issue of ten best cases not to be impish or
perverse, but because I was in the final stages of completing a
Field Guide to UFOs (with Patrick Huyghe) to be published next
year by Avon. For that, we had to come up with 50 cases, each one
to be illustrated. And, frankly, after 40 cases, I thought we
were huffing and puffing pretty hard.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 11

                 Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General

From: DRudiak@aol.com
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 16:23:21 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 23:38:15 -0400
Subject: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General


>> From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com
>> Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 12:44:37 EDT
>> To: updates@globalserve.net
>> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General

<large snip>

>> Again, this wasn't a point I made, but I will address it. The
>> purpose Project Mogul might have be classified, but the
>> equipment was not. It was, in essence, a weather balloon and
>> radar reflector (or for those who want to nitpic, a cluster of
>> balloons and an array of equipment). However, that equipment was
>> NOT classified. It was so unimportant that pictures of a cluster
>> of balloons launched at Alamogordo appeared in newspapers around
>> the country on July 10, 1947. Had it been a Mogul balloon, there
>> would have been no need for SAC headquarters to issue warnings
>> to Ramey and DuBose.

>> Not to mention the fact that the CAA required the Mogul people
>> to announce through NOTAMS (Notice to Airmen) that the
>> launch had taken place.

>From: Robert Todd <RTodd12191@aol.com
>Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 14:59:03 EDT
>Fwd Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 10:02:50 -0400
>Subject: Re: Roswell Photos Clears Air Force General

>This is a claim Mr. Randle keeps repeating, despite the fact
>that it has been debunked before.

>Essentially, Mr. Randle's claim is that members of the New York
>Univeristy (NYU) Balloon Group were required to provide high
>density air traffic areas with information about the launches of
>their balloons. In other words, the pilots and others at Roswell
>were aware of the balloon arrays because the CAA demanded that
>the launches be announced in the Notices to Airmen (NOTAMs),
>which the pilots would have read.

>One of the reasons the NYU balloon launches were moved to
>Alamogordo Army Air Field (AAAF) was because of the airspace
>restrictions placed on the development effort in the New
>York/New Jersey/Pennsylvania area by the CAA.

Actually the major CAA restriction objected to by Mogul was on
the amount of cloud cover required before launch. There is NO
documentation that they objected to the issuance of NOTAMs. See
below.

> No formal
> arrangements were made to notify anybody in the New Mexico area

There is no clear documentation to that effect. It's simply one
interpretation of the actual Mogul documents. Again, Mogul
explicity objected to cloud cover restrictions, but NOT the
issuance of NOTAMs.

>because it was assumed (no doubt with a wink and a nod on the
>part of NYU personnel) that the balloons would not drift off the
>White Sands range.

If it was done with a "wink and a nod," then they were acting
irresponsibly. The balloons were potential air hazards.

Mr. Todd is distorting slightly what is ACTUALLY documented in
the Mogul project reports. The summary of the August 21, 1947
meeting of the Fort Worth Regional Airspace Subcomittee states
that a few balloons had drifted into the vicinity of Roswell,
creating a potential hazard. It also states:

"It was first thought that balloons would ascend and descend
within the confines of the White Sands presently assigned danger
area and that no further authorizations would be required."

So all it says is that "no further authorization would be
required" by the CAA for these New Mexico launches. It does NOT
say that the project Mogul people chose to ignore some basic
safety procedures initially laid down by the CAA several months
before.

Back on March 20, 1947, the CAA stated that the flights would be
permitted along the eastern seaboard only if 1) skies were clear
below 20,000 feet with at least 3 miles visibility, 2) NOTAMS
were issued at least 12 hours in advance of launch and at the
time of launch 2) the balloons were tracked at all times, with
positions relayed to civilian air authorities at regular
intervals. On April 17, C.S. Schneider of Mogul requested a
relaxation of the restrictions on cloud cover, stating that the
phenomenon they hoped to measure was an infrequent one and
likely to be missed if they waited for cloudless skies.
Schneider's request was not only rejected, but further
restrictions were placed on the launches in the form of
completely clear skies. The important point here is that
Schneider ONLY requested a change in the limitations imposed on
cloud cover, and did NOT request a relaxation of the requirement
to issue NOTAMs.

Then they moved to Alamogordo with its sparser air traffic and
clearer weather. I can find NOTHING in the project reports that
clearly indicates whether or not NOTAMS were issued during June
and July. The April 1, 1948 progress report states that:

"At a meeting on 20 March 1947, the New York Air Space
Sub-Committee prescribed a procedure which was designed to
minimize the hazard to air traffic. Similarly, the Fort Worth
Sub-Committee [in August] established a procedure for flights
made within the Fort Worth Region of the CAA."

It says nothing about whether the March 20 procedures were
suspended in whole or in part when they moved to New Mexico.

The progress report then goes on to say that the balloons were a
potential flight hazard as they descended through levels of air
travel, and that current flights had the following safeguards:
(1) Flights were released only on days of light cloud cover and
(2) NOTAMS were to be issued if the balloon was descending
within designated regions of dense air traffic. Again, it
doesn't say WHEN these current safeguards were placed into
effect, or whether they had been in effect to some degree all
along, starting in March 1947. The wording, however, to my mind,
suggests that Mogul WAS concerned with air safety from the
beginning, and therefore followed some version of the original
CAA safety guidelines in New Mexico.

>It wasn't until balloons started landing all
>over the place in June and July of 1947 that the CAA got
>involved and arrangements were made to issue notifications.

Why did the CAA get involved again? The August 21 summary states
that they were notified by Mogul (more specifically NYU), that
some of the balloons had drifted near Roswell. In other words,
in contacting the CAA, the Mogul people obviously ALREADY
recognized the potential safety hazard. If Mogul was concerned
with safety, they would have instigated safety measures (if they
hadn't already), including the issuance of NOTAMs, as soon as
they realized hazard potential. Either that or they were
dreadfully negligent.

When was the first such instance of a balloon drifting near
Roswell? We all know about the infamous Flight #4, June 4, the
debunking explanation of the later Roswell incident. But there
is no documentation as to where this balloon actually went.
However, Flight #5, launched the next day, June 5, is documented
as drifting directly over Roswell AAF. Furthermore, it was in
its potentially dangerous descent mode, approximately 25,000 to
30,000 feet over the base, and at an even lower altitude further
east of the base. All this information can be gleaned from the
graphs of the flight published in the Air Force Roswell report.

All the Mogul flights were followed by a military airplane,
generally a B-17 which circled underneath. So if Roswell base
WASN'T informed of this flight by issuance of a NOTAM, then we
have the situation where there would have been a major incursion
of this base's very sensitive airspace by both a large balloon
train and an unknown military aircraft. In addition to the air
space violation, base pilots would have been placed into
potential jeopardy by the descending balloon.

This incident could hardly have gone unnoticed at Roswell base.
Plane spotters on the ground would likely have seen both the
unknown B-17 and the balloon train. Any pilots in the air near
the base would likely have done the same. The B-17 also probably
would have shown up on short range approach radar. Flight tower
operators probably would have asked the B-17 for identification,
informed them that they were flying in a restricted area, and
inquired about their business. Because of this breach of base
security, even Marcel's intelligence office might have looked
into it, since it was within their purview.  A report or two
likely would have been written. Somebody with authority, like
the base operations officer or maybe even Col. Blanchard
himself, would have demanded an explanation.

If these things hadn't happen, then Roswell base security would
have been a joke. A Soviet spy could have arranged flights over
this highly secretive atomic bomber base and snapped pictures
with impunity. So the balloon flight with its attendant plane
would have been spotted, explanations demanded, and provisions
put into place to prevent similar future occurrences (such as by
the issuance of NOTAMs)

>I discussed this issue several times with Prof. Charles Moore,
>who headed the NYU balloon team at AAAF, and he states
>unequivocally that they made no notifications in either June or
>July of 1947, and that they didn't "get legal" until September
>of 1947.

No slight of Prof. Moore, but at the time he was just a young
guy right out of grad school and had no need to know what might
or what might not have been communicated about the Mogul project
at higher levels, including to the Eighth Air Force and Roswell.
In fact, Moore says pretty much exactly that in his A.F.
interview (p. 43):

"I think we were just some ignorant, little innocent graduate
student contractors on a military base, and things were going on
that we didn't know anything about."

Then later (p. 49), he says that his balloon launch group didn't
interface with the regular military at Alamogordo at all:

"We were just a little bunch of civilians there on an almost
deserted base, doing what we wanted."

So does Moore really know what Roswell base knew of Mogul in
June/July 1947? Probably not. He wasn't in a position to know.

>Therefore, there is absolutely no reason to think >anybody at
Roswell Army Air Field (RAAF) knew anything about the >NYU
balloon launches from AAAF.

There is EVERY reason to believe that a number of people at
Roswell base knew SOMETHING of these flights, since one violated
their air space as early as June 5, 1947 (Flight #5) and another
came close on July 7 (Flight #11).

>These facts are documented in the CAA correspondence reproduced
>as part of the NYU balloon development reports, which, in turn,
>were reproduced in the Air Force's first report on the Roswell
>incident.

The fact that a Mogul overflew Roswell base on June 5 is
likewise part of the NYU balloon development reports, also
reproduced in the Air Force's first report on the Roswell
incident.

And nowhere in these reports does it say that Mogul violated
basic safety procedures before the CAA issued new guidelines and
Mogul "got legal." Rather, it shows that Mogul first notified
the CAA about potential safety problems with their New Mexico
launches. If they did that, why would they then wait for safety
measures to be mandated LATER by the CAA. Why did initiate them
immediately on their own?

>The CAA correspondence is dated in August of 1947,
>long after the NYU Balloon Group had left Alamogordo Army Air
>Field in early July of 1947. The NYU Balloon Group did not
>return to Alamogordo Army Air Field until September of 1947.

Even IF Mogul chose to ignore basic safety procedures and failed
to issue NOTAMs, Roswell base would still have known about the
existence of the balloon flights right from the gitgo, because
one flew directly over the base on June 5. They could hardly
have missed it, and those involved would have been derelict in
their duty to not inquire further about it. And Mogul would have
been derelict not to issue NOTAMS afterwards, now being fully
aware of the potential for passing through Roswell flight air
space.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 11

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: Jeff King <Boroimhe@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 20:18:59 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 23:41:49 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


Morning/Afternoon/Evening (pick one based on time zone) all:

>From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
>To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs
>Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 08:53:27 -0400

>John Mack -- who happens to be on the scene, looking for more
>African abduction reports -- asks them if
>they're the ones we've been seeing in the skies and in our
>bedrooms....

Here�s a frightening thought for you. The aliens actually tell
Mack that everything he�s postulated about them is correct and
we�re stuck with alien overlords who talk in nothing but new
agey platitudes.

>Back to the drawing board. I think we're left with Mark's and my
>straightforward notion that if UFOs are alien craft, they'll have
>stable, discernable physical characteristics (though perhaps
>other traits that seem like magic to us).

While I agree that this would be good support for Cashman�s OEH,
the difficulty is reliably establishing the existence of these
characteristics. For example, anecdotal eyewitness testimony is
not a very good source for ensuring that these characteristics
exist.  Cases that have been solved to the satisfaction of most
everyone can be shown to share important characteristics with
unsolved cases that are accepted as fair evidence of an
anomalous phenomenon.   Also, there�s the inevitable problem
that many sighting reports are only solved through pure luck,
meaning that there�s always the risk that one or more of those
establishing the unifying physical characteristic are in the
unknown category because of pure *bad* luck.   Not to forget, as
you said before, if we can prove up the OEH, this doesn�t really
say anything about the ETH per se.  For that we need something
like Cashman�s prediction of detection in outer space, even if
this isn�t a good prediction to use for falsification of the
ETH.

And now for something completely different (and off topic).  I
haven�t seen any recent reviews of yours in the Journal of the
Vast Right Wing Conspiracy (a/k/a The Wall Street Journal).
Have you really been absent for a good while, or have I just
missed your stuff in their new Friday format?

Regards,

Jeff






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 11

               Moon Rock Most Expensive Jewellery Of The 21st

From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose)
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 02:21:38 +0200
Fwd Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 23:42:44 -0400
Subject: Moon Rock Most Expensive Jewellery Of The 21st

From The Independent (UK) June 11.

URL: http://www.independent.co.uk/stories/A1106829.html

Stig

*******


Jewellery's final frontier


By Charles Arthur


Ditch diamonds and forget about platinum. The most expensive jewellery
of the 21st century will be made out of moon rock.

John Baines, from Newcastle, has teamed up with Space Quest, a firm
based in his home town which has set up a Moon prospecting company,
Lunar Gems Ltd, on the basis that "it seemed if it could be done an
absolute fortune could be made".

Space Quest hopes that a round trip to the Moon will be possible by
2005 and that this will provide opportunities to pick up raw materials.

The venture is tempted by the prospect of big profits. In 1993
Sotheby's auctioned one carat - 200 milligrams - for $442,500
(=A3276,550). That would make a kilogram worth $2.2bn, or $2.2m per gram.
At those prices, a kilogram of moon rock would be worth far more than
it would cost to get it.

However, Mr Baines faces stiff competition from American competitors,
who may have an advantage in getting hold of venture capital. But
according to one expert scientist, moon rocks would not look that great
as earrings - "rather a dull grey colour" - and might be easy to forge.

Monica Grady, an expert in extraterrestrial materials at the Natural
History Museum, in London, said: "There were a lot of venture
capitalists sniffing around at the Lunar Planetary Science conference
in March, trying to raise money for a mission to the Moon. They wanted
to do it with the Discovery TV Channel, which has a series of shops.
They reckoned they could sell vials of moon dust for $50 a piece."

While vials of dust might be saleable, she thinks that making jewellery
would present a problem. "I don't think any of them would polish up
very well. You would have to make sure you were getting rock, not soil.
It might be that the cachet of owning something which costs thousands
of dollars could make up for it being a dull grey colour.

"But I think there would probably be a lot of fakes," she added.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 11

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 23:13:18 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 23:49:37 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


>  Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 17:35:53 -0400
>  From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
>  Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs
>  To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>  >Date: Tue, 09 Jun 1998 20:28:06 -0300
>  >From: "Stanton T. Friedman" <fsphys@brunnet.net>
>  >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>  >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


>  I jus thought this was worthy of repetition:

>  >The essence of science involves asking the right questions,
>  >maintaining a large gray basket and going after the relevant
>  >data, not in raising theoretical arguments which obscure reality
>  >but waste loads of time.

"As for trying to show that there is such a thing as nature, that
would be ridiculous; it is clear that there are many such natural
beings. To demonstrate what is clear by what is obscure is the
act of a man who cannot distinguish what is self-evident from
what is not. That such a state is possible is plain: one blind
from birth can indeed argue about colors, and such men must needs
talk about words, since they have no knowledge."

   --- Aristotle - Physics II, ch 1

I think this is the same thing, just older. Plus ca change...


------
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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 11

                              Re: The Ten Cases

From: Keith Woodard <qwoodard@worldnet.att.net>
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 17:27:40 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 23:44:56 -0400
Subject: Re: The Ten Cases


> Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: The Ten Cases
> From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
> Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 23:43:29 -0400
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

> >From: RobIrving@aol.com
> >Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 10:50:42 EDT
> >To: updates@globalserve.net
> >Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: The Ten Cases

> >>From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
> >>Subject: UFO UpDate: The Ten Cases [was Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs]
> >>Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 03:05:01 -0400
> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

<snip>

>> Or are they purely witness accounts? If that's the
>> case, why are these accounts more compelling to
>> you than, say, a CSETI lights-fest, resulting in a
>> "near-landing" of a "metallic structured craft"?

> You see, this is why 10 cases are a futile exercise.

I don't think this has been futile at all. In fact, much has
already been accomplished. Dennis Stacy has been silenced, Rob
Irving is at least breaking stride while he attempt to wade
through them -- and actually admits to being intrigued.

Frankly, vague references to the literature did sound like a
copout to me. The ball has now been placed squarely in the court
of the skeptics.

And I would hope that any other ufologists who can think of
particularly strong cases will post them here.

> The question was, which cases are the most
> suggestive of ETI? ETI is suggested by structured
> objects, unconventional performance, escape velocity,
> vertical departure to high altitude, non-human beings,
> unusual physics, and unconventional interest in
> humanity. These cases present that sort of material.

> As I mentioned, cases which prove OEH (UFOs are
> objectively existent) are not necessarily the same cases
> which suggest ETI.

Personally, I'd love a list of your ten best OEH cases.

Kind regards,

Keith






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 11

                  More Elaborate SERENDIP III (SETI) Report

From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose)
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 05:25:19 +0200
Fwd Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 23:51:26 -0400
Subject: More Elaborate SERENDIP III (SETI) Report


From: SPACER.COM - "daily news from the frontier".

URL: http://www.spacer.com/spacecast/news/seti-98a.html

Stig

*******


SETI Insentitive To Earth-like Signals


By Robert Sanders


Berkeley - June 10, 1998 - SETI researchers at California's
Berkeley University have completed the most sensitive sky survey
ever conducted in search of intelligent signals from outer
space. The survey, called SERENDIP III, employed a detector
mounted on the world's largest radio telescope, the 1,000-foot
dish at Arecibo, Puerto Rico. The instrument analyzed 500
trillion signals in the last six years and recorded information
on three billion of them.

"At our level of sensitivity, there was nothing we could
uniquely identify as an extraterrestrial signal," said project
leader Stuart Bowyer, a professor in the graduate school at UC
Berkeley and an astronomer at the campus's Space Sciences
Laboratory.

Nevertheless, the SERENDIP (Search for Extraterrestrial Radio
Emissions from Nearby Developed Intelligent Populations) team
already has embarked on a new generation search using an
improved instrument mounted a year ago on the Arecibo radio
telescope.

"Our negative results don't rule out the possibility of
civilizations out there because we are still only covering a
small part of the radio spectrum," said Dan Werthimer,
co-director of SERENDIP. "We are continually getting better.
Since we started the project 20 years ago, our ability to survey
the sky has grown by a factor of a million. Our newest
instrument, SERENDIP IV, will give us 40 times more coverage
than SERENDIP III."

Sabine Airieau, a junior member of the SERENDIP team who
graduated from UC Berkeley last year, presented a status report
on SERENDIP III at the June 7-11 meeting of the American
Astronomical Society in San Diego, Calif.

During their sky survey, the team also looked for signals from
six recently discovered extrasolar planets: 51 Pegasi, 70
Virginis, 55 Cancri, Tau Bootes, HD114762 and Rho Corona
Borealis. No signals were detected.

SERENDIP is one of the world's longest running searches for
extraterrestrial intelligence, known as SETI projects. SERENDIP
III, which collected data from 1992 until this year, employed a
third-generation instrument piggybacking on the large radio dish
at Arecibo.

The SERENDIP III instrument scanned about a third of the sky
every six months, looking in a radio band centered around a
wavelength of 70 centimeters -- a radio region typically used
for communications, and which includes UHF and mobile phone
channels.

A fourth-generation instrument, SERENDIP IV, was installed on
the Arecibo telescope in May of 1997, designed to scan the same
region of the sky but in a frequency band centered on a
wavelength of 21 centimeters. That wavelength is considered by
many the most likely at which a civilization would broadcast its
presence.

When a new receiver comes on line at Arecibo later this year,
the SERENDIP IV instrument should be able to analyze 40 times
more signals than SERENDIP III.

The search is conducted by looking for repeating signals. Thus,
the more often they look at a given area of sky, the greater the
chance of detecting an extraterrestrial signal -- if there is
one. With specially designed computer circuitry and software,
SERENDIP IV will simultaneously examine 168 million frequency
channels every 1.7 seconds. The 168 million signals are analyzed
immediately for radio intensities above background levels. Those
found are immediately transmitted to UC Berkeley, where they are
analyzed to eliminate the ones caused by interference from
Earth-based or near-space radio sources.

"Ninety-nine percent of recorded signals are rejected at this
point," said SERENDIP software director Jeff Cobb. "Those that
remain will be studied closely for patterns consistent with an
artificial signal from space."

"When and if we find something that is compelling, we will call
up the telescope director and ask for time to take a longer look
at that area of the sky," Werthimer said.

Despite piggybacking on the world's most sensitive radio
telescope, he said, the instrument could not detect random radio
noise emanating from a civilization like ours, which has been
leaking radio and TV signals for less than 100 years. For
SERENDIP and most other SETI projects to detect a signal from an
extraterrestrial civilization, the civilization would have to be
beaming a powerful signal directly at us.

"With available instruments we are unlikely to detect Earthlike
planets or civilizations," Airieau said. "This sort of detection
will not come within our realm for another few decades."

Werthimer added, "The first civilization Earthlings detect is
likely to be more advanced than ours -- perhaps 10,000 to
billions of years old."

SERENDIP was started in 1978 by Bowyer and astronomer Michael
Lampton on a UC Berkeley radio telescope located in Hat Creek,
Calif. SERENDIP II followed with two years of observations
(1986-88) at the National Radio Astronomy Observatory in Green
Bank, W. Va., using a 300-foot telescope that collapsed several
years ago. SERENDIP III was mounted at the Arecibo Observatory
in 1992.

SERENDIP is supported by the Planetary Society and the SETI
Institute of Mountain View, Calif., with major donations from
numerous companies and from the Friends of SERENDIP, a group led
by novelist Arthur C. Clarke.


*SETI

*SPACER.COM

*Books@Spacer

Copyright 1996-1998, All Rights Reserved, Spacer Group -
Articles by Frank Sietzen are copyright SpaceCast News Service -
- Advertising does not imply endorsement, agreement or approval
of any opinions, statements or information provided by Spacer
Group on any web page published or hosted by Spacer.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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 11

                          Re: Who Is Jerome Clark?

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 98 20:51:56 PDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 23:57:18 -0400
Subject: Re: Who Is Jerome Clark?


> Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 19:54:16 -0400
> From: The Duke of Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith]
> Subject: Who Is Jerome Clark? [was: Corso, Stacy & Birnes]
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>


> With the compliments of the Duke of Mendoza:

> >To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
> >From: "Jerome Clark" <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Stacy, Corso & Birnes
> >Date: Fri, 05 Jun 98 09:59:53 PDT


> >> There are even people who have thought that Phil Klass
> >> would chuck them into the Chesapeake Bay riddled with
> >> bullets, or some such thing, should they take up an
> >> invitation to go sailing with the Dread Debunker.
>
> >Don't know that guy, I'm afraid, though once Klass made
> >a "joke" to that effect to me, in the course of a fairly
> >abusive communication.

My, my. Aren't we hard up for something substantive to debate
about? One can only conclude that Mr. Brookesmith senses an
urgent need to bring in the most transparent of diversions.

> Presumably then it is some other Jerome Clark entirely, of whom
> no one but Klass - obviously suffering one of his habitual
> delusions - has previously heard, but of whom Klass writes in
> SUN #51 (May 1998), page 7 [see note below]:

> "I concluded my letter [of 8 April 1984] to Clark as follows:
> 'If business or pleasure should bring you to the DC area, I
> invite you to join me aboard the "Hanky Pank," but warn you of
> the dangers of the mysterious Chesapeake Quadrangle in which
> many UFOPs (UFO Promoters) have disappeared mysteriously. A few
> have been found with their bodies riddled with bullet holes.
> Some who are anxious to keep the Cosmic Watergate under cover,
> will stop at nothing.

Note, if you are able to read better than Mr. Brookesmith can,
that Klass here is taking off on something I find as absurd as
he: the notion that ufologists are at physical peril for looking
into cover-ups real or imagined.

> "Clark responded in friendly fashion, indicating that he
> recognized the foregoing was intended as a joke.

As why should I have not?

> So my May 14,
> 1984 letter to Clark concluded: 'The yacht Hanky Pank made her
> maiden voyage of 1984... Perhaps you will join us someday (and
> your body will be found floating in the Chesapeake).'

Note here further evidence of Mr. Brookesmith's inability to
read. Here the "joke" has Klass implying that it is he who will
have me murdered. Let's have a show of hands out there. How many
of you would take as a "joke" -- not even from a friend here,
mind you, but a longtime adversary -- a remark intimating a
desire to have one done in? No, Mr. Brookesmith, you've already
voted. Any other hands? No?

> "Clark replied on May 21, saying that he considered my May 14
> letter to be a 'death threat,' and not a joke. 'Unless you make
> a full, immediate and unqualified apology, all communication
> between us wil cease and I will have nothing further to do with
> you.'

The "joke" was so staggeringly tasteless, rude, and offensive
that an apology was clearly called for. How many of you out
there would make a "joke" like that? No, Mr. Brookesmith, as I
said before, you've already voted. Any further votes in favor?
No?

> Now, I don't think this is a particularly funny joke. But, even
> if it were true that "[n]obody... has ever accused Phil of
> possessing a sense of humor that rises above the
> pre-adolescent", if this report's accurate, we may be forgiven
> for wondering - some people may make a book - if Jerome will
> *ever* be accused of having a sense of humor again

Yeah, I guess I'm a little sensitive about "jokes" from people
with whom I do not share a cordial relationship that have as
their object my being murdered. I even think "jokes" like that,
being offensive, merit an apology. How many of you out there
disagree? Mr. Brookesmith, please ... and by the way, are only
you and Klass obtuse enough not to know the difference between a
demand for an apology for an offensive remark and a sense that
one is genuinely under threat of having one's bullet-riddled
body tossed into the Chesapeake? Possibly you can't, which would
explain much otherwise inexplicable.

The remark about having no sense of humor shows the depth to
which one has to sink when one chooses to apologize for Klass'
excesses. When we were friends, Mr. Brookesmith and I shared
many a laugh together. In a sense it's another example of what
I've long noted about debunkers (and other true believers): the
necessity to reinvent the world, not to mention other people's
personalities, so that the debunkers' biases and interests can
be served.

> It would be ironic, or poetic justice, or a case of squabbling
> pot and kettle, were Klass to be misrepresenting through
> selective quotation and distortion. Because in this very same
> post, we find Jerome repeating an ancient canard about Klass.
> Here it is:

> >Speaking of believing anything:
> >Klass believes that ufology is tantamount to Communism,
> >among other odd and idiosyncratic notions. Ah, what
> >one has to believe to be a Dread Debunker.

> And what economy with the truth one has to practise to demonize
> Philip J. Klass successfully.

> I see from the latest edition of Fortean Times (No 112), which I
> had cause to confiscate from a malingering tweenie-maid this
> morning (No 112), that in its correspondence columns as well,
> Jerome is repeating his carefully warped and essentially
> inaccurate version of the incident on which this slur is based.
> If you repeat not-quite-truths often enough, you end up
> believing them yourself.

Ah, the depths to which the ever-spinning Mr. Brookesmith has to
sink to defend Klassian excesses. My "The Debunkers versus the
UFO Menace" is available on at least one website, and in a
forthcoming listing, I will give the address (I don't have it at
hand at the moment) for those interested in the whole hilarious
and immensely revealing story. Even CSICOP chairman Paul Kurtz,
when given a chance to defend Klass' assertions about ufologists
and Communists, headed for the hills. Good to know Klass can
count on one friend, even if he has to look all the way across
the water to find him. Maybe it takes that sort of distance for
him to look rational.

> In that piece, Klass and his statements are variously
> represented as "peculiar", "ludicrous", "desperate", a member of
> the "debunking thought police", "scurrilous", "McCarthyite", and
> (by implication) "irrational", "crazy", "lunatic" and "nutty",
> for (allegedly) maintaining that ufology is tantamount to
> Communism.

They are, alas and sadly, all of the above.

> Ironically, the whole article is weakened somewhat by its
> author's incapacity to distinguish between the notion that fans
> of a UFO cover-up lend support to the Communist movement (which
> Klass maintained) and the notion that *ufologists as a class* do
> so (which Jerome maintains Klass maintained). Without knowing
> who were the cover-up artists to be featured at the Lincoln
> conference in question, a detail omitted by Jerome, it's
> impossible to judge just how eccentric Klass was being in this
> instance.

Thank you for making that crucial distinction, Mr. Brookesmith.
I am sure we are all impressed. Significantly, Klass himself
(see below) has never brought this distinction into his various
attempts to defend himself against my criticisms. Maybe Klass
should hire Mr. Brookesmith to handle his p.r., or maybe even
his thinking.

This seems as good a place as any to bring this up: Is there
possibly something wrong with somebody (e.g., Klass) -- or his
publication -- that he and/or it actually devotes space to a
private 1984 exchange between him and me, on a subject that
could be of no interest to anybody, except somebody with too
much time on his hands (e.g., Mr. Brookesmith)? Just wondering.

> In the course of following exchanges, Jerome failed to identify
> the cover-up artists in question, although he managed to say
> quite a lot else. But the difference between a bunch of
> conspiracy addicts and ufologists at large ought to be plain
> enough.

This is the sort of lazy rhetoric we have come to expect from
Klass apologists. Persons who believe a cover-up exists are not
necessarily "conspiracy addicts." Moderate and sensible cover-up
proponents from Keyhoe on have believed merely that the
government is keeping UFO secrets. "Conspiracy addicts" are the
ones who believe the Secret Government not only conceals UFO
truths but controls the world. Strange that Mr. Brookesmith has
suffered such a sudden failure of understanding, especially
after writing brilliantly (I am not being sarcastic here) on the
subject (in UFO: The Government Files, Chapter 6).

> >If Klass had actually done that, Mr Clark, I might. As it
> >was, you spent a great many words dancing on a distortion
> >of Klass's position. Which was - let us spell it out
> >again, the way we have to with everything - that
> >ufological cover-up artists undermine the credibility
> >of the US Government, and that as there is "no scientific
> >evidence to support the claims of the presenters... these
> >organizations, by publicly questioning the government,
> >lend support to the Communist movement." However eccentric
> >that position is - and, please note, I don't quibble with
> >your calling Klass meddlesome, etc - it is patently not
> >the same as the generalization that ufologists are to be
> >equated with Soviet agents.

Mr. Brookesmith here maintains a tactful silence on Klass' other
excesses, which are really far more serious than his idiotic
equation of ufologists with Soviet agents: namely, his legal
threats against the university and his role in its decision not
to permit any further UFO/Fortean conferences on its campus.
Since you won't hear that part of the story from Mr.
Brookesmith, you'll have to go to my "UFO Debunkers versus the
UFO Menace." There you will also learn about Klass' threat to
sue Omni, after I'd written about the episode. Omni's lawyer
called me and asked me for the documentation, which I provided
and which he pronounced satisfactory. Klass was heard from no
more.

Thus it is doubly amusing to hear this belated charge from Mr.
Brookesmith, who may be the last person (possibly including even
Klass himself) who thinks, or represents himself as thinking,
that I misrepresented Klass' curious sentiments.

Incidentally, in subsequent correspondence with me, Klass went
on to compare university sponsorship of a UFO conference to
sponsorship of a Ku Klux Klan or Nazi Party meeting. He also
contended that proponents of a UFO cover-up were in effect
accusing Presidents of treason, a "slanderous" charge.

> >The ad-hominemery here is inextricable from the
> >distortion, for the one follows from the other. So,
> >if I were you, I should worry more that those who
> >were capable of observing how you travestied Klass's
> >position might wonder to what extent your other writings
> >are built on misrepresentation and factitiousness. I say
> >that without regard for our ufological differences, too.
> >You may like to think about that.

Mr. Brookesmith, if I may speak as one concerned for your soul:
search it, the sooner the better, before it abandons you
altogether. And let us rise from the depths of Klass
apologetics, to which I would like to think Mr. Brookesmith is
superior on his better days, of which this appears not to be
one.

> To judge from his somewhat dyspeptic and ad-hominem response to
> this, and his blithe repetition here of this hoary old canard,
> Jerome did not think about it much at all.

Let us here insert, as a way of clarifying issues rather than
(as seems Mr. Brookesmith's intention) clouding them further,
with an exchange between Klass and me (IUR, September/October
1992, p. 19; I apologize for not being able to bring in the bold
type with which Klass colorfully expressed his argument, such as
it was):


To the editor:

In his editorial in the March/April issue of IUR, Jerome Clark
claims that in my August 23, 1983, telephone conversation with
Robert Mortenson of the University of Nebraska, "[bold
type]Klass pronounced ufology virtually tantamount to
Communism[end bold type]." (My dictionary defines
"[bold]tantamount[end bold]" as "[bold]equivalent to" [end
bold].)

Clark's editorial continues: "Speaking over the phone to an
astonished University of Nebraska administrator, he declared
that `as a patriotic American I very much resent' ufologists'
cover-up charges against the U.S. government. In making these
charges, he reasoned (if that verb applies here), ufologists
`seek what the Soviet Union does -- to convey to the public that
our government cannot be trusted."

IUR readers deserve to know that Clark [italics]intentionally
omitted[end italics] the sentence preceding the one he quoted --
which I supplied to him in 1983 -- in which I said, "[bold]I
emphasize to you that I am not, repeat not, suggesting that any
of the people or any of the organizations[end bold] [involved in
the conference] [resume bold]are in any way affiliated with
Communist Fronts or with the Soviet Union [end bold]."

I challenge Clark to find anything in my four books dealing with
UFOs or in my numerous published papers to substantiate his
charge that I believe that "ufology is tantamount to Communism."

Philip J. Klass
Washington, D.C.

Jerome Clark responds:

Klass both misquotes me and misrepresents what I said about him.

First, the words he ascribes to me were written matter-of-factly
in Roman, not frantically in bold, type. Second, if I had meant
to write "Klass believes that ufologists consciously serve the
interests of international Communism," I would have said so. No
other reader could have misread my meaning as Klass does or,
more likely, as Klass pretends to.

My point was simply this: In disputing official pronouncements,
Klass contends, ufologists are equivalent to Communists in their
effect, which is to undermine faith in the American government.
("Tantamount" means, according to Webster's New Collegiate
Dictionary, "equivalent in value, significance, or effect.")
Note, moreover, that to make his meaning perfectly clear, Klass
explicitly made patriotism the issue, remarking that "as a
patriotic citizen" -- as opposed, presumably, to other citizens,
such as the ufologists and the Communists to whom the former are
tantamount -- he deeply resented disbelief in
Washington-certified versions of reality.

His final paragraph takes us to a new depth of balminess. Well,
not exactly a [italic]new[end italic] depth. Consider his
October 5, 1987, "OPEN-LETTER CHALLENGE TO JEROME CLARK," which
promises to donate $5000 to CUFOS if I can find in any of his
"[italics]published books or articles [end italics]" ... an
accusation that UFO cover-up theorists serve Soviet policy ends.
Of course, he adds hastily, the offer "does [italic]not[end
italic] apply to my expression of personal opinion during a
private telephone conversation" with Mortenson. I responded by
stating the obvious -- that I had never charged him with
committing the sentiment to print -- and added, "Amusingly, in
making his `challenge,' Klass seeks to exclude the very evidence
that bears on the issue."

Klass wants to have it every way it can be had. In what he
thought would be a private conversation, he likened ufologists
to Communist agents. Then, as if ashamed or embarrassed when the
rest of us learned about it, he threatened legal action against
the university after the revelation surfaced. (He also
threatened once to sue Omni when I mentioned the episode in an
article in that magazine.) Since then, as if the proud,
self-described "patriotic citizen," he defends and reaffirms the
ufologist-Communist equivalence in personal correspondence (most
recently to me in a November 26, 1991, letter). Meanwhile,
portraying himself as the wounded victim of a vicious smear, he
challenges critics to show where he has ever made the charge
[italics]in print[end italics].

We can only conclude that Klass lacks the courage of his strange
convictions.

> I've long found it interesting too that in his treatment of the
> RB-47 case in his UFO "Encyclopedia", which is so admirable in
> so many other ways, Jerome dismisses Klass's interpretation of
> the data as a series of unlikely coincidences. But he doesn't
> mention that Klass presented that interpretation to the RB-47
> crew, who agreed that the "UFOs" were the product of human error
> & excitement combined with ghost echoes on the radar. This is a
> key item in Klass's analysis. Surely it was not just dislike for
> the man that led Jerome to omit it?

I refer readers to Brad Sparks' extended treatment of the case
in The UFO Encyclopedia, Volume 2, pp. 761-90, for an eye-
opening study of the numerous fatal errors Klass made in his
imaginative recreation of the RB-47 case. Thanks, Mr.
Brookesmith, for giving me another opportunity to draw list
members' attention to this seminal analysis of what Sparks holds
"is arguably the most important UFO incident in history ... the
first scientific proof of the existence of UFOs." As Sparks
concludes, "This evidence does not prove what UFOs are or where
they come from. But mimicry of an air defense radar is a
technological effect hardly comparable with, say, a nonsentient
`plasma'." Not to mention a psychosocial effect, an earthlight,
or whatever happens to be in fashion in Mr. Brookesmith's
circles at the moment.

Cordially,

Jerry Clark (lifelong ufologist, knee-jerk liberal, and
anti-Communist)








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 12

                  Re: Cape Coral, Fort Lauderdale Sightings

From: marxworld@webtv.net, Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose)
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 06:56:40 +0200
Fwd Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 06:51:57 -0400
Subject: Re: Cape Coral, Fort Lauderdale Sightings

Received via "alt.alien.research" June 11 at 23.50 local time.

Stig

*******

Hi everyone I'm new the name is Marx. I was wondering if anyone has
heard about the Cape Coral , Fort Lauderdale sightings? I was just
there, pretty strange stuff going on. Day and evening sightings of
three light clusters. The Coast Guard is passing it off as testing in
the papers. I wish I had one of their test planes.

Marx Shadow...

<html><bgsound src="http://members.tripod.com/~webtv6/tzone.wav"><img
src="http://members.tripod.com/~gifs123/alien2.gif"><body:
background="http://members.tripod.com/~mintcar/starb.gif"></body></html>

Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 16:45:58 -0400
From: marxworld@webtv.net (marx shadow)
Subject: Cape Coral Sightings









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 12

                  Report Of New Planet Needs More Scrutiny

From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose)
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 05:33:21 +0200
Fwd Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 06:49:57 -0400
Subject: Report Of New Planet Needs More Scrutiny

>From The Columbus Dispatch (Ohio). URL:

http://www.dispatch.com:80/pan/localarchive/burns07nws.html

*******


Astronomy: Report of new planet needs more scrutiny


Tom Burns

June 7, 1998


The National Aeronautics and Space Administration recently announced
that Susan Terebey of the Extrasolar Research Corp. had used the Hubble
Space Telescope to discover a planet near a star in the constellation
Taurus.

The star in question is really a star system: two stars orbiting each
other like two cosmic thumbs twiddling. The planet, if it really is
one, is at least twice as big as our sun's largest planet, Jupiter. It
is only 2.7 quadrillion miles from us, making it practically our
celestial neighbor.

Unlike the planets of our own solar system, the new planet is not
orbiting a star. It has been expelled somehow from its star system and
apparently is moving away. Even distant Pluto is only 3 billion miles
from the sun. The new planet is a whopping 130 billion miles from its
parent stars.

In fact, that's how it could be detected by the Hubble Space Telescope
at all. Stars shine with incredible power -- they're hydrogen bombs
more than a million miles wide, after all. Planets are minuscule balls
of rock or liquid that shine only with reflected light from the nearby
star.

Looking for a planet is like looking for a speck of dust on an oncoming
car headlight. No one has ever seen a planet orbiting another star.

Such planets may have been detected indirectly, however. Astronomers
break the light from a star into its components, the rainbow of colors
and energies called the spectrum of the star. By looking for esoteric
variations in that spectrum, astronomers can tell if a star is wobbling
a tiny bit as it moves through the galaxy. Such a wobble indicates that
something invisible is orbiting the star.

The size of the wobble tells astronomers the planet's mass, i.e., how
much stuff it contains. The time required to complete one wobble
reveals how long it takes for the planet to orbit the star.

Amazing technique, eh? It is if it really detects planets -- but it is
highly controversial. Perhaps it is really detecting brown-dwarf stars,
balls of hydrogen gas that are a bit too small to begin to explode like
a normal star. In addition, the wobbles detected are tiny, and the
technique may be detecting motion that isn't there.

Besides, most people (astronomers included) won't be happy until they
see with their own blessed eyes a planet actually orbiting a star.
Current telescope technology is not advanced enough to do that. The
planets are too dim and too close to the blinding glare of the stars.

That's what makes the recent discovery so important if the tiny speck
on the Hubble image really turns out to be a planet. It could be a
brown dwarf, a background star much farther away or some other object
as yet unclassified.

I hate to sound like a spoilsport all the time, but such preliminary
data hardly constitute a confirmed find. Much bigger space telescopes
will need to be built, and the data will have to be argued over by
astronomers in scientific journals, at conferences and in academic
offices over cups of cold coffee for many years.

Still, in 100 years or so, humans may think of planets as being as
common as dirt in the galaxy. If they do, they will be one step closer
to assuming that some of those planets could support life, and they
will be more actively involved in the search for our extraterrestrial
brethren.

In that glorious future, they may look back on Terebey's discovery as a
watershed -- the very first time that humans saw with their own two
eyes the hint of other worlds.


Tom Burns is director of Perkins Observatory in Delaware, Ohio. He is
online at:

burns.15@osu.edu

Copyright =A9 1998, The Columbus Dispatch






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 12

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: RobIrving@aol.com
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 01:54:15 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 07:06:37 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

>  Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 11:38:10 -0300
>  From: Stanton T. Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
>  To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>  Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

Stanton,

> The problem is that you and Peter constantly ask the wrong
> question (What are UFOs.. as opposed to "Are any UFOs ET
> Spacecraft"). You often make pronouncements not based on
> evidence...

Er, talking of which, I don't think I've ever asked that question -
the former, anyway - and certainly not here.

>  I mention my lectures to professional groups because the
>  responses clearly indicate that they will pay attention to facts
>  and data.

It might have passed over you, but this was exactly my point...
that scientists will pay attention if sufficient evidence is
offered.

So what is it with these 'professionals', Stanton? Why isn't your
message hitting home?

> Have any of you splendid writers done field investigations,
> visited archives, had a security clearance?

Field investigations, yes. Visited archives, yes. Had a security
clearance? It would be disingenuous of me if I wasn't up front in
saying that the only such clearance is to certain media firms and
the Royal Veterinary Hospital, which probably, I'm thinking,
won't interest you.

> Talk is cheap.

Yes, quite. That's kind of my point too.

Rob






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 12

                              Re: The Ten Cases

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 01:25:46 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 06:56:16 -0400
Subject: Re: The Ten Cases


> Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 22:13:09 -0500 (CDT)
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: The Ten Cases

> But that's exactly the rub, isn't it? And Cashman is right to
> hint that you need ten cases in ten categories.

> But why should that be the case? After all, if every reported
> abduction were accompanied by an implant, missing fetus and time,
> scoop mark, burnt ring of grass in the backyard, radar
> confirmation, multiple independent witnesses, dramatic
> acceleration to high altitude, unconventional physics and so on
> -- all routinely captured on 35mm film and videotape -- then we
> probably wouldn't be having this discussion, would we?

True. But, then again, if we had 15 billion years, we wouldn't
have to try to piece together where the sun, white dwarf stars,
T Tauri stars and Cepheids all fit in the scale of stellar
evolution. If we had 3.5 billion years, we wouldn't have to
piece together how fossils imply evolution - we'd be watching
it.

> So is the ET hypothesis the result of even ten consistent cases
> over time, or merely an afterthought based on some sort of
> collective body of evidence, specific examples of which may or
> may not be related to one another, and therefore may or may not
> be indicative of extraterrestrial origin(s)?

Well, the point is that most cases have more than one feature.
For instance, Valensole has beings, sample gathering, unusual
traces, and the startling performance normal to UFO cases. The
Moreland case has unusual luminosity, sequential behavior of
that luminosity, beings, and departure to altitude.

One could go for a number of different ways of approaching the
"best cases". Some might say the best cases are those which
contain the most indicators of OEH, ETH or whatever. Others
might say that exemplars which are the clearest representatives
of a particular aspect of the phenomenon are the best.

I suppose, unconsciously, I leaned toward the latter as a better
method of illustrating the suggestion of ETI in UFO reports. I
tend to think of the first approach being better for OEH. But of
course, both have their points.

> For example: the ability (or is it liability) of UFOs to be
> detected by Earth-based radar was once thought to be one of the
> weightiest pieces of evidence in favor of their extraordinary
> nature. But times and technologies change. Now it's almost an
> axiom: if you don't want to show up on radar, you don't have to.
> So one might just as well make the following contorted argument:
> it's only those cases in which UFOs *don't* show up on our radar
> screens that indicate true advanced intelligence, viz., anyone
> who had already solved the problem of interstellar travel would
> long before that have solved the problem of an unwanted radar
> return.

Actually, one can certainly state that there are many cases from
all eras where UFOs were stealthy. And in some cases, for
instance where height-finding radar was unavailable, UFOs could
not be correlated with radar returns.

Considering the radar reflectivity of the lenticular disk is an
interesting problem which I can't say I am qualified to solve.
But my best guess is that in some orientations, it is pretty
stealthy, and in others, it has an overstated signature compared
to an aircraft with a wingspan the diameter of the disc. Given
the UFO propensity for wobbling and violent manuvers, there can
be no doubt that the radar returns would be odd at best. Then
there is the possible plasma sheath around the object, which
certainly should have some effect on radar signals.

------
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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 12

             Discovery Narrows Search For Precursor Of All Life

From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose)
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 05:39:21 +0200
Fwd Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 06:50:37 -0400
Subject: Discovery Narrows Search For Precursor Of All Life

>From ScienceDaily Magazine. URL:

http://www.sciencedaily.com:80/printer_friendly.asp?filename=3D98061008290
1

Stig

*******


Source: Yale University

Posted=BF6/10/98


Yale Scientists Recreate Molecular "Fossils," Now Extinct, That May
Have Existed At The Beginning Of Life

Discovery Narrows Search For Precursor Of All Life Forms


New Haven, Conn. -- Yale scientists report they have synthesized
molecules like those that probably gave rise to the earliest life forms
on Earth nearly 4 billion years ago, thus creating a biochemist's
version of "Jurassic Park" populated by exotic molecular "fossils" that
have long since become extinct.

In the May 26 issue of the Proceedings of the National Academy of
Sciences, the Yale biologists report the creation of one of these
"fossils," an unusual hybrid molecule made up of a scaffold from
deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) with chemical "scissors" attached to it.

Ronald R. Breaker, who created the first DNA enzymes in 1994 with
colleagues at The Scripps Research Institute, said he "looted the tool
box of proteins" to get the amino acid "scissors," which destroy
messenger ribonucleic acid (RNA) in humans and many other organisms.
The feat was accomplished using a technique known as test-tube
evolution.

Breaker's tailor-made enzyme is the first known nucleic acid enzyme
that uses an amino acid to trigger chemical activity, and it brings
scientists a step closer to finding the precursor of all life -- a
single molecule containing both genetic code and an enzyme capable of
triggering self-replication.

"If we can raid a protein's tool box to take one of its favored
chemical groups -- in this case, a key amino acid called histidine
found in a protein called RNase A -- then we should be able to raid the
entire tool box and make use of anything we find there to make highly
sophisticated DNA or RNA enzymes," said Breaker, who collaborated with
Yale postdoctoral associate Adam Roth.



Which Came First -- DNA, RNA Or Proteins?


The discovery provides important clues to the chicken-or-egg dilemma of
which came first -- DNA, RNA or proteins. Most scientists agree life as
we know it cannot exist without DNA as the storehouse of genetic code,
RNA as the genetic messenger, and proteins to carry out the chemistry
of reproduction. Can any one of these three key molecules have existed
as the precursor of the other two, serving as both chicken and egg?

Evidence is mounting that "it was an RNA World at the dawn of life as
the Earth began to cool," said Breaker, who added that he and his
colleagues can create dual-purpose genetic enzymes in the laboratory
out of either RNA or DNA. "These genetic enzymes have the chemical
sophistication, the full catalytic ability, to do many of the
fundamental reactions we see in biology today. I am confident one will
be created soon that can replicate itself."

He added that the new DNA enzyme he crafted destroys RNA with
impressive efficiency at a rate 10 million times faster than it would
decay naturally, although the protein the enzyme mimics acts much
faster still.

No naturally occurring DNA enzymes have been found to date, but such a
discovery would not surprise Breaker. The discovery nearly two decades
ago of naturally occurring RNA enzymes, or ribozymes, earned Yale
biochemist Sidney Altman and University of Colorado researcher Thomas
Cech the 1989 Nobel Prize in Chemistry. In separate experiments, Altman
and Cech exploded the myth that RNA is merely a passive carrier of
genetic code incapable of triggering cell activity.

Referring to the dozen or more DNA and RNA enzymes created in his
laboratory in recent months, Breaker said, "We believe these are like
ancient molecular 'fossils' that might have been found stomping around
the planet -- or more likely floating in the seas -- during the Archean
Era between 3.8 and 4 billion years ago."



RNA Identified As Strongest Candidate For Precursor To All Life


While the Yale biologists created the versatile protein mimic from DNA,
Breaker theorizes that a similar enzyme could be created with RNA,
which many scientists believe is the strongest candidate for being the
precursor of all other life forms. In addition to RNA's dual function
as genetic molecule and as enzyme, RNA serves important roles in all
living systems as the carrier of genetic instructions from DNA and as
the orchestrator of all protein synthesis.

"This is exactly what you would expect if RNA invented these processes
during the 'RNA World,'" Breaker said. "Because DNA is about a million
times more stable than RNA, DNA most likely evolved later as a safe
storehouse for the genetic code first found in RNA. Similarly, proteins
probably evolved that were more efficient chemical catalysts,
eventually driving most RNA enzymes extinct and relegating RNA to a
more limited role."

The discovery that nucleic acids can raid the tool box of proteins
means "the RNA World could have been a very sophisticated place,"
Breaker said. "The earliest RNA could have had access to all of these
chemical helpers now used by proteins. Instead of working from a very
primitive palette, varieties of RNA could have evolved that had a very
rich chemical capability early on."



Tailoring Nucleic Enzymes To Fight Disease


Besides elucidating how life might have evolved, DNA and RNA enzymes
show great promise as powerful medications. In fact, some RNA enzymes
already have been developed to function as precision scissors that can
snip out flawed gene segments and splice in corrected versions -- a
method that has potential for treating diseases ranging from cystic
fibrosis to muscular dystrophy and sickle cell anemia.

Because DNA lends itself well to test-tube evolution techniques, it can
be synthesized readily in the laboratory, and different strains of
enzymes can be genetically engineered for specific purposes, Professor
Breaker said. For example, he and his colleagues have created
self-cleaving DNA enzymes that can fold into chemically active
molecules and cut themselves or other DNAs into segments. The next step
is to genetically engineer a DNA enzyme that can shred the genetic code
of a harmful organism like the HIV virus, rendering it harmless.

Specific DNA enzymes also could be tailor-made to break down only in
the presence of target molecules, making them effective as biosensors
for detecting toxic chemicals in the environment or for medical
diagnostics. Working in collaboration with a Jerusalem-based firm
called IntelliGene Ltd., Breaker plans to create biosensors for
detecting biological or chemical warfare agents with funding from the
Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA).



"Test-Tube Evolution" Mimics Nature


Breaker sets up a system of natural selection through test-tube
evolution to produce DNA sequences with the characteristics he desires.
Typically, Breaker and his colleagues begin crafting an enzyme by
synthesizing more than 10 trillion random DNA sequences using a
computerized DNA synthesizer. Then they wash a grid containing the
sequences with various compounds, in this case histidine. Rare DNA
molecules that by chance fold into enzymes will break themselves free
from the grid.

By cloning the DNA sequences that are washed away by the amino acid and
then repeating the process several times, the Yale biochemists isolate
desired enzymes. "Our latest findings not only improve our
understanding about the origins of life, they also expand our skills in
molecular evolution," he said. "While we may not be able to resurrect
fossilized creatures like they did in 'Jurassic Park,' we very well may
be able to recreate many of the ancient enzymes that were needed at the
very beginning of life nearly 4 billion years ago."

Funding for this research was from the Arnold and Mabel Beckman
Foundation Young Investigator Award.


Copyright =A9 1995-97 ScienceDaily Magazine.

E-mail: Dan Hogan,

editor@sciencedaily.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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 12

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: RobIrving@aol.com
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 01:54:24 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 07:09:45 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


> Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs
>  From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
>  Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 09:34:50 -0400
>  To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

Mark,

>  This seems clearly to show Rob, that you are focused on popular
>  culture while knowing little about UFOs. Of the ten cases I
>  cited, at least 5 are classics, cited in multiple references.

Let's get this straight. Is your complaint that I don't memorize
cases, as perhaps you do, or that I can't be bothered to get off
my comfy chair and look them up? Either way, Mark, I can take
the heat, but it's a non-issue in my book, or would be if I
could only be arsed to reach for the book and check.

>  Kelly-Hopkinsville is one of the most well known occupant cases,
>  Levelland the exemplar EM case. Marignane has been referenced
>  several times, as has Loch Raven Dam and Valensole.

Then in that case they must be on the shelf somewhere. That's
good enough memory for me.

>  ETH isn't part of popular culture. Ideas about ETs are. ETH is a
>  hypothesis and is part of the scientific investigation of
>  possible causes for UFO reports.

Okay, I accept that point. Do you think, however, that it's fair
to say that many of the leading ET Hypothesists believe it? In
which case, what bearing do you think that might have on the
science aspect? (not rhetorical - well, maybe partly, but please
answer it anyway)

>  You can't shift the base from considering the actual cases that
>  lead to consideration of ETH (and which helped stimulate the
>  interest in ETI among the public) to merely considering popular
>  culture in a vacuum. Some of these cases were key in establishing
>  the possibility of ETI for the public, though, not being aware of
>  their fame, you would be unaware of their role.

Hmm, I'm not sure I merely consider popular culture in a vacuum.
What makes you say this?

>  Trying to attribute interest in ETI and acceptance of it as a
>  popular explanation for UFOs to popular culture is placing the
>  cart in primacy to the horse. Serious cases such as those listed
>  and many others have had a profound impact on the willingness of
>  the public to consider ETH.

Perhaps, dare I suggest it, that willingness is placing the cart
before the horse. Let me ask you: Do you believe that the ETH is
really more than a hypothesis? If you do, then we should perhaps
untie the cart and put it in its rightful place, just so we know
where we're coming from.

>  Perhaps you didn't realize that in the 1940s, ETH was not even in
>  the running as a theory for UFOs, as far as the public was
>  concerned. It was only cases like those I listed, which became
>  famous in the press, that caused the change in opinion.

That depends upon how wide a context you're putting it. The
wider it is, the more BS that is. Perhaps ET can be read as a
metaphor for some other outside entity, cultural tracking and
all...

>  The truth is that ETH is far more accepted by the public as a
>  theory of UFO report causation than any other. This despite the
>  lack of credibility of the charlatans and the hucksters.

But perhaps aided by the mythology of which serious researchers
like you, as well as said charlatans and hucksters, contribute.
You are the one putting the cart before the horse in this
instance, I think.

Anyway, does consensus make it true? Does US consensus make it
truer?

>  Jerry
>  can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the public at large
>  wouldn't know Sims and Leir from any other two guys, or Greer if
>  he appeared in a puff of green smoke and waving lights. The
>  modern charlatans just don't get the press of Adamski and the old
>  contactees. They do, however, generate a lot of heat in the "UFO
>  community", which is where they get most of their attention.

You would know more about the American perspective than I. But
bear in mind that it is certainly not the only perspective....
We have Reg Presley, remember. If I could remember the bod's
name I'd give you a perfect example from Italy of a particularly
dodgy ET believer who seems to get most of the media attention,
despite the worthy efforts of more sensible others. The more I
think about this, in fact the less I agree with you.

>  I think public awareness and acceptance of ETI comes down in
>  large part to the following factors:

>  1) Well-known cases suggestive of ETH.

>  2) MHH proponents, especially the AF, being unable to
>     successfully explain important cases, and making general
>     fools of themselves with clearly contrived "explanations".

>  In short, the public uses Occam's Razor a bit themselves.

I hope they keep it sharp.

Btw... before you go racing off in your cart and horse, perhaps
you wouldn't mind addressing some of the questions I asked you
in your TBC thread?

Rob







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 12

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: RobIrving@aol.com
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 01:54:20 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 07:14:08 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


>From: "Greg Sandow" <gsandow@prodigy.net>
>To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs
>Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 14:00:36 -0400

Greg,

>Well, let's see.

Don't you just love it when people say that, as if it carries
some authority? Okay, Greg... let's see.

>The committee at Harvard considered formal academic censure. If I
>remember correctly, it also considered stripping away Mack's
>tenure, a serious and almost unheard of punishment at American
>universities.

True.

>Sure, in the end Mack was neither censured nor demoted.

True, as I pointed out to you. It's worth remembering. Yes the
whole affair was unfortunate, but that particular aspect of it
is well worth remembering.

>But to use him as an example of how free scientists are to pursue
>UFO research seems more than a little grotesque.

Grotesque?

Firstly, he was your example. You challenged me to challenge it,
as I did. The reason I challenged it was because you portrayed
Dr Mack's plight inaccurately. Moreover, I suspect that the
underlying reason he ran into the trouble he did was because he
was doing so many talk shows to sell his book, talking about
aliens and sexual experiments, etc., in the name of Harvard (as
they saw it). I have a different slant, and certainly not the
one you portray me as having...

Hence my taking up of your challenge. See how this works?

>An example of how academic freedom protects my right to do any
>research I like. Or an example of how much trouble I can get into
>if my colleagues don't like what I do?

As I say, ultimately I don't think it was his research so much
as what Harvard saw as spiralling negative publicity that
concerned them. This seems to me to be supported by the fact
that he eventually argued his case successfully.

Just my opinion. Try chopping it around a bit.

>Suppose I don't have tenure yet. Am I encouraged to throw myself
>into ufology, and to publish ufological papers?

No, of course you're not encouraged to do that. Why should you be?

>"If there are people at Harvard
>powerful enough to threaten a tenured full professor who's won
>the Pulitzer Prize, what could they do to me? Wouldn't they be
>powerful enough to deny me tenure? They wouldn't even have to
>make a public fuss."

To me the eventually outcome struck for freedom of pursuit.
Okay, not immediately, but that's progress for you. It requires
precedents sometimes and Mack is one. Be heartened by it, not
disheartened.

>Then there's the issue of government funding. Many scientists get
>grants for their research David Pritchard told me he worried that
>his funding might get cut off because of his abduction work. When
>I interviewed him, he asked me not to use his name in print, and
>insisted we only talk when he was home. He didn't want anyone to
>accuse him of doing ufology on MIT's time.

How does he feel about your using his name on the Internet? I
don't know of Pritchard, so I can't rightly comment. I
understand the plight you describe, however. Equally I could
cite examples of people that have gone it alone, independent of
any funding, to pursue their goal successfully and against all
odds. Surely a supportable ETH would be worth that?

>Would our young scientist imagine his path to funding would be
>smoothed by his UFO research?

Chicken and egg. What he would need is some kind of precedent...
Or perhaps a well-put-together proposal, based on existing
material.

>Let's remember James McDonald, who in his capacity as a top
>atmospheric physicist was asked to testify before Congress on a
>matter unrelated to UFOs. Congressmen who disagreed with his
>position taunted him, declaring his views worthless because he
>believed in "little green men."

Give me a break, Greg. The world is full of taunters, as you
know. Everyone with an original idea has taunters. So what?
Reasonable people, rightly or wrongly, pride themselves in
sniffing cranks at a mile away. Ufology is full of cranks...
not all ufologists, mind, but it shouldn't surprise the more
sensible ones when they suffer taunts due primarily to the
antics of the less sensible ones.

>Is that something other scientists would welcome?

I don't know... ask Darwin if he welcomed it from Creationists.

Perhaps if there are any still around we could ask a
Flat-Earther?

Some might welcome it, if only for motivational purposes. You
are generalizing.

>So, as I said, let's see. Rob and I are debating whether
>scientists are discouraged from pursuing UFO research. I
>challenge him to quote a scientist who says he or she isn't, and
>he picks the one who got in the most dangerous -- and public --
>trouble. (Thus demonstrating one good reason why scientists would
>shy away from UFOs.)

I hold the opposite view, as stated above. If Mack had been
censured I would have been just as angry about it as you, except
that you act as if he was. Spot the difference? I understand
what you're saying, but it is a crucial difference.

No-one discouraged Terence Meaden from pursuing UFO research, or
even Michael Persinger, by the way. Do they count? Or are you
saying ETH research or UFO? Have I said "spot the difference"
once already?

>There ought to be a name for that. May I suggest "rhetorical
>suicide"?

If you feel the need, and you feel that you are right, go ahead.
Tho' not in the McDonald sense, I hope.

Rob






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 12

                              Re: The Ten Cases

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 01:08:26 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 07:27:07 -0400
Subject: Re: The Ten Cases


>From: RobIrving@aol.com
>Wed, 10 Jun 1998 14:16:32 EDT
>Subject: The Ten Cases

>>From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
>>Tue, 9 Jun 1998 23:43:29 -0400

>Mark, Thanks for the info, I'll check it out.

>>You see, this is why 10 cases are a futile exercise. The
>>question was, which cases are the most suggestive of ETI? ETI is
>>suggested by structured objects, unconventional performance,
>>escape velocity, vertical departure to high altitude, non-human
>>beings, unusual physics, and unconventional interest in
>>humanity. These cases present that sort of material.

>Fair enough, as long as one remains aware of our tendency to
>impose order, meaning and therefore value on what we see; ie
>'escape' velocity... escape being a rather subjective term.

There is nothing subjective about 'Escape Velocity'.   Pure
Physics.E.V.  is a very precise rate of speed ( with proper
direction of course). It depends directly upon the size, mass
and gravity of a given planet, moon. or other object in space.

Below this speed, or at an improper direction, no projectile
will escape into space. Above it, it will..... Any complicating
factors (wind resistance etc.) are likewise purely physical.

We did not impose this mathematical order; it imposed itself on
us.


Best wishes

-  Larry Hatch







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 12

                              Re: The Ten Cases

From: JJ Mercieca <mufor@maltanet.net>
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 09:43:15 +0200
Fwd Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 07:28:10 -0400
Subject: Re: The Ten Cases


>Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: The Ten Cases
>From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
>Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 23:07:07 -0400
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>I'm sure this must be some odd rhetorical thing, because escape
>velocity is, of course, completely objective and is the speed
>required for an object to escape the gravity of the earth and
>enter non-orbital space. Observing a UFO operating at escape
>velocity is, of course, suggestive of ETH, since attaining that
>velocity is necessary to leave the vicinity of the earth for
>interplanetary travel.

Wouldn't escape velocity depend on the type of technology being used?

That is, our rocket technology has to accelerate to Mach 25 to
leave the Earth.  However, if antigravity is what propels UFOs
all they'd have to do is counter the Earth's gravity and
literally "float" away from it.
Is this correct or am I missing something here?

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 12

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: RobIrving@aol.com
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 01:54:13 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 07:00:05 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


>  To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>  From: "Jerome Clark" <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>  Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs
>  Date: Wed, 10 Jun 98 12:34:54 PDT

Jerome,

<snip>

Sticking to the subject...

>  The notion that scientists investigate UFOs at their own
>  professional peril is false staggers the imagination.

That's not quite how I put it, is it. I would have expected that
you, as a self-professed 'English major' would have learned by
now to read more carefully, to address what is actually said,
and try not to jump to conclusions.

>  Scientists' resistance, for reasons not always strictly
>  rational, to anomalous claims is the subject of a considerable
>  literature in the sociology and philosophy of science, e.g.,
>  Mauskopf's The Reception of Unconventional Science
>  (AAAS/Westview, 1979) and Bauer's The Enigma of Loch Ness
>  (University of Illinois Press, 1986; see Chapter 7 in
>  particular). (I have a bulging file of papers, mostly from
>  social- science journals, on this and related matters.)
>  Sociologist of science Marcello Truzzi has written lengthily and
>  eloquently on this subject, most recently in the forthcoming
>  essay "On Some Unfair Practices Towards Claims of the
>  Paranormal." (By the way, Truzzi, though skeptical, holds the
>  view that rational, critical-minded persons can look at UFO data
>  and see, rightly or wrongly, an ETH there.

Yes, as I'm aware. As I said in an earlier post to Greg, I was
at one time, until quite recently, entirely sympathetic. Lately
I have changed my mind somewhat, assuming that is allowed
without ridicule. I guess that depends on who one talks to.

I dare say that if I were to sift through your suggestions I
would change my mind again. Changing my mind doesn't bother me.

As I keep stressing, that is not my point.

Supergluing myself to the point, I believe that how seriously
the ETH is taken very much depends upon how it is presented, and
the quality of evidence offered. That is essentially what I
wrote previously - adapting it to your mind-set won't change the
fact.

You seem to feel that the evidence offered thus far is
sufficient, and laid out in a way that should, in a perfect
world, make every scientist jump to attention. I happen to
disagree, and cited a few examples where revolutionary ideas
were accepted quite early, even if some dismissed them as
ludicrous. Opposite precedents nonetheless.

What I've been trying (unsuccessfully so far) to get you to tell
me is why you think the so-called science establishment baulks
at the subject of ufology _in particular_.

>  He admirably resists the temptation to rhetorical inflation so
>  beloved of Rob and some others on this list, who regularly
>  tell us we are religious fanatics, gullible true believers, and
>  even [see below] clinically paranoid.)

Well, Jerome, that's evidence enough for me that you jump to
conclusions. Can you show me where I've described you or anyone
in those terms? If that is indicative of your accuracy in
reporting, and from what I've read I fear it is, then I am not
surprised you moan about not being taken seriously.

>  One might add that an Allen Hynek speaks on this subject >
with rather more authority than Rob Irving.

Yes, I see a tack developing. I freely admit that I am not as au
fait with every UFO case history as yourself and others, and
suddenly I'm to be dismissed?  If you think about it, isn't that
a little childish? Or smug?... smugness in this field, that's
funny.

Not remembering every little ufological detail was a conscious
decision on my part, by the way. Not knowing has its benefits
too, although I don't expect you to accept that. No matter...

<Many references woz 'ere>

<redundancy snipped> I know how adept you are at chucking out
references, Jerome, but I'm not that convinced you've grasped
the full mettle of the history and philosophy of science in this
context, any more than Blondlot did.

You get my drift?

>  Anyone who's ever investigated a case and found an item of
>  evidence (in, say, a CE2) for evaluation by a scientist can
>  testify to the extraordinary skittishness even of interested
>  professionals. Few will allow their names to be published, for
>  fear of what their colleagues or deans will say (or of being
>  attacked and ridiculed in the journal of scientistic law
>  enforcement, Skeptical Inquirer). (See the discussion on "CE2s
>  and Failed Science" on pp. 196-97 of The UFO Encyclopedia, 2nd
>  Edition.)

As if continually citing your own references gives them weight.
Yes, I'm not disputing the fact that there have been and always
will be problems in presenting revolutionary evidence. As I said
before, I'm quite aware of this. But that isn't really my point.

>  Bruce Maccabee, a scientist who is open about his UFO interests,
>  tells some amazing tales of scientism's resistance to even the
>  most thoroughly documented UFO data in his eye-opening paper
>  "Still in Default," MUFON 1986 UFO Symposium Proceedings,
>  131-60. The title, incidentally, harks back to McDonald's
>  "Science in Default: Twenty-two Years of Inadequate UFO
>  Investigations," in the Sagan/Page UFOs -- A Scientific Debate,
>  52-122.

I know. Funnily enough, I've read Bruce's report.

>  This is utter rot. No one is talking "conspiracy" except Rob here.

Okay...  I assumed that Stanton was talking along the lines of,
as I said, 'a subtle or not so subtle conspiracy', which, in its
mild form, might have been along the lines of tacit
disapproval...some kind of widespread prejudice. Perhaps
Stanton's well-known phrase, the Cosmic Watergate, inadvertently
slipped into my mind as I thought of who I was addressing. Okay
Jerome, no conspiracy. I'm sorry.

So, again, we arrive at the same question I've asked before:
What is the problem, exactly? You haven't even attempted to
answer it.

Do you even have an answer? I'm beginning to think not.

Beyond your own citations -- if you've ever ventured that far, that
is - what is your current opinion on why science turns a blind eye
to your evidence? Try to be lucid in your response... I'm interested
to hear it.

>  (Whatever else might be said, the guy does have a fertile
>  imagination.) Maybe, my friend, you really ought to find a subject
>  you know something about to denounce. What we're seeing
>  from Rob, I fear, is more indicative of the classic descent into
>  the sort of arrogance usually occurring when ignorance is
>  dominant.

Projections, Jerome... yet more projections.

Incidentally, you cited Fort earlier as a major
influence...what, I wonder, would he have thought about your er,
dogmatism? He would have laughed surely, as I am now.

Rob






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 12

              911/UFO Pursuit - Interview with WYTV 33 Reporter

From: Kenny Young <task@fuse.net>
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 03:42:52 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 07:22:50 -0400
Subject: 911/UFO Pursuit - Interview with WYTV 33 Reporter

Trumbull County Investigation:
Discussions with the reporter from Ch. 33

Delving further into the mysterious affairs surrounding the 1994
Trumbull County Disturbance, I contacted a Ms. Stacey Adger, a
news reporter with WYTV Channel 33 in Youngstown, Ohio.

Adger is the reporter whose voice is heard on the 9-1-1 tapes,
inquiring with the Trumbull County dispatch headquarters of the
UFO situation.

I first spoke with Stacey Adger on June 8, 1998, and asked her
why this story was never reported, and how such an incredible
event could have been kept so quiet for so long.

She said that she was off of work in the two days following the
incident, and nobody else ever 'reported' on the situation. She
said that while she was off, she "did some checking" into the
story, but nobody would tell her anything. She added that she
was fully aware of the numerous UFO reports and the police
pursuit of an unknown object.

I asked Stacey about the FAA involvement with the report, and
where the FAA tower was in relation to the airbase. She said the
airbase and airport are both in Vienna, Ohio, adjacent to one
another. This is the same area where the UFO was sighted. Adger
said that if the security guard was visually observing the UFO
from his vantage point at the airport, there is "no way" the FAA
tower could NOT observe the UFO, especially from a 70-foot
elevation and using binoculars.

She was aware that a Howland police officer was standing
alongside a security officer at the airbase and both were
observing the UFO. Neither could identify the object.

Stacey said that she called the airport herself that night, and
talked with the same FAA tower operator who was on the tape.
This man told her that 'people were pulling pranks' and there
was nothing on radar.

She recalled the first woman who phoned in, and said that the
woman was extremely scared. The woman described the UFO as a
bluish-green object that was real close to the ground, and had
lights associated with it.

I told Stacey that I had been advised by the 9-1-1
telecommunicator (who furnished me the tape) that she was also
going to be sent a copy, and we would be the only two
recipients, aside from several police officers who wanted a copy
for their own curiousity. I asked her if she had received her
copy, and she said that she did. She said she has listened to it
5 or 6 times now, and each time was thunderstruck by what she
heard.

I asked if she conveyed information of this to others, and she
said that she has not. She announced that she was the only
person in the news media who had the tape.

She has not told anyone about it, because she "wanted to check
with certain persons involved," whose careers may be in
jeopardy, she was inclined to suspect. Evidently, she was given
to believe that the tapes were removed from the regular storage
area and were hidden in another part of the 9-1-1 center. Adger
felt that the tapes may have been hidden purposefully.

Yours truly was also told by one of the telecommunicators that
the tapes were mysteriously 'misplaced' in another location, or
lost altogether. The telecommunicator expressed to me that when
he noticed the tapes missing, he was 'spooked.' He did not,
however, interpret this as a conspiratorial act, because he said
there was a 'backup' tape located elsewhere that he was able to
retrieve. The exact circumstances surrounding this situation is
still unclear, but there was a definite problem which surfaced
when the tapes were initially sought for retrieval. [I hope to
clarify these details in a later report.]

Adger thought that any reportage of this incident may have grand
ramifications. She also was aware of the re-assignment of the
air traffic controllers at the Youngstown FAA after the UFO
incident.

During my June 8 discussion with Stacey Adger, she said that her
managing editors are not aware of this situation, and she didn't
have any plan on when or how to tell them. She feared that the
News Director may "hop all over" the story with a motivation not
to focus on the UFO incident, but to wrongfully characterize the
9-1-1 center in a false light.

I spoke with Stacey Adger again on June 12, and still she gave
no indication that this story is being pursued, or that she has
given the information to the News Director. She did say that her
initial estimation that the tapes were deliberately concealed by
the management of the 9-1-1 center were 'probably incorrect.'

In my reflections of this entire situation, the news staff of
WYTV Channel 33 in Youngstown, Ohio is largely to blame for this
story being concealed from the public so. Certain persons on the
news staff have been in full possession, from the beginning, of
this remarkable account. No efforts were made to report on this
event. Even after acquisition of these incredible tapes, this
valuable data has not been addressed, and there is no indication
that it will yet be pursued.

Following my June 8 phone call, I assumed that reportage of this
incident would shortly commence. This has not been the case, and
I am under the impression that the staff of Channel 33 longs for
this matter to be swiftly swept aside and forgotten.

During my June 12 conversation, Adger even acknowledged that her
initial fears were unfounded, and the understandable concerns
for the job safety of others were largely exaggerated. Despite
no expressed interest in addressing this incident with the
Channel 33 news forum, Adger agreed with me that the tapes are
shocking and are of extreme
news-interest.

June 12, 1998
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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 12

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: Jeff King <Boroimhe@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 07:44:39 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 07:51:35 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


Greetings all:

>Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 18:31:48 +0100
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Sean Jones <Tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

To my rather simple ponint, to wit,

>>I'm not sure lots of alien artifacts
>>and bodies are needed to prove the ETH, however. One properly
>>authenticated piece of alien hardware or dead alien and that's
>>it, break out the champagne.

Mr. Jones opines:

>I can only assume that you are innocent in the ways of the world.

>For one person to come forward with any evidence of alien
>hardware or whatever there will be at least ten to say that it is
>fake, falsified or just plain not alien enough.

No Sean, my profession unfortunately keeps me in far too close
touch with the ways of the world.  You seem to have ignored the
point about "properly authenticated."  This would mean, for
example, several reputable independent institutions confirming
that a piece of clearly manufactured material (an I beam say) is
composed of unearthly isotopic ratios or that a humanoid body
has no dicsernable DNA or is based on something other than
carbon.  I'm not taking about some Derrel Sims flunkie saying "I
got the proof but I ain't letting nobody look at it."  Despite
your jaundiced view of his intellectual honesty, even the
fearsome Duke would retreat in the face of such independently
varified evidence.

Now, would disputes arise during the replication process, of
course. That is the way of all new scientific discoveries.
Eventually, if the evidence is strong enough, such ridiculous
things as a round Earth and the theory of relativity are
accepted.   Will some still refuse to accept?-yes. Just because
the Flat Earth Society is going strong, however, doesn't mean I
need to worry about falling off the edge next time I fly to
Europe.

Regards,

Jeff






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 12

                        Re: Asking Pamela Stonebrooke

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 12:55:01 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 07:59:59 -0400
Subject: Re: Asking Pamela Stonebrooke

Hi Pamela, hi All,

I am crossposting a communique from one of the members of AIC
[Abduction Information Center]. (Anonymously of course!) I'm
doing it because the questions being asked deserve answers and
because it will help us all to get to 'know' Pamela better.

I concur with the observations/opinions/questions being made in
this post. The members of AIC are conducting an ongoing
investigation/peer review of our experiences. As you can see,
the questions are pointed and direct. It's one of the things I
love so much about the members. They are all intelligent and
caring people - and when it comes to this topic they book no BS.
They want and have come to expect straight, no nonsense, honest
responses to questions about abduction.

"Inquiring (peers) minds want to know Pam!" <VBG>

Peace,

John Velez

======================================================

Hi John, and All:

>>Pamela wrote:

>>Certainly, the reptilians use sex to control people in various
>>ways. They have the ability .... to control the mind of the
>>experiencer, as well as to give tremendous pleasure....  I have
>>wrestled with all of these implications and the various levels
>>of meaning and possibilities represented by my encounter
>>experiences.  .... I feel a deep respect for the reptilian entity
>>with whom I interacted, and a profound connection with this being.

I'm wondering if Pamela might need to continue wrestling with
all of the implications pertaining to her reptilian encounters.
On what grounds does she base her feelings of deep respect for
this "entity"?  She says this reptilian is using sex to control
people (and Pamela?) in various ways, as well as, controlling
the mind of the experiencer (Pamela's, too?). Might this "giving
of tremendous pleasure" also cloud Pamela's discernments?

>>Pamela wrote:

>>I believe that on one level, I may be meeting these entities ...
>>or perhaps they are different aspects of myself.  I don't
>>really know;

I think that the answer to this question is paramount to all
others in Pamela's account.  If she doesn't "really know" with
any certainty, how can she possibly discriminate between her
actual experiences and the internal workings of her mind?

>>Pamela wrote:

>>I am looking forward to appearing on major TV talk-shows,
>>and to bringing the message directly to the public about
>>this phenomenon.

Why does Pamela feel so sure the public will believe her
fantastic testimony. I would hate to see her psyche hurt for the
sake of TV entertainment but I feel this may be the case.

>John Velez commented:

>Isn't the abduction phenom in and of itself confusing enough
>to investigate without throwing in reincarnation, time travel,
>and past life regression into the mix?

And let's not forget to include Pamela's prophecies about the
future, either.I hope all goes well for her and the rest of us
in this boat.

Best,
(Anonymous) Member of AIC - Abduction Information Center








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 12

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: RobIrving@aol.com
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 09:02:09 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 20:00:54 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

> From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
>  To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net>
>  Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs
>  Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 10:31:04 -0400

Greg,

>  Suppose we substituted "spousal abuse" for "UFOs" in what you've
>  written here:

Purely as a thought experiment, now substitute Satanic Ritual
Abuse...

>  Would this suggest that spousal abuse isn't real, and that
>  complaints about it are generated simply by cultural factors?
>  Hardly.

...then ask yourself the same question.

Rob






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 12

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 09:18:17 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 20:05:13 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


> From: Jeff King <Boroimhe@aol.com>
> Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 20:18:59 EDT
> To: updates@globalserve.net
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

> >Back to the drawing board. I think we're left with Mark's and my
> >straightforward notion that if UFOs are alien craft, they'll have
> >stable, discernable physical characteristics (though perhaps
> >other traits that seem like magic to us).

> While I agree that this would be good support for Cashman�s OEH,
> the difficulty is reliably establishing the existence of these
> characteristics. For example, anecdotal eyewitness testimony is
> not a very good source for ensuring that these characteristics
> exist.  Cases that have been solved to the satisfaction of most
> everyone can be shown to share important characteristics with
> unsolved cases that are accepted as fair evidence of an
> anomalous phenomenon.

How significant would those factors be?

Here we need studies of (broadly speaking) solved vs. unsolved
cases. The Air Force's Special Report #14 did provide that, and
showed (if I remember correctly -- Stan Friedman may want to
supply more accurate information) that the unsolved cases
involved more qualified observers, and had lasted for a longer
time.

This study badly needs to be done again, with far more cases.

> Also, there�s the inevitable problem
> that many sighting reports are only solved through pure luck,
> meaning that there�s always the risk that one or more of those
> establishing the unifying physical characteristic are in the
> unknown category because of pure *bad* luck.

How many -- what proportion -- of cases are solved through luck?

> And now for something completely different (and off topic).  I
> haven�t seen any recent reviews of yours in the Journal of the
> Vast Right Wing Conspiracy (a/k/a The Wall Street Journal).
> Have you really been absent for a good while, or have I just
> missed your stuff in their new Friday format?

I'm flattered you asked!

My last piece was in the Journal two months ago, and indeed was
in the new Friday section. (The Leisure and Arts page, I can
assure you, is not even right-wing, let alone part of a
conspiracy.)

Then I did some music-oriented travelling, and returned to some
angry, buzzing deadlines not related to the Journal. Three of the
four Journal pieces I've been assigned to write turn out to
involve extensive research. (Please write the editor of Leisure
and the Arts to explain that I should be paid double.) I've
written one of them, however -- about the community outreach of
the St. Louis Symphony -- and it will be appearing reasonably
soon.

Anyone interested in reading my music stuff can find lots of it
on my website, http://pages.prodigy.com/gsandow.  (And now I've
joined the ranks of the self-promoters on our fair List!)

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 12

                              Re: The Ten Cases

From: "Steven Kaeser" <steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 08:33:41 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 19:59:45 -0400
Subject: Re: The Ten Cases


>Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 09:43:15 +0200
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: JJ Mercieca <mufor@maltanet.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: The Ten Cases

<snip>

>Wouldn't escape velocity depend on the type of technology being used?

>That is, our rocket technology has to accelerate to Mach 25 to
>leave the Earth.  However, if antigravity is what propels UFOs
>all they'd have to do is counter the Earth's gravity and
>literally "float" away from it.
>Is this correct or am I missing something here?

>Regards,

>JJ Mercieca
>Malta UFO Research

IMHO, the use of the phrase "escape velocity" helps to define the
limits of our current technology.

To successfully move away from a large body of matter one would
have to attain a certain speed to "escape" the attraction caused
by the force of gravity.  That "velocity" would be defined by the
size of the mass involved.
In theory, if one could counter the effect of that "mass" (i.e.
the force of gravity), then the "escape velocity" becomes much
lower.

I would note that the term "antigravity" is really not well
defined here.
Are we talking about a negative gravity field that pushes you
away from mass, or a gravity shield that merely reduces (or
eliminates) the impact of the basic "force" involved.  On the
other hand, perhaps we're talking about the ability to point a
gravity beam out into space and counter the pull of the mass
we're closest to, causing the craft to move.

When using the visual sightings of "unknowns" and their apparent
ability to make sharp turns at high speeds as an argument for
some sort of gravity control, aren't we really talking about the
ability to control the effect of mass and inertia?

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 12

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 08:19:58 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 20:03:20 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


> From: Jean-Luc Rivera <PSaintc798@aol.com>
> Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 12:42:20 EDT
> To: updates@globalserve.net
> Subject: Re:  UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

> >From: "Greg Sandow" <gsandow@prodigy.net>
> >To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net>
> >Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs
> >Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 18:45:41 -0400

> <snip>

> >If the PH is valid it implies that the UFO is most widespread in
> >countries which share social and economic conditions, and have
> >similar cultural values. As the UFO phenomenon seems most
> >widespread in the USA we would expect it to be experienced most
> >often in similar societies. This does seem to be the case.

<snip>

> >We would expect the UFO phenomena to be least widespread in
> >those societies which either do not share this social
> >background, or are actually hostile to it, e.g. the Islamic
> >countries, most of Africa, Asia (except Japan), and this is
> >indeed the case. This is not, of course, to say that no UFO
> >reports at all come from those countries.

> We don't know how widespread the UFO phenomenon is in these
> parts of the world: the lack of investigators or just of
> channels to receive the reports maybe the reason of the absence
> or quasi-absence. In Malaysia, thanks to the work of Ahmad
> Jamaludin, we have learned of the existence of UFO waves which
> would have gone unreported otherwise.

> Furthermore the works of Bertrand Meheust (in Algeria and Gabon)
> and Thierry Pinvidic (in Algeria) published in France show that
> the UFO phenomenon exists in different cultures and apparently
> awaits to be reported. These 2 french researchers cannot be
> suspected of deep ETH bias in their investigations as the list
> members not familiar with french ufology must know that they are
> supporters of the PH.

<etc>

Jean-Luc, it's wonderful to see you posting here!

I want to clarify one thing. The statements Jean-Luc discusses
are by John Rimmer. I quoted them in my reply to Rimmer's post.

Jan-Luc has told me several times that Americans aren't well
enough aware of UFO research around the world, and apparently
that's true of British researchers as well.

John Rimmer thinks he and his colleagues are on the road to
validiating the PSH. I suggested that they've left some major
assumptions unexamined in their work, the biggest being that a
(supposed) lack of UFO reports from non-western counties is due
to a lack of UFO sightings, not the lack of a developed UFO
reporting system.


Jean-Luc, while making a similar point, also shows that UFO
reports -- in numbers Rimmer doesn't seem to know about -- <can>
be found outside the west. Rimmer and his associates need,
perhaps, to examine not only their assumptions, but their
research.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 12

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: RobIrving@aol.com
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 09:02:32 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 20:01:52 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


> Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 17:56:59 -0700
>  To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>  From: Geoff Price <Geoff@CalibanMW.com>
>  Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

Geoff,

>  To my eyes, responsible "ufologists" routinely do more than cast
>  one suspiciously, they positively roll them with some frequency.

Before we start I feel I must point out that I of course would
never initiate the term 'responsible ufologists' -- it was rather
thrust upon me. Otherwise that's heartening to hear, but what is
the evidence?

>  I can imagine some end-runs around these regrettable legal
>  protections -- mail bombs, dark-tinted Subarus and mysterious
>  disappearances, etc. -- but my gut feeling is that such things
>  would only fuel some of the ET cover-up paranoia out there.

Amusing... no, really.

[Re. Greer, Hesemann, Simms & Leir, etc]

>  Such people never even use the term "ETH", in my experience.
>  They speak of ET reality, ET cover-ups, and alien implants.  It
>  seems frankly bizarre and quite arbitrary to declare them the
>  representatives of the ETH.  Some clearer use of terminology
>  might help here.

Good point. I concede it. However, the veracity with which others
have defended their cause in these discussions makes me think
that perhaps there are some who hide an inelastic stance behind
the 'H' word. Bruce and Stanton, for instance are known around
these parts as scientists, and Jerome and Greg like to talk in
terms of science, but I'm not sure I'd describe any of them as
models of impartiality.

It's a problem, people rarely are.

Rob






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 12

                        Re: Asking Pamela Stonebrooke

From: Skye Turell <turel33@west.net>
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 07:29:52 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 20:10:31 -0400
Subject: Re: Asking Pamela Stonebrooke

> Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 12:55:01 -0500
> To: updates@globalserve.net
> From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
> Subject: Asking Pamela Stonebrooke

<snip>

> >>Pamela wrote:

> >>I believe that on one level, I may be meeting these entities ...
> >>or perhaps they are different aspects of myself.  I don't
> >>really know;

> I think that the answer to this question is paramount to all
> others in Pamela's account.  If she doesn't "really know" with
> any certainty, how can she possibly discriminate between her
> actual experiences and the internal workings of her mind?

The issue of discriminating between "actual experience" and
"internal workings of mind" are hardly limited to the abduction
arena.  This is a constant thorn in the side of each one of us
and this issue shouldn't be used to debunk or devalue the
experience of any individual.  Those that claim they can easily
make this distinction -- or that such a simple distinction can be
made -- are probably not demonstrating the self-awareness
necessary to even begin to make this distinction.
--

Skye Turell <turel33@west.net>
ICQ Pager 6797092






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 12

                          Re: Who Is Jerome Clark?

From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 09:05:16 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 20:07:07 -0400
Subject: Re: Who Is Jerome Clark?


> To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
> From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Who Is Jerome Clark? [was: Corso,
> Stacy & Birnes]
> Date: Thu, 11 Jun 98 20:51:56 PDT

> > Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 19:54:16 -0400
> > From: The Duke of Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com>
> [Peter Brookesmith]
> > Subject: Who Is Jerome Clark? [was: Corso, Stacy & Birnes]
> > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

Maybe I can offer a modest clarification.

> > >> There are even people who have thought that Phil Klass
> > >> would chuck them into the Chesapeake Bay riddled with
> > >> bullets, or some such thing, should they take up an
> > >> invitation to go sailing with the Dread Debunker.

> > >Don't know that guy, I'm afraid, though once Klass made
> > >a "joke" to that effect to me, in the course of a fairly
> > >abusive communication.

> My, my. Aren't we hard up for something substantive to debate
> about? One can only conclude that Mr. Brookesmith senses an
> urgent need to bring in the most transparent of diversions.

> > Presumably then it is some other Jerome Clark entirely, of whom
> > no one but Klass - obviously suffering one of his habitual
> > delusions - has previously heard, but of whom Klass writes in
> > SUN #51 (May 1998), page 7 [see note below]:

> > "I concluded my letter [of 8 April 1984] to Clark as follows:
> > 'If business or pleasure should bring you to the DC area, I
> > invite you to join me aboard the "Hanky Pank," but warn you of
> > the dangers of the mysterious Chesapeake Quadrangle in which
> > many UFOPs (UFO Promoters) have disappeared mysteriously. A few
> > have been found with their bodies riddled with bullet holes.
> > Some who are anxious to keep the Cosmic Watergate under cover,
> > will stop at nothing.

> Note, if you are able to read better than Mr. Brookesmith can,
> that Klass here is taking off on something I find as absurd as
> he: the notion that ufologists are at physical peril for looking
> into cover-ups real or imagined.

> > "Clark responded in friendly fashion, indicating that he
> > recognized the foregoing was intended as a joke.

> As why should I have not?

> > So my May 14,
> > 1984 letter to Clark concluded: 'The yacht Hanky Pank made her
> > maiden voyage of 1984... Perhaps you will join us someday (and
> > your body will be found floating in the Chesapeake).'

> Note here further evidence of Mr. Brookesmith's inability to
> read. Here the "joke" has Klass implying that it is he who will
> have me murdered. Let's have a show of hands out there. How many
> of you would take as a "joke" -- not even from a friend here,
> mind you, but a longtime adversary -- a remark intimating a
> desire to have one done in? No, Mr. Brookesmith, you've already
> voted. Any other hands? No?

I haven't had nearly as much experience with Phil as Jerry has,
but I've learned that his remarks do have a context.

When I first spoke to him, I was trying to arrange an interview
with him for something I was writing. He invited me to visit him
in Washington, DC, and to stay over at his townhouse. Twice in
the course of extending this invitation he, with his
characteristically ponderous humor, warned me not to bring any 15
year-old girls, and propose to spend the night with them.

Well, I made the visit, but didn't stay with him. I stayed at a
fine old DC hotel, with my girlfriend of the time. We thought
we'd enjoy a weekend in Washington, and visit some of her
friends. I had a date with Phil the morning after we arrived, and
Sandy decided she'd go to an art museum. I'd join her when I was
finished.

Phil very kindly offered to drive me to meet Sandy, even though
by that time he was raging at me, and making extraordinary ad
hominem attacks at J. Allen Hynek, whose name I hadn't even
mentioned. When we arrived at the museum, I spotted Sandy (who's
tall and blonde, hard to miss). I introduced her to Phil, and,
without missing a beat, he launched into a dirty joke. The
connection seemed to be, "You're a woman, so now I talk about
sex." There was no lightness, no real humor in his tone. There
was something hardcore about it, for which the word "smut"
wouldn't be inappropriate. (Note. As the good Duke knows, I'm not
a prude. Anything but.)

From a younger man, this would have been offensive. It would
have verged, in fact, on sexual harrassment. (Not an
exaggeration.) Coupled with Phil's earlier remarks about 15
year-old girls, it could well have indicated a strange
preoccupation. But because Phil comes from another generation, I
didn't take it all that seriously, especially after Rebecca
Shatte (in e-mail some time ago) put Phil's remarks in the
context of his age. (For those on the list who might not know,
he's at least in his 70s.)

Still....here's what I mean about context. His offensive joke to
Sandy goes in the context of his jokes about 15 year-old girls.
His remark to Jerry -- about Jerry's body being found in the
Chesapeake -- goes in the context of his sudden, unexpected joke
to Sandy, and his rage about Hynek. Klass is on one hand genial
and amusing (even if his humor can be ponderous). On the other
hand, there's an unpleasant edge to him, a tendency to rage, and
more than a hint of brutality. Here the context includes his
attempt to get the UFO conference stopped (as Jerry Clark has
related), his threat to sue Omni magazine (also related by
Jerry), and an attempt to get George Knapp, the TV
anchorman/ufologist in Las Vegas, fired from his television job.

Phil can change in seconds from being a nice man to being a
horror. In that context, Jerry's reaction to the "floating in the
Chesapeake" remark isn't entirely unreasonable. I've had letters
from Phil that are wonderfully cordial, and at least one that
bordered on rage. He's a tricky personality.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 12

                              Re: The Ten Cases

From: RobIrving@aol.com
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 09:46:32 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 20:09:28 -0400
Subject: Re: The Ten Cases

>  Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 01:08:26 -0700
>  From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
>  To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>  Subject: Subjective escape velocity

Larry,

>  >Fair enough, as long as one remains aware of our tendency to
>  >impose order, meaning and therefore value on what we see; ie
>  >'escape' velocity... escape being a rather subjective term.

>  There is nothing subjective about 'Escape Velocity'.

My mistake. I had it in my mind that Mark was talking from the
pov of an eyewitness on the ground.

Rob






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 12

                              Re: The Ten Cases

From: RobIrving@aol.com
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 09:46:50 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 20:08:52 -0400
Subject: Re: The Ten Cases

>  Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: The Ten Cases
>  From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
>  Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 23:07:07 -0400
>  To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

Mark,

Re. escape velocity... my error, I misunderstood you.

<The lavender field>

>  This case illustrates sample gathering, something unlikely to be
>  a part of the behavior of terrestrial aviators, and it is a well
>  known, well-investigated and frequently republished case that has
>  stood the test of time. It's nice that it has trace evidence,
>  though.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you seem to be suggesting
(particularly in your reply to Dennis) that it is has been pretty
well established that the farmer saw what he says he saw;
'beings' collecting samples.

>>> For instance, Valensole has beings, sample gathering, unusual
>>> traces, and the startling performance normal to UFO cases.

The case, the scenario, the story has beings. That's how I see
it, not that that makes it untrue, of course.

Previously I mentioned Max Burns' Sheffield case because it made
me ask myself why cases, as you say, stand the test of time. What
would you expect to happen that would pull the rug from under our
farmer's story if it were untrue? Does the fact that it's an old
story make it better because no-one has thus far successfully
disproved it? What would it take to do that? By what standard did
you deem a single-witness story to be untrue?

The air is filling with such questions and anti-precedents -- I
had better leave it at that.

Rob






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 12

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 10:29:54 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 20:14:02 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


> From: RobIrving@aol.com
> Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 01:54:20 EDT
> To: updates@globalserve.net
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

> >But to use [John Mack]  as an example of how free scientists are to
> >pursue UFO research seems more than a little grotesque.

> Grotesque?

> Firstly, he was your example. You challenged me to challenge it,
> as I did.

Not so. I challenged you to quote scientists who didn't feel
they were discouraged from pursuing UFO research. You quoted
Mack. (And nobody else.)  Granted, Mack isn't discouraged. But
he's a special case (huge advance for his book, lavish funding
from outside the scientific community, Pulitzer Prize), and in
any case demonstrates exactly the trouble scientists can get
into. Hence -- as your only example -- grotesque.

You're now, in other posts, making a virtue of ignorance -- no,
sorry, of not clogging your mind with data -- but here it would
be helpful to hear the voice of scientists who haven't yet been
publicly quoted. I'll make a stab at that, using a connection or
two that I have. Since my connections aren't usually in
scientific fields, I can't promise results. Yes, I've spoken to
a couple of science or medical professionals involved at least
peripherally in UFO research, but I'm interesting in hearing
from scientists with virgin UFO dossiers.

Here's one additional thought, though. If you search a database
of psychology journals for articles on anything paranormal
(keyword: "paranormal"), you'll find a good many papers
examining, from a favorable persepctive, the hypothesis that a
belief in paranormal phenomena is linked to psychopathology. Or,
colloquially, that people who believe in anything paranormal
aren't quite right in the head. There's a fairly famous UFO
inquiry of that sort, by the late Nicholas Spanos and several
colleagues. As is well known, they found -- to their evident
astonishment -- that people who believe UFOs are "real" (and
even those who claim sightings or abductions) are no crazier
than anyone else.

The point here, though, is the bias in the field. People who
believe in such things may well be psychologically disturbed.
With this as a prevalent belief in the field, how likely are
psychologists to publicly declare their own sympathetic interest
in UFOs or the paranormal? (And yes, Rob, you'll find a few
papers in which psychologists do just that. A few. As opposed to
many more on the other side. The climate in the field is
unmistakable. I did ask a psychologist about it, and got
confirmation of my impression, but I'll admit that she's only a
sample of one.)

> >Let's remember James McDonald, who in his capacity as a top
> >atmospheric physicist was asked to testify before Congress on a
> >matter unrelated to UFOs. Congressmen who disagreed with his
> >position taunted him, declaring his views worthless because he
> >believed in "little green men."

> Give me a break, Greg. The world is full of taunters, as you
> know. Everyone with an original idea has taunters. So what?
> Reasonable people, rightly or wrongly, pride themselves in
> sniffing cranks at a mile away. Ufology is full of cranks...
> not all ufologists, mind, but it shouldn't surprise the more
> sensible ones when they suffer taunts due primarily to the
> antics of the less sensible ones.

> >Is that something other scientists would welcome?

> I don't know... ask Darwin if he welcomed it from Creationists.

Not the same thing at all. I've taken unpopular views in my own
field, and been attacked or taunted for it. Earlier this year, I
attended the annual retreat of the American Composers Orchestra,
a respected classical music institution in New York. This was a
populous affair, attended by almost 100 people, many of them
prominent. I made some remarks, as is my wont, and was descended
upon afterwards by people angry at me. (I'd suggested that
contemporary classical music didn't need the special pleading
late in the '90s that it had needed in the '70s, when the ACO
was founded.) Among those angry at me -- and this man was almost
shaking with rage -- was one of my colleagues on the Juilliard
faculty, the head of their composition department.

I doubt he's happy that I'm teaching a course called "Classical
Music in an Age of Pop, " in which I express ideas like the ones
he fumed at. For all I know, he went to the president of
Juilliard and denounced me, saying nobody like me should be
teaching there. If I organize a symposium next year, as I hope
to, on the future of classical music, maybe he'll denounce me
there.

And if he does it, how can I object? But suppose he went to the
president and said, "Look, Sandow's views on music are bad
enough, but did you know he's a UFO nut?" That would be
genuinely troubling. I've always wondered how much at risk I am
from attacks like that. There is a BIG difference, let me
stress, between being attacked for your controversial views in
your own field, as Darwin was by the creationists, and being
sideswiped by your opponents for something outside it. That's
what happened to McDonald before Congress. His brave involvement
in ufology made him vulnerable in his mainstream scientific
pursuits, something I'm sure most people on our list can
understand, even if Rob can't.

> No-one discouraged Terence Meaden from pursuing UFO research, or
> even Michael Persinger, by the way. Do they count? Or are you
> saying ETH research or UFO? Have I said "spot the difference"
> once already?

Of course there's a difference. Scientists didn't object when
Sagan took the time to denounce UFO belief. Scientists didn't
give Donald Menzel any trouble (though they certainly should
have, if they cared about evidence and reason). It's precisely
which side you appear to be on that makes the difference. That
was the point right from the start of this discussion, and for
Rob to announce that saying so implies some partiality to the
ETH, some privileging it in the discussion, is.....grotesque.

 >Then there's the issue of government funding. Many scientists get
> >grants for their research David Pritchard told me he worried that
> >his funding might get cut off because of his abduction work. When
> >I interviewed him, he asked me not to use his name in print, and
> >insisted we only talk when he was home. He didn't want anyone to
> >accuse him of doing ufology on MIT's time.

> How does he feel about your using his name on the Internet? I
> don't know of Pritchard, so I can't rightly comment.

Now why would your conversation with Mark Cashman make me
suspect you didn't know Pritchard?

He's a research physicist, a professor at MIT, with an
extracurricular interest in the possibility of extraterrestrial
life. He felt that SETI research hadn't produced results, and in
addition might be based on questionable assumptions. (For
instance, that aliens or their robot probes weren't likely to
visit us.) He thought that abduction reports might provide more
concrete evidence, and began to look into abductions. Along with
John Mack, he organized a conference on abductions held at MIT
at 1992, though not under official MIT sponsorship.

I feel free to mention his name on the Internet because it's
well known in UFO circles, and to some extent has surfaced in
the mainstream press. When he asked me not to mention him by
name, he said he'd gotten in trouble in his department
previously, when his UFO interest had been mentioned in the Wall
Street Journal.

Oh, and Rob....you'll like this. Pritchard was worried about
losing government funding for his research, but he also said
that UFO crazies had begun calling the MIT physics department,
trying to find him, so they could tell him the answers to UFO
mysteries. The department chairman had to field those calls, and
wasn't happy about it.

Pritchard has gone back and forth about his public visibility.
Last time I noticed, he was on the advisory board of JUFOS,
which certainly puts his name before the public in a UFO
context. (Not that any wide public reads that journal.) I've
seen him once on tabloid TV, talking about the alleged penile
implant he'd analyzed. And his more recent comments about
pressure from colleagues making him reconsider his UFO work were
made to a television interviewer -- though, I must say, to a
most discreet and seductive one, with a history of making her
subjects feel at ease, which perhaps accounts for Pritchard
talking to her at all. In any case, his remarks (not used on the
TV show in question) were entirely unambiguous, even if his
behavior is not. In any case, he was protected, in one sense --
the show was about abductions, and his comments were skeptical
of most abduction research. In fact, he served as one of the
skeptical voices on the show. His scientific respectability
wouldn't have been hurt.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 13

                 Re: East Kent MEP Demands UFO Investigation

From: Sean Jones <Tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 18:44:27 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 18:24:25 -0400
Subject: Re: East Kent MEP Demands UFO Investigation

>Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 22:09:43 -0700 (PDT)
>From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
>Subject:  East Kent MEP:  Demands UFO Investigation
>To: Updates@globalserve.net

>I thought the following news might interest some of you:

>Mark Watts, Member of European Parliament for East Kent, has
>demanded an investigation into UFO sightings in the Hythe area
>Kent England. He said that there were many independent sightings
>of strange flying objects in the weeks leading upto the General
>Election last May. They all occurred close to the home of former
>Home Secretary Michael Howard. When the MP stood for the
>conservative party leadership last summer fellow Tory Anne
>Widdicombe made accusations that he had "having something of the
>night about him".

>Thus far, calls for a probe have been resisted by the
>authorities. Watts will continue his campaign until someone in
>the establishment wakes up to his constituents demands for
>action!!!.

>Regards,

>Roy

Hi Errol, Hi Rob, Hi All

The case is still being investigated by UFOMEK, (UFO Monitors
East Kent), of which I am a proud member and a four page summary
of the investigation is available for those who would like a
copy for the paltry sum of one English pound sterling. Contact
me via email if you would like a copy.

Extensive investigations have established that the authorities
have not only lied but also contradicted each other. We can
prove this in corespondence.

We also feel that is is worth mentioning that Mark Watts is NOT
a UFO buff but concerned for his constituents and he felt it was
worthy of futher investigation by his office.

Group Co-Ordinator Jerry Anderson can also be contected by email
<ufomek@netcomuk.co.uk> regarding this incident.

---
      People can have it any colour, as long as its black!
       Sean Jones
 Homepage--http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Zone/1745/index.htm
 Research 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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 13

                    Translators Wanted - Dutch to English

From: ufonet - Jeroen Kumeling <ufonet@xs4all.nl>
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 17:27:43 +0200
Fwd Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 19:01:58 -0400
Subject: Translators Wanted - Dutch to English


Hello UFO-fellows

Can anyone help us translating our Dutch UFO-and related
subjects-articles into English?

There are a lot of interesting things going on in Holland , and
we (Me and the Dutch UFO research group UFO-Werkgroep Nederland)
I know there are a lot of Dutch emigrants all over the US,
Australia and Canada, so maybe can somebody help us. My English is
not so very good, that's why I'm looking for someone who can
translate.

Greetings and
Met vriendelijke groeten,

Jeroen Kumeling
kumeling@hetnet.nl
UFO-Werkgroep Nederland
ufonet@xs4all.nl
http://www.xs4all.nl/~ufonet
PO-Box 2191, 7500 CD Enschede
tel/fax: +31 53 4339363
UFO-HOTLINE: +31 53 4310412






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 13

                        Ufologists and Klass Conflict

From: "Jerome Clark" <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 98 12:22:28 PDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 18:21:41 -0400
Subject: Ufologists and Klass Conflict

Hi, everybody,

        As promised on an earlier posting, I have an address
for those who may wish to read my "The UFO Debunkers vs. the
UFO Menace," which concerns Philip J. Klass' interactions with
the University of Nebraska.  The address is:

        http://www.evansville.net/~slk.com.htm

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 13

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 15:48:45 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 18:45:08 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


>From: Jeff King <Boroimhe@aol.com>
>Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 07:44:39 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

To anyone with access to a newsstand, the June 25 issue of The
New York Review of Books has an article, "UFOs Land at Cornell!"
by Frederick Crews, which looks at 'The Threat' by David Jacobs,
Confirmation by Whitley Strieber, and Aliens in America:
Conspiracy Cultures from Outerspace to Cyberspace by Jodi Dean,
and UFOs in general. Old Ockham is even mentioned!

It is your typical TNYRB article.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 13

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 14:31:56 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 18:40:04 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

>From: RobIrving@aol.com
>Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 01:54:24 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

>>This seems clearly to show Rob, that you are focused on popular
>>culture while knowing little about UFOs. Of the ten cases I
>>cited, at least 5 are classics, cited in multiple references.

>Let's get this straight. Is your complaint that I don't memorize
>cases, as perhaps you do, or that I can't be bothered to get off
>my comfy chair and look them up? Either way, Mark, I can take
>the heat, but it's a non-issue in my book, or would be if I
>could only be arsed to reach for the book and check.

Rob,

How much credence would you give a software developer who didn't
know who Yourdon was, or an astronomer who didn't know what made
M82 special? (Off the top of their heads, of course)

In a science one cannot begin with broad abstractions and
proceed to develop them without reference to the fundamental
facts of the field. That may work amidst the floating
abstractions of what some are pleased to call modern philosophy,
but it can't be allowed in science. The fundamental facts of the
UFO field are the UFO reports - especially those which are both
well-known and solidly attributed.

To be able to speak with authority on a subject requires one to
form ideas and hypothesis _from_ the data. Your lack of
knowledge of the fundamental material of the field makes it
difficult for me to credit your disputes of OEH or ETH, because
you need to know the cases to deal with the reasons those
hypotheses are given credence.

For instance, let's imagine that you have a hypothesis that UFO
cases are simply misperceptions of common or uncommon events by
untutored witnesses. In order to support such a hypothesis, you
must account for the complex detail and large angular size
provided by certain observations, and the presence of occluded
reference points. But if you do not know the cases, you cannot
know that the object was observed to have a large angular size
or that there was complex detail. Further, in order to support
such a hypothesis, you must be able to demonstrate that the
reported description and behavior are consistent with perceptual
and cognitive psychology, but again, you cannot determine what
must be explained in that context without familiarity with the
content of the case.

There is no question that none of us have all of the facts of
any case in our minds at any time. That's why we write things
down and we have libraries. But by the same token, without a
mind well-populated with fundamental data, it would be
impossible for us to start putting together a schema of how the
data fits together, and from that to proceed to a reasonable
hypothesis.

Let me give an example.

I am very interested in the luminosity of UFOs. To come to any
conclusions on that, I am constantly thinking about the exemplar
cases of UFO luminosity, as I select them based on credibility
and level of detail. I know that there are things which any
theory of UFO luminosity will have to explain, and these are
illustrated in various cases:

1) Moreland shows that the UFO luminosity at the rim has the
appearance of flames, that it can rotate around the rim at high
speed, that it can counter-rotate, that its color can be orange
with a green core. It suggests that the temperature is not high,
because despite closeness and brightness, the witness felt
little heat, and that only on departure.

2) Beaver Falls shows that some UFO luminosity can be invisible
to the naked eye and yet emit strongly enough in to affect film
to the same level as visible luminosity as bright as the full
moon. The invisible portion of the luminosity must be able to be
at least partly focused by a camera lens, which leaves out
direct stimulation of the film by radiation higher than UV or
lower than IR.

3) Tulsa, OK, 1965 indicates that UFO luminosity can exist in
discrete patches on the surface of the UFO, and that it exhibits
what may be limb darkening, that its colors are red, yellow and
green, and that it may be layered, with a lower red layer and an
upper green layer with yellow between.

4) Levelland indicates a connection between UFO luminosity and
EM effects, since one witness noted their headlight brightness
varying inversely with the variable brightness of the nearby
UFO.

If I don't know the cases, then I can't know what needs to be
explained.

>>ETH isn't part of popular culture. Ideas about ETs are. ETH is a
>>hypothesis and is part of the scientific investigation of
>>possible causes for UFO reports.

>Okay, I accept that point. Do you think, however, that it's fair
>to say that many of the leading ET Hypothesists believe it? In
>which case, what bearing do you think that might have on the
>science aspect? (not rhetorical - well, maybe partly, but please
>answer it anyway)

I'm sure that scientific researchers know the difference between
popular culture and solid data.

Basically my view is that there are many different dimensions to
the community of people who investigate UFOs.

There are field investigators, the best of whom are highly
skeptical people who reject more cases than they accept, and the
worst of whom accept everything they hear, and then proceed to
distort and confabulate the data. Because FIs usually know UFO
data quite well, the confabulations they generate are quite
dangerous - thus a body of work by an FI is required to
determine their objectivity, though use of the term "ships" or
"beamships" or "spacecraft" is certainly an indicator.

There are analysts, who depend on the field investigators for
good data. The analysts, like the FIs, range from the carefully
skeptical and scientific, to the fringe.

Now we then have to ask, who are the leading ETH theorists? If
we are talking about people like Michael Swords, Richard Haines,
etc. then there is no question in my mind that yes, they know
the difference, and they are aware of the effect it can have on
their data. If we're talking about Greer - look, the guy is a
kook, and he doesn't need theories, because the ETs are telling
him what's going on, how many races there are, that they have
bases, yada yada.

Now, should UFO researchers pay attention to ideas about alien
cultures as formed in popular culture? Of course.
Science-fiction authors have spent decades exploring the
ramifications of alien cultures and the impact of such cultures
on human life. We would be fools to ignore that database. By the
same token, we can easily recognize that very little of what has
been explored in SF has been manifested in UFO phenomena, except
where the phenomenon demonstrated the effect first. This isn't
always true, but it seems to be at least largely true.

We need to recognize that UFO phenomena if objectively existent,
lose none of the quality which makes them so fascinating to man.
Many UFO phenomena are undeniably beautiful to the artist, or
tantalizing to the writer as a dramatic device. Many UFO
theories are undeniably attractive as plot lines or themes. But
these are the UFO phenomenon to popular culture interaction, and
it seems to me from what I've read, that PSH adherents won't
accept that direction of flow, unless they construe the initial
reports as acts of tale telling. Thompson's Angels and Aliens
touches admirably on the notion of the touchstone cases in the
literature, but construes them as a mythic ground, rather than
focusing on the idea that an objectively existent UFO stimulus
as reported, must, of necessity, be fundamental to and a return
point for any scientific research, just as the
Michaelson-Moreley experiment is for physics.

The task of the modern historical researcher is, it seems to me,
to broaden the base of touchstone cases. There are many
excellent cases which are denied attention because excellent
researchers are busy with Roswell, or Meier, or MIB data.

BTW, to consider reports as "stories" is, it seems to me, to
neglect a very salient strangeness: these are stories with no
point, no resolution. Once they are told, they lie there like
strange rocks with no explanation of how they formed, how they
got there, or what they are. Why are these stories so different
from ghost stories and fiction? Why are they so similar to
reports of accidents and crimes?

>>You can't shift the base from considering the actual cases that
>>lead to consideration of ETH (and which helped stimulate the
>>interest in ETI among the public) to merely considering popular
>>culture in a vacuum. Some of these cases were key in establishing
>>the possibility of ETI for the public, though, not being aware of
>>their fame, you would be unaware of their role.

>Hmm, I'm not sure I merely consider popular culture in a vacuum.
>What makes you say this?

Because your comments indicate that you do not consider UFO
events as real events affecting popular culture, but only
stories affecting other tale tellers, influenced by or
influencing popular culture. If I'm wrong, explain it to me.

>Perhaps, dare I suggest it, that willingness is placing the
cart >before the horse. Let me ask you: Do you believe that the
ETH is >really more than a hypothesis? If you do, then we should
perhaps >untie the cart and put it in its rightful place, just
so we know >where we're coming from.

I think OEH is pretty solid, and that ETH is currently hard to
prove or disprove.

>Btw... before you go racing off in your cart and horse, perhaps
>you wouldn't mind addressing some of the questions I asked you
>in your TBC thread?

As far as I know, we're up to date.

------
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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 13

                    Nua Blather: A Mothman Retrospective

From: Dave Walsh <dave@nua.ie>
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 05:50:32 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 18:42:31 -0400
Subject: Nua Blather: A Mothman Retrospective

*******************************************************************
NUA BLATHER  NUA BLATHER NUA BLATHER
Weekly free email of Dogma Destruction,
Forteana and High Weirdness

By Daev Walsh   Email: blather@nua.ie
Web: http://www.nua.ie/blather/
*******************************************************************
June 12 1998  Published By:  Nua Limited  Vol 2. No. 5
*******************************************************************

A MOTHMAN RETROSPECTIVE

Having finally read previously neglected copy of John Keel's 1975
fortean classic *The Mothman Prophecies*, Blather would care to share
with you a smidgen of its worth.

Reading this thoroughly enjoyable book at this late stage has
caused me no real loss either -- if I had read it back when I began
delving into murky fortean literature, I may have enjoyed the book
less, as I would have been very conscious of how to deal with the
material therein -- after reading it now, it has allowed me to put
many predominant cultural motifs into chronological context and
mythical perspective.

So what's it all about? Seen the movie *Men In Black*
(http://www.meninblack.com), or ever noticed all those eerie West
Virginia episodes of the X-Files (http://www.thex-files.com/)? I'm
not a regular viewer of that particular TV programme, but according
to what I'm told, there was episode which mentioned the Mothman,
called *Detour*. Many of the predominant motifs in *The Mothman
Prophecies* have leaked into popular culture. This is not to say that
these motifs did not exist before Keel wrote about them, but rather
the book serves to illustrate how they soaked into pop media.
(http://www.thex-files.com/epi504.htm)
(http://www.suite101.com/articles/article.cfm/4370)


So - what, or who, is the Mothman? For a thirteen month period from
November 1966 until December 1967, the town of Point Pleasant, West
Virginia, USA was seemingly tipped into a state of chaos (or, if you
like, a 'state o' chassis!'[1]), overrun by UFOs, poltergeists, Men
in Black in beyond-fashion-clothing driving impeccable old cars and
fake service workers -- both groups had dark, sharp features, and
wearing thick soled rubber shoes. If that wasn't bad enough, a
surrealist abbatoirist left cattle cadavers strewn about the fields
of Point Pleasant.

The appearance of all these phenomena appeareded to revolve around
regular sightings of the more fearsome visitor of all - a winged
humanoid that quickly became known as the 'Mothman'. Mothman tended
to hang about the disused North Power Plant, which was part of the
dormant West Virginia Ordnance Works complex
(http://members.aol.com/mothmanwww/building.html). The area was used
as a shooting range and 'lovers lane', and kind of unofficial common.

There were hundreds of alleged witnesses to these phenomena -- some
members of the population claimed 'contact' with various
extraterrestrial -- or, as Keel posits *ultra-terrestrial --
entities.


It seemed that anyone even peripherally involved was affected, and
Keel, who had arrived from New York to investigate the reports, was
no exception.

Before long, he was experienced disconcerting sychronicities, such as
many of his 'contactee' friends knowing of his future actions
*before* he had himself decided on them. His phone line became almost
unusable with untraceable interference, tapping, line cutting,
crossed lines, harassments, hoax phone calls and dark photographers
trailing him round Manhattan. . . "Between the IRS, the
phone company. . . and flying saucers I was fast becoming a candidate
for the funny farm".


Keel received constant precise predictions throughout the 13
months, presumably 'channelled' by various contactees. These 'Mothman
prophesies' had a nasty habit of being *almost* right - but not right
enough. The predicted assassination attempt on the pope -- followed
by "days of darkness" didn't happen, instead the pontiff escaped
eradication in the Philippines three years later.


Things finally came to a head during rush hour on Point Pleasant's
Silver Bridge, which spanned the Ohio River. Keel's contactees warned
of a nation-wide power outage for December 5th. Instead, the Silver
Bridge crumpled into the river, taking 31 vehicles and 67 people with
it. There were 46 deaths.

The difference between *Mothman Prophecies* and other 'casebooks' of
this ilk is illustrated by Keels good humour (how he kept it I don't
know), his modesty, and his apparent realisation that he was not in a
position to assume an objective role in documenting the goings-on in
Point Pleasant. He knew that he was *too close*.

However, I would urge readers to keep their fortean hats secured to
their noggins with a suitable chin-strap. Although Keel's testimony
is invaluable, one should employ a liberal dash of salt when
considering many of the incidents involved. Keel succeeds in pulling
off a fairly convincing objective analysis of a subjective
experience, but I was left wondering where the objectivity began and
the subjectivity took over.

As Hilary Evans points out in Fortean Times 53:54, "Insofar as Keel
has encouraged serious and thoughtful researchers to extend their
notions of the possible, he can have done nothing but good. Insofar
as has encouraged flightier minds to espouse dubious notions for
which the evidence is less than adequate, he may have done more harm
than good."


Nonetheless, if 'fortean study' ever becomes an academic science,
*The Mothman Prophecies* should be prerequisite.

A damned fine book.





Note 1: Occasional Blatherskite Mark Pilkington met and interviewed
John Keel in New York earlier this year. This interview is expected
to appear in the pages of Magonia (http://www.magonia.demon.co.uk).

Note 2: See Fortean Times 65:27 for another interview with John Keel.



The Mothman Prophecies
IllumiNet Press
ISBN: 0962653438
http://bot.fringeware.com:80/product/BOOK-0-9626534-3-8


The Mystery of the Mothman (Revisited)
http://www.geocities.com/SunsetStrip/Alley/7982/mothman.htm

Mothman: Alien Creature in West Virginia?
http://members.aol.com/mothmanwww/index.html


The Paranormal Project: Mothman
http://www.tenthmuse.com/paranormal/mm.html


*Superspectrum Blues*
- The trans-electromagnetic nature of elements of the Fortean
continuum...by by Steve Mizrach
http://www.clas.ufl.edu/users/seeker1/fortpages/superspectrum.html


Point Pleasant County Seat of Mason County West Virginia
http://wvweb.com/cities/point_pleasant/index.html


W.Va.'s own Mothman stalks the Net
http://dailymail.com/life/greg0204.htm


John Keel on UFOMind
http://www.ufomind.com/people/k/keel/


UFOpedia Website, see under 'K'
http://ufo.pair.com/dossier/PaperTrails/ufowords.html


Mothman on UFOMind
http://www.ufomind.com/people/m/mothman/



[1] *Juno and the Paycock* by Sean O'Casey
http://www.public.iastate.edu/~spires/Concord/junosearch.html



Dave (daev) Walsh
June 12th 1998




Feedback and comments to <blather@nua.ie>

Have your say: http://www.nua.ie/blather/blabber

*******************************************************************

NUA INTERNET SURVEYS
A weekly newsletter, Internet Surveys is a free digest of the most
interesting surveys containing data relating to the Internet.
It is available by sending an email to
<surveys-request@lists.best.com>
with the word "subscribe" in the body of the message.

NUA WHAT'S NEW
A monthly newsletter, What's New is a free monthly newsletter
highlighting the new additions, happenings and changes at Nua.
It is available by sending an email to
<whatsnew-requestlists.best.com>
with the word "subscribe" in the body of the message.

NUA NEW THINKING
New Thinking is a free, weekly, 500-word email column, whose
objective is to contribute to a practical philosophy for The
Digital Age. It is available by sending an email to
<newthinking-request@lists.best.com> with the word "subscribe" in
the body of the message.

*******************************************************************

SPONSORSHIP:
While Blather will always remain free to the subscriber, Nua is
always willing to talk to interested parties with regard to
sponsorship.
Contact Daev Walsh: <daev@nua.ie>

*******************************************************************

For the Blather archives, please go to:
http://www.nua.ie/blather/archives/index.html


*******************************************************************
NUA MISSION STATEMENT
*******************************************************************

To excel in the establishment and development of online relationships and
brands.

For further information on how Nua can help your organisation get the best
out of the Internet, contact our marketing director, Mary Gorman
<mary@nua.ie> or our representative in New York, Niall Swan <nswan@nua.ie>

Mary Gorman:   mailto:mary@nua.ie
Niall Swan:    mailto:nswan@nua.ie


*******************************************************************

NUA LIMITED
Nua, a vibrant, innovative, Irish company whose focus is in helping
progressive organisations adapt to the new environment created by the
Internet. We have the management/marketing, design and technical
skills to truly understand your unique situation, and to translate
that understanding into a successful Internet presence for you.

Nua has received an array of awards since its genesis in 1996. Among
those are the coveted "Best Overall World Wide Web Business
Achievement" the top prize for website development in Europe.
http://www.nua.ie/about/review.html
SUBSCRIBING TO BLATHER
Send an email to:
<blather-request@lists.best.com>
with the word
subscribe
in the body of the message. An automatic acknowledgement
should be returned to you by e-mail within a few minutes.

UNSUBSCRIBING
Send an email to
<blather-request@lists.best.com>
with the word
unsubscribe
in the body of the message.

TECHNICAL PROBLEMS
If you are having any technical problems,
please email the Nua Webmaster at: <web@nua.ie>.

*******************************************************************

____________________________________________________________________
NUA : Internet Consultancy & Developer         http://www.nua.ie/
Dave Walsh <daev@nua.ie> Tel: +353-1-676-8996  Fax: +353-1-661-3932
Read Blather: http://www.nua.ie/blather - weekly weirdness by email







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 13

                              Re: The Ten Cases

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 14:38:15 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 18:41:03 -0400
Subject: Re: The Ten Cases

>Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 09:43:15 +0200
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: JJ Mercieca <mufor@maltanet.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: The Ten Cases

> Wouldn't escape velocity depend on the type of technology being used?

>That is, our rocket technology has to accelerate to Mach 25 to
>leave the Earth.  However, if antigravity is what propels UFOs
>all they'd have to do is counter the Earth's gravity and
>literally "float" away from it.
>Is this correct or am I missing something here?

The cheapest form of antigravity is the thrust of a rocket. Even
an "antigravity" field would "effectively" exert a thrust. An
antigravity field which allowed an object to escape the earth's
field and penetrate into non-orbital space, would counteract the
object's weight and the local field to the same extent as a
rocket battles against it.

I suspect that an antigravity vehicle would have to appear to be
travelling at escape velocity, or it would not escape.

------
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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 13

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 98 10:59:16 PDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 18:25:24 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


> From: RobIrving@aol.com
> Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 01:54:13 EDT
> To: updates@globalserve.net
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

> > To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
> > From: "Jerome Clark" <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
> > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs
> > Date: Wed, 10 Jun 98 12:34:54 PDT

> Jerome,

> <snip>

> Sticking to the subject...

> > The notion that scientists investigate UFOs at their own
> > professional peril is false staggers the imagination.

> That's not quite how I put it, is it. I would have expected that
> you, as a self-professed 'English major' would have learned by
> now to read more carefully, to address what is actually said,
> and try not to jump to conclusions.

An interesting example of what happens to academics and
scientists who publicly identify themselves with the UFO heresy
comes in the new (June 25) issue of the New York Review of
Books, generally regarded as the leading cultural and
intellectual journal in the United States. In the course of an
extraordinarily emotional attack on abductees, abduction
investigators, and ufologists generally, Frederick Crews
approvingly notes the professional near-ruin to which Mack and
Jacobs have been brought, mentioning their "well-earned
ostracism and ridicule from their colleagues." One need have no
great imagination to sense the chilling effect this must have on
other academics thinking of taking up UFO study.

> Supergluing myself to the point, I believe that how seriously
> the ETH is taken very much depends upon how it is presented, and
> the quality of evidence offered. That is essentially what I
> wrote previously - adapting it to your mind-set won't change the
> fact.
>
> You seem to feel that the evidence offered thus far is
> sufficient, and laid out in a way that should, in a perfect
> world, make every scientist jump to attention. I happen to
> disagree, and cited a few examples where revolutionary ideas
> were accepted quite early, even if some dismissed them as
> ludicrous. Opposite precedents nonetheless.

And I disagree with you. Having read a great deal of the
anti-UFO literature, as well as many of the anti-UFO
pronouncements of scientists, I have learned what Peter Sturrock
established more formally years ago in a poll of his fellow
astronomers: that there is a strong correlation between
ignorance of the UFO phenomenon and rejection of it. (The only
exception that comes to mind is the chapter on UFOs in Steven J.
Dick's splendid The Biological Universe [Cambridge University
Press, 1996], and even here Dick is careful to leave the door
open a crack.)

Interestingly in this connection, Sturrock found that
astronomers who had personal UFO sightings were reluctant to
discuss them. He noted that "if you want to find out whether
scientists see UFOs, you must ask them and you probably must
guarantee them anonymity." This silence, of course, fuels the
scientistic myth, perpetrated by ufophobic astronomers when
bloviating to journalists, that astronomers never see UFOs.

> What I've been trying (unsuccessfully so far) to get you to tell
> me is why you think the so-called science establishment baulks
> at the subject of ufology _in particular_.

Oh, my. Don't you have to make a living, as I do? I already
spend too much time at this nonpaying labor, and I am getting
dangerously behind on a book deadline. Unless you choose to
confine your effort to educate yourself to reading what's on
this list, I urge you to go to the sociology/philosophy of
science literature for lengthy discussions of why scientists
take up some issues and not others, and not always for rational
reasons. Marcello Truzzi, David Hufford, James McClenon, Henry
Bauer, Ron Westrum, and others have written cogently on the
subject. Mark Rodegher's Ph.D. thesis (Factors Influencing
Attitudes Toward Controversial Research: Quantitatively
Disentangling the Social from the Scientific [University of
Illinois, Chicago, 1994]) is a searching examination of the
question. Truzzi's sadly defunct journal Zetetic Scholar dealt
exclusively with the matter. Look up some back issues if you can
find them.

> > He admirably resists the temptation to rhetorical inflation so
> > beloved of Rob and some others on this list, who regularly
> > tell us we are religious fanatics, gullible true believers, and
> > even [see below] clinically paranoid.)

> Well, Jerome, that's evidence enough for me that you jump to
> conclusions. Can you show me where I've described you or anyone
> in those terms? If that is indicative of your accuracy in
> reporting, and from what I've read I fear it is, then I am not
> surprised you moan about not being taken seriously.

I have no idea what this last remark means. It seems to exist as
yet another example of rhetorical inflation, such as your claim,
in a recent posting (which, disingenuously, you act as if you
have forgotten), that we who disagree with you on the issue in
question are conspiracy theorists suffering from clinical
paranoia. (To your credit you apologize at least for the
"conspiracy theorist" part of the charge later in this posting.)

In fact, as painful as it will be for you to learn, I am taken
quite seriously. My books are well reviewed in both professional
journals and popular publications, I have won a number of
literary awards, and I have had titles in the Book of the Month
Club twice. I receive a lot of flattering mail from readers,
some from academics and journalists who say they find my work
uniquely rational and helpful. An editor from this nation's
leading newspaper calls me regularly for advice and information
on current UFO matters.

I apologize profusely to readers of this list for having to wax
immodest here. Believe me, it is not my choice. I am sorry to
have to defend myself against the weird charge that I "moan
about not being taken seriously."

> Yes, I see a tack developing. I freely admit that I am not as au
> fait with every UFO case history as yourself and others, and
> suddenly I'm to be dismissed? If you think about it, isn't that
> a little childish? Or smug?... smugness in this field, that's
> funny.

Give me a break.

> Not remembering every little ufological detail was a conscious
> decision on my part, by the way. Not knowing has its benefits
> too, although I don't expect you to accept that. No matter...

I don't think the issue was "not remembering every little
ufological detail." The issue, as raised by Mark Cashman, was
your unfamiliarity with some of the most basic cases in the
literature.

> <redundancy snipped> I know how adept you are at chucking out
> references, Jerome, but I'm not that convinced you've grasped
> the full mettle of the history and philosophy of science in this
> context, any more than Blondlot did.

Really.

> > Bruce Maccabee, a scientist who is open about his UFO interests,
> > tells some amazing tales of scientism's resistance to even the
> > most thoroughly documented UFO data in his eye-opening paper
> > "Still in Default," MUFON 1986 UFO Symposium Proceedings,
> > 131-60. The title, incidentally, harks back to McDonald's
> > "Science in Default: Twenty-two Years of Inadequate UFO
> > Investigations," in the Sagan/Page UFOs -- A Scientific Debate,
> > 52-122.

> I know. Funnily enough, I've read Bruce's report.

Good for you.

> > This is utter rot. No one is talking "conspiracy" except Rob here.

> Okay... I assumed that Stanton was talking along the lines of,
> as I said, 'a subtle or not so subtle conspiracy', which, in its
> mild form, might have been along the lines of tacit
> disapproval...some kind of widespread prejudice. Perhaps
> Stanton's well-known phrase, the Cosmic Watergate, inadvertently
> slipped into my mind as I thought of who I was addressing. Okay
> Jerome, no conspiracy. I'm sorry.

Apology accepted and issue closed.

> Incidentally, you cited Fort earlier as a major
> influence...what, I wonder, would he have thought about your er,
> dogmatism? He would have laughed surely, as I am now.

Try opening your brain a crack, Robbie. The fresh air would do
it good. That's what Fort taught me and still teaches me. If the
Fortean spirit pervaded this field, we'd all be a whole lot
better off. Another thing that Fort taught me is that there is
nothing wrong with saying, when the occasion calls for it (as it
often does), that we just don't know. Of course, when one does
so, one is at risk of being called (not by Rob but by someone
who shall here remain nameless) a "pathological fencesitter."
Hey, you guys really ought to make up your minds on which I am.
I can't be both, can I?

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 13

                       Proposed UK Abduction Symposium

From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 17:49:30 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 18:55:21 -0400
Subject: Proposed UK Abduction Symposium


An Open Letter To UK Abduction Researchers

Note: This has been circulated around some researchers in the
UK. The invitation extends to researchers worldwide, but the
focus is on UK cases. Please feel free to re-post this to
anyone/group/ list you choose. Response has been excellent so
far and the event _will_ be taking place.

In 1992 a conference  was held in the USA at the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology. It dealt solely with the subject of UFO
Abductions. This was a breakthrough in the treatment of
so-called 'Abduction claims'. It gave a chance for researchers
and  investigators into the abduction phenomenon to gather
together and hear evidence, discuss among themselves.

Whatever you think about the nature of the material presented at
the M.I.T. conference the *idea* and the *intent* was excellent.

The UK has *never* had anything like this type of event.
Although there are numerous individuals involved in abduction
research few people know what the others are doing at any one
time. Open discussion, the exchange of views, evidence and ideas
are, despite protestations to the contrary, all but unknown
among abduction researchers.

To this end a group of ufologists in the UK are suggesting that
we have an M.I.T. style Abduction symposium in the British
Isles, to dwell specifically on the Abduction experience as it
manifests itself here.

This event would be a unique chance for disparate researchers
working in the same field of interest to take a 'snapshot' of
the phenomenon at the end of the 20th century. It would, in
fact, be ufological history in the making and a spring board for
us to take our research into the 21st century.

At the moment we have no firm venue, plans or criteria for the
event but we envisage the event would be:

* A chance for Abduction researchers to present one or more
10-15 minute papers on any aspect of Abduction research

* A chance for Abduction percipients to put forward their
experiences and theories

* A chance for facilitated and moderated discussion between researchers,
   Professionals and percipients

* A chance to see and discuss the latest hard evidence, video
evidence etc concerning the abduction phenomenon * A chance to
meet and socialise with other abduction researchers

This event would be open to any UFO researcher or investigator
based in the UK who has some interest or involvement with
Abduction research. We do not plan to exclude *anyone* because
of their specific belief system about the phenomenon. We would
also invite individuals who have had an abduction experience and
professionals from the relevant areas of expertise such as
hypnosis, false memory, folklore etc.

This event will not be open to the general public. Media
involvement will be by specific invite. The proceedings will be
published in some form.

Events such as these cost money and yes, it will actually *cost*
to attend, although the cost *may* be offset by any sponsorship
etc we can conjure up. However we think it will be worth the
cost to be able to spend two or three days focusing on one
specific area of ufology, away from the pressures of having to
entertain or to make money.

What we would like from you now are answers to the following
questions.

*   Would you be interested in attending

*   Would you like to present a paper (no need to be more
specific at this time)

*   Can you suggest anyone who we should approach (if so send
email/snail address)

*   Have you any suggestions as to the content of the event

*   Would you be interested in attending a meeting to discuss
the event

*   Do you have a preference for any specific time of year in
1999

*   Any comments welcome

Please reply - even if it is to say you are not interested

If enough people express interest in this event then we will
press onto step two, which is to have a preliminary meeting of
people interested in actually organising and running the event,
and to discuss suggestions forwarded to us.

Following that we will notify all interested parties of the
format of the event for consultation. At the same time we will
be looking for a suitable venue.

This event is not being run by any one organisation. It is being
organised _by_ ufologists _for_ ufologists.

Leave your politics at the door!

Happy Trails

Andy Roberts






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 13

                     Re: Meteor Shower Sparks UFO Alert

From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose)
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 03:10:52 +0200
Fwd Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 19:32:15 -0400
Subject: Re: Meteor Shower Sparks UFO Alert


>From Yahoo Ireland & UK. URL:

http://www.yahoo.co.uk/headlines/980612/news/897642913-4.html


Stig


*******


Yahoo! NewsTop Stories headlines

Friday June 12, 9:15 AM


Meteor Shower Sparks Ufo Alert


A blazing bright blue object in the sky sparked a flying saucer alert
across much of England.

The bright blue object raised the alarm from Devon to Oxfordshire,
Hereford and Worcester, Staffordshire and Derbyshire.

Police received calls from people ranging from civilian pilots and
sharp-eyed householders who reported a bright blue object apparently
falling to earth. But the Ministry of Defence said that the
eyewitnesses had seen what was thought to have been a meteor shower.

"Initial reports suggest it was an atmospheric impact which burnt up in
the sky," said the spokesman.

"There is no evidence of any ground impact."

Police forces and Coastguards across the south of England received
calls about the bright lights, prompting one police officer to say:
"The Martians haven't landed yet."

Callers to control rooms in Dorset, Hampshire and Sussex described
flares and a bright object breaking up and flames shooting across the
sky.

Another officer said: "We weren't being invaded."

=BF=BF
Comments to:

news-admin@uk.yahoo-inc.com


Copyright =A9 1998 Press Association Limited. All rights reserved.
Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are
expressly prohibited without the written consent of Press Association
Limited







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 13

                          FBI Secrets Going Online

From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose)
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 03:05:26 +0200
Fwd Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 19:31:31 -0400
Subject: FBI Secrets Going Online

>From The Seattle Times. URL:

http://www.seattletimes.com/news/nation-world/html98/file_061298.html

The links are preceded by stars.


Stig


*******


Copyright =A9 1998 The Seattle Times Company

Posted at 06:52 a.m. PDT; Friday, June 12, 1998


Juicy FBI secrets going online


by Angie Cannon
Knight Ridder Newspapers


WASHINGTON - Deep inside the forbidding FBI fortress is a small, drab
room with fluorescent lights and rows of tall bookshelves.

There's an institutional table, a few chairs and some nondescript
landscape paintings on the walls.

This is the FBI Reading Room where juicy FBI secrets are stashed.

And now, you don't even have to travel to Washington to see them. The
FBI is putting its entire Reading Room collection on its Web site - an
extraordinary undertaking at 1.3 million pages.

In the FBI Reading Room, you can learn that Lucille Ball registered to
vote as a Communist in 1936 at her grandfather's insistence.

You can read about an FBI investigation of John Lennon when agents
learned the musician had contributed $75,000 to a group planning to
disrupt the Republican National Convention in 1972.

You can bone up on John Dillinger, Bonnie and Clyde and Baby Face
Nelson. You can peruse files about enduring mysteries: aviator Amelia
Earhart's disappearance, UFOs (one of the most requested) and John
Wilkes Booth (was he alive for years after President Lincoln's
assassination?).

It's all there - worn and wrinkled letters, clippings, telegrams and
memos.

The FBI aims to put its entire Reading Room collection on its Web site
- an extraordinary undertaking at 1.3 million pages.

Another batch of 20 files (including Errol Flynn, Adolf Hitler and
Marilyn Monroe) went online a few days ago, more than doubling the
number of files on its Web site. The files are available online at
www.fbi.gov

"We believe making this information available on our Web site helps
maintain the public's confidence that the FBI is investigating
consistent with the rule of law," said John Collingwood, an assistant
FBI director. "We think the best way for the public to be confident in
how the FBI conducts itself is to see the underlying documents."

Collingwood, who says he has reviewed all the cases, doesn't have a
favorite.

"Several are interesting for different reasons," he said. "The
Rosenberg file is historically significant. The Bonnie and Clyde file
is very entertaining." The Mississippi Burning file is the kind of
historical records we are trying to get on our Web site as quickly as
we can."

The Internet may make the Reading Room go the way of "Old Beulah," the
Packard sedan agents drove to crime scenes in the 1930s. Even now,
there are weeks when no one shows up at the Reading Room. Sometimes,
only five to 10 people come in.

The Reading Room is open five days a week, but visits are by
appointment only and require two-day notice. Most requests for files
are made through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).

The FBI office that handles FOIA requests is huge - 400 to 600
employees. The bureau gets 12,000 to 13,000 written requests annually
for files - many of which aren't among the 278 files in the Reading
Room. Linda Kloss, a public-information officer for FOIA requests, says
it takes at least one to four years to fulfill a request. People can
pay for copies of files, which then are sent through the mail.

There's one catch - for the FBI to make one of its files public, the
subject must be deceased, unless an individual is seeking his or her
own file.

Already, there have been 20 requests for any files on Frank Sinatra and
Barry Goldwater, according to FBI officials.

The most common Reading Room patrons are college students, authors,
academics and attorneys working for clients.

Jim Lesar, a Washington attorney, was in the Reading Room the other day
with a research assistant, combing files for his research on an "aspect
of J. Edgar Hoover's life."

"There's lots of good stuff in the FBI files," says Lesar, head of the
small Assassination Archives and Research Center, which focuses chiefly
on JFK's assassination.

Lesar says he has spent his legal career devoted to Freedom of
Information Act litigation. "I sue the FBI on a very regular basis," he
says, noting that he intervenes on behalf of clients, such as author
Anthony Summers, who wrote a biography of J. Edgar Hoover called
"Official and Confidential."

Lesar believes the volume of files, especially of celebrities and
spies, had to do with the times.

"It is a product of the Cold War and earlier periods under J. Edgar
Hoover," he said. "It still goes on, but not nearly at the same pace as
it did during the Cold War."

Historian David Garrow says it's important to remember that just
because someone had an FBI file didn't mean the bureau was snooping.

"The FBI wasn't investigating 75 percent of the people who have files,"
said Garrow, who has requested many files during his years of research
on Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. "The FBI was a vacuum cleaner of clipping
operations. And people who think a 200-page FBI file is a big deal
don't realize that people who the bureau was seriously following have
thousands and thousands of pages."

Putting the files on the Internet is a dramatic departure for the FBI,
he said.

"This is absolutely wonderful," said Garrow, who has written numerous
books about King and the civil-rights movement, including the Pulitzer
Prize-winning "Bearing the Cross."

"I'm stunned that they would be technologically with it enough," he
said. "And what amazes me is that they would be motivated to do this.
The whole inescapable bureau problem is that the more they release, the
worse their history looks."

Indeed, some files are a showcase of guns-blazing G-man triumphs.
Others, however, portray an agency that engaged in petty snooping or
was comically out of its time.

Hoover, for instance, was advised not to meet Elvis in 1970 because the
rock 'n' roll icon was "wearing his hair down to his shoulders and
indulges in the wearing of all sorts of exotic dress."

The Nixon White House, in anticipation of a reception, asked Hoover to
pore over FBI records for derogatory information on various athletes
and sports-journalism figures. Among those who came up clean were Ewing
Kauffman, the Kansas City Royals owner; Carl Lindeman, the former CBS
and NBC vice president for sports; and Dick Peebles, the Houston
Chronicle sports editor.

"A lot of the old files contain information that was collected in a
different era, when standards were different and the law was
different," Collingwood said. "The FBI collected substantial amounts of
information that we would never collect today. It was not unlawful at
the time. But in hindsight, it was clearly not justified. Today's laws
and guidelines and internal policies preclude us from collecting that
type of information." Links to the FBI's Web site are on The Seattle
Times Web site at:

http://www.seattletimes.com


*FBI web site

*Excerpts from files on Elvis, Mickey, Bonnie and Clyde


*Copyright =A9 1998 The Seattle Times Company








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 13

                  Re: Chat with Michael Lindemann, CNI News

From: "Yvonne Hedenland" <vonni_h@email.msn.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 20:22:53 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 19:33:23 -0400
Subject: Re: Chat with Michael Lindemann, CNI News


Lindemann is known throughout the UFO community for what is
considered the best UFO-related publication in cyberspace -
Global News on Contact with Non-human Intelligence.

Join the UFO Forum for a special chat with the head of CNI News
on Sunday, June 14th at 7pm, PT as we discuss the Media's
Influence on the UFO Phenomenon.

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.

The Netshow Audio Interview with Mr. Lindemann is available Now
at  http://forums.msn.com/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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 13

                              Re: The Ten Cases

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 00:21:19 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 19:38:18 -0400
Subject: Re: The Ten Cases

>From: RobIrving@aol.com
>Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 09:46:50 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: The Ten Cases

>Correct me if I'm wrong, but you seem to be suggesting
>(particularly in your reply to Dennis) that it is has been pretty
>well established that the farmer saw what he says he saw;
>'beings' collecting samples.

I have seen no rebuttal of this case. To the best of my
knowledge, Masse was interviewed several times and at length,
and by different investigators. No suggestion has ever been made
that the witness had any motivation for hoaxing, any history of
hoaxing or mental illness, and, certainly, given the situation
as described, misperception is out of the realm of possibility.
The witness was interviewed by police authorities who also
examined the traces.

>>> For instance, Valensole has beings, sample gathering, unusual
>>> traces, and the startling performance normal to UFO cases.

>The case, the scenario, the story has beings. That's how I see
>it, not that that makes it untrue, of course.

The beings were seen examining a lavender plant. The object
departed at a speed so high as to seem almost instantaneous. The
beings aimed a device at Masse which seemed to prevent him from
moving when he came close. So there's more than just beings.

>Previously I mentioned Max Burns' Sheffield case because it made
>me ask myself why cases, as you say, stand the test of time. What
>would you expect to happen that would pull the rug from under our
>farmer's story if it were untrue? Does the fact that it's an old
>story make it better because no-one has thus far successfully
>disproved it? What would it take to do that? By what standard did
>you deem a single-witness story to be untrue?

The Sheffield case is already embroiled in controversy that
seems to be going badly for it. That is the sort of thing that
one would expect to find happening to Valensole if it were an
unreliable case.

Remember, the witness was also interviewed by the police, who
have extensive experience in dealing with frauds and unreliable
people.

Yes, a report which has been investigated many times over many
years and which retains consistency over that time is certainly
more reliable than one which has not. That's the point.

Single witness reports (not "stories") are generally not granted
a probability higher than 3 (according to Hynek) regardless of
the credibility of the witness. Nonetheless, the standard which
allows it to attain that level of probability requires a stable
witness with a good reputation, with no problematic history
before or after. Obviously, as shown in the discussion of the
Desvergers' case, even a multiple witness case with an
unreliable primary witness will tend to be discredited.

------
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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 13

                              Filer's Files #23

From: Majorstar@aol.com
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 17:46:27 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 19:20:28 -0400
Subject: Filer's Files #23

Filer's Files #23-1998 MUFON Skywatch Investigations
George A. Filer, MUFON Eastern Director,
June 12, 1998,  Majorstar@aol.com (609) 654-0020

Remember what Sam Donaldson said for this year�s forecast: "I predict for one
of my predictions for 1998, that we will pick-up ET signals" Thanks to Robert
Collins.


NEW JERSEY

.  Some very strange things are happening in Mullica Hill, NJ ten miles south
of the Philadelphia Airport.  Many people are frightened by UFOs hovering a
few feet above their large homes.  Three members of this family claim to have
observed alien beings and their craft at close range.  MUFON Investigator
Evelyn Gaulson reports that several members of a local family, that may be
abductees were shopping at the local mall.  One store uses blacklites for a
soft purple glow to display a room full of posters.  When they walked into the
room they were startled to see they had silver fluorescence blotches on their
arms and faces.  The blotches were so noticeable that others in the room
remarked about them.  They were rather embarrassed and left the room.  We can
speculate the fluorescence is caused by inter-action with the aliens.  This is
a normal middle class college educated family that has not been hypnotized and
appears mentally alert.  The silver fluorescence has been removed with Scotch
tape and is being tested.  There is no known reason for this silver powder
like substance to be on the faces, arms and backs of the family members.
Blacklite bulbs can be bought for $3.00 and should be in the investigators
tool kit.  Investigators may desire to spend some time in similar places and
look for fluorescence blotches on other people.  A careful and casual
discussion may lead to further abduction revelations.  My suggestion is not to
use UFOs or aliens in the discussion unless brought up by others.  I have
found that being friendly and a little small talk helps before asking.  "Have
you had any strange things happen lately?  I saw some funny lights."
Sometimes this will get people talking.

PENNSYLVANIA:

On June 8, 1998, Lauren Carissa DeMichiei   from Cherry Tree, PA  reports
sighting two objects in the northern sky at approximately 11:00 PM.  They were
larger than first magnitude stars and traveled at the same slow speed.  There
was no blinking lights or exhaust coming from the lights.  This tends to rule
out jets or airplanes.  The size was too large for satellites.  After about 40
seconds of flying in a direct straight path, the first object shot up into the
atmosphere and disappeared.  The second UFO followed and rose in the same
place.  Thanks to John Thompson and ISUR.  Lauren DeMichiei  at 814-743-5406;
RD2 Box 271 F Cherry Tree, PA 15724

GEORGIA:

Chief Walter Sheets, the Georgia MUFON Director, reports on June 4, 1998, that
an object with triangular light configuration was reported.  The lights were
red, white, and blue about size of full moon, moving back and forth very
swiftly in the north and east of Albany last Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday
nights.  No other details at this time.  The witness is a 43 year old retiree.
An investigation will follow.  Thanks to Walter Sheets.

OKLAHOMA

Skywatch�s Jim Hickman reported on June 10, 1998.  "Last week, I had wanted to
have seen my wife's sighting, well last night I saw it. And I'll never wish
for things like that again!  I was providing security for a medic-flight
helicopter that had arrived at the hospital that I work at in Elk City.  I had
a few minutes to starwatch, so I checked out the sky.  At about 10:40 p.m.,
central time,  I observed a small, not very bright object that appeared to be
very high.  Its angle from the ground was about 70 degrees.  It was moving
west at a very fast speed and turned extremely bright, brighter than the
landing lights on the helicopter that had just arrived.  The object was white,
star size, and much brighter than the full moon.  It appeared several orders
of magnitude brighter than any other stars.  The object made a 120 degree turn
to the southwest, but done not display typical ballistic movement.  It was a
very sharp course change. The object continued with the bright light through
the turn.  Two seconds after the turn it the light started dimming and turned
off and faded to black.  Total time of sighting was 10 to 15 seconds.  I have
been skywatching for over 35 years, and I have previously observed satellites.
When I was seven, I was shown the first Sputnik satellite, I�ve been following
them ever since. This was definitely not a satellite, but I have no idea what
this object was.  Thanks to Jim Hickman, VP Skywatch International Inc.

TEXAS

On Sunday, May 31, 1998, at 11:30 p.m., Texan Ufologist Mike Harman and his
brother-in-law were on a skywatch near Andrews, Texas (population 10,678) when
they spotted a strange flash in the sky.  Andrews is on Highway 385
approximately 350 miles (560 kilometers) west of Dallas.  "The cloud cover had
finally lifted, and we were able to view the heavens again," Mike reported.
After about 15 minutes of skywatching, I noticed what I perceived as a flash
in the western sky. Then, there it was again. I grabbed my binoculars and
started searching the sky for what had caused this.  I could not seem to get
the binoculars up to my eyes fast enough.  So I watched and again I saw
another flash.    Once I spotted the object, I noticed through my binoculars
that the object was glowing orange in color. It would gradually brighten until
it was as bright as the brightest stars in the sky, then return to its orange
glow. When it peaked at its brightest, it seemed almost to flash."  Mike
estimated that the average time cycle between normal glow and "brightest
flash" was two seconds. The entire sighting "lasted about four minutes."
Thanks to Mike Hartman and UFO Roundup Vol. 3 #23, 6/7/98 Editor: Joseph
Trainor for this report. Editor�s Note:  New Iridium satellites are causing
mirror like reflections off the sun.

 CALIFORNIA:

Mike Rogalski reports that on April 9, 1998, (?) two UFOs were involved in a
near miss of an Air Western Airliner over the San Bernardino Mountains.  To
confirm this story Mike contacted Joshua Control (Edwards AFB ATC) concerning
the close encounter.  Mike writes, "To reiterate, I was surprised that the
Quality Control Officer for Joshua Control would tell me that the UFOs were
picked up by radar, tracked as almost colliding with an Air Western airliner.
The UFOs were being chased by an F-15 out of Edwards Air Force Base, who was
only left in the cosmic dust, when he approached the craft.  It just
accelerated out of sight.  There were no log entries at Joshua Control.  He
just provided a frank verbal acknowledgement of the incident.  Apparently, the
government puts pressure on their air traffic controllers not to call any of
these incidents "UFOs" or their credibility suffers."  Thanks to Mike at
Rogalski@dfrc.nasa.gov.

CANADA

On May 29, 1998, Sally Svenningson  who lives on River Road, Bancroft, Ontario
writes. �I was sitting in my living room at 22:30 PM, and saw bright lights
flashing across the sky.' I ran outside and a V shaped object with bright
lights flew by our house and up the lake.  My car lights and outside spot
light went on and stayed on.  I have had sightings here before, but never at
such a low altitude or with lights being turned on.  Thanks to ISUR and Sally
Svenningson, 613 332 0278, at R.R.#2  Bancroft  Ontario K0L 1C0

AUSTRIA

On Monday, June 1, 1998, at 9:30 p.m., Christian K., his friends Daniel and
Lisa, and five other youths were hanging out at a beach on the Traunsee Lake
in Gmunden, Austria.  They "observed a bright red-orange object across the
lake near Grinberg."  Gmunden is just off the B-1 in the Oberosterreich region
of Austria, approximately 264 kilometers west of Vienna.  "My friends Daniel
and Lisa saw it first," Christian reported. "Strangely, nobody saw it before
or noticed how it got there. We were looking north- northeast from the small
port of Gmunden to the top of the Grinberg Mountain.  It was a half-hour after
sundown, and the mountain was not illuminated by the sun."  "We first thought
it was a helicopter.  This seems impossible due to its climb rate," which he
estimated to be "six meters (20 feet) per second. "You can hear a helicopter
at that distance, especially if the engine noise is reflected by a mountain."
"Then, when it started climbing faster and faster, and was higher than the
mountain, you could see that it was not just one big light. It was about one
meter wide at arm's length.  It "was almost round, just flattened a bit at the
top and the bottom, so that to us it was an oval just a little bit wider than
taller." Christian went home and arrived at 10 p.m., my little brother was
watching TV, and it was blank," with no signal.  The television had been
malfunctioning for twenty minutes or a few minutes after the phenomenon was
first seen. Thanks to UFO Roundup Vol. 3 #23, 6/7/98 Editor: Joseph Trainor.

DAYLIGHT DISC IN PARAGUAY

South America's latest UFO encounter took place Saturday afternoon, May 24,
1998, in the small nation of Paraguay, just north of the capital city,
Asuncion.  Miguel Bustamente Saavedra was spending his day off boating with
several friends on the wide Rio Paraguay. Suddenly, they saw a metallic gleam
in the sky to the north, over the town of Aceval.  "I noticed something
brilliant in the sky," Miguel reported. "It was like a big mirror seen in the
air. I thought it was an airplane, but it wasn't because" the next moment "I
saw a metal-colored object in the air like an egg."  "The object was going
gently up and down and from right to left. When it suddenly made a move to the
left and accelerated out of sight. Thanks to Tim Hagemeister of NACOMM and UFO
Roundup Vol. 3 #23, 6/7/98 Editor: Joseph Trainor.

SOLAR WIND ACTIVITY INCREASING

There appears to be a correlation between heavy solar wind activity and the
reduction in UFO activity.  UFO activity is down this year compared to 1997,
'96 or '95.  On my site at page: I show a chart that details the Sun's solar
activity. Major UFO activity tends to avoid periods of heavy solar wind
activity.  Because we are headed into the Solar Maximum, we can expect to see
less UFO activity in the next 2 to 3 years.  For UFO groups this might be a
time of lean and lean budgets.  But there is always some UFO activity in each
year.  This monthly activity tends to follow cycles controlled by the
planetary alignments and solar magnetic field.  El Nino itself is also
controlled by the Sun's cycles.  Thanks to THC at
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Station/1073/page10.html

ARE SOME ROD-LIKE UFOs ALIVE?

On August 9, 1997, after departing from Philadelphia a Swiss Air 747 flying
over New York barely missed being hit by a rod like UFO.  The near miss has
put the spotlight on rod shaped UFOs.  The objects are not like the typical
"cigar" shaped UFOs that have been reported throughout history.  Jim Peters,
the Assistant Director of Colorado MUFON, has been part of a team that has
studied this new type of UFO.  The have been found on the video tape footage
of many researchers such as Jose Escamilla.  The first known Rod was
videotaped in Midway, New Mexico on March 19, 1994.  At first,  it was thought
they were bugs or birds flying close to the camera lens.  The Rods are capable
of flying at very high speeds and appear to range in length from a few inches
to more than a hundred feet.  They appear in shape similar to a long cigar or
telephone pole.  Some look like spears or missiles with fin like appendages.
They are able to emerge or enter the ground without leaving a trace.  They
move through the air like a fish swimming in water.  Satellite cameras are
also starting to pick the Rods up.  The most astounding facts about the Rods
is that they appear to have intelligence and may actually be alive!  Although,
they could be a very advanced form of craft or electrical plasma life forms,
their appearance suggest they are not metallic and not mechanical.  Last week,
a new bird species was found in the Andes Mountains of Ecuador by Dr. Robert
S. Ridgely, the Director of the Center for Neotropical Orinthology in
Philadelphia.   It is possible that as remarkable as it sounds, another new
species or gigantic bird like creature has been discovered.  Some Rods have
what appear to be "appendages" along their torsos resembling Centipedes. These
appear to be membrane-like fins that move in an undulatory wave like motion
along both sides of the fuselage or torso.  Close up video indicates there
appears to be definite uniform undulations or movement of the fins as the Rod
moves through the air.

POSSIBLE FLIGHT PROPULSION OF THE RODS     After reviewing hundreds of clips
of the Centipede type Rods, MUFON�s Jim Peters, came up with the Rod�s
possible flight characteristics.  He states: "We were looking at still images
of some of the Centipede Rods that Bryan Williams in New Jersey had shot, and
noticed that the "appendages" appear to be "flapping" as the Rods pass by at
extremely high speeds.  The motion begins at the front and undulates toward
the tail.  Jim noticed a feather near a computer and picked it up making the
point that the appendages look like a super-thin series of feather-like
appendages, rather than thick protrusions or flaps as we thought previously.
Perhaps these things fly much like some fish that have a series of thin fins
along the torso.  Looking at the atmosphere as a liquid ocean, maybe the Rods
evolved from the oceans and use this type of propulsion, (which is natural to
them),   to glide them through the air effortlessly.  In the ocean, fish
travel at   extremely high speeds and are capable of making right angle turns
without slowing down. Nature defying gravity! Even huge sharks travel at
extremely high speeds and make quick darting turns effortlessly.  With this
type of flapping and their serpentine or fish -- like movements   of their
torsos; perhaps we are seeing "Sky Fish" in a variety of species swimming
through their oceans which we call the skies.  In the following examples we
show you some of the new Rod stills and computer composites of how they might
fly. The "Ghost Knife fish present an "undulatory Fin" that resembles the
"fin-like" appendages on the Rods!"  Editors note: I encourage you to go to:
www.roswell.rods.com and make your own conclusions.  We have reports that if
damaged, the craft can repair holes in flight. Thanks to MUFON�s Jim Peters.

ARE TRIANGULAR UFO's OURS OR THEIRS?

In recent years large numbers of Flying Triangles have been observed in the UK
and US.  Tim Matthews a British Aviation expert wrote to Skywatch claiming
some are ours and some our theirs.  Tim states, "There is no evidence to
support the claims made that the TR3A or TR3B or any remotely similar
triangular aircraft are of ET-recovered alien technology.  The larger
platforms are lighter-than-air vehicles that use the latest composite
materials in construction and which are used for; covert insertion of troops,
reconnaissance, moving of classified materials and other unspecified missions.
Such craft as the Aereon 340, Aereon 26, etc. were on the drawing board in the
1960s.  Smaller models were test-flown before the whole thing was covered up
in the late 1970s.  Work undertaken by various experts was classified by the
NSA in 1976.  The existence of several triangular aircraft makes perfect sense
only if you look at them from the point of view of their possible use:  --
dart-shaped reconnaissance platform -- smaller triangular 'mini B-2'--
Unmanned Combat Aerial Vehicle -- larger sensor platform/transporter --
stealthy fighters and bombers.  The suggestion that triangles are both alien
and terrestrial in origin is a cop-out and a failure to come to terms with the
fact that there is no evidence for recovered alien technology.  The genesis of
all these aircraft were German and American and their roots can be traced back
to the 1930s.  I suggest some historical study by UFO researchers to establish
the actual facts of the matter - or a discreet E-mail to me. All sensible
questions answered in as much detail as possible.  Thanks to Tim Matthews,
Lancashire UFO Society,

ABDUCTIONS:

Mark Cashman, MUFON�s Assitant State Director of Connecticut writes:  "For
what it's worth, the lack of solid physical evidence in a context where it
should be readily available is what keeps me away from most abduction cases.
However, I can offer some suggestions.  To implement research, you need to
have a case which happened very recently. * Undertake a search of the area
looking for ground traces or traces on the  treetops. * Make sure the clothes
they wore that night have not been washed. If they have  not, bag them and
preserve them for analysis. Also obtain a control sample of  their normal
clothing which could not have been involved in an abduction.  Look for unusual
substances, dust, stains, etc.  You will want to work with a scientist who
knows clothing and fabrics for this. * If the witness claims that the entities
entered a house, take samples of any  rugs that the entities may have crossed.
Take control samples from rugs in  unaffected areas. Look for variations in
dust composition, presence / absence of dust mites, unusual substances,
microscopic changes in the fibers.  An expert  in carpets and their
inhabitants is essential for this work. * If the witness claims that the
entities passed through anything, try to  obtain a sample of whatever they
passed through, and a control sample of an  area distant from that but of the
same material.  Have these samples analyzed  for microscopic changes, burns,
differences in density or material  characteristics, surface coatings, and
radiation. You will need a good  materials scientist to help you with devising
good tests and controls.

If the witness is willing, have blood work done.  Exposure to radiation leaves
traces of some kind in the blood for over a week.  Also look for allergens and
antigens in the blood - if the witness has been exposed to alien substances,
there should be some activity in the blood.  We need a good blood scientist
with an open mind who can help you devise appropriate tests.  If the witness
claims that intercourse or genital / anal probing occurred, use of a standard
rape examination as soon after the event as possible is essential.  The police
may be able to advise you as to the nature of such tests, and doctors which
can perform them.  Be prepared for some awkward questions, however, unless you
have a police advisor who is familiar with the abduction literature.  Make
sure the doctor, however, has no such familiarity. * Don't put much credence
in scars.  There are too many potential sources for  such things.

* If a fetal removal is claimed, insist on medical records from the witness
gynecologist.  All samples should be gathered with two investigators present,
and should be sealed in ziploc bags.  A sheet of paper should accompany each
piece of  evidence, with the signatures of the investigators.  Each time the
evidence is  opened, two investigators should be present, should sign the
sheet, and should note on the sheet the reason for opening the bag.  Determine
how long the  material has been in its current location for both evidence and
control  samples. Handle the samples with tongs, etc.  Make sure the sample
handling  devices are also sealed in ziplocs with their own evidence sheets.
Only use the  same sample handlers with the same samples to avoid cross
contamination, and to  ensure that any contamination from the sample handlers
is kept to a minimum and  is traceable.  If any of these tests show unusual
results, you should be prepared to submit  the same evidence to a second lab /
scientist, who has NO familiarity with UFOs  and who is not made aware of
anything except the specific tests you want  performed.  This comes as close
as you can probably approach a double-blind  examination of the evidence.  Be
very cautious in interpreting the results.  Several similar results from
several independent cases will be required before any kind of conclusions may
be able to be drawn.  Even differences between the primary and the control
sample will have to be carefully examined to ensure they are not spurious."
Thanks to Mark Cashman mcashman@ix.netcom.com

Please send your reports and letters to George A. Filer at 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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 13

                          Re: Who Is Jerome Clark?

From: RobIrving@aol.com
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 18:59:04 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 19:30:01 -0400
Subject: Re: Who Is Jerome Clark?

>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Who Is Jerome Clark?
>Date: Thu, 11 Jun 98 20:51:56 PDT

Jerome,

>>So my May 14,
>>1984 letter to Clark concluded: 'The yacht Hanky Pank made her
>>maiden voyage of 1984... Perhaps you will join us someday (and
>>your body will be found floating in the Chesapeake).'

>Note here further evidence of Mr. Brookesmith's inability to
>read. Here the "joke" has Klass implying that it is he who will
>have me murdered. Let's have a show of hands out there. How many
>of you would take as a "joke" -- not even from a friend here,
>mind you, but a longtime adversary -- a remark intimating a
>desire to have one done in? No, Mr. Brookesmith, you've already
>voted. Any other hands? No?

If not, more than likely because it's such a childish exercise,
which either becomes you or it doesn't. Who can tell? Perhaps we
should vote on it with a show of hands.

Anyway, never one to shy away from childish exercises I'll stick
my hand up.  You'd have to be either a fool to not sense that
Klass was alluding to his previous comments (how good a joke,
and how funny they were is irrelevant)...either a fool, utterly
humourless or anxious for any opportunity to score points off
the guy, due to an underlying resentment over separate
longstanding issues, I suspect.

Clearly you appear more comfortable taking disagreements down to
a personal level.  So you'd be hard pushed to convince anyone
who knows that, other than a half-wit, that Klass's comments
constituted a 'death-threat'.

Curious for one who likes to parade as being 'tolerant of
ambiguity'. I see you've read Festinger. You should read him
again.

As you asked,

Rob







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 13

                             BBC On UK UFO Alert

From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose)
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 04:25:29 +0200
Fwd Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 19:35:36 -0400
Subject: BBC On UK UFO Alert

>From the BBC's newssite. URL

http://news.bbc.co.uk:80/hi/english/uk/newsid_111000/111380.stm

Links (audio and others) are preceded by asterisks.


Stig


*******


Friday, June 12, 1998 Published at 16:27 GMT 17:27 UK

UK


They came from space ...

(Attached image: An impression of how the objects might have appeared)

Blazing bright blue objects in the sky which sparked a flying saucer
alert across much of England are being dismissed as a meteor shower by
the government.

*BBC News' John Andrew reports on the strange phenomenon (audio)

The objects were spotted by hundreds of people from Devon to the
Midlands for several hours from about 2300 on Thursday.

They were seen both as one big light and a group of smaller lights,
travelling in a north easterly direction

Sightings spark alert

Many people rang the police to report a flying saucer, while others
feared they had seen a burning aeroplane.

Sergeant John Drake, of Staffordshire police, said: "We had more than a
dozen calls around midnight from people who had seen a single, blue
light that was bigger than a car.

"Many officers from police cars also radioed in saying they had seen
the same thing.

*An eye witness describes how the sky lit up (audio)

"Some people described a tail behind the light, while others said it
looked like it was burning or flaming. We had calls from Keele in the
north of the county to Tamworth in the south."

In southern England, Thames Valley Police contacted Air Traffic Control
at Heathrow Airport after receiving a call from High Wycombe that a
burning plane had been seen coming into land.

They also received calls from drivers on the M4 motorway, near Reading
in Berkshire.



Ministry blames meteors


But the Ministry of Defence has tried to dispel fears of an imminent
martian invasion.

A spokesman said: "Initial reports suggest it was an unusually large
meteor shower which takes place when material and debris from outer
space comes through the upper atmosphere.

"When the material passes from a zero-gravity zone into the gravity of
the upper atmosphere, it burns up because of the friction.

"It is not unusual on a smaller scale, but last night's shower seems to
have been quite big.

There was no evidence of any meteors hitting the ground, he added.



Relevant Stories


10 Jun 98=BF|=BFSci/Tech

*Scientists warn of meteor storm



Internet Links


*The Ministry of Defence

*International Meteor Organization

*American Meteor Society

*UFO Magazine

*UFO Studies

=09
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet 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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 13

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: bruce maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 01:08:42 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 20:47:56 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


>Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 15:25:13 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time)
>From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

>Greetings,

>To all those who participated in this on going discussion on
>Occam's Razor and UFOs (and those who did not but might like
>to), can anyone tell me who correctly applied Occam's Razor to
t>he two very similiar E.T. related cases below?

<snip>

>Can we really conclude that one specimen is of E.T. origin while
>another is not if the assumptions made and the tests performed
>are identical? This Physics Today article may turn out to be a
>very important one for ufology. If not, at least it does show
>that interstellar visits are possible (after all, unintelligent
>rock particles can do it).>>

>Nick Balaskas


HAW HAW HAW.

As I said before, Occam's Razor is a double edged blade. It cuts
both ways.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 13

                        Skywatching 1st week in July

From: Steve Neeley <stneeley@mail.bright.net>
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 15:12:57 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 21:20:02 -0400
Subject: Skywatching 1st week in July

****************************************************************
                OHIO SKYWATCH INTERNATIONAL
                           NEWS
                      June 13, 1998
****************************************************************

The first official Skywatch International of OHIO Skywatch
Picnic and BBQ!
July 1-7 1998

Hundreds of people will arrive in Roundhead, Ohio for the fourth
of July fireworks and celebration including rides, games, and
the ever popular pony pull!

This is the first year OSI (Ohio Skywatch Int.) will join in and
officially be skywatching and organizing the local citizenry.

Perhaps you would like to participate. Write me and include your
thoughts on skywatching. A special event sure to become an
annual affair!

Steve of Ohio


Steven J. Neeley, Director
Ohio Skywatch International

http://www.geocities.com/soho/5782

stneeley@bright.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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 13

                      Re: Ufologists and Klass Conflict

From: Doc Barry <authority@webtv.net>
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 16:50:45 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 21:28:27 -0400
Subject: Re: Ufologists and Klass Conflict


>To: updates@globalserve.net
>From: "Jerome Clark" <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Subject: ufologists and Klass conflict
>Date: Fri, 12 Jun 98 12:22:28 PDT

>       As promised on an earlier posting, I have an address
>for those who may wish to read my "The UFO Debunkers vs. the
>UFO Menace," which concerns Philip J. Klass' interactions with
>the University of Nebraska.  The address is:

>       http://www.evansville.net/~slk.com.htm

Dear Jerry Clark,

I would like to read Debunkers vs. Menace, but the URL for that
page doesn't work.  == Doc






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 13

                              Re: The Ten Cases

From: Perry Mick <perrym@teleport.com>
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 08:59:18 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 21:16:01 -0400
Subject: Re: The Ten Cases


>Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 01:08:26 -0700
>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Subjective escape velocity

>>From: RobIrving@aol.com
>>Wed, 10 Jun 1998 14:16:32 EDT
>>Subject: The Ten Cases


>There is nothing subjective about 'Escape Velocity'.  Pure
>Physics.E.V. is a very precise rate of speed ( with proper
>direction of course). It depends directly upon the size, mass
>and gravity of a given planet, moon. or other object in space.

>Below this speed, or at an improper direction, no projectile
>will escape into space. Above it, it will..... Any complicating
>factors (wind resistance etc.) are likewise purely physical.

>We did not impose this mathematical order; it imposed itself on
>us.

>Best wishes

>- Larry Hatch

Actually escape velocity only applies to projectiles, and
objects that need to be in "orbit" to remain in space, with no
additional power input of their own. Rockets are just projectile
delivery devices.

With the demonstrated capabilities of UFOs, escape velocity is
an irrelevant term. If a UFO can hover indefinitely without the
use of the atmosphere as a medium to push against (i.e. a
helicopter), then a UFO could basically just float into space at
any leisurely pace it so desired. Then, once there, accelerate
to any speed it wishes to, or continue to hover. It would never
be in orbit, unless it wanted to. This will be the great benefit
to us if we ever can develop artificial gravitational field
propulsion, or anti-gravity.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 13

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: bruce maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 01:08:54 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 20:54:47 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


>Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 11:38:10 -0300
>From: Stanton T. Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


>> From: RobIrving@aol.com
>> Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 08:09:47 EDT
>> To: updates@globalserve.net
>> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

>> >Date: Tue, 09 Jun 1998 20:28:06 -0300
>> >From: "Stanton T. Friedman" <fsphys@brunnet.net>
>> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

>> Stanton,

>> >I think Rob's comments are so much horse manure.

>> You appear to be referring to the following comments, but your
>> reply didn't really address why, nor answer the question I
> >posed...

> >>With sufficient and clearly presented evidence I can't see much
> >>of a problem. What exactly is the problem, in your opinion? I
> >>personally don't accept the line that scientists are too worried
> >>about reputation to involve themselves in ufology - that argument
> >>doesn't hold water.

> I maintain that if the ETH were ever presented in a manner that
> didn't rely on anecdotal and bogus documentary evidence, it
> wouldn't face the stonewalling from the scientific community
> that many imagine.

<snip>

>> So, Stanton, what exactly is the problem in your opinion? Why
>> can't we read your paper 'Flying Saucers ARE Real' in a science
>> journal?

> Rob


>The problem is that you and Peter constantly ask the wrong
>question (What are UFOs.. as opposed to "Are any UFOs ET
>Spacecraft"). You often make pronouncements not based on
>evidence, you constantly ignore the fairly obvious national
>security aspects of UFOs, you presume on other people's
>motivation (Did I say my goal was to publish "Flying Saucers ARE
>Real" in a science journal?.. though I gather you haven't read
>my items in Physics Today and Aeronautics and Astronautics or my
>congressional testimony.

>I mention my lectures to professional groups because the
>responses clearly indicate that they will pay attention to facts
>and data.

>You are wasting people's time with theoretical
>claptrap.

>The simplest explanation for the best observations(by competent
>observers, investigated by competent investigators like Jim
>McDonald, Bruce Maccabee, John Schuessler etc) whose appearance,
>texture, protuberances clearly indicate they were manufactured,
>and whose behavior-- high speed and no speed, sharp turns, lack
>of noise, exhaust, visible external engines indicates they were
>not made on earth, because if they had been in the 1940s, 1950s,
>we Earthlings would be using them as military craft. They would
>make wonderful weapons delivery and defense systems, able to fly
>circles around anything we have been flying.

>Since we are still building F-16,17,18, MIG 29, Mirage 5 etc,
>what was built back then wasn't built by us, therefore it was
>built at some Extraterrestrial location. Of course that doesn't
>answer all the questions. It just says "not made here". Occam's
>razor applies. ET vehiciles. Have any of you splendid writers
>done field investigations, visited archives, had a security
>clearance? Talk is cheap.

>Stan Friedman


Talk is cheap, Truth is expensive. Truth requires effort -
investigation - and less talk until there really is something to
talk about. Instead of endless theorizing about the ETH or some
other hyptothesis about "them", we should intensely discuss some
sighting. A real advance would be made if through the use of the
internet a worldwide group of people could discuss ONE \
SIGHTING AT A TIME until (a) everyone gave up because each
sighting can be reasonably explained or (b) at least one
sighting is found that EVERYONE can agree is unexplainable in
conventional terms.

This is where the rubber meets the road, guys and gals..... are
there any TRuely Unexplainable Flying Objects... TRUFOs...
sightings that remain unexplained after extensive investigation.
Of course, this would require a considerable effort on the part
of each researcher to "get up to speed" on any particular
sighting. In this regard, some of the "ancient" sightings are
convenient to study because the pertinent data/information
already exists and is not continuing to be generated (as with
recent sightings, for example). If you want to know HOW to do an
investigation, go with a recent case under investigation (e.g.,
Mexico City Video). If you want a case worthy of discussion for
which all information that ever will exist is already available,
then go with an old one.

In a previous post I mentioned case 10 of Special Report #14.
This is a 5 witness sighting with observation of a reasonably
close object, viewed through binoculars, for which the
description is quite explicit. The witnesses are credible. The
shape is clearly unconventional, as are the dynamics. All the
available information is in the Project Blue Book microfilm
file. I also mentioned a White Sands triangulation event. In
each of these cases the data are limited to what we have.

There are numerous other cases like this, of course.
The questions for mutual agreement would then be

1) is this(are these)..sighting(s) accepted as unexplainable
by all concerned and

2) granted that the sight(s) is(are) unexplainable, is it
evidence of technology of non-terrestrial origin?

If the members/recipients of this list were to agree on just
one unexplainable sighting we would "make history."

After that, discussions on ETH, time travel, whatever, would
be valuable.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 13

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: RobIrving@aol.com
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 07:46:16 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 21:06:25 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

>From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
>To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs
>Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 10:29:54 -0400

Greg,

>You're now, in other posts, making a virtue of ignorance -- no,
>sorry, of not clogging your mind with data -- but here it would
>be helpful to hear the voice of scientists who haven't yet been
>publicly quoted.

"Making a virtue of ignorance" isn't necessarily how I see it,
but if you have to put it that way that's fine. What I mean is
that ufology is not my primary pursuit, or even interest.
Therefore I don't carry information about cases around in my
head, as others seem to. If you were to ask me about specific
cases concerning subjects of more immediate interest to me, such
as human attacks on horses, I wouldn't presume to know the
details of specific cases without referring to my research
material. Yes I believe that 'not knowing' is something of a
virtue, but that's perhaps another conversation.

I gave up needing to appear as if I know everything years ago...

empty vessels produce the finest resonance, and all that.

Anyway, as for our discussion about how well research into the
ETH would be accepted by the powers-that-be in science, soon I am
to interview a leading theoretical physicist in this country, who
has in the past made comments on ufology. I'll ask him and let
you know. Maybe I'll make some other calls too - this might make
for an interesting project.

Offhand, apparently unlike you I don't know what they'd say.

Rob








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 13

                    Re: Speeding Meteor Sparks UFO Alert

From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk=20
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 13:11:05 +0200
Fwd Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 21:09:34 -0400
Subject: Re: Speeding Meteor Sparks UFO Alert


>From the Electronic Telegraph. URL:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk:80/et?ac=3D000140326706927&rtmo=3DVxw5VZ4x&atmo=
=3DV
xw5VZ4x&P4_FOLLOW_ON=3D/98/6/13/nmet13.html&pg=3D/et/98/6/13/nmet13.html

Links are preceded by asterisks.


Stig


*******


Saturday 13 June 1998

Issue 1114


Speeding meteor sparks UFO alert


By Sally Pook


A METEOR speeding across the night sky prompted a UFO alert across
England yesterday.

Police forces in at least eight counties received calls from hundreds
of onlookers who saw bright blue lights travelling in a north-easterly
direction from Devon to the Midlands. The British Astronomical
Association confirmed that the speeding object was a meteor, the result
of cosmic debris burning up in the earth's atmosphere.

Howard Miles, spokesman, said: "It was quite spectacular, crossing the
sky at about midnight and fragmenting as it burnt up in the atmosphere,
causing bright sparks. From our reports, it appears to have been a
single object, a piece of inter-planetary material called a meteor,
which burned up completely before it reached the ground."

It was seen across Shropshire, Worcestershire, Derbyshire, Oxfordshire,
Berkshire, Sussex, Hampshire, Gloucestershire and Caernarvon in north
Wales. A spokesman for Staffordshire police said: "People told us they
had seen a single, blue light that was bigger than a car. Some people
described a tail behind the light, while others said it looked like it
was burning or flaming."

Callers to police in Dorset, Hampshire and Sussex described flares and
a bright object breaking up and flames shooting across the sky. A
Ministry of Defence spokesman said: "We are satisfied this was a meteor
which broke up on entering the earth's atmosphere, causing the bright
glow which people saw.


*17 May 1998: How meteors made an impact Down Under
*24 November 1997: Clinton looked for evidence of UFOs
*3 April 1997: UFOs brought to earth with a bump
*20 May 1996: Mighty meteor catches astronomers unawares
*12 June 1995: Meteor tail threatens spacecraft in orbit



External Links


*The International Meteor Organisation

*Meteors, Meteorites and Impacts - Nineplanets

*The Meteoritical Society

*UK UFO Network

*British Astronomical Association


=A9 Copyright Telegraph Group Limited 1998. Terms & Conditions of
reading.

Information about Telegraph Group Limited and Electronic Telegraph.

"Electronic Telegraph" and "The Daily Telegraph" are trademarks of
Telegraph Group Limited. These marks may not be copied or used without
permission. Information for webmasters linking to Electronic Telegraph.


*Email Electronic Telegraph.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 13

                        Re: Asking Pamela Stonebrooke

From: Cathy Johnson <cej@idirect.ca>
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 10:07:31 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 21:09:52 -0400
Subject: Re: Asking Pamela Stonebrooke

>Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 07:29:52 -0700
>From: Skye Turell <turel33@west.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Asking Pamela Stonebrooke

>>Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 12:55:01 -0500
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
>>Subject: Asking Pamela Stonebrooke

><snip>

>> >>Pamela wrote:

>> >>I believe that on one level, I may be meeting these entities ...
>> >>or perhaps they are different aspects of myself.  I don't
>> >>really know;

>> I think that the answer to this question is paramount to all
>> others in Pamela's account.  If she doesn't "really know" with
>> any certainty, how can she possibly discriminate between her
>> actual experiences and the internal workings of her mind?

>The issue of discriminating between "actual experience" and
>"internal workings of mind" are hardly limited to the abduction
>arena.  This is a constant thorn in the side of each one of us
>and this issue shouldn't be used to debunk or devalue the
>experience of any individual.  Those that claim they can easily
>make this distinction -- or that such a simple distinction can be
>made -- are probably not demonstrating the self-awareness
>necessary to even begin to make this distinction.

I hope you don't mind if I add my opinion.  It is not the
disctinction of altered states and abductions from normal mental
states.  In a reasonable context, the mind plays on like a
recorder.

But, in certain circumstances, memories can be altered and even
recreated to suit the conscious needs.  And further, in
abductions, there are events that are simply not remembered
because of outside interference.

Although it is possible to see patterns emerging with recalled
memories, it must be remembered that those memories are only
artifacts of mental processes.  Whether truth or relative
information is contained in those memories, is only relevant to
the individual.  And, the individual is subject to as much
internal as well as external motives and purposes regarding the
control of memories.

The product of personality is evolved from critical factors of
perception and capabilities that allow conditioned perceptions of
experience.  As much by chance as by habit do we see beyond our
mundane filters and conditioning.  So, the stage must be set to
explore and accept new values as we wander through experience.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 13

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: bruce maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 01:08:48 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 20:49:58 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: "Jerome Clark" <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs
>Date: Wed, 10 Jun 98 12:34:54 PDT

<snip>

>Bruce Maccabee, a scientist who is open about his UFO interests,
>tells some amazing tales of scientism's resistance to even the
>most thoroughly documented UFO data in his eye-opening paper
>"Still in Default," MUFON 1986 UFO Symposium Proceedings,
>131-60. The title, incidentally, harks back to McDonald's
>"Science in Default: Twenty-two Years of Inadequate UFO
>Investigations," in the Sagan/Page UFOs -- A Scientific Debate,
>52-122.
Jerry Clark<

Dear Jerry,

Since you are one of the most astute participants in this field I
am not surprised and of course I am pleased, that you mentioned
my paper of 12 years ago regarding my efforts to publish in
conventional science journals.   It seems to me that I emailed a
copy of this to Mr. Irving, but perhaps he didn't get it.

Regarding Jim McDonald's efforts, he spoke at numerous companies
and military bases about UFOs and built up a very public
reputation.

He also communicated with some of his closest associates in
atmospheric physics and weather modification.   In 1985 or so,
some 12-13 years after his death, I decided to try to contact
several of these people McDonald had communiucated with to find
out if they had (a) "been convinced" and (b) were still (or ever
had been) interested.

I actually communicated via letter and phone with several and had
lunch with Gordon McDonald (no relation to Jim) and Tom Malone.
I brought them up to date.   However, they were not interested in
pursuing the and apparently still believed it was "beyond the
pale" for open "conventional science" investigation.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 13

                               Re: Ford Fund?

From: Elaine M Douglass <elaine26@juno.com>
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 21:18:08 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 22:04:22 -0400
Subject: Re: Ford Fund?


>From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 10:09:37 -0400
>Fwd Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 10:09:37 -0400
>Subject: Ford Fund?


>In view of the interest in the John Ford case on UFO UpDates I'm
>re-posting the following. I don't know if the E-Mail addresses
>still work - I've Cc:'ed the interested parties.

>ebk

<snip>


Saturday June 13, 1998

Dear UFO UpDates-Toronto:

You must have received this message in a time capsule. It is out
of date. As you can see, the date on Don Jernigan's message is
1996.

John Ford is no longer in jail. He is in a mental hospital in
New York state. Mr. Jernigan is no longer trying to raise money
for John's legal expenses, nor am I, nor any other members of
the now-defunct John Ford Defense Committee.

Best regards,

Elaine Douglass







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 13

                        Re: Asking Pamela Stonebrooke

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 04:24:03 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 21:01:57 -0400
Subject: Re: Asking Pamela Stonebrooke

>Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 07:29:52 -0700
>From: Skye Turell <turel33@west.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Asking Pamela Stonebrooke

>> Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 12:55:01 -0500
>> To: updates@globalserve.net
>> From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
>> Subject: Asking Pamela Stonebrooke

><snip>

>> >>Pamela wrote:

>> >>I believe that on one level, I may be meeting these entities ...
>> >>or perhaps they are different aspects of myself.  I don't
>> >>really know;

An "experiencer" asks,

>> I think that the answer to this question is paramount to all
>> others in Pamela's account.  If she doesn't "really know" with
>> any certainty, how can she possibly discriminate between her
>> actual experiences and the internal workings of her mind?

Skye contributes:

>The issue of discriminating between "actual experience" and
>"internal workings of mind" are hardly limited to the abduction
>arena.  This is a constant thorn in the side of each one of us
>and this issue shouldn't be used to debunk or devalue the
>experience of any individual.  Those that claim they can easily
>make this distinction -- or that such a simple distinction can be
>made -- are probably not demonstrating the self-awareness
>necessary to even begin to make this distinction.
>--

>Skye Turell <turel33@west.net>
>ICQ Pager 6797092

Hello,

You write:

>This is a constant thorn in the side of each one of us
>and this issue shouldn't be used to debunk or devalue the
>experience of any individual.

The person that submitted the post was not "debunking" or
attempting to "devalue" anything. Those are -your- words and
interpretation Skye. It has nothing to do with the questions
being asked. Pamela made a statement and the post asks a
pertinent question(s). How is that "debunking" or "devaluing?"

I think you are reading more into it than is actually there.
Don't let the fact that people actually question the nature of
their own experiences threaten you so. No-one is out to hurt or
defame anyone here. Those "motives" (debunking and devaluing)
exist _only_ in your interpretation of the post! <G>

The post, and the questions asked were intended to elicit a
response from -Pamela- (who made the original statements) and to
hopefully get some clarification of -her- statements. Nothing
sinister or terrible about that. Asking someone to clarify a
statement they made is not "debunking." Unless the meaning of
the word "debunk" has changed while I slept. <G>

Your 'contribution' to the thread goes on to state:

>Those that claim they can easily
>make this distinction -- or that such a simple distinction can be
>made -- are probably not demonstrating the self-awareness
>necessary to even begin to make this distinction.

That's easy for _you_ to say! <LOL>

But, I (and others) do think that _it is_ important to make
distinctions between stuff that happens strictly between ones
ears and -actual- external physical events.

I am becoming convinced that 'certain folks' are confusing what
they themselves label "spiritual" or purely "mental" experiences
with actual physical abductions. (Which is a whole other kettle
of fish!) Because -their- experience is purely
"mental/astral/spiritual" they assume that it`s _that way_ for
the rest of us.  Not so.

The distinction has to be made. Some folks are just "tripping."
It's time we made those differences of 'experience' clearer. If
you want to call that "debunking" or "devaluing" then I can't
stop you. But that's _not_ what it is Skye.

I'd still like to hear (Pamela's) responses - if any. Thank
you.

Peace,

John 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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 13

                 Grand Jury for Chaves (Roswell) County NM?

From: Mike Jamieson <MDJ50@webtv.net>
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 18:52:14 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 22:06:54 -0400
Subject: Grand Jury for Chaves (Roswell) County NM?

The signatures of 200 registered voters in Chaves County, New
Mexico (home of the city of Roswell) will require the local
district attorney to impanel a grand jury that would investigate
the 1947 Roswell case.

Larry Bryant has not been able to get anybody from that area to
coordinate the effort and gather petition signatures.  If there
is anyone in the area interested in helping with this effort,
please contact me at the above address.

Fortunately I just learned that Larry is finally going to get a
computer fairly soon!






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 14

                        Re: Asking Pamela Stonebrooke

From: Skye Turell <turel33@west.net>
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 20:09:27 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 07:27:30 -0400
Subject: Re: Asking Pamela Stonebrooke


>From: Cathy Johnson <cej@idirect.ca>
>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Asking Pamela Stonebrooke
>Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 10:07:31 -0400

>>Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 07:29:52 -0700
>>From: Skye Turell <turel33@west.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Asking Pamela Stonebrooke

>>>Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 12:55:01 -0500
>>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
>>>Subject: Asking Pamela Stonebrooke

>><snip>

>Although it is possible to see patterns emerging with recalled
>memories, it must be remembered that those memories are only
>artifacts of mental processes.  Whether truth or relative
>information is contained in those memories, is only relevant to
>the individual.  And, the individual is subject to as much
>internal as well as external motives and purposes regarding the
>control of memories.

This assumes that these are "memories," meaning that there was a
period of forgetfulness, and then "recall."  If I understand
Pamela's story correctly this does NOT describe her experience.

If you don't mean the above, then how do you refer to my
"memory" of typing the previous paragraph?  Is this just an
"artifact of mental processes?"  I don't think so.

>The product of personality is evolved from critical factors of
>perception and capabilities that allow conditioned perceptions of
>experience.  As much by chance as by habit do we see beyond our
>mundane filters and conditioning.  So, the stage must be set to
>explore and accept new values as we wander through experience.

Absolutely.  And there's no question that we color our
experience. But that doesn't mean that it is all fantasy,
confabulation or any one of a host of terms that some like to
apply to the abduction experience.

--

Skye Turell <turel33@west.net>
ICQ Pager 6797092






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 14

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: "Greg Sandow" <gsandow@prodigy.net>
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 23:31:05 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 07:30:11 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


> From: Brian Straight <brians@mdbs.com>
> To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs
> Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 09:34:18 -0500

> While I subscribe to the tenets of Occam's Razor, it is worth
> noting that, from the point of view of deconstructionist
> philosophy, it is a concept that can be quite easily
> deconstructed, i.e., Occam's Razor claims that the 'simplest'
> explanations are always the best, because they likely to accord
> more closely with 'reality.'

> The Deconstructionist, who is not likely to be gainfully
> employed, and therefore has lots of time to think about this
> kind of thing, is likely to reply to this assertion with the
> observation that it is precisely the 'simplest' explanations
> that are, on the contrary, likely to be the most culturally
> complex.  In other words, Occam's Razor makes all kinds of
> assumptions about the nature of 'reality' and empiricism which
> arise directly from a highly complex cultural continuum and from
> a lengthy ideological history.  "Simple' is only simple with
> reference to this rich backgound (wich has little to do with
> external reality, whatever that is).

> What's the moral of all this?  Always be aware of the
> assumptions that go into any attempt to structure what we call
> reality.  Ufology requires us to think 'outside the box.'

> Brian

Very nice, Brian! And, quite seriously, an important point. We
(me included) have been talking very blithely, as if we knew what
"simple" was, not realizing that the concept is a minefield.

I'd only add that the deconstructionist you mention is almost
certainly teaching at an American unversity. The first time I met
any large number of them was 10 years ago, when I was visiting
professor at the University of Minnesota (a deconstructionist
hotbed), and as far as I know their number throughout American
academia has only increased since then.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 14

                               Re: Ford Fund?

From: Michael Christol <mchristo@mindspring.com>
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 22:47:58 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 07:40:12 -0400
Subject: Re: Ford Fund?


>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Ford Fund?
>From: Elaine M Douglass <elaine26@juno.com>
>Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 21:18:08 EDT


>Saturday June 13, 1998

>Dear UFO UpDates-Toronto:

>You must have received this message in a time capsule. It is out
>of date. As you can see, the date on Don Jernigan's message is
>1996.

>John Ford is no longer in jail. He is in a mental hospital in
>New York state. Mr. Jernigan is no longer trying to raise money
>for John's legal expenses, nor am I, nor any other members of
>the now-defunct John Ford Defense Committee.

>Best regards,

>Elaine Douglass

Elaine,

Is anyone in contact with John?  Is he allowed to receive phone
calls and mail?  If so, could you provide me with a phone number
and or address?

REgards, Mike


The fastest way to respond to this message is through the ICQ
Network. A message sent this way will go directly to my screen.
If you have ICQ you can message me at ICQ#:7508455.

If you don't have ICQ you can page me through:  My Personal
Communication Center:   http://wwp.mirabilis.com/7508455 (go
there and try it!)

Or you can send me a regular e-mail to my EmailExpress address:
7508455@pager.mirabilis.com.

Download ICQ at http://www.icq.com/ Include your ICQ details in
YOUR e-mail signature: http://www.icq.com/emailsig.html.

My BBS Telephone Number is: (502) 683-3026

My Fax Number is: (502) 686-7394 My Home Telephone Number is:
(502) 683-6811

Michael Christol
----------------------------------------------------






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 14

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 23:24:48 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 07:37:01 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


>From: RobIrving@aol.com
>Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 09:02:09 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

>>From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
>> To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net>
>> Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs
>> Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 10:31:04 -0400

>Greg,

>> Suppose we substituted "spousal abuse" for "UFOs" in what you've
>> written here:

>Purely as a thought experiment, now substitute Satanic Ritual
>Abuse...

>> Would this suggest that spousal abuse isn't real, and that
>> complaints about it are generated simply by cultural factors?
>> Hardly.

>...then ask yourself the same question.

Same answer. You can't tell -- from the mere fact that Western
countries have reports of something, and less developed places
don't -- whether that something is real or not.

John Rimmer seems to think the opposite. If countries that
aren't strongly Westernized don't have as many publicized UFO
reports as the West does, he evidently thinks that's evidence
that the Western reports are cultural artifacts. To emphasize
how arbitrary that conclusion is, I rephrased his words,
substituting "spousal abuse" for UFOs. We know that spousal
abuse exists. When you read John's paragraphs with something
whose reality we know as the subject, the structure of his
reasoning is unmistakable, and unmistakably wrong.

Rob evidently misunderstands, and thinks I was trying to prove
UFOs are real. So he plays my game, and gives John's paragraphs
yet another subject, this time something we know does NOT exist.
In doing so, he proves yet again that John's reasoning is
flawed. We know that satanic abuse doesn't exist, but not
because of John's argument. There's no way to deduce from John's
argument that satanic abuse does or does not occur -- which, in
all the guises this paragraph has assumed, is exactly my point.

What's really ironic here is that you don't need fancy Rimmer
reasons to understand the cultural sources of satanic abuse
reports. They usually come from fundamentalist Christians.

But then Mark Cashman has, without using impolite language,
decisively shown why Rob is a dilettante. He talks like an
expert about UFOs, without knowing (or even thinking he ought to
know) many of the principal cases. He makes pronouncements about
abduction research, too, but In his discussion with me, he said
he hadn't heard about David Pritchard. Evidently, then, his
knowledge of abductions is limited to what he derisively calls
"populist ufology." Anyone who seriously studies abduction
research -- as opposed to someone who just reads John Mack, Budd
Hopkins, and David Jacobs, and shakes his head in dismay --
would HAVE to know Pritchard's name. Pritchard co-edited the
only published collection of serious scientific papers on
abductions (the proceedings of the abduction conference at MIT,
which Pritchard co-organized with John Mack).

I wonder if Rob has read Stuart Appelle's paper on the abduction
evidence in JUFOS, which Jerry Clark mentioned not long ago.
Don't worry, Rob -- it doesn't say abductions are real. It just
summarizes -- exhaustively -- what's actually known, and lays
out what both skeptics and proponents of abduction reality need
to prove before they can say they've settled the question.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 14

                             John Fords Address

From: John Veelez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 01:07:16 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 07:46:04 -0400
Subject: John Fords Address

Hi All,

In case anyone would like to drop John Ford a line here's
the address. 'Thank you' to my anonymous information
provider! <G>

John Ford, Ward 43
Mid-Hudson Psychiatric Center
PO Box 158
New Hampton, NY 10958

Send the guy a little note letting him know that folks
haven't forgotten him. I don't think much of John as
a researcher, nor do I give much credence to the cases
that he championed but now is the time just to be
supportive of a fellow human being who finds himself
between a rock and very hard place. You don't have to
agree with the guy to show a little empathy for his
situation.

You've got the address, it's up to _you_ now.

Peace,

John 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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 14

                  Re: Translators Wanted - Dutch to English

From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 03:15:42 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 07:50:37 -0400
Subject: Re: Translators Wanted - Dutch to English

>From: ufonet - Jeroen Kumeling <ufonet@xs4all.nl>
>To: <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: translators
>Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 17:27:43 +0200

>Hello UFO-fellows

>Can anyone help us translating our Dutch UFO-and related
>subjects-articles into English?

>There are a lot of interesting things going on in Holland , and
>we (Me and the Dutch UFO research group UFO-Werkgroep Nederland)
>I know there are a lot of Dutch emigrants all over the US,
>Australia and Canada, so maybe can somebody help us. My English is
>not so very good, that's why I'm looking for someone who can
>translate.


You could try Jean van Gemert at    j.gemert@wxs.nl    He also runs the
"Science, Logic, and the UFO Debate" Web page at
http://www.primenet.com/~bdzeiler/

He contributes to UFO Updates and Usenet from time to time and his English is
excellent.  He's a busy college student, however, so his time is probably
limited.

Hope this helps.

David Rudiak






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 14

               Re: Grand Jury for Chaves (Roswell) County NM?

From: Mike Jamieson <MDJ50@webtv.net>
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 21:47:51 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 07:44:20 -0400
Subject: Re: Grand Jury for Chaves (Roswell) County NM?

Larry Bryant describes his efforts to initiate a grand jury probe
of Roswell in the current issue of The Right to Know Forum.  This
issue is posted at ORTK's web site: www.ortk.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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 14

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: bruce maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 00:19:59 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 07:42:36 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


>From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
>To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs
>Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 09:18:17 -0400

>>From: Jeff King <Boroimhe@aol.com>
>>Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 20:18:59 EDT
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

> >Back to the drawing board. I think we're left with Mark's and my
>>>straightforward notion that if UFOs are alien craft, they'll have
>>>stable, discernable physical characteristics (though perhaps
>>>other traits that seem like magic to us).

>>While I agree that this would be good support for Cashmans OEH,
>>the difficulty is reliably establishing the existence of these
>>characteristics. For example, anecdotal eyewitness testimony is
>>not a very good source for ensuring that these characteristics
>>exist. Cases that have been solved to the satisfaction of most
>>everyone can be shown to share important characteristics with
>>unsolved cases that are accepted as fair evidence of an
>>anomalous phenomenon.

>How significant would those factors be?

>Here we need studies of (broadly speaking) solved vs. unsolved
>cases. The Air Force's Special Report #14 did provide that, and
>showed (if I remember correctly -- Stan Friedman may want to
>supply more accurate information) that the unsolved cases
>involved more qualified observers, and had lasted for a longer
>time.

>This study badly needs to be done again, with far more cases.

You are correct. The Battelle Memorial institute, in conjunction
with the Air Force Intelligence at Wright-Patterson AFB, Foreign
Technology Division/Project Blue Book, studied carefully 3201
sighting reports from 1947 through the end of 1952. The results
were published and made available to the newsmedia on a limited
basis in 1955.... oddly enough the same year Ruppelt's book was
published.

Anyway, Battelle found out that when the sightings were divided
into four reliability groups, Poor, Doubtful, Good and
Excellent, the percent unexplained increased with the quality of
the sighting. Only about 15-20 percent were unexplained in the P
and D classes, but in the E classification nearly 30% remained
unexplained after analysis. When civilian sightings were removed
from the collection leaving only sightings by military
witnesses, usually on duty at the time of the sighting, the %
unexplained rose to about 33%. In other words, the better the
sighting the more likely to remain unexplained AFTER
investigation.  This result is not consistent with expectation
if there are no TRue UFOs (TRUFOS - truly uinexplainable flying
objects), because the best cases, by their nature, should
contain the most accurate information which would provide the
analyst with all he needed to identify the object sighted.
Conversely, the poorest observers, who make the low quality
reports (few details, self-inconsistent) should leave analysts
with the most difficult cases to explain simply because there
was not sufficient information for identification. Note that
Insufficient Information (II) was a separate "identification"
from Unknown.  If there was not enough information to make a
reliable identification, and there was also not enough
information to reject all possible explanations, the sighting
was listed as II. The % II was highest in the P and D catagories
and lowest in the G and E, as would be expected since the G and
E reporters provided the most self-consistent and accurate
details.

One should read the report and my analysis of it (published by
the Center for UFO Studies) to get the complete picture of
Special Report #14.  However, the bottom line is that after
investigating 3201 sightings and dividing them into reliability
categories the Battelle and Air Force investigators found that
the % II was l;owest and the %U was highest in the G and E
categories.  This result is more consistent with the hypothesis
that there really was something unexplainable which these
witnesses saw, than it is with the hypothesis that everything
they reported was explainable/..






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 14

                  Re: Translators Wanted - Dutch to English

From: Karel Bagchus <karel@atmm.nl>
Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 11:44:59 +0200
Fwd Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 07:50:27 -0400
Subject: Re: Translators Wanted - Dutch to English


>From: ufonet - Jeroen Kumeling <ufonet@xs4all.nl>
>To: <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: translators
>Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 17:27:43 +0200

>Hello UFO-fellows

>Can anyone help us translating our Dutch UFO-and related
>subjects-articles into English?

>There are a lot of interesting things going on in Holland , and
>we (Me and the Dutch UFO research group UFO-Werkgroep Nederland)
>I know there are a lot of Dutch emigrants all over the US,
>Australia and Canada, so maybe can somebody help us. My English is
>not so very good, that's why I'm looking for someone who can
>translate.

Hi Jeroen,

I'm Dutch and lived in the US for one year so my English is
pretty good (I think) <g> I did translations before. Let me know
if you are interested.

Karel.


------------------------====### ATMM ###====---------------------


Karel Bagchus                       karel@atmm.nl

Audax-Tros MultiMedia               tel    (+31) 035 - 625 45 45
Ceintuurbaan 2                      fax    (+31) 035 - 625 45 55
1217 HN Hilversum                   http://www.atmm.nl
the Netherlands                     palace://havendam.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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 14

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: Sean Jones <Tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 08:44:24 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 07:49:28 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


>From: RobIrving@aol.com
>Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 07:46:16 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

>I gave up needing to appear as if I know everything years ago...

>empty vessels produce the finest resonance, and all that.

Rob

I take it you do not like symphony music.

Empty yes for resonance, full, half full etc etc for a more
varied spread of notes to make the symphony. To make a symphony
you need several or more vessels filled to various levels to get
different notes to make the music. Played right you can have a
magical sound.

---
      People can have it any colour, as long as its black!
                       Sean Jones
 Homepage--http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Zone/1745/index.htm
         Research 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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 14

                 Re: Are The X-Files More Fact Than Fiction?

From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose)
Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 12:38:01 +0200
Fwd Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 07:53:11 -0400
Subject: Re: Are The X-Files More Fact Than Fiction?

>From the Calgary Herald. URL:

http://www.calgaryherald.com:80/news/980613/1783644.html

Stig

*******


Saturday 13 June 1998


Are X-Files more fact than fiction?


Daryl-Lynn Carlson, Calgary Herald


What if the X-Files movie is not mere fiction, but part of a grand
conspiracy to prepare us for The Truth?

No, seriously.

Some UFO buffs in Calgary believe The X-Files is the flagship of an
armada of alien shows and movies being produced to prepare us for an
inevitable close encounter.

The movie -- based on the popular sci-fi/fantasy TV series starring
David Duchovny and Gillian Anderson-- lands in Calgary theatres June
19. About 142,000 Calgarians tune in weekly.

"We know for a fact that there's been a lot of information that's been
planted to steer people away. But in no way in the world are we the
only beings in the universe," David Fisher said.

Fisher, a Calgary musician and photographer studies the UFO phenomenon
in his spare time.

"I think it's just a question now of the public being prepared."

Fisher is part of a small contingent of buffs, or ufologists, in
Western Canada whose examination of extraterrestrials resembles that of
the so-called Lone Gunmen, a trio of computer mavericks on The X-Files
who advise FBI special agent Fox Mulder (played by David Duchovny) on
UFO occurrences.

Mulder's partner on the show, Dana Scully (Gillian Anderson), is the
skeptical referee between science and conjecture, who increasingly
believes in the incredible.

Michael Green, a Calgary playwright rehearsing his latest production,
called Martian, said that simply by researching the topic can attract
trouble. "I believe there are definitely groups of people who seem to
have the interest or the finances to control certain information,"
Green said.

"Fortunately for me, the men in black are not tapping my phone or
following my kid home from school. But when I started this, I didn't
know if they would."

Green has interviewed people who claim they have been abducted for a
dramatic play he produced in 1995, called Alien Bait. He commended The
X-Files for basing its stories on facts, including "very effectively
captivating the kind of paranoia that is very much a part of ufology."

But he hopes the movie offers some fresh insights. "The whole alien
abduction thing has been squeezed dry," he said. "These days, a lot of
people are having their implants removed. The real work in the field is
focused on Mars."

The truth is, The X-Files is real to thousands of people.

In Alberta, the town of St. Paul -- which built a spacecraft landing
pad as its centennial project in 1967 -- expects as many as 1,000
people worldwide to visit Western Canada's first UFO conference there
July 10 and 11.

Although Alberta is not considered a UFO hot spot, the latest news on
sightings, crop rings, cattle mutilations and alien abductions will be
examined at the conference. So will the theories about conspiracies to
control public information.

To some people who follow UFOs seriously, The X-Files is more than
night-time entertainment.

"There are theories about attempts to prepare the population . . . and
it's well-known that governments have been very much involved in
disinformation and in leaking information," William Wynn, a professor
of para-psychology at the University of Regina, said of the world's
"inevitable" meeting with extraterrestrials.

Semi-retired, Wynn has extensively studied UFOs and interviewed people
who believe they were abducted and probed by aliens -- a phenomenon
addressed frequently in The X-Files.

Aside from the show's occasional story lines about sewer monsters and
ghosts, Wynn said The X-Files smacks of truth.

"It works with some themes that are legitimate, and it doesn't always
make the aliens out to be bad guys."

While their ideas might appear to be "out there," ufologists say they
are just seeking answers to strange happenings that science has failed
to explain. Some hope their work, maybe even aliens, will help save
mankind.

"Human kind is in a very desperate kind of situation right now. We're
right at the edge of a cliff," Wynn said. "If we don't make some
changes very fast, change is just going to happen and it won't be
pleasant."


Calgary Herald New Media 1998

Contact us: online@theherald.southam.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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 14

                      Re: Ufologists and Klass Conflict

From: Perry van den Brink <UASR@gmx.net>
Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 14:23:48 +0200
Fwd Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 08:30:15 -0400
Subject: Re: Ufologists and Klass Conflict


>From: Doc Barry <authority@webtv.net>
>Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 16:50:45 -0700
>To: updates@globalserve.net (UFO UpDates - Toronto)
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Ufologists and Klass Conflict

> >To: updates@globalserve.net
> >From: "Jerome Clark" <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
> >Subject: ufologists and Klass conflict
> >Date: Fri, 12 Jun 98 12:22:28 PDT

> > As promised on an earlier posting, I have an address
> >for those who may wish to read my "The UFO Debunkers vs. the
> >UFO Menace," which concerns Philip J. Klass' interactions with
> >the University of Nebraska.  The address is:

> > http://www.evansville.net/~slk.com.htm

>Dear Jerry Clark,

>I would like to read Debunkers vs. Menace, but the URL for that
>page doesn't work.  == Doc

Hi Doc and all,

The correct URL should be :

http://www.evansville.net/~slk/com.htm

Good luck :-)

Sincerely, Perry van den Brink, UASR Web site & list owner
UASR Web site ---> http://www.geocities.com/~phenomena-x

"A lie, even minor,left unchallenged,will be accepted by the ignorant
 and uninformed, as the truth"................[Right? RIGHT!!]







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 14

                        Re: Writers For U.K. Magazine

From: Ian J. Darlington <webmaster@interweb-design.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 13:54:35 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 17:41:47 -0400
Subject: Re: Writers For U.K. Magazine


>Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 06:48:49 -0700 (PDT)
>From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
>Subject: Writers For U.K. Magazine
>To: Updates@globalserve.net

>"Down to Earth" the bi-monthly publication of the Essex & London
>UFO Network are looking for articles covering the whole spectrum
>of the ufo subject. If you are a researcher of ufos and write
>the odd article and would like it published then read on.

>"Down to Earth" is a serious research magazine dedicated to the
>investigation of the ufo phenomena. We already have a number of
>writers but we always welcome fresh input. As mentioned the mag
>covers as wide a spectrum as possible seeming that there are
>many avenues to explore regarding the whole ufo subject.

>If you are interested in submitting an article/story etc, and
>would also like more details on ELUFON please write to the
>following address or direct by e-mail. Details below.

>Any submissions will be fully credited to the author,and they
>will also receive a copy of the issue containing there work. You
>can send articles in pre-typed format or on a floppy disk
>compatible with Microsoft publisher 97.

>Kindest regards to all.
>Roy Hale

>For moreinfo or submissions please write to the following
>address or e-mail.

>Roy Hale
>21 Sparrow Green Bull Lane
>Dagenham
>Essex
>RM10 7EU

>: E-mail: Roy_Hale@Hotmail.com.uk
>  E-mail: ELUFON@Yahoo.com.uk


Dear Roy,

I saw your post to UFO UpDates, great minds think alike - I was
just about to do the same thing!

If you agree to the following and have no objections, I'd like
to post the following to that list:

Dear Roy Hale and List,

The Cornwall UFO Research Group (C.U.F.O.R.G.) would also like
to appeal for articles for its bi-monthly newsletter
'Skywatchers'.

The same copyright, credits and gratis copy apply, as does the
fact that we are a serious research organisation established
since 1996 when our Founder & Chairman Dave Gillham saw his
first UFO.

Many of our members and the majority of the committee have had
their own experiences, including the editors of the newsletter -
myself and my wife Elaine.

Roy, as a further suggestion I would like to propose that you
join our exchange programme whereby we exchange newsletters -
perhaps in our case we can also exchange articles where
copyright permits?

I look forward to hearing from you, Roy, and also any fellow
researchers, investigators and interested parties who feel they
can submit articles for our small-circulation newsletter. (Word
97 on disc or email articles if possible please). Thanking you
all in advance.

Errol - keep up the damn fine work.

Regards,
Ian & Elaine Darlington.
Editors, 'Skywatchers'.
The bi-monthly publication of the
Cornwall UFO Research Group.
Available on the web at:
http://www.interweb-design.co.uk/cuforg
mailto:cuforg@interweb-design.co.uk

Snail mail:
Dave Gillham
24 Carrine Road
Truro, Cornwall
TR1 3XB, 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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 14

                   Re: ORTK and CAUS endorse Bryant effort

From: MDJ50@webtv.net (Mike Jamieson)
Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 06:44:47 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 17:45:41 -0400
Subject: Re: ORTK and CAUS endorse Bryant effort

ORTK's Board of Directors, by unanimous vote, endorsed Larry
Bryant's efforts in its April board meeting. CAUS, under the
direction of Peter Gersten, has also endorsed the effort to have
a grand jury impaneled in Chavez County, New Mexico. Roswell is
the county seat of Chavez County.

Over two years ago, Larry (the ever valiant warrior in the
fighrt to end UFO secrecy) tried to get the federal government
to convene a grand jury on the 1947 Roswell case--obviously
without success.

For further information about Larry's efforts see his article in
the current RIGHT TO KNOW FORUM at: www.ortk.org

P.S. ORTK's next board meeting is in September. Three board
members (with one year terms) will have to run for re=election
(if they choose so). And since there is now also already one
vacancy, that leaves four seats up. Any ORTK member interested
in running for a seat should send Mike Jamieson (that's me,
ORTK's Secretary) a candidate statement and description (of
UFO-related activities and interests).






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 14

                          BWW Media Alert 19980614

From: Bufo Calvin <BufoCalvin@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 11:47:54 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 17:55:07 -0400
Subject: BWW Media Alert 19980614

Bufo Calvin
P O Box 5231, Walnut Creek, CA  94596
Internet: BufoCalvin@aol.com
Website: <A HREF="http://members.aol.com/bufocalvin">http://members.aol.com/bufo
calvin<;/a>
<A HREF="surprise link to Amazon.com">http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=048
6230945/bufosweirdworldA/<;/a>
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED (permission is granted to reproduce or redistribute this
edition of Bufo's WEIRD WORLD 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).
 <A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0963869108/bufosweirdworld">
Surprise Link to Amazon Books</A>

June 14, 1998

Not much up this week, but expect some possible tie-ins on local news (and
other places) with the new X-FILES movie opening.  I had been told at one
point that some UFO figures (including Bill Hamilton) were going to be on the
X-FILES movie special on Fox on Monday night, but I've since heard that the
segment has been cut.  As long-time readers know, I don't cover purportedly
fictional programming any more.

One other note...one of the big four television networks is doing a special
based on a major abduction book.  In typical television fashion, they know
what they want.  They are looking for an articulate, adolescent abductee,
preferably "of color" (to use the phrase I was given).  The decision to appear
on a program like this should not be made lightly, but if you know someone who
fits the profile and is interested in being on, let me know and I can pass it
along.

Unless stated otherwise, time are Pacific.

THE DISCOVERY CHANNEL
Sunday, June 14, 1:00 PM, ARTHUR C. CLARKE'S MYSTERIOUS WORLD: THE JOURNEY
BEGINS (this was the first episode of the series, and offers an overview)
Sunday, June 14, 1:30 PM, ARTHUR C. CLARKE'S MYSTERIOUS UNIVERSE: PSYCHIC
DETECTIVES
Sunday, June 14, 2:00 PM, STRANGE BUT TRUE: SEA MONSTER, ANCIENT TOMBSTONE
CURSE
Sunday, June 14, 7:00 PM, BEYOND BIZARRE: UFOS AND ALIEN IMPLANTS (apparently
contains Spontaneous Human Combustion as well)

THE TRAVEL CHANNEL
Monday, June 14, 11:00 AM, TRAVELERS: LAS VEGAS (includes "UFO enthusiasts")
___________________________

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 Media Alert the same way. Also, please let me know if
there is something in the media you think I should cover. Deadline is Tuesday, t
he 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.  For more information on OPUS, see its we
bsite at http://members.aol.com/josephxx3






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 14

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 10:07:03 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 17:56:44 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


> To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
> From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs
> Date: Fri, 12 Jun 98 10:59:16 PDT

> An interesting example of what happens to academics and
> scientists who publicly identify themselves with the UFO heresy
> comes in the new (June 25) issue of the New York Review of
> Books, generally regarded as the leading cultural and
> intellectual journal in the United States. In the course of an
> extraordinarily emotional attack on abductees, abduction
> investigators, and ufologists generally, Frederick Crews
> approvingly notes the professional near-ruin to which Mack and
> Jacobs have been brought, mentioning their "well-earned
> ostracism and ridicule from their colleagues." One need have no
> great imagination to sense the chilling effect this must have on
> other academics thinking of taking up UFO study.

Good point, Jerry. And when Dennis (in another post mentioning
this piece) calls this a typical New York Review article, I
can't agree.

A few weeks ago, the New York Review published a length article
by one of the world's most profound musical scholars, Charles
Rosen. This essay, however, found Rosen out of his depth -- he
doesn't seem to know anything that happened in contemporary
classical music during the last 20 years -- and I got quite
involved with it, writing a 3,000 word letter to the editor
(which, oddly enough, they haven't published).

This was my first letter to any editor in quite a while. The
issues involved were crucial for my own work in music.

Anyhow, the Rosen piece, while wrong and in some ways offensive,
was quite reasonably written. I won't even begrudge the man his
fine gloss of Mandarin disdain. I enjoyed his sarcasm, as much
for its elegance as for its humor. I was outraged enough, as
I've said, to write a lengthy response, but that was because of
the content of the piece, not its tone.

This Crews review is another story. Jerry is, if anything,
understating when he describes its tone as "extraordinarily
emotional." "Hysterical" might be more like it. (And no, I'm not
writing a reply. I don't want to get my musical letter caught up
in a UFO crossfire.) What makes it all even odder is that Crews
-- unlike many people who've written similar commentary -- has
or at least pretends to have some knowledge of the UFO
literature. At the very least, he names the right names, from
Hynek to Nicolas Spanos. What he says about the books and
articles, though, can be quite peculiar. He seems to think, for
instance, that Klass's "UFOs Explained" can serve as a
point-by-point refutation of Hynek's "The UFO Experience," when
actually the books cover very different ground.

The Nation carried a review of The Threat and other recent UFO
books, by John Leonard, that was, if anything, even more
hysterical. Crews and Leonard get so carried away, in fact, that
it's fair to ask what's going on. Why do they care so much? Is
Crews upset, as he says he is, because a few thousand people
have been misled by abduction investigators into believing their
experiences are real? (And, as he doesn't note, finding genuine
relief from their anxiety, whatever its cause. But that's
another story!) Has he shown equal passion for massacres,
poverty, child mortality in the underdeveloped world?

Something's out of whack here. It's not unreasonable to raise
another possibility -- that Crews, Leonard, and others who get
so worked up are frightened because they can't help wondering if
these UFO fables just might be true.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 14

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 09:26:51 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 17:44:07 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


> From: RobIrving@aol.com
> Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 07:46:16 EDT
> To: updates@globalserve.net
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

> >From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
> >To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net>
> >Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs
> >Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 10:29:54 -0400>

> Greg,

> >You're now, in other posts, making a virtue of ignorance -- no,
> >sorry, of not clogging your mind with data -- but here it would
> >be helpful to hear the voice of scientists who haven't yet been
> >publicly quoted.

> "Making a virtue of ignorance" isn't necessarily how I see it,
> but if you have to put it that way that's fine. What I mean is
> that ufology is not my primary pursuit, or even interest.
> Therefore I don't carry information about cases around in my
> head, as others seem to. If you were to ask me about specific
> cases concerning subjects of more immediate interest to me, such
> as human attacks on horses, I wouldn't presume to know the
> details of specific cases without referring to my research
> material. Yes I believe that 'not knowing' is something of a
> virtue, but that's perhaps another conversation.

> I gave up needing to appear as if I know everything years ago...

> empty vessels produce the finest resonance, and all that.

> Anyway, as for our discussion about how well research into the
> ETH would be accepted by the powers-that-be in science, soon I am
> to interview a leading theoretical physicist in this country, who
> has in the past made comments on ufology. I'll ask him and let
> you know. Maybe I'll make some other calls too - this might make
> for an interesting project.

> Offhand, apparently unlike you I don't know what they'd say.

No, Rob. When I don't know someone, I don't have a clue how
they're going to answer any question.

You don't seem to understand what's going on here. More or less
off the top of your head, you offered an opinion on scientists
and UFOs. Nothing stops them from examining the evidence, you
think, so if they haven't supported the ETH, that must be
because the evidence for it isn't very good. This seems to be
one of your favorite rhetorical gambits -- mixing opinions in
with facts in your arguments, and treating the opinions as if
they carried as much weight as facts, even if you haven't (or
don't offer) any evidence for them.

Thus you opined that the opposition to John Mack at Harvard
doesn't really tell us much about scientists and UFOs, because
Mack -- or so you speculate -- got into trouble not for his
opinions, but because he publicized them on talk shows. Having
imagined that I invoked Kuhn's theories on scientific paradigms,
you counter me with a shrug, saying that you personally don't
think much of Kuhn's work. (And yes, you gave one quick reason,
but hardly enough for any serious discussion of someone so well
established.)

And now you say that you, yourself, personally, don't think
scientists would be discouraged from taking a favorable view of
UFOs. Again, you've offered us a glimpse, not at the actual
subject we're discussing, but of your own mind. Which is why I
get exasperated with you. As you've shown us all, you don't know
very much about UFOs. Nevertheless, you expect us to take your
unsubstantiated opinions seriously. As I and others on this list
have tried to tell you, there's a lot of data about scientists
and UFOs -- quite a lot of it, actually, much of it published,
and none of it ambiguous, especially to anyone who's actually
talked with one or more scientists about this subject.

So now, like an eager puppy, you're dashing off to find out for
yourself. There's nothing wrong with replicating research; I
said I might do it myself (though both of us ought to offer more
than a single sample, if we want our inquiries to mean very
much). But you at least ought to acknowledge that you're tilling
a well-plowed field here, and that whatever answer you get from
your theoretical physicist won't be entered on a blank dossier.
You are not, in other  words, going to find some data on a
subject that has never been investigated before. You're simply
going to discover whether this physicst says the same thing as
the other scientists whose views are already known.

Greg Sandow

And by the way, I just found more published evidence. Kenneth
Ring, who wrote a book called "Project Omega," is an
psychologist at the University of Connecticut who became known
for his studies of near-death experiences. At one point, someone
sent him a copy of Whitley Strieber's "Communion," suggesting
that UFO abductions might interest him as well. His first
reaction was to hide the book, or so I read in a substantial new
book, "Enquete sur les enlevements extraterrestres" ("An Inquiry
into Alien Abductions"), by Marie-Therese de Brosses. (Many
thanks to Jean-Luc, who gave me a copy.)

And why did Ring hide "Communion"? "It was out of the question,"
he said, "that anyone should come into my office and see a book
like that on my desk!" (His exclamation point, my translation
from French.) Now, Rob is free to point out that Ring overcame
his reluctance, and both studied and wrote about abductions. My
own interpretation, however, would go like this. Even Kenneth
Ring, who'd already pushed the envelope by accepting NDEs, was
afraid of what his colleagues would think if they saw him with a
book on 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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 14

                          Re: Who Is Jerome Clark?

From: "Jerome Clark" <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Sun, 14 Jun 98 13:54:36 PDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 18:01:14 -0400
Subject: Re: Who Is Jerome Clark?


> From: RobIrving@aol.com
> Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 18:59:04 EDT
> To: updates@globalserve.net
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Who Is Jerome Clark?

> >To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
> >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Who Is Jerome Clark?
> >Date: Thu, 11 Jun 98 20:51:56 PDT

> >Note here further evidence of Mr. Brookesmith's inability to
> >read. Here the "joke" has Klass implying that it is he who will
> >have me murdered. Let's have a show of hands out there. How many
> >of you would take as a "joke" -- not even from a friend here,
> >mind you, but a longtime adversary -- a remark intimating a
> >desire to have one done in? No, Mr. Brookesmith, you've already
> >voted. Any other hands? No?

> If not, more than likely because it's such a childish exercise,
> which either becomes you or it doesn't. Who can tell? Perhaps we
> should vote on it with a show of hands.

> Anyway, never one to shy away from childish exercises I'll stick
> my hand up.You'd have to be either a fool to not sense that
> Klass was alluding to his previous comments (how good a joke,
> and how funny they were is irrelevant)...either a fool, utterly
> humourless or anxious for any opportunity to score points off
> the guy, due to an underlying resentment over separate
> longstanding issues, I suspect.

There really isn't much to say here.Apparently it is "childish"
to be offended at a "joke" whose "humor" explores the comic
potential of a death threat.

Apparently it is not childish to make such a "joke" in the first
place, not to mention bring it back to life 14 years later in a
public forum.Poor Phil must really be desperate for
point-scoring, after all those years of losing arguments with
me.

Yet more reason, too, to reflect in amazement and sorrow at the
depths to which one has to sink to defend Phil Klass.Hard, too,
to believe the good opinion I had, a couple of years ago, of
somebody named Rob Irving, apparently not to be confused with
you, who wrote the delightful "Henry X File" in Fortean Times. I
assume the two of you are unrelated.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 14

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: Stanton T. Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 12:58:19 -0300
Fwd Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 17:54:15 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


>Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 00:19:59 -0400
>From: bruce maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
>Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs
>Sender: bruce maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
>>To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs
>>Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 09:18:17 -0400

>>>From: Jeff King <Boroimhe@aol.com>
>>>Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 20:18:59 EDT
>>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

>>>>Back to the drawing board. I think we're left with Mark's and my
>>>>straightforward notion that if UFOs are alien craft, they'll have
>>>>stable, discernable physical characteristics (though perhaps
>>>>other traits that seem like magic to us).

>>>While I agree that this would be good support for Cashmans OEH,
>>>the difficulty is reliably establishing the existence of these
>>>characteristics. For example, anecdotal eyewitness testimony is
>>>not a very good source for ensuring that these characteristics
>>>exist. Cases that have been solved to the satisfaction of most
>>>everyone can be shown to share important characteristics with
>>>unsolved cases that are accepted as fair evidence of an
>>>anomalous phenomenon.
>
>>How significant would those factors be?

>>Here we need studies of (broadly speaking) solved vs. unsolved
>>cases. The Air Force's Special Report #14 did provide that, and
>>showed (if I remember correctly -- Stan Friedman may want to
>>supply more accurate information) that the unsolved cases
>>involved more qualified observers, and had lasted for a longer
>>time.

>>This study badly needs to be done again, with far more cases.

>You are correct. The Battelle Memorial institute, in conjunction
>with the Air Force Intelligence at Wright-Patterson AFB, Foreign
>Technology Division/Project Blue Book, studied carefully 3201
>sighting reports from 1947 through the end of 1952. The results
>were published and made available to the newsmedia on a limited
>basis in 1955.... oddly enough the same year Ruppelt's book was
>published.

>Anyway, Battelle found out that when the sightings were divided
>into four reliability groups, Poor, Doubtful, Good and
>Excellent, the percent unexplained increased with the quality of
>the sighting. Only about 15-20 percent were unexplained in the P
>and D classes, but in the E classification nearly 30% remained
>unexplained after analysis. When civilian sightings were removed
>from the collection leaving only sightings by military
>witnesses, usually on duty at the time of the sighting, the %
>unexplained rose to about 33%. In other words, the better the
>sighting the more likely to remain unexplained AFTER
>investigation. This result is not consistent with expectation
>if there are no TRue UFOs (TRUFOS - truly uinexplainable flying
>objects), because the best cases, by their nature, should
>contain the most accurate information which would provide the
>analyst with all he needed to identify the object sighted.
>Conversely, the poorest observers, who make the low quality
>reports (few details, self-inconsistent) should leave analysts
>with the most difficult cases to explain simply because there
>was not sufficient information for identification. Note that
>Insufficient Information (II) was a separate "identification"
>from Unknown. If there was not enough information to make a
>reliable identification, and there was also not enough
>information to reject all possible explanations, the sighting
>was listed as II. The % II was highest in the P and D catagories
>and lowest in the G and E, as would be expected since the G and
>E reporters provided the most self-consistent and accurate
>details.

>One should read the report and my analysis of it (published by
>the Center for UFO Studies) to get the complete picture of
>Special Report #14. However, the bottom line is that after
>investigating 3201 sightings and dividing them into reliability
>categories the Battelle and Air Force investigators found that
>the % II was l;owest and the %U was highest in the G and E
>categories. This result is more consistent with the hypothesis
>that there really was something unexplainable which these
>witnesses saw, than it is with the hypothesis that everything
>they reported was explainable/..


One can see why I have focused on "Blue Book Special Report 14"
in almost all my 700 UFO lectures and why debunkers have ignored
it. But there are a few more points that must be made here:

l. No sighting could be listed as UNKNOWN unless all 4 Final
Report evaluators agreed it was an UNKNOWN. Any 2 could label it
as astronomical, aircraft, balloon etc Very conservative
approach.

2. Bruce has noted one falsifiable aspect: If some UFOs were
really unidentifiable, than the better the quality of the
observation, the more likely to be UNKNOWNS. Passes that test.

3. If UNKNOWNS are just missed knowns, than a careful
statistical analysis (i.e. Chi square) on the basis of
observable characteristics such as apparent color , shape, size
etc, should show that the probability that the UNKNOWNS are just
missed knowns is very high. Sorry Skeptics, the Probability that
the UNKNOWNS are just missed knowns is less than 1%.

4. Some disbelievers claim the only reason a few cases remain
unidentifiable is that there just wasn't enough data. FALSE.
Insufficient DATA was a separate category. Not enough data = NOT
an UNKNOWN.

5.Another false claim of disbelievers is that observations don't
last very long.. just a few seconds. More hogwash.. UNKNOWNS are
observed on the average for longer than KNOWNS. More than 60% of
the UNKNOWNS were observed for longer than 60 seconds. More than
35% were observed for longer than 5 minutes and more than 10%
were observed for longer than 30 minutes.

6. The definition of UNKNOWN "Those reports of sightings wherein
the description of the object and its maneuvers could not be
fitted to the pattern of any known object or phenomenon".

7. I frequently have heard remarks to the notion that most
sightings are hoaxes or from crazy people. MORE NONSENSE. In BB
SR 14 only 2% were listed as hoaxes and only 1.5% of the cases
were listed as "psychological aberrations". The American
Physicial Society to which professional physicists such as Bruce
Maccabee and myself belong, once said that 2%of the papers
submitted to it were crackpot papers.

Please contrast the facts with this strange (totally without
substantiation or merit) statement by Carl Sagan "There are no
interesting UFO sightings that are reliable and no reliable
sightings that are interesting" I should also point out that
Battelle's connection with this study was considered classified
for many years and that the Air Force Press Release given very
wide distribution (though not noting author, title or BMI)
included the following totally false claim by the Secretary of
the Air Force Donald Quarles"On the basis of this report we
believe that no objects such as those popularly described as
flying saucers have overflown the United States. Even the
unknown 3% could have been identified as conventional phenomena
or illusions if more complete observational data had been
available." Now that takes Chutzpah.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 14

                          Re: New Russian UFO Crash

From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 17:33:47 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time)
Fwd Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 18:12:16 -0400
Subject: Re: New Russian UFO Crash

Greetings everyone,

Stig Agermose's May 8/98 message to UFO UpDates had the latitude
and longitude of the Russian UFO crash site from Greg Jarikov's
e-mail to Philippe Piet van Putten.

Since this UFO is said to have crashed in Kirghizia in 1991 and
its dimensions were huge (a length of about 2000 feet) I decided
to check remote sensing images of this area (about 42 degrees,
11 minutes North and 79 degrees, 41 minutes East) prior to and
after the crash date.

Unclassified U.S. photo-reconnaissance satellite images from
1960 to 1972 are now available through the U.S. Geological
Survey. The resolution of these images is about 30 feet at best
and although these images cannot be used to read the license
plates of crashed UFOs, they will show something as big as this
UFO. One can access and view these U.S. satellite images on a
computer monitor for free and better copies can be purchased
about $10. Their web site is:

http://edcwww.cr.usgs.gov/Webglis/glisbin/search.pl?DISP

I found only two useful images, free from clouds, which I made
made hardcopies on my 600 dpi printer. These were my pre-crash
images.

For my post-crash images, I found two web sites that allowed me
to view, for free, satellite images of any place on Earth.The
best images I could obtain also had resolutions of about 30 feet
and I made hard copies of these too. Better quality images can
be purchased from these web sites for about $1000.Their web
sites are:

http://www.spotimage.fr/anglaise/offer/catalo/oc_consu.htm
(click on DALI Guest Access)

http://origin.eosat.com/
(click on Register)

I calculated that the image size of the crashed UFO would be up
to 4 millimeters in the hardcopies of the satellite images I had
(not including marks on the ground from the crash itself and the
crater produced by the explosion sometime afterwards). When I
compared the pre-crash and post-crash satellite images for the
specified location of the UFO crash site, I did not notice any
differences other than snow fall variations from one image to
the next.

Is the location of this Russian UFO crash site, west of the
border with China, correct? Since some of my post-crash
satellite images are a few years old, its possible the Russians
moved the UFO shortly after the crash (unlikely considering the
size and the reported difficulties they had approaching it)?

I was informed that many Canadian RADARSAT images (the pictures
this satellite produces is not affected by clouds or darkness)
have been taken of the UFO crash location, one as recently as a
few days ago but I cannot view them for free and I cannot afford
to buy them either. If any one has or can obtain high resolution
images of this area and can share these with UFO researchers, we
may be able to determine if this UFO crash report is real or
not.

Nick Balaskas






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 14

                               Re: Ford Fund?

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Sun, 14 Jun 98 14:56:18 +500
Fwd Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 18:04:38 -0400
Subject: Re: Ford Fund?


>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Ford Fund?
>From: Elaine M Douglass <elaine26@juno.com>
>Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 21:18:08 EDT

>>From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 10:09:37 -0400
>>Fwd Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 10:09:37 -0400
>>Subject: Ford Fund?

>>In view of the interest in the John Ford case on UFO UpDates I'm
>>re-posting the following. I don't know if the E-Mail addresses
>>still work - I've Cc:'ed the interested parties.

>>ebk

><snip>

>Saturday June 13, 1998

>Dear UFO UpDates-Toronto:

>You must have received this message in a time capsule. It is out
>of date. As you can see, the date on Don Jernigan's message is
>1996.

I'm annoyed that that you seem to imply a shelf life for justice and fair play.
Your light tone suggests that you have changed _your_ mind regarding John's
guilt or innocence . . . why! I think you owe me an explanation. I think you
owe us _all_ an explanation!

>John Ford is no longer in jail. He is in a mental hospital in
>New York state. Mr. Jernigan is no longer trying to raise money
>for John's legal expenses, nor am I, nor any other members of
>the now-defunct John Ford Defense Committee.

>Best regards,

>Elaine Douglass


Ms. Douglass, you wrote a very impassioned paper that got _me_
all stirred up. Subsequently, your tune has changed . . . you
now _buy_ the radium in the toothpaste foolishness?

With respect, madam, _you_ started this fire. Your casual
efforts to put it out _now_ only increases my suspicion, anger,
and sense of outrage.

With friends like you, it would seem, John Ford needs NO
enemies.

Lehmberg@snowhill.com

RESTORE JOHN FORD!





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 14

                        Re: Asking Pamela Stonebrooke

From: Cathy Johnson <cej@idirect.ca>
Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 14:48:30 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 17:59:18 -0400
Subject: Re: Asking Pamela Stonebrooke


>Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 20:09:27 -0700
>From: Skye Turell <turel33@west.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Asking Pamela Stonebrooke

>>From: Cathy Johnson <cej@idirect.ca>
>>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Asking Pamela Stonebrooke
>>Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 10:07:31 -0400

>>>Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 07:29:52 -0700
>>>From: Skye Turell <turel33@west.net>
>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Asking Pamela Stonebrooke

>>>>Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 12:55:01 -0500
>>>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>>>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
>>>>Subject: Asking Pamela Stonebrooke

>>><snip>

Dear Skye,

For the sake of brevity I have snipped a bunch. But the topic is
as interesting to me as it is to you because it concerns
memories and experiences of others in relation to our own
experiences and understanding.

A lot of people have had unusual experiences which perhaps may
not be identical to Pamela's circumstances, but certainly beyond
the 'eat, sleep, work' kind of life. How Pamela relates to her
own experience is not a whole lot different than how I relate to
my own experiences. So I was just trying to help from my own
point of observation.

I think that all memories are a product of our mental processes.
While there are a host of clues we normally use to distinguish
fact from fiction, and to resolve conflicts of all kinds, there
is an interactive gray area where the processes merge. This is
an ongoing part of the subconscious that the consciousness is
not aware of happening. If the conscious loses or forgets
critical information, it has the subconscious information to
rely upon to go through the decision-making to reach the same
conclusions. If we lose or forget parts of information at the
subconscious level, that data is lost entirely. Perhaps we can
still go through the decision-making process and with
progressive logic, fill in the missing details, and thereby
reach the same old conclusions. This usuallly happens, but not
always successfully.

>This assumes that these are "memories," meaning that there was a
>period of forgetfulness, and then "recall." If I understand
>Pamela's story correctly this does NOT describe her experience.


I don't think that there is necessarily forgetfulness, as much
as it is possible for other things to happen. The levels or
stages of memory are conditioned to the needs of each
individual. For me, short term memory only lasts a few minutes
at most. Summaries of short term memories are placed in my
intermediate memory for a longer period of time, possibly hours.
I could not tell you what I did yesterday at all. I could tell
you generally what I did a week ago. Yet, my subconscious does
not lose or forget much. All of these normal memories aside, I
still have photographic memories of events that happened over
forty-five years ago. How is this possible without some sort of
extrordinary association with those specific memories of my
experience?

>If you don't mean the above, then how do you refer to my
>"memory" of typing the previous paragraph? Is this just an
>"artifact of mental processes?" I don't think so.

I think so. Since there are different memory stages all the way
down to genetic levels, we can be using one kind of memory or
another without realizing it.

>Absolutely. And there's no question that we color our
>experience. But that doesn't mean that it is all fantasy,
>confabulation or any one of a host of terms that some like to
>apply to the abduction experience.

There are different levels of contact just as there are
different levels of abduction. As far as I am concerned, reality
we perceive is so limited and narrow without knowing the
invisible factors that make-up the product of our individual
reality.

What you are asking is that can we be abducted in ways that we
do not consciously perceive. As far as that goes I have to
emphatically say yes, we can be abducted while standing in a
room of people, not be missed, and returned within a short time,
without anyone noticing a thing out of place in an ongoing
conversation. This is where seconds turn into hours so that a
whole lot of stuff can occur at fantastically accelerated rates.
In other instances, our awareness can be moved from where we
normally associate its being placed, to new places other than
where it is normally. Do not confuse this with OOBE experiences.
It is just not the same thing. But, it is interactive awareness
at a different level in a different place.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 14

                      UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 3, Number 24

From: Joseph Trainor <Masinaigan@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 10:47:29 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 17:48:58 -0400
Subject: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 3, Number 24

     UFO ROUNDUP
Volume 3, Number 24
June 14, 1998
Editor: Joseph Trainor

UFO SEEN BY HUNDREDS
IN THE UNITED KINGDOM

     A spherical blue UFO was seen by hundreds of
Britons Friday night, June 12, 1998, as it flew over
the UK from Cornwall to Staffordshire.
     According to the Daily Mirror, "Fire in the sky
triggered a big UFO scare early yesterday.  Hundreds
of sky watchers bombarded (authorities) with calls
about a flaming blue ball hurtling towards Earth.
Pilots alerted control towers about the fiery object.
Eight police forces launched probes.  Experts said
last night that a shower of meteors caused the
drama."  (See the Daily Mirror of London for June 13,
1998, "UFO alert as fireball flashes across sky.")
     The mass sighting followed nights of intense
UFO activity in Cambridgeshire and Norfolk.
     On Tuesday, June 1, 1998, "a Cambridge resident
was...at a bonfire at about 11:30 p.m. when he noticed
some lights in the sky.  There was a white light with a
red light separated by some distance.  The witness
reports that they seemed to be moving together and at
a high altitude and speed, and that after 15 seconds,
the white light rapidly faded."
     "His judgement is that what he witnessed was a
single object, and that it was also large (because of the
separation of the lights) and too high to be a helicopter."
     According to researcher Dave Piggott, "a check of
possible objects responsible shows that both the
shuttle (Discovery) and Mir would both have been
passing overhead between 11:05 and 11:20 p.m.  They
would not, however, have looked like a single object
since they had different trajectories."
     The sighting was confirmed by Dave Roberts, who
lives in Brandon, 40 miles (64 kilometers) northeast of
Cambridge.  Roberts reported, "At around 11:30 last
Tuesday night (June 1), I was sitting out in the back
of my house, having a night cap with some friends,
when I pointed out a point of light coming from the
direction of Cambridge.  It was moving too fast to be an
aircraft, too bright to be a satellite.  One of my friends is
an old colleague from my days in the RAF, and we
started talking about when we were over on exercises
in Germany, how we used to watch satellites go over
at night...My wife went indoors to get the binoculars.
I managed to get (focus) them on the source but could
not make out any discerning features."
     ""At the rate it was traveling, and assuming it would
keep its present course, it should have passed over
North Walsham (in Norfolk) around 4 to 5 minutes later
and south of Mundesley on the north Norfolk coast 20 to
30 seconds after that."
     The object "traveled in a straight line through
approximately 50 degrees arc of light," he added, and
"after a few moments swapping tales, we all reached
the same conclusion--it must be Mir...its speed remained
constant throughout, and there was no sound."
     North Walsham and Mundesley are about 110 miles
(176 kilometers) northeast of London.  (Many thanks to
Dave Piggott, Dave Roberts and Errol Bruce-Knapp for
the Cambridge reports.)

CROP CIRCLE APPEARS IN AN
OLIVE GROVE IN CROATIA

     On Tuesday, June 8, 1998, a crop circle appeared
on Hvar Otok, a large island in the Adriatic Sea just
off the shore of Croatia.  The formation was found beside
an olive grove on a farm in Poljica, near Jelsa.
     The "ellipse" was found in a hillside field of grass
by Marko Huljic, owner of the olive grove.  "Based on the
opinion of the discoverer Marko Huljic, that kind of trail
couldn't have been made by a car, or an agricultural
machine."
     "On the relatively straight meadow with the
overgrown grass, two continuous ellipses in the range
of 40 centimeters (20 inches) are there.  The ground
with the bent grass is one meter (3.3 feet) in diameter.
The length of the external ellipse is 4.8 meters, and the
width is 3.6 meters."
     "The trail of this unexplained phenomenon has been
confirmed also by Ivo Zupanovic, Vladimir Huljic, Nikola
Zenchic and others."  Meanwhile, "fantastic stories"
about the crop circle "are circulating around Poljica."
     Hvar island is 256 kilometers (160 miles) south of
Zagreb.  It's also 112 kilometers (70 miles) southeast
of Sibenik, Croatia, the site of a reported UFO landing
back in January 1998.  (See the Croatian newspaper
Free Dalmatia for June 9, 1998, "UFO at olive field
near Jelsa?"  Many thanks to Mirko Crnchevic for
forwarding the newspaper article.)

ANOTHER UFO SIGHTING IN
GMUNDEN, AUSTRIA

     A second UFO has been reported in Gmunden,
a small city on the Traunsee (lake) in Austria.  The
witness this time was Christian K.'s 15-year-old
brother, Thomas.
     On Saturday, June 6, 1998, Thomas and another
youth were outdoors at the base of the Grinberg, a
mountain on the outskirts of Gmunden.  "The whole
thing was gleaming," Thomas reported, "It could have
been a light spot but the rest of the object was just a
glow."
     The sighting took place "at about 11 p.m.  The
object was headed southwards.  Then it departed to
the east.  It was about as big as a small-range plane
--like a Boeing 767 or smaller--flying about 6,000 feet high."
     The UFO took off "straight up" and the boys
"followed it until it reached an estimated altitude of
100,000 feet, when we lost sight of it."  (Email Interview)

ORANGE SPHERICAL UFO
FLIES OVER BERMUDA

     On Monday, May 31, 1998, at 10:15 p.m., Jay and
Vangie A. were sitting in their backyard at Somerset
Bridge, Bermuda, when "skywatching, we watched,
straight up, between the last two stars of the Big
Dipper's handle, a small, dull, orangeish-coloured light
similar to a satellite.  It was traveling due south at a
speed slightly faster than a satellite or an airplane.
Then, suddenly, it flashed like a huge strobe light
and became the size of a dime held at arm's length."
     "It was an extremely bright flash, much brighter than
any of the stars, though it faded out.  The UFO continued
to flash intermittently four or five times before it
disappeared over the southern horizon.  The strobe
effect did not seem to have a regular rhythym to it.
This sighting--our first!--lasted about four to five
seconds in total.  It was no airplane because about
five minutes later an aircraft passed over Bermuda
going west, with its typical flashing red and white
lights." (Email Interview)
(Editor's Note: Five seconds to the horizon works
out to an estimated speed of 2,880 miles per hour.)

ANOTHER UFO SPOTTED IN
CHATTANOOGA, TENNESSEE

     On Sunday, June 7, 1998, at 9:55 p.m., Patricia B.
and her 8-year-old stepson "saw a strange object
coming out of the southern sky (from Georgia--J.T.)
traveling east at a rapid rate of speed."
     From their hometown of Chattanooga, Tennessee
(population 152,466), they observed that "the object
headed for the handle of the Big Dipper and it appeared
to brighten significantly and then dim out and disappear."
     "I waited and approximately three to five minutes
later, two or more objects appeared," Patricia reported.
"Again from the south traveling at great speed, and
appeared to slow down, then speed up several times
before reaching the same destination as the first
object--handle of the Big Dipper.  They both slowed down,
glowed very intensively for a few seconds and then
faded out and disappeared.  I watched for another hour
to see if more objects appeared but no success."
     Chattanooga is in southern Tennessee on Interstate
Highways I-24 and I-75 approximately 128 miles
(205 kilometers) south of Nashville, the state capital.
(Editor's Comment: Interesting, no?  Two cases of
brightening UFOs headed for the handle of the Big
Dipper, also known as Ursa Major.  The two stars
at the end of the "handle" are Alkaid (magnitude
1.86) located 110 light-years from Earth, and Mizar
(magnitude 2.09), which is 88 light-years from Earth.
Could there be a cloaked mothership parked in
geosynchronous orbit up there?)

UFOs, BLACK HELICOPTER
HAUNT SKY OVER MONTREAL

     Since May 12, 1998, the Association Quebecois
de'Ufologie (Quebec Ufology Association) has received
"many reports of UFO sightings along the St. Lawrence
River," according to Gilles Millot and Patrick Tremblay
of the AQU.
    UFO sightings were reported from Three Rivers, Que.
(population 48,419), located 150 kilometers (90 miles)
east of Montreal, to the city of Chateauguay (population
41,423), located 10 kilometers (6 miles) southwest
of Montreal.
     According to Milot, "In one case, in the city of
Berthierville (population 4,300), 60 kilometers (36 miles)
east of Montreal, the witness took one picture of a
triangular formation of lights."  (Merci beaucoup a
Gilles Milot de AQU pour ces nouvelles.)
     On Tuesday, June 9, 1998, at 9:45 p.m., just south
of Montreal, Marie G. "saw two bright discs or broad
spheres--about four times the size of a star--flying between
10,000 and 50,000 feet (3,030 to 15,152 meters) and at
least twice as fast as a satellite."
     The luminous discs flew from east to west.  "One was
longer than the other.  They took about five minutes or
less" to cross the sky.  "The glow was always the same,
which precludes the reflection argument.  The first disc
was caught by the second, which proceeded steadily
until out of sight."  Merci beacoup a Mike Broussard
pour ces nouvelles.)
     On Saturday night, May 30, 1998, Kayla and other
witnesses spotted "a sleek black helicopter" hovering
over Lac St. Louis, west of Montreal, "It was about 20
feet above the water.  It was also an unmarked
helicopter."
     According to Kayla, "For the last three weeks,
there have been many black helicopters seen in and
around the west end of the island" in the St. Lawrence
River where Montreal is located.  "The night helicopters
are usually seen between 1 and 4 in the morning,"
flying around the Montreal suburbs of Hampstead,
St. Laurent and Lachine.  (Email Interview)

V-SHAPED UFO SEEN IN
CENTRAL ONTARIO

     On Friday, May 29, 1998, Sally Svenningson
spotted a large, low-flying V-shaped UFO over her
home on River Road in Bancroft, Ontario, Canada.
     "I was sitting in my living room at 10:30 p.m.
and saw bright lights flashing across the sky,"
Sally reported.  "I ran outside, and a V-shaped object
with bright lights flew by our house and up the lake.
My car lights and the outside spotlight went on and
stayed on.  I have had sightings before but never at
such a low altitude or with the lights being turned on."
     Bancroft (population 2,383) is at the intersection
of Provincial Highways 62 and 28 about 130 miles
(238 kilometers) west of Ottawa.  (See Filer's Files #23
for 1998.  Many thanks to George A. Filer, Eastern
director of MUFON, for this news story.)

UFO SEEN NEAR NEWCASTLE,
NEW SOUTH WALES

     On Thursday, May 28, 1998, at 7:30 p.m., Hugo
Starri, 55, an accountant, was at his home at Buff
Point, New South Wales, near Newcastle, when he
spotted three UFOs.
     "Mr. Starri used binoculars for a major part of the
observation, and he was able to give a very accurate
description of what he saw.  The object was described
as three deep orange-coloured balls of light approximately
the size and luminescence of 'the Morning Star'"
     "One of the objects took approximately 10 minutes to
traverse the visible arc of the sky, and it seems as if
the other balls were 'playing with it.'  They seemed to
approach at a very fast pace.  One of them traversed
one-quarter of the visible sky in approximately 1.5
seconds.  The two balls of light traveled in several
different directions in variance to the direction traveled
by the more steady light.  The general direction of travel
was from north to south."
     Starri estimated that the UFOs were "six or more
times as large as a passenger airliner."  He added that
he "has never seen anything of this type before and is
not particularly interested in phenomena of this type."
     Newcastle, N.S.W. is on Australia's Central Coast
170 kilometers (102 miles) north of Sydney.  (Many
thanks to Barry Davidson and John Thompson of ISUR
for this report.)

UFO SIGHTED IN DESERT
NEAR INDIO, CALIFORNIA

     On Sunday, June 7, 1998, at 8:58 p.m., Jack L.
Curtis was driving east on Interstate Highway I-10,
heading home to Arizona, when he spotted
something strange in the sky just outside Indio,
California (population 36,793).
     "I noticed a bright blue-green meteorite traveling
eastward," Jack reported.  "It was extremely brilliant,
traveling rapidly but slower than a real meteorite.  As
it approached the eastern horizon, it appeared to
burn out as it turned orange, then yellow, then
disappeared from sight.  The night was clear with dust
limiting visibility slightly, and the moon was really
full and bright."
     "The object was in a straight line.  I was driving
directly east, and it was slightly to the left and dead
ahead, so would have been about 080 (degrees) from
from first view to disappearance.  First view was also
45 degrees of (up from) the horizon...As I was traveling
at freeway speed, it was impossible to hear anything
but the engine...I estimate that it was about six to eight
seconds from first view to disappearance."
     Indio is at the intersection of I-10 and California
Highway 86 approximately 115 miles (184 kilometers)
east of Los Angeles.  (Email Interview)

UFOs RETURN TO ELK CITY,
OKLAHOMA

     On the heels of last week's UFO sighting in Elk City,
Oklahoma (population 10,428) comes a new report
of an unidentified flying object.
     Skywatch vice president Jim Hickman reported
that he "was providing security for a Mediflight
helicopter" due to arrive at the hospital in Elk City
when he spied the UFO.
     "I had a few minutes to skywatch, so I checked out
the sky.  At about 10:40 p.m. (on Tuesday, June 9) I
observed a small but not very bright object that
appeared to be very high.  Its angle from the ground
was about 70 degrees.  It was moving west at a very
fast speed.  It then turned extremely bright, brighter
than the landing light of the helicopter that had just
arrived."
     "The object was white, star size, much brighter
than the full moon that was in the southeastern sky.
It appeared to be several orders of magnitude brighter
than any other stars visible.  It then moved 120
degrees to the southwest...It was a very sharp
course change."
     "It continued with the bright light thing during the
turn, then two to three seconds after the turn, it
'turned off' the light.  You could still see the lights
burning on the object.  It then faded to black with
nothing else seen afterward."
     "Last week I wanted to have seen my wife's
sighting," he added, "Well, last night I saw it, and
I'll never wish for a thing like that again."  (Many
thanks to Jim Hickman for sending us his report.)

NEW SIGHTING IN THE
PITTSBURGH SUBURBS

     On Wednesday, June 10, 1998, at 10:20 p.m., a
witness "first observed a bright red light with a yellow
color around the outside edge, moving from the
northwest to the southeast" over Bethel Park,
Pennsylvania (population33,823), a city six miles
(10 kilometers) south of Pittsburgh.
     "A few minutes later, it (the UFO) was followed
by an identical light that went in the same direction.
Then, seconds later, a third similar light followed
the same path, then disappeared in seconds just
like the other two."
     "About five minutes later, a fourth similar light
went from west to east, then disappeared in seconds."
     "And then was followed by a fifth light, which also
went from west to east and disappeared also in
seconds.  The strange thing about this observation,
to the witness, was that all five lights seemed to
disappear in the same direction of the sky."  (Many
thanks to Stan Gordon for this report.  Stan's UFO
Hotline can be reached at (724) 838-7768.)

ROUNDUP CORRIGENDA: Barry Taylor, founder of
Australian UFO Researchers Network, writes, "I am
trying to fix up the information that was posted on
UFO Roundup" last week (Vol.3, #23) "re the sighting
reports supplied to you by Robert Frola."  Barry
invites all Roundup readers to read the original New
South Wales sighting report at this website--go to
http://ufoinfo.com/news/aus1998_3.html  UFO
Roundup apologizes for any embarassment that
may have been caused by the headline.
     Also in last week's issue, Patricia B. of
Chattanooga, Tenn. and her 8-year-old stepson
were the eyewitnesses to the sighting.  UFO Roundup
apologizes for the misidentification.

from the UFO Files...

1790: A UFO LANDS DURING
          THE FRENCH REVOLUTION

     A very strange UFO incident took place in Alencon,
a city in France's department of Sarthe, about 160
kilometers (100 miles) southwest of Paris on June 12,
1790, at about 5 a.m.
     When word reached the Committee of Public
Safety, they sent an agent of their secret police named
Liabeuf to investigate.
     "The witnesses, a group of French peasants, told
him that an enmormous globe had appeared that
morning, moving with a rocking motion, and that it
crashed into the top of a hill, uprooting the vegetation.
Heat from the object started grass fires, and the
peasants rushed to put them out before they spread.
The huge globe was warm to the touch."
    "'The eyewitnesses of this event were two mayors,
a physician, and three other local authorities who
confirm my report,' Liabeuf writes, 'Not to mention
the dozens of peasants who were present.'"
     "As the crowd gathered around the mysterious
object, 'a sort of door opened, and there came out a
person, just like us, but dressed in a strange manner,
in clothes adhering completely to the body, and
seeing the crowd of people, this person murmured
something incomprehensible and ran into the wood.'"
     "The peasants backed away from the object
fearfully, and a few moments later, it exploded
silently and nothing was left but a fine powder.  A
search for the mysterious man was launched,
'but he seemed to have dissolved in thin air,'"
Liabeuf wrote.  (See OPERATION TROJAN HORSE
by John A. Keel, Manor Books, New York, NY,
1970, page 66.)
(Editor's Comment:  The UFOnaut policy on forced
landings seems to be similar to downed pilots in
our era.  Destroy the aircraft, avoid contact with
the indigenous population and wait for rescue.
However, I guess old Willermoz, the Illuminatus of
Lyon, had to change his satin knee breeches
after reading that report.)

     Today is the birthday of Charles-Augustin de
Coulomb, one of the fathers of modern physics.
He was born at Angouleme in France on June 14,
1736 and spent many years in the Caribbean as
a military engineer for the French Army.  In the
late 1780s, he discovered what we now call
Coulomb's Law, that the force between two
electrical charges is proportional to the product
of the charges and inversely proportional to the
square of the distance between them.  The
Coulombic force is one of the principal forces
involved in nuclear reactions.  He died in Paris
on August 22, 1806.

     If anything, this was the week of "UFOs that
brighten intermittently as they cross the sky."
What's next?  Find out next Sunday from "the
paper that goes home--UFO ROUNDUP."
See you then.

UFO ROUNDUP: Copyright 1998 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 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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 15

                     Corso Suffers Massive Heart Attack

From: Peter A. Gersten <UFOLAWYER1@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 17:53:01 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 08:12:06 -0400
Subject: Corso Suffers Massive Heart Attack


Dear CAUS Subscribers:

I have just learned that Colonel Philip Corso suffered a massive
heart attack this past Tuesday, June 9th.

I have spoken to his son who has informed me that the Colonel
suffered 90% heart damage and was not expected to survive when
first brought into the hospital.

His heart attack came within two weeks of his signing the CAUS
affidavit swearing to the statements made in 'Day After
Roswell.'

Miraculously over the past five days, the Colonel has made a
remarkable recovery and is now listed in stable condition. There
is a possibility that he may be able to return home in five
days.

He is presently in the Jupiter Hospital in Jupiter, Florida. I
am sure he would appreciate any and all prayers and support.

On behalf of CAUS, we wish the Colonel a speedy recovery.

Peter A. Gersten
Executive Director
Be sure to visit the CAUS web site at http://caus.org
To join this mailing list, go to http://caus.org/feedback.htm

To be REMOVED from this mailing list, go to...
http://caus.org/remove/






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 15

                     Hot Gossip UK Magazine - June 1998

From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 01:44:29 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 08:41:42 -0400
Subject: Hot Gossip UK Magazine - June 1998



Hot Gossip UK Magazine - JUNE 1998
The Unexplained Page
http://www.camelot-group.com/hotgossip/unexgoss.html
By Georgina Bruni

****************************************************************

AN EVENING WITH STIGMATIC/CONTACTEE - GIORGIO BONGIOVANNI

THE BENTWATERS WOODBRIDGE FILE - continued

A CLOSE ENCOUNTER OF THE ROMANTIC KIND
_____________________________________________

AN EVENING WITH STIGMATIC/CONTACTEE - GIORGIO BONGIOVANNI

PHOTO: Giorgio Bongiovanni showing his wounds.

It's not every day that you get to meet a Stigmatic and
Contactee, so when I was invited to a press conference to hear
the well known Italian Stigmatic, Giorgio Bongiovanni speak, I
was more than pleased to accept.

I personally have no religious beliefs, but my interest in
unexplained phenomena was enough to have me cancel an important
pre-arranged dinner in order to meet this unusual man.

The London Press Conference was held at the St John's Wood home
of Baroness Edmee Di Pauli. On my arrival I found about fifty
guests cramped into a small drawing room anxiously awaiting the
presence of Bongiovanni. He was late, and the Baroness was
getting very worried. After what seemed like ages he finally
arrived with his entourage, which turned out to be a British
film crew where making a documentary of the Italian mystic.

Bongiovanni is certainly simpatico, but strange. He's a thirty
five year old Italian who bleeds a quarter of a glass of blood
every day from his hands, feet, side, and forehead. Every day
the wounds open up and as they do so, he says he receives
messages from a spiritual force.

He has to travel with his personal nurse who takes care of his
wounds and changes his dressings daily, and so far he has not
suffered any infection. Apparently, stigmatics don't. The bloody
mark on his forehead is in the sign of a cross, and he points
out that the other wounds also form Christian symbols.

Bongiovanni's personal story really begins in April 1989,
although he empathises that by then he had already received
spiritual preparation from another contactee. The visions had
already began! But one day, during a lunch break from his small
shoe repair business, he claims he saw a bright figure floating
in a ray of light. He immediately fell on his knees and
instinctively knew it was the virgin mother Mary, herself.

Bongiovanni says the figure spoke the following words to him.

" I am appearing here before you because I want to give you a
mission"

The bewildered young man confessed his experience to family and
close friends, and meanwhile the vision continued to return for
a period of five months. Finally in August the vision told him
to go to Fatima.

[Fatima is a village situated about 70 miles north of Lisbon in
Portugal, where, in 1915 it suddenly became famous when three
young peasant children claimed that religious visions had
appeared before them.]

"I will manifest a sign that all will see." said the vision to
Bongiovanni.

"I thought it would be a UFO but I was presented with a
stigmata," he says.

His stigmata first appeared in 1989 whilst on his pilgrimage to
the site of the famous Fatima event. The first wounds appeared
on his hands as he was kneeling down inside the famous grotto.
He explains:

 "It was at that moment that two beams of light came from the
heart of the Mother Mary. The beams hit my hands and created the
wounds. No one else could see this except me, and I was
prepared to receive the sign."

I'm told that he also believes he's the reincarnation of
Francesco, one of the children to have seen the visions at
Fatima in 1915.

The conference finally begins and the Baroness proudly
introduces her special guest.

" It is a great honour to see someone wearing a stigmata" she
announces in her quaint Austrian accent.

Some ladies in the audience are clearly overwhelmed by the sight
of this man.

Bongiovanni doesn't speak in his native language [Italian].
Instead he chooses to speak in Spanish to make it easier for his
friend and translator, Giorgio Piacenza, who is Peruvian.
Piacenza is a charming man, and a great supporter of
Bongiovanni, and he does an excellent translation.

" I am very joyous to be here with you tonight. This is the
second time I have visited London. The first time was in 1995
when my friend Michael Hesemann invited me as one of the few
people to view the Ray Santilli video [Alien Autopsy Footage]. I
was asked as an expert to give a spiritual opinion of this case.
I acted through my emotions and feelings, and it is my opinion
that the movie [Alien Autopsy Footage] is real. But tonight we
are here to talk about ET's. For me, the contact with ET's is
the second most important event in history. The first being, the
contact with God, or the cosmic intelligence....or whatever you
prefer to call it."

He then talks about religion and the extraterrestrial universes.

Some people are falling asleep. It's been a long wait and many
of the guests have been here since 7pm without any refreshment -
the mainstream media would have left for the pub ages ago. It's
now almost 10pm. I have another appointment at ten.

Bongiovanni tells us that three days before his 33rd birthday,
[Jesus died on his 33rd birthday] the Stigmata was completed. He
was now bearing all the wounds of Jesus Christ, and is the only
permanent Stigmatic alive. But I am informed that he can halt
this any time he chooses.

An announcement startles the audience. Nick Pope's ears prick
up. He has received another sign! We are going to have a
relationship with the extraterrestrials! The problem with
Bongiovanni's beliefs, is that he truly believes all
extraterrestrials [including the little greys] to be genuinely
friendly. I begin to wonder how the long suffering abductees
will take all this, when suddenly from somewhere in the room,
the editor of Flying Saucer Review, Gordon Creighton, jumps up
to defend his theory that not all ET's are friendly.

Queries Creighton:

" I've come to the conclusion that a great many people in the
world are under the impression that the ET's are good. I believe
they are not. Why have the angelic powers not given us any kind
of guidance? It is perfectly clear that half breeds [hybrids]
exist, and at the present there is no doubt that the satanic
powers are more dominant. Is it possible that Man could have
more guidance?

Bongiovanni returns with a long drawn out answer, quoting from
the bible he relates the story of Jesus Christ, pointing out
that Christ's own people were, after all, responsible for his
demise.

"It is the people who choose. What then, does Mankind choose?
The negative? Man calls upon himself. He can choose both the
positive or the negative."

Tell that to the abductees Giorgio. They don't seem to have much
choice in the matter!

Now for the really interesting part. Giorgio Bongiovanni
believes he has received the third secret of Fatima [the other
secrets were revealed to the children when they saw the visions,
but the third has been withheld by the Vatican, and has still to
be told] It was rumoured that Pope John 23rd was about to reveal
it just before his death. I very much doubt he would have
managed that because part of the prediction, assuming
Bongiovanni and others are right of course, is that the Church
itself will fall. The messages he receives are a Pope's
nightmare. Bang, there goes his sainthood! They appeal to the
Church to return to humility, and end materialism and corruption
within its hierarchy. The second part was that mankind should
prepare for extraterrestrial encounters at the latter part of
the 20th century. And the third was the usual nuclear threat.
Bongiovanni told James Whale [Talk Back Radio] that the world's
governments have suppressed the truth because they think the
people aren't ready to accept ET realisation.

After the conference I had arranged to meet Lynn Picknett, and I
asked what she thought about the Stigmata phenomena. Picknett
co authored with Clive Prince, the best seller [Turin Shroud -
In Whose Image]. She clearly thinks that the shroud is a hoax
perpetrated by Leonardo da Vinci.

So what does she say about all this?

" It is just so unhealthy! It reveals nothing about the life and
death of Jesus. Nor anything about the validity of Christianity.
What it does reveal, is the power of the unconscious mind to
create outward and visible signs of any kind of fanatically held
beliefs."

Picknett points out that the crucifixion victims were not nailed
to the cross by being pierced through the palms of the hand -
but by being nailed through the wrists. Her argument is that
none of those claiming to be a Stigmatic have wounds through the
wrists.

It's interesting to note that most Stigmatics were/are female,
and apart from being devout Christians, most have been from
humble backgrounds. In many cases they have been known to suffer
from severe ill health which immediately terminated at the first
signs of receiving the Stigmata. Another interesting factor is
that the majority are 'part time', inasmuch as they only take on
the wounds at weekends, religious holidays or every Friday.

The first recorded Stigmatic [1224] was said to be that of St
Francis of Assisi. Not only did he have the usual wounds, but
nails were said to have protruded from the core of them, and his
feet were especially painful, causing him to eventually become
lame. Since then there have been other cases were the actual
nails have been prominent. But the most incredible story of all
seems to be that of Teresa Neumann, who bled almost every Friday
for thirty two years. In a biography of her, by Johannes
Steiner [1967] it is written that apart from the Communion wafer
and wine - no food or liquid was consumed for 35 years. There
was enough evidence from scientists and doctors to prove that
this was the case, and apart from the latter, and the fact that
eventually she ceased to pass any excreta, she remained healthy
and active until her demise in 1962.

Trying to understand this strange phenomena is not easy,
especially when people witness pictures and statues of the
Virgin Mary and Christ that appear to cry real tears. But I'm
inclined to agree with Lynn Picknett. I believe the mind is so
powerful that if one has enough passion and belief, one is able
to create so called miracles. In my opinion, Giorgio
Bongiovanni is not a fraud, but a genuine soul who truly
believes. So much so, that he has brought upon himself the
suffering of a Stigmata. And when he tells his audience that
they have the choice to choose what is positive or negative.
He's right, but just how positive is it to have to carry the
burden of such dreadful wounds around for the best part of, or
rest of ones physical life.

I also agree with George Creighton. We must be aware that if
there is good and evil right here on our own planet - there's
probably good and evil out there in the rest of the universe.
And yes, if the angelic powers do exist maybe they should send
us something positive to work with. No offense is meant to
Bongiovanni, or any other Stimatic, but I for one just cannot
believe that human mutilation is a sign from the Creator. There
are a lot of [grey] areas here.
___________________________________________________________

THE BENTWATERS WOODBRIDGE FILE -Continued

This story remains so complex and unbelievable that it has
almost become a tangled web of intrigue. An unexplained case
that continues to baffle the media, UFO investigators and
sceptics alike. What really happened in Rendlesham forest during
the last week of December 1980 is still a mystery, but with many
new witnesses coming forward, we know that something highly
unusual occurred at the perimeter of RAF Bentwaters/Woodbridge -
something so incredible that it changed the lives of many of
those who were directly involved.

A few months ago, author and American researcher PETER ROBBINS
[who has spent several years working on this case] received a
phone call from Timothy Egercic, an ex Bentwaters/Woodbridge SP
who had contacted Peter through Lori Rehfelt, another ex
Bentwaters SP. For some time now, Lori and others have been most
helpful in providing both Peter and I with an insiders knowledge
of the twin bases. In a written statement to Peter, Timothy
presents us with interesting new details and names....

Here's Timothy's story.

Timothy Egercic was stationed at RAF Bentwaters from March 1979
until March 1981, and was a Security Policeman for the 81st
Security Police Squadron assigned to D Flight. He worked on D
Flight throughout his entire two year tour. His Flight Chiefs
were Ray Gulyas, Edwin Keaney and Robert F Ball. He claims the
UFO incident occurred under Bob Ball's leadership.

On the 25 December 1980 Egercic was just finishing his last
swing shift with D Flight at 11pm, when a Woodbridge Patrol
called in a report of strange lights outside the base. Before
going off duty Timothy and his colleagues turned over the report
to the next shift, which was C Flight. He can't remember what
post he was on that first night, but for the following three he
was posted on Whiskey One [alarm monitor for the WSA structures
containing nuclear weapons and Central Security Control]

On his return to duty the following evening he began the first
of his three night mid shifts (11pm - 7am). The first thing he
did was ask Sgt Bob Ball (who had been there the previous night)
if C Flight had also seen the strange lights that had been
reported by the earlier shift. Ball's answer was "no".

But for the next three nights Egercic states that during the
hours of midnight and 2am, the Woodbridge patrols reported
strange lights appearing over Rendlesham Forest. He points out
that the second and third nights activities were fairly
identical. Bob Ball took the calls on every instance, and
according to Egercic, Ball would call up a patrol to open the
back gate of Bentwaters (Butley Gate) and then he and whoever
else was with him, would then proceed to take the four - five
mile journey to Woodbridge. Egercic recalls trying to keep in
radio contact with Ball as he entered the forest [at times
almost losing him because of a weak signal or static] and
randomly asked for his security status. Ball always responded
back politely with "Secure".

It was during one of these nights that Egercic asked Sgt Willie
B Williams, the Woodbridge Supervisor, if he would like to go
into the forest with the others. He responded back with a quick
"negative".

He also recalls that during the last night of the sightings,
someone from Communications was let into the WSA to observe the
lights from the tower, Egercic was asked if he'd like relief to
go as well, but he declined. On this, the last night, Tim
states that radio transmissions from witnesses were more than
the previous nights, and he remembers repeating the
transmissions from witnesses over the air so the troops at
Bentwaters could hear what was being seen by the Woodbridge
personnel. From the tower the observers could see dancing
lights in the sky atop the treeline towards Woodbridge base.

Recently Timothy Egercic contacted Adrian Bustinza [Ret Sgt] who
was a first hand witness to one of the incidents. During the
conversation Bustinza confirmed that the April 1984 interview
with Larry Fawcett [featured in the book LEFT AT EAST GATE co
authored by Larry Warren and Peter Robbins] was true, and went
on to add that during the debriefing the next day they were told
to "Keep Quiet"....and those famous words " Bullets Are Cheap".
Fawcett's interview with Bustinza is very interesting, and well
worth reading. The following information is taken from the
latter.

Sgt Adrian Bustinza was stationed at Bentwaters/Woodbridge and
attached to the 81st Security Police Squadron during the 1980
incidents. He was in the service for six years. On the night of
his encounter he was with Lieutenant Bruce Englund. The two
took a jeep out to the East Gate to relieve SP Larry Warren of
his duty there and take him with them to the motor pool. After
filling the light-alls they then drove [back to the field] and
discovered that the light-alls now didn't work - although they
had worked perfectly well at the motor pool. From there on they
picked up a jeep and drove to the Bentwaters gate were they met
up with other vehicles. They then left the Bentwaters gate and
headed towards Woodbridge, were on the road they passed Military
Police with flares blocking the traffic. [remember this is on
British soil] The jeep then turned into the wooded area were
they were met by other vehicles. The personnel had to hand over
their M16 weapons because they were on British soil - but
Bustinza's side arm was not taken. At this stage the animals
were going frantic, Lieutenant Englund had already cautioned him
to drive carefully on the way over because the animals were all
over the road. About this time Major Zickler stepped out of a
jeep and fell into mud up to his waist, which caused a lot of
laughter. After organising themselves, they began to break up
into four man teams and proceeded to enter the forest in some
kind of a line. Amongst the personnel with the aforementioned
were John Burroughs, Sgt Medina, Captain Verrano, MSSgt Bob
Ball, Mark Thompson, Sgt Combs, Palmer.

Bustinza says that a pararescue squadron from the Woodbridge
base was activated [67 ARRS outfit] Major Zickler had requested
the scramble, and helicopters were now overhead. Meanwhile the
field was ringed by about 30 military personnel including
British. The field was now a yellow mist, and over the pine
trees came a red ball of light that went over the top of the
mist and exploded into lots of colours in the middle of the
field. There was no sound. Fawcett asks Bustinza to confirm
that an officer [says it may have been Zickler] ordered them to
move closer to the object and that they could see their shadows
on it . "Yes, sir, that's correct." Agreed Bustinza. However he
refused to discuss what allegedly took place the following day
whereby Warren claims they were both taken by two Oriental types
bunged in the back of a car, sprayed with a gas, and taken to an
underground facility. All he said was:

" Yeah, I'm with you. I don't want to say anything else. I'm
with you.....the underground part. I really don't know anything
about the underground part."

Bustinza does recall that Larry Warren and himself were going
closer to the object and it reminded him of another encounter
that he had been involved with at Mather Air Force Base,
California in the late 70s when he was with the 320 SPS unit.
He then said to Col Halt "Oh, no, not again." An officer [he
names Halt] was communicating with something but didn't know
what.

Interestingly, Bustinza claims that Halt was having a
conversation with something that he [Bustinza] couldn't see. He
states:

" To tell you the truth, I remember seeing the craft. I remember
Colonel Halt talking, and I remember looking to who he was
talking to and I couldn't see anybody" Earlier in the interview
he exclaimed how shocked and helpless he had felt during this
incident.

The part of the bizarre conversation between [Halt] and the
[invisible source] he vaguely remembers is as follows:

" And I do remember him saying he would contact the electronics
division which would be CRF, I think it was the call letters for
the group. And they would possibly have to get the part from
another world. And I just looked at, I couldn't hold my, you
know. Who are you talking to, what are you talking about, you
know."

Was it Halt - or someone else? Remember Warrens said it was
Williams.

Bustinza was later told to refrain from talking about the
incident as he should know better. He was told to "keep an eye
on the guys, if anybody says anything, you report to Colonel
Halt." The lieutenant told him.

Fawcett's interview with Adrian Bustinza fills a total of 16
pages in LEFT AT EAST GATE. Fascinating reading.

My thanks to Tim for this latest information, and to all the
wonderful ex Bentwaters/Woodbridge personnel that have come
forward to help with this case.
___________________________________________________________

A CLOSE ENCOUNTER OF THE ROMANTIC KIND

On a lighter note, romance is blossoming for two of Britain's
most well known authors. I was surprised to learn that LYNN
PICKNETT and NICK POPE are now an item. I caught up with them
at their favourite eatery, and over a bottle of wine and supper
I managed to get a brief story about their new found romance.

Nick Pope is best known as Britain's real life Fox Mulder. For
three years in the early nineties he was in charge of the
Ministry of Defence's UFO desk. Although Nick is still very
much employed by the MoD, he has now been promoted to another
section. Nick caused controversy both in the UFO world and at
the Ministry when he authored two best sellers on the subject of
UFOs. The first [Open Skies, Closed Minds] and his latest [The
Uninvited]. The latter is released in paperback this month. Now,
he's busy writing his first science fiction book which involves
the government and UFOs, and I'm told it's based on a good deal
of fact.

Lynn Pickett is a respected researcher and author of the
[unexplained]. She has co authored two best sellers with CLIVE
PRINCE, both of which received much criticism from the Church,
and apparently the Pope himself indirectly made a derogatory
statement about their book [Turin Shroud - In Whose Image]
which claimed that the Holy Shroud was in fact a hoax. Their
latest book [The Templar Revelation] caused even more of a stir
when it portrayed John the Baptist as more important than Jesus
Christ.

Lynn and Nick first met in 1995, at Walkers Wine Bar in
Whitehall. A busy venue which is the favourite drinking hole of
the MoD chaps. Lynn takes up the story.

"At the time, I was with Lucienne Morgan, [the then dream
analyst for Live TV network] we'd been together for three years.
It was a social evening, Lucienne and I arranged to meet up with
Rob Irving [sceptic] and a friend of Nick's called Michele, and
of course Nick turned up. We met many times since then, always
at social gatherings and conferences, and recently we were
together on a panel of judges at a convention. I've always been
very fond of Nick, and although I thought he was a great guy, I
didn't imagine he was looking in my direction. I suppose I was
misreading the signals. Recently though, since Lucienne and I
split up, I began to realise that Nick was interested."

Nick tells his story:

"I've always had the hots for Lynn, but we only ever seemed to
meet up in large groups, and occasionally at social events. We
flirted with each other but nothing ever came of it. Then three
years after we first met, we finally got together."

Lynn jumps in with one of her famous lines:

" Who would have thought that I, of all people, would have such
a close relationship with a "Pope".

Do we hear wedding bells I wonder?

Lynn begins to say no, but then she laughingly quotes: "And I of
all people should realise that one should never say
that....anything is possible!"

Nick's reply is quite expected: "I can neither confirm or deny
that the thought as ever crossed my mind."

Indeed. Whilst Lynn was busy doing a media interview, Nick was
having a good time at Stringfellows with me and model Valerie
Campbell at a function organised by some of his MoD [Ministry of
Defence] colleagues - a benefit for Great Ormond Street
Children's Hospital. For evidence of this - see picture on our
Spotlight page. And for conspiracy theorists out there. Sorry,
but I've been working with these guys on charity events long
before I met Nick. And no, I don't work for the Ministry!

Until next month Georgina Bruni
___________________________________________________________

Permission to distribute this information on the Internet is
granted providing the authors and Hot Gossip UK are credited.
Photographs are copyright, and cannot be published without
permission

This section accessible at
http://www.camelot-group.com/hotgossip/unexgoss.html

Georgina Bruni
Editor in Chief
Hot Gossip UK
www.hotgossip.co.uk
georgina@easynet.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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 15

              'Popular Mechanics' Accuses US Government Of UFO

From: Stig Agermose <wanderer@post8.tele.dk>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 02:21:45 +0200
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 08:30:00 -0400
Subject: 'Popular Mechanics' Accuses US Government Of UFO

From the July edition of 'Popular Mechanics'.

URL:

http://popularmechanics.com/popmech/sci/9807STSPBM.html#UFO

But do go the page itself! The numerous photos make it well worth
a visit.

Links are preceded by asterisks.


Stig


*******


July 1998


Six Unexplainable Encounters

These UFO sightings continue to defy science and the skeptics.


BY JIM WILSON


*- SHERAZ, IRAN, October 8, 1978
*- TRINDADE, BRAZIL, January 16, 1958
*- BENTWATERS, ENGLAND, December 27, 1980
*- ZANESVILLE, OHIO, November 13, 1966
*- HILLSDALE, MICHIGAN, March 21, 1966
*- What The Government Really Knows About UFO Sightings


Skeptics say it is easy to make a UFO crash. Just poke it with a
pointed question. Consider the legendary Mantell incident in
which a UFO supposedly shot down a F-51 Mustang in broad
daylight. Ask if any other military aircraft were aloft over
Kentucky that fateful Jan. 7, 1948 afternoon. You will discover
that Capt. Thomas F. Mantell Jr., a pilot in the Air National
Guard, died after running out of oxygen while chasing the Sun's
reflection off a then-secret Navy Skyhook balloon.

Radar has proven as fallible as the human eye, producing
headlines describing fleets of UFOs over Washington, D.C., Los
Angeles and sensitive military installations. In each case the
real invaders were overlapping radar signals, air masses of
differing densities, or flocks of birds that suddenly tightened
formation. Each anomaly can cause multiple targets or blimp-size
objects to appear one second and disappear the next.

At times, differences in interpreting the "facts" of a case can
make ufologists and skeptics seem like members of warring
tribes. There is, however, one point on which they agree: Most
UFO sightings are aircraft, planets or other natural phenomena.

Most sightings doesn't mean all sightings. And while government
investigations have repeatedly assured the public that UFOs pose
no danger to national security, the very same reports also
detail dozens of sightings that neither science nor the skeptics
can adequately explain. Among these cases are six sightings that
are more puzzling now than when they were originally reported.

POPULAR MECHANICS offers no opinion on whether these mysterious
flying machines originate from secret military airstrips here on
Earth or spaceports somewhere "out there." We do, however, feel
comfortable making one prediction: When the shell of security
surrounding UFOs finally cracks, it will be because one of the
sightings we present here provided the wedge.

(Image text: Trent described the UFO that he photographed as "a
good-sze parachute canopy without strings, only silvery bright
mixed with bronze." A colorized computer enhancement of the
photo reveals no evidence of strings, and a smooth bottom and
sharp edges that suggest an artificial, rather than natural,
object.)

Asked to pick the most credible UFO photos ever taken,
ufologists select the simple black-and-white snapshots taken by
Paul Trent, a farmer in McMinnville, Ore.

The photos allegedly confirm a sighting that occurred on May 11,
1950, when an inverted pieplate flying machine was seen by
Trent, his father-in-law and his wife.

Mrs. Trent saw the craft first. She told Air Force investigators
that she first spotted it about 7:30 pm as she walked across her
yard. About 30 ft. across, it floated noiselessly toward her
from the northeastern sky, creating a wake that rustled her
dress.

Thinking it was "something the Army was experimenting with," she
shouted for her husband to bring the camera. As he darted
outside and began snapping photos, she ran inside to phone her
parents, who lived next door. Thus alerted, her father caught a
glimpse of the craft a (sic!)

When the film was developed, Trent showed it to his friend Frank
Wortmann, a local banker, who displayed the pictures in the
bank's window. A local reporter saw and published the photos.
Within a month the main photo was circulated by news wires and
printed in Life magazine. The FBI and Air Force interviewed the
Trents. And then the photos disappeared.

Found in a news wire photo archive after 17 years, the misfiled
pictures were sought out by skeptics. "The pictures attracted
attention because they depicted not nebulous lights but an
artificial, structured aircraft," says Jerome Clark, of the J.
Allen Hynek Center for UFO Studies (JAHCUS). He investigated the
case while researching an encyclopedia titled The UFO Book.

Skeptics found nothing to disparage the Trents' integrity, and
no financial motive for having faked UFO pictures. The strongest
criticism of the photos to date has come from Philip J. Klass,
an aviation journalist who has published several books and a
newsletter debunking UFO claims. Klass says the Trent photo
shows a shadow pattern that could be produced only if the
picture was taken in morning light. Bruce Maccabee, an optical
physicist more sympathetic to ufologists, says the same effect
could have been created by cloud cover.

And so the mystery continues. "If authentic, they comprise
significant evidence for the reality of intelligently controlled
UFOs," says Clark.


SHERAZ, IRAN October 8, 1978

In the late 1970s, the long-friendly relationship between the
United States and Iran soured after the ouster of the Shah of
Iran. Anticipating armed conflict, both sides ratcheted up their
military preparedness. With U.S. spy satellites looking down and
Iranian radar installations looking up, the skies over Iran
became the most heavily monitored airspace in the world.                    =


(Image text: The Sheraz photo, shown enlarged in the upper right
corner, closely resembles Tacit Blue, a secret stealth jet.)

Had it not been for these political events, it is doubtful the
U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff would have been interested in a
snapshot taken by 16-year-old Jamshid Saiadipour. Up late
studying for exams in June 1978, he saw and photographed a UFO
from the window of his family's apartment in the town of Sheraz.

The photo caused a stir among ufologists because it resembled a
UFO reported by pilots during their landing approach to the
Teheran airport earlier in the year.

On Oct. 8, 1978, a similar craft was photographed by another
youngster, Franklin Youri, from outside his home near Lake Urmia
in western Iran. This picture, however, was not revealed until
the Youri family relocated to the United States three years
later.

A Freedom of Information Act request and lawsuit (see "What The
Government Really Knows About UFO Sightings" below) ultimately
led to the release of Defense Department documents that revealed
the American military's interest in the sightings.

What made ufologists and the U.S. military so interested in
photos of UFOs taken by two Iranian teenagers? Ufologists claim
that Iranian airspace had been a hotbed of UFO activity for many
years. They say a pivotal moment occurred on Sept. 19, 1978,
with an encounter between two Iranian Phantom jets and an object
that failed to appear on radar. When the American-made F-4
fighters got close enough to release their air-to-air missiles,
the planes' weapons-firing control systems mysteriously and
repeatedly failed.

Skeptics point out the real reason for the interest from the
Joint Chiefs of Staff may have been the strong resemblance
between the object that appeared in the two photos and a
then-secret stealth aircraft, Tacit Blue. Based at the former
Area 51 secret aircraft development center in Nevada, it was
designed to test stealth technology.

Ufologists say the case needs further investigation. Until then
it remains a valid UFO.


TRINDADE, BRAZIL January 16, 1958

(Image text: The Trinidade UFO was photographed and seen by more
qualified observers than any other sighting.)

When ufologists and skeptics can't find strings, shadows or
signs that a UFO photo is faked, they question the credibility
of the photographer and witnesses. Trained observers=96including
pilots, ship captains and military officers=96are usually
considered the best witnesses. It is the credibility of the 47
crew members of the Brazilian naval vessel Almirante Saldanha
that makes the Trindade, Brazil UFO photo so important.

As part of its contribution to the 1957-58 International
Geophysical Year, the Brazilian navy set up a weather station on
the small rocky island of Trindade, in the south Atlantic Ocean.
In January 1958, observers began spotting unusual aerial
activity, including fast-flying disks. On the night of Jan. 16,
the disk shown here appeared within view of the ship's company.

Among those present was civilian photographer Almiro Barauna,
who snapped a series of six photos. After the ship returned to
port, the photos, which had been developed on board in a
makeshift darkroom, were turned over to the Brazilian Navy
Ministry. Analysts determined the photos to be authentic and
concluded they showed a 50-ft.-dia. object moving at 600 mph.

Skeptics have offered two explanations for the craft. Initially,
Harvard University astronomy professor Donald H. Menzel said the
UFO was simply a plane flying through fog. Then, in the first of
several books he would write debunking UFOs, he claimed the
photos were faked. Barauna, he said, had first photographed a
model UFO in his home and later double-exposed the same roll of
film with pictures of the open sky. However, a 1978 examination
by an independent laboratory using digital photo analysis ruled
out such tampering.

"Given the number of witnesses, the results of photo analysis,
both military and civilian, and the need for debunkers to
reinvent the incident to 'explain' it, it seems most unlikely
that the Trindade photographs were hoaxed," says JAHCUS's Clark.


BENTWATERS, ENGLAND December 27, 1980

"I started my tour of duty believing in aircraft lights," Nick
Pope tells me as we eat a traditional English lunch of fish and
chips at London's Red Lion pub, just down the block from his
office in the British Ministry of Defence (MOD). "I ended it
believing in aliens."

For three years Pope was assigned to the MOD office responsible
for investigating UFO reports. Holding a rank equivalent to
captain, he knew the detours around the roadblocks bureaucrats
put in the way of ufologists.

(Image text: England's UFO investigator, Nick Pope, went from
skeptic to believer.)

Among the cases he examined was an incident that has come to be
known as England's Roswell. It occurred over the last days of
December 1980, near a now-closed U.S. Air Force base in
Bentwaters. For two nights security patrols observed unusual
lights in the Rendlesham Forest just beyond the base's fence. On
the second night they entered the forest with generator-powered
floodlights, Geiger counters and 2-way radios. At the critical
moment when an angular, 20-ft.-wide, 30-ft.-tall craft appeared,
the radiation-detecting instruments started to clatter and the
spotlights and radios began to sporadically fail.

Daylight revealed broken tree limbs and three 1 1/2-in. deep,
7-in.-dia. circular depressions, suggesting something had
landed, just as the observers claimed.

Initially, skeptics dismissed this physical evidence as wind
damage. They explained the unusual lights by constructing a
complex chain of events that included unusual astronomical
activity, satellite debris burning up on reentry, and the
rotating beam of a lighthouse several miles away.

What the skeptics couldn't explain, says Pope, is a scientific
report he found in the MOD files. It revealed radiation levels
25 times higher than normal background levels in the soil and
trees surrounding the landing site. (Image text: The USAF
account was found in British UFO files.)

As Pope delved more deeply into MOD files he found that the
Bentwaters case, as it is known to ufologists in the United
States, was the second to occur in the Rendlesham Forest.

On Aug. 13, 1956, British radar had picked up blips similar to a
jet aircraft's=96only it was moving at speeds up to 9000 mph.
Technicians later told investigators for Project Blue Book that
diagnostics checks indicated their radar was operating normally.
The incident remained classified until 1969.

Pope said the two Bentwaters episodes and others he investigated
during his stint as England's top UFO investigator moved him
from skeptic to believer, and inspired him to write a book
titled Open Skies, Closed Minds.

"As long as we are all afraid of ridicule, the UFOs are going to
be ignored," says Pope. "Perhaps we ignore them at our peril."


ZANESVILLE, OHIO November 13, 1966

For those who believe UFOs are piloted by child-size creatures
with large almond eyes, any sighting that takes place in the
state of Ohio merits special attention.

The attraction is Wright-Patterson Air Force Base. In addition
to being the headquarters for Project Blue Book, it was also
home to the Air Technical Intelligence Centers, which analyzed
flying machines based on Nazi German "flying disc" designs (see
Roswell Plus 50, July '97). What makes these stories even more
appealing are recurring rumors that the base is also the
repository for debris from crashed UFOs, and alien bodies.                  =


(Image text: The Zanesville photos fit descriptions of craft
seen by police and sheriff's deputies elsewhere in Ohio in the
spring and fall of 1966.)

Ohio holds another distinction in UFO lore. In Zanesville, on
Nov. 13, 1966, local barber and amateur astronomer Ralph Ditter
took the two spectacular UFO photos shown here. Beyond their
detail=96which to some skeptics is evidence itself of fraud=96the
importance of the photos lies in their similarity to the craft
reported during a series of sightings that occurred throughout
the year.

At least two of these sightings were made by law enforcement
officials, credible witnesses on everyone's list. In Toledo, on
March 25, two Lucas County deputies, Robert Schultz and Stanley
Nelepa, reported seeing a huge object floating at treetop level.
Four days later, a glowing orange object was seen floating over
the Ohio Turnpike administration building in Berea. Three days
later it was spotted a second time, by Berea patrolmen Clarence
T. Janowick and John R. Galik Jr.

Because Ditter took his photos with a Polaroid camera, there are
no negatives to investigate for signs of tampering. The jury
remains out=96and perhaps may never be able to return a verdict on
whether the Zanesville photos are spectacular evidence or
spectacular frauds.


HILLSDALE, MICHIGAN March 21, 1966

Ufologists sometimes say skeptics are people who haven't had a
"close encounter." Josef Allen Hynek, who coined the phrase
"close encounter," might agree.

(Image text: As with the Bentwaters site, higher radiation
levels were also found at the Hillsdale site.)

Hynek was a University of Chicago-trained astrophysicist and
confirmed skeptic who served as the scientific consultant to the
Air Force Project Blue Book UFO investigation. And then he
changed sides. The case that prompted his conversion occurred in
Hillsdale County, Mich., on March 21, 1966, and involves the
photo shown here.

At about 10:30 pm a resident of the women's dormitory at
Hillsdale College reported a strange object in the sky. County
Civil Defense director William E. Van Horn responded and
confirmed that a bright glowing object was indeed bouncing
across a nearby hollow and then became airborne. Hynek, who died
in 1986, dismissed the Hillsdale sighting as "swamp gas." Within
two weeks, however, he changed not only his opinion about the
sighting, but also sides in the great UFO debate.

Perhaps it was the contents of Van Horn's report that sparked
the conversion. Soil analysis showed that on the very spot where
the "swamp gas" had touched down, radiation levels were higher
than in the surrounding terrain. More significant still was the
finding that the ground was also contaminated with boron, the
element used to slow nuclear chain reactions.


What The Government Really Knows About UFO Sightings

Do you believe the government is telling the truth about UFOs?
Each of the government's major UFO studies - projects Blue Book,
Grudge and Sign - claimed to have made a clean breast of things.
Yet, according to JAHCUS's Clark, 80% of Americans "believe the
government is hiding evidence of UFOs."

David M. Jacobs, a historian at Temple University, says the
government's own paper trail suggests there may be a good reason
to distrust the official version. He points out that between
1953 and 1969, the entire period the Air Force was responsible
for investigating UFOs, its officers operated under standing
orders from the Joint Chiefs of Staff that made it a crime under
the Espionage Act to share UFO reports with unauthorized
personnel.

"This action effectively stops the flow of information to the
public," says Jacobs. "Only if Blue Book could positively
identify a sighting as a hoax or misidentification would the Air
Force release information to the public."

The rules, Project Blue Book advisor Hynek once remarked, made
it impossible to evaluate a UFO report as anything other than a
natural object, weather or atmospheric phenomenon, a hoax or a
hallucination.

Hynek claimed that the Air Force was also under economic
pressure to reduce the paperwork that UFO reports generated. To
help keep the work flow manageable, said Hynek, Blue Book made
arbitrary rules. For example, sightings reported by anyone under
18 were automatically disregarded. Toward the end of the
project, enlisted men were allowed to summarily dismiss cases by
claiming they were filed by crackpots.

Now, many of the sightings that Blue Book and earlier UFO
investigations refused to examine are about to come out. In 1980
a group called Citizens Against Unidentified Flying Objects
Secrecy filed a lawsuit under the Freedom of Information Act
that asked the National Security Agency (NSA) to open its files
on 239 sightings. In documents filed under a top-secret security
classification, NSA responded that revealing its knowledge of
UFO activity would damage national security.

But now, under revised declassification rules, many of these
documents are being released by virtue of their age. Included
among them are the Joint Chiefs of Staff communications about
the Iran sighting. Historians and ufologists may soon have the
final pieces of the great UFO puzzle.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 15

                           U.F.O. Historical Revue

From: jan@cyberzone.net (Jan Aldrich)
Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 20:09:50 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 09:03:31 -0400
Subject: U.F.O. Historical Revue

U.F.O. Historical Revue is at the printers and should go out
to subscribers shortly.

The first issue of Barry Greenwood's new publication is
dedicated to the memory of David Christensen who recently
passed away.

In this issue Barry will finish up his coverage of the
summer of 1997.  The article is a continuation from the last
issue of his JUST CAUSE.  The main UHR article entitled,
"Unusual US Coastal Sightings during World War II" will
feature two interesting sightings from Aircraft Warning
Service (AWS) observers published for the first time.  A
number of other such sightings will be covered, showing
that unusual observations in the "foo-fighter" era were
not just confined to Europe and Asia.


UHR may be order from:

    U.F.O. Historical Revue
    P.O. Box 176
    Stoneham, MA 02180

$15/year in the US, $20/year foreign.  Make check payable to UHR.


--
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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 15

                   Re: ORTK and CAUS endorse Bryant effort

From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 21:19:20 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 09:10:33 -0400
Subject: Re: ORTK and CAUS endorse Bryant effort


> From: MDJ50@webtv.net (Mike Jamieson)
> Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 06:44:47 -0700
> To: updates@globalserve.net
> Subject: ORTK and CAUS endorse Bryant effort

> ORTK's Board of Directors, by unanimous vote, endorsed Larry
> Bryant's efforts in its April board meeting. CAUS, under the
> direction of Peter Gersten, has also endorsed the effort to have
> a grand jury impaneled in Chavez County, New Mexico. Roswell is
> the county seat of Chavez County.

Forgive me if this question is answered on a website somewhere,
but....what jurisdiction can a county grand jury legally claim over
things the military allegedly did 50 years ago? According to the
statutes of New Mexico, what's the general jurisdiction of any grand
jury? Is it required to find that laws were violated, in order to
bring any indictments? What laws might have been violated during the
Roswell affair?

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 15

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: RobIrving@aol.com
Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 21:15:33 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 09:01:05 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


>From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
>To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs
>Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 23:24:48 -0400

Greg,

>Suppose we substituted "spousal abuse" for "UFOs" in what you've
>written here:

>>Purely as a thought experiment, now substitute Satanic Ritual
>>Abuse...

>Would this suggest that spousal abuse isn't real, and that
>complaints about it are generated simply by cultural factors?
>Hardly.

>>...then ask yourself the same question.

>Rob evidently misunderstands, and thinks I was trying to prove
>UFOs are real. So he plays my game, and gives John's paragraphs
>yet another subject, this time something we know does NOT exist.
>In doing so, he proves yet again that John's reasoning is
>flawed. We know that satanic abuse doesn't exist, but not
>because of John's argument. There's no way to deduce from John's
>argument that satanic abuse does or does not occur -- which, in
>all the guises this paragraph has assumed, is exactly my point.

Nicely manoeuvred, but please don't presume what I think.  You
were discussing the possible cultural influences on witness
testimony, and gave an example wherein this testimony has proved
to be true. I used your reasoning to highlight the flaws in that
reasoning.  It's a spurious, pointless argument, plain and
simple.

>What's really ironic here is that you don't need fancy Rimmer
>reasons to understand the cultural sources of satanic abuse
>reports. They usually come from fundamentalist Christians.

If you have read the relevant literature you would know that SRA
has historical connections that pre-date the Christian church.
It appears to be part of the human condition... and very much
affected by cultural & socio-economic factors. That issue (like
UFOs, I suspect) runs greatly deeper than your apparently facile
view of it.

>But then Mark Cashman has, without using impolite language,
>decisively shown why Rob is a dilettante.

Yes, I am a dilettante, at least as the OED describes one. I
like art, and I don't pursue any particular subject full-time -
I keep an eye on many, as I'm sure you do. I like to think I can
rely on people like Mark Cashman if I need specific details.

>He talks like an expert about UFOs, without knowing (or even thinking
>he ought to know) many of the principal cases.

I don't remember ever suggesting that I'm an expert in UFOs -
far from it - or even describing myself as a ufologist. I don't
think this disqualifies me from discussion.  Without me, this
"not the discussion I wanted to start" would not have started.
I'm sure you've learned something from it, even if you are loath
to admit it. Perhaps you will learn more, as I hope to (not
seeing this medium purely as a means to parade knowledge). You
seem quite threatened by disagreement, btw - you really needn't
be.

>He makes pronouncements about abduction research, too, but In his
>discussion with me, he said he hadn't heard about David Pritchard.

I don't remember making any pronouncements about abduction
research, unless you are referring to my comments regarding Dr
Mack. As far as I am aware, you should have no idea of my
thoughts regarding abduction research, because I have never
discussed them with you. Nor as far as I remember have I ever
written on the subject, unless in passing.

If you were to ask me what my actual thoughts are, rather than
settling for your invented version you may be surprised by them.

>I wonder if Rob has read Stuart Appelle's paper on the abduction
>evidence in JUFOS, which Jerry Clark mentioned not long ago.
>Don't worry, Rob -- it doesn't say abductions are real. It just
>summarizes -- exhaustively -- what's actually known, and lays
>out what both skeptics and proponents of abduction reality need
>to prove before they can say they've settled the question.

Again and again you pay me the discourtesy of presuming my
opinion. You'll describe me as a 'PST supporter' next, if you
haven't already - I think someone has somewhere. You don't know
my opinion on UFOs, only my opinion on the opinion of others.
It's a big, very big difference.

Rob







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 15

             Jesse Jr., Again Sees Symbols From Roswell 'Crash'

From: Stig Agermose <wanderer@post8.tele.dk>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 02:54:21 +0200
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 08:57:50 -0400
Subject: Jesse Jr., Again Sees Symbols From Roswell 'Crash'

This interesting update by James Bond Johnson was received
via NY MUFON's list June 14.

Stig

*******


Date: 14 Jun 1998 19:28:03 -0000
From: lclark@ibm.net
To: <NYMUFON@listbot.com>
Subject: Fw: Jesse Marcel, Jr., Sees Again Symbols From the
Roswell "Flying Saucer" Crash
Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 15:28:57 -0400

This message is sponsored by:

SiteOwner.com
The Ultimate Bookmark for Web Site Owners!
Free tools for promoting and analyzing your site.
http://www.siteowner.com/

From: James Bond Johnson <JBONJO@aol.com>
To: JBONJO@aol.com <JBONJO@aol.com>
Date: Saturday, June 13, 1998 9:31 PM
Subject: Jesse Marcel, Jr., Sees Again Symbols From the
Roswell "Flying Saucer" Crash


Press Release
Not for publication
Prior to June 15, 1998
(562) 426-3622


Jesse Marcel, Jr. Sees Again the Symbols From the Roswell
"Flying Saucer" Crash

By James Bond Johnson

It had been a long time since Dr. Jesse A. Marcel, Jr., had seen
these very special symbols... more than a half century! Now he
was seeing them remarkably being painted across his computer
screen as he sat in his home in Helena, Montana, where he is a
physician at the Veterans Affairs Hospital. These symbols are
connected to the most famous "flying saucer" incident in world
history -- the Roswell, New Mexico, crash of 1947.

He had been an 11-year-old boy that night in July, 1947, when
his father, Major Jesse A Marcel, Sr., rushed into their home in
the middle of the night and waked young Jesse from a deep sleep.
The father had just gathered up these pieces of debris from a
ranch near Roswell and was taking them to show to his commanding
officer at the Roswell Air Base where Major Marcel was the base
intelligence officer. But first he wanted his son to see these
exciting and unique pieces of a strange craft which had crashed
near Roswell.

And young Jesse, in examining the pieces spread out on their
family's kitchen floor noticed that there were unusual markings
on some of the beams -- symbols, kind of like ancient Egypt
writing. "Hieroglyphics", the teacher at school had called them.

Now, nearly 51 years later, Jesse recalled that night with
remarkable clarity. "I may not remember what I had for breakfast
yesterday, but the events of 50 years ago are as clear as
crystal" Jesse said in recalling that night. It was like no
other night in his life. "I even remember the telephone number
at our Roswell address so I do have a quirky memory which
sometimes gets me into trouble with the skeptics because they
say it isn't possible for me to remember the details that I do,"
Jesse added.

The symbols, described by many as the "fishhook", the "shark
fin" and the "Ankh" and some others were back to remind him of
that special night. Over the years Jesse had been asked to
describe the symbols and he had sketched them for publication in
books on UFOs.

But now, thanks to high tech digital enlargement techniques,
these symbols had been discovered on pieces of the debris shown
with his dad in the 8th Air Force headquarters offices of Brig.
General Roger Ramey in Fort Worth, Texas.

Major Marcel was photographed along with General Ramey and
Ramey's chief of staff, Colonel Thomas J. Dubose, all examining
the wreckage which had been brought to Fort Worth by Major
Marcel.

The story of that Roswell crash has been told and retold so many
times... and with so many conflicting details... in dozens of
books and articles, a movie and several television shows over
the years. But one thing always has been clear in the mind of
Jesse Marcel, Jr. -- the symbols on the pieces of wreckage.

"I am sure that some of the material in the photos is the real
stuff -- maybe it all is", Jesse said as he looked closely at
details of the greatly enlarged photo displayed on his computer
screen. Then he added: "My dad did say however that the
reporters saw only a small portion of the debris. Maybe he was
trying to throw people off the track because General Ramey was
supposed to handle it."

Or maybe it was because most of the debris had been left behind
on the B-29 bomber which had brought Major Marcel on an urgent
courier mission from Roswell with the puzzling cargo. It was
General Ramey who had ordered the flight so that he could
personally examine the wreckage of the "flying saucer", which
had been "captured", as the official Army Air Forces press
release described it.

Perhaps Major Marcel was concerned about soiling the nice new
carpet in the general's office and chose just a few parcels of
the debris to display on the floor in the general's office. It
was just a quick stopover in Fort Worth as the "saucer" was
being taken on to the AAF test center at Wright Field (now
Wright Patterson Air Force Base) for testing.

All the facts now can never be known. Nearly all federal
government records relating to the Roswell Incident apparently
now have been "sanitized" -- bureaucrateze for "destroyed" --
for reasons never explained by the government. A recent national
survey showed that since the government has offered four widely
different "official" versions of just what did happen near
Roswell in 1947, 91 per cent of American citizens now believe
the government has engaged in a "cover up".

Meanwhile, Dr. Marcel, veteran of Pacific military combat and
now proudly retired in the rank of full colonel after a total of
38 years active and National Guard service as a helicopter pilot
and flight surgeon, turned back to his computer screen to scan
the debris photo even more closely.

The symbol that he remembers best was a figure of a truncated
pyramid with a ball floating over it. "I remember it best
because it resembled a seal balancing a ball on its nose", he
said. Maybe he will find it somewhere in those pictures where it
has been hiding for 51 years.

                          -30-

















   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 15

               Re: Popular Mechanics' Accuses US Government Of

From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 11:37:56 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 16:25:22 -0400
Subject: Re: Popular Mechanics' Accuses US Government Of

>From: Stig Agermose <wanderer@post8.tele.dk>
>Subject: 'Popular Mechanics' Article Accuses US Government Of UFO Cover-Up
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 02:21:45 +0200

>>From the July edition of 'Popular Mechanics'.

>URL:

>http://popularmechanics.com/popmech/sci/9807STSPBM.html#UFO

>But do go the page itself! The numerous photos make it well worth
>a visit.

>Links are preceded by asterisks.

I heard about this issue late last week and picked up a copy to
see which "6 Sightings" they were excited about, and found that
they were certainly not new to those of us who frequent this
'list'.  Indeed, it appears that Popular Mechanics is once again
trying to increase their magazine sales by putting "UFOs" on the
front cover, which is similar to their 'expose' regarding "Area
51" last year (in which the author claimed that the base was
being phased out and a new "Area xx" was being created).

Unfortunately, "Popular Mechanics" (PM) and "Popular Science"
(PS) are two magazines that have been very influencial in
attracting those who are not familiar with the UFO genre,
although that impact my be much less today given the media
attention it now receives.  Those who are familiar with ufology
would (probably) never rely on information from PM or PS, but
those just developing an interest in the subject may gather their
early information from these sources and it could help to
formulate their view of it.

I noted that in his article, Jim Wilson referred to the J. Allen
Hynek Center for UFO Studies as JAHCUS, rather than CUFOS.  Is
JAHCUS a term that I've simply missed all these years, or is Jim
making this up as he goes along?

If PM and PS are going to use this genre to increase their sales,
as seems to be the case, it would be interesting if someone with
a greater depth of knowledge regarding this field could be tapped
to write the article.

My 2-cents.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 15

                               Re: Ford Fund?

From: Elaine M Douglass elaine26@juno.com
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 02:40:40 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 16:20:57 -0400
Subject: Re: Ford Fund?


>From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Date: Sun, 14 Jun 98 14:56:18 +500
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Ford Fund?


>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Ford Fund?
>>From: Elaine M Douglass <elaine26@juno.com>
>>Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 21:18:08 EDT

>>>From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 10:09:37 -0400
>>>Fwd Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 10:09:37 -0400
>>>Subject: Ford Fund?

>>>In view of the interest in the John Ford case on UFO UpDates I'm
>>>re-posting the following. I don't know if the E-Mail addresses
>>>still work - I've Cc:'ed the interested parties.

>>>ebk

>><snip>

>>Saturday June 13, 1998
>
>>Dear UFO UpDates-Toronto:

>>You must have received this message in a time capsule. It is out
>>of date. As you can see, the date on Don Jernigan's message is
>>1996.

>I'm annoyed that that you seem to imply a shelf life for justice and
>fair play.

>Your light tone suggests that you have changed _your_ mind regarding
>John's guilt or innocence...why! I think you owe me an explanation.
>I think you owe us _all_ an explanation!

>>John Ford is no longer in jail. He is in a mental hospital in
>>New York state. Mr. Jernigan is no longer trying to raise money
>>for John's legal expenses, nor am I, nor any other members of
>>the now-defunct John Ford Defense Committee.

>>Best regards,

>>Elaine Douglass


>Ms. Douglass, you wrote a very impassioned paper that got _me_
>all stirred up. Subsequently, your tune has changed . . . you
>now _buy_ the radium in the toothpaste foolishness?

>With respect, madam, _you_ started this fire. Your casual
>efforts to put it out _now_ only increases my suspicion, anger,
>and sense of outrage.

>With friends like you, it would seem, John Ford needs NO
>enemies.

>Lehmberg@snowhill.com

>RESTORE JOHN FORD!

Dear Alfred et al.:

Your fuses are too short.

My message contained simply facts, no opinions.

You read into things, not a good policy.

I expended countless hours on the John Ford dilemma, you just
tuned in. Took a lot of guff for my trouble, seems that hasn't
ended.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 15

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 06:52:55 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 16:22:03 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


>From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
>To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs
>Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 23:24:48 -0400

>>From: RobIrving@aol.com
>>Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 09:02:09 EDT
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

>>>From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
>>> To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net>
>>> Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs
>>> Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 10:31:04 -0400

>>Greg,

>>> Suppose we substituted "spousal abuse" for "UFOs" in what you've
>>> written here:

>>Purely as a thought experiment, now substitute Satanic Ritual
>>Abuse...

>>> Would this suggest that spousal abuse isn't real, and that
>>> complaints about it are generated simply by cultural factors?
>>> Hardly.

>>...then ask yourself the same question.

>Same answer. You can't tell -- from the mere fact that Western
>countries have reports of something, and less developed places
>don't -- whether that something is real or not.

Secondarily is the question of whether something is worth
reporting.  In Western culture UFOs don't fit, they are odd and
out of place, so they are reported.  In cultures where magic
and witchcraft are everyday matters, they may be perceived as
just another part of boring daily life and not worthy of any
special mention.  Familiarity breeds contempt, or at least
boredom.

BTW, I've been following this thread as much as time allows,
and it seems to me that old Occam's razor has gotten kind of
rusty and dull with all those years of use.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 15

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: bruce maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 22:56:02 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 16:10:32 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


>Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs
>From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
>Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 14:31:56 -0400
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>From: RobIrving@aol.com
>>Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 01:54:24 EDT
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

>>>This seems clearly to show Rob, that you are focused on popular
>>>culture while knowing little about UFOs. Of the ten cases I
>>>cited, at least 5 are classics, cited in multiple references.

>>Let's get this straight. Is your complaint that I don't memorize
>>cases, as perhaps you do, or that I can't be bothered to get off
>>my comfy chair and look them up? Either way, Mark, I can take
>>the heat, but it's a non-issue in my book, or would be if I
>>could only be arsed to reach for the book and check.

Rob,

>There is no question that none of us have all of the facts of
>any case in our minds at any time. That's why we write things
>down and we have libraries. But by the same token, without a
>mind well-populated with fundamental data, it would be
>impossible for us to start putting together a schema of how the
>data fits together, and from that to proceed to a reasonable
>hypothesis.>

>Let me give an example.

>I am very interested in the luminosity of UFOs. To come to any
>conclusions on that, I am constantly thinking about the exemplar
>cases of UFO luminosity, as I select them based on credibility
>and level of detail. I know that there are things which any
>theory of UFO luminosity will have to explain, and these are
>illustrated in various cases:

>1) Moreland shows that the UFO luminosity at the rim has the
>appearance of flames, that it can rotate around the rim at high
>speed, that it can counter-rotate, that its color can be orange
>with a green core. It suggests that the temperature is not high,
>because despite closeness and brightness, the witness felt
>little heat, and that only on departure.

>2) Beaver Falls shows that some UFO luminosity can be invisible
>to the naked eye and yet emit strongly enough in to affect film
t>o the same level as visible luminosity as bright as the full
>moon. The invisible portion of the luminosity must be able to be
>at least partly focused by a camera lens, which leaves out
>direct stimulation of the film by radiation higher than UV or
>lower than IR.

>3) Tulsa, OK, 1965 indicates that UFO luminosity can exist in
>discrete patches on the surface of the UFO, and that it exhibits
>what may be limb darkening, that its colors are red, yellow and
>green, and that it may be layered, with a lower red layer and an
>upper green layer with yellow between.>

>4) Levelland indicates a connection between UFO luminosity and
>EM effects, since one witness noted their headlight brightness
>varying inversely with the variable brightness of the nearby
>UFO.>

>If I don't know the cases, then I can't know what needs to be
>explained.


I realize you were just giving a few examples, but here is
another if you are interested in luminosity. This is important
because it is one of the few where luminosity could be
calculated because (a) the image on film indicated how much
radation in the visible spectrum was captured by the camera,.
and (B) a good estimate of distance was available. I refer to
New Zealand, with multiple witnesses, radar and color movie
film. Estimated radation in the bandwidth of the film (visible
spectrum) was equivalent to several hundred thousand watts of
incandescent light...i.e., several hundred thousand watts of
light bulbs would be needed to make an equivalent image.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 15

                  Chat with Fate Magazine's Antonio Huneeus

From: "Yvonne Hedenland" <vonni_h@email.msn.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 07:23:52 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 16:23:05 -0400
Subject: Chat with Fate Magazine's Antonio Huneeus

UFO Research in South America

Fate Magazine's UFO Journalist, Antonio Huneeus
joins the UFO Forum on Tuesday, June 16th at 6pm
Pacific Time, to discuss the announcement of the
Chilean Government to form a bonafide research
division to study the UFO phenomenon.

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.

The Netshow Audio Interview with Antonio Huneeus
is available Now at  http://forums.msn.com/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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 15

                          'Eliptical' Crop Circles

From: "Leanne Martin" <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 23:25:02 PDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 16:15:08 -0400
Subject: 'Eliptical' Crop Circles


>Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 17:48:58 -0400
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: UFO UpDate: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 3, Number 24

>From: Joseph Trainor <Masinaigan@aol.com>
>Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 11:52:50 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 3, Number 24
>Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 10:47:29 EDT

>     UFO ROUNDUP
>Volume 3, Number 24
>June 14, 1998
>Editor: Joseph Trainor

>CROP CIRCLE APPEARS IN AN
>OLIVE GROVE IN CROATIA
>
>     On Tuesday, June 8, 1998, a crop circle appeared
>on Hvar Otok, a large island in the Adriatic Sea just
>off the shore of Croatia.  The formation was found beside
>an olive grove on a farm in Poljica, near Jelsa.
>     The "ellipse" was found in a hillside field of grass
>by Marko Huljic, owner of the olive grove.  "Based on the
>opinion of the discoverer Marko Huljic, that kind of trail
>couldn't have been made by a car, or an agricultural
>machine."
>     "On the relatively straight meadow with the
>overgrown grass, two continuous ellipses in the range
>of 40 centimeters (20 inches) are there.  The ground
>with the bent grass is one meter (3.3 feet) in diameter.
>The length of the external ellipse is 4.8 meters, and the
>width is 3.6 meters."
>     "The trail of this unexplained phenomenon has been
>confirmed also by Ivo Zupanovic, Vladimir Huljic, Nikola
>Zenchic and others."  Meanwhile, "fantastic stories"
>about the crop circle "are circulating around Poljica."
>     Hvar island is 256 kilometers (160 miles) south of
>Zagreb.  It's also 112 kilometers (70 miles) southeast
>of Sibenik, Croatia, the site of a reported UFO landing
>back in January 1998.  (See the Croatian newspaper
>Free Dalmatia for June 9, 1998, "UFO at olive field
>near Jelsa?"  Many thanks to Mirko Crnchevic for
>forwarding the newspaper article.)

<snip>

Ladies and Gentlefolk,

The above story prompts me to put forward an hypothesis for
discussion on the whole 'crop circle' issue.

We call these events "crop circles" for the obvious reason -  the
common shape caused in the fields. But we have here the very
distinct shapes of eliptoids, or 'stretched' circles. Why should
this occurrance be so different?

Tonight, go outside with a torch and shine it vertically to the
ground.
You should, of course, see a circular bright spot. Then slowly
tilt the beam away from you until you can see the bright spot
change shape.

Anything come to mind?

I suggest that it is quite possible that 'crop circles' are the
result of satellite based beam experiments - perhaps even
targeting experiments from the S.D.I. The complex shapes and
accurate patterning of some of them suggest a very obvious
control process.

The fact these Croatian ones are not quite circles may indicate
that the beams originated from a point directly above areas where
other 'circles' are really circles.

Notice, too, that they always seem to appear in open fields and
don't overlap structures that impede 'image quality'. This
suggests that they are being produced in such a way so as to
facilitate easy checking with satellite photography.

Regards to all,

Leanne Martin
Computer Engineer @ WANG GLOBAL Australia







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 15

                   Re: ORTK and CAUS endorse Bryant effort

From: Mike Jamieson <MDJ50@webtv.net>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 10:16:19 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 16:33:11 -0400
Subject: Re: ORTK and CAUS endorse Bryant effort

>From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: ORTK and CAUS endorse Bryant effort
>Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 21:19:20 -0400

>Forgive me if this question is answered on a website somewhere,
>but....what jurisdiction can a county grand jury legally claim over
>things the military allegedly did 50 years ago? According to the
>statutes of New Mexico, what's the general jurisdiction of any grand
>jury? Is it required to find that laws were violated, in order to
>bring any indictments? What laws might have been violated during the
>Roswell affair?

Excellent questions, Greg, that provide an opportunity for Larry
to first explain the basic purpose. I called Larry this a.m.,
relayed your questions, and he briefly pointed out a few things
about what he has in mind here.

First, it should be noted that when he tried to get the federal
judiciary involved a U.S. attorney told him that the statute of
limitations was likely up on any possible crimes.

Larry would like to see a grand jury investigate this case, get
elderly witnesses and records on the record, and in general
examine whether the feds at that time engaged in a general abuse
of power. An example would be the question of Mac Brazel's
detainment, the intimidation of witnesses, allegedly including
the Sheriff and his family.

Indictments are not the realistically expected goal. A report,
with surviving witnesses and records, is the goal.

The local district attorney would obviously need help with the
discovery process--identifying potential witnesses and records.
Therefore, I would like to repeat Larry Bryant's request for
help from people living in Chavez County. All it takes is the
signatures of 200 registered voters and the D.A. has to convene
a grand jury on this.

Greg, your questions deserve further answers than this--and that
will be done after I get one of those famous packets of material
from Larry in the mail. It will be quite a lifestyle change for
Larry once he gets his own computer.

Oh, if you go to: www.ortk.org you can see Larry there on the
home page: that's him in the foreground holding a sign.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 15

                   Re: ORTK and CAUS endorse Bryant effort

From: Peter A. Gersten <UFOLAWYER1@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 12:44:12 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 16:28:45 -0400
Subject: Re: ORTK and CAUS endorse Bryant effort


>From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: ORTK and CAUS endorse Bryant effort
>Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 21:19:20 -0400

>Forgive me if this question is answered on a website somewhere,
>but....what jurisdiction can a county grand jury legally claim over
>things the military allegedly did 50 years ago? According to the
>statutes of New Mexico, what's the general jurisdiction of any grand
>jury? Is it required to find that laws were violated, in order to
>bring any indictments? What laws might have been violated during the
>Roswell affair?

Greg,

You are absolutely correct. A New Mexico grand jury has no
authority to subpoena records of the federal government let alone
the military. A county grand jury can investigate any crime(s)
committed within their jurisdiction.

Though CAUS supports Larry Bryant's attempt to learn the truth,
it has little, if any hope or belief, that this is a viable
method.

Simply stated, its only value is in publicity.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 15

                     Sheffield 'Incident' - New Evidence

From: David Clarke <dclarke14@compuserve.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 15:00:23 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 16:41:10 -0400
Subject: Sheffield 'Incident' - New Evidence

>From Dave Clarke, Sheffield

To recap:  Max Burns claims a witness called Jonathon Dagenhart
saw the co-pilot of a Tornado fighter jet which was destroyed by
a UFO it was pursuing above the Peak District of Northern
England on the evening of March 24, 1997.

This is the Burns scenario: After bailing out of his aircraft,
this co-pilot parachuted onto the A57 Snake Pass, one of the
busiest trans-Pennine roads linking the cities of Sheffield and
Manchester. Despite being soaked to the skin with highly
inflammable aviation fuel, the "co-pilot" did not radio
emergency services for help but decided to hitch a lift from a
passing mini-bus in which Mr Dagenhart and friends were
travelling to Sheffield...

Am I alone in smelling a rat here?

In a pathetic bout of name-calling Max claims I have lied about
my conversations with Dagenhart and further that all I can do is
follow his witnesses around "like a demented schoolboy".

However, Max does not own exclusive rights to "his" witnesses
and if he intends to use - or in this case manipulate - their
evidence to support wild claims about UFOs then he must expect
others to approach and question them too.

In this case by doing so I have managed to conclusively disprove
ALL of the claims Max has made about this incident and in the
process discovered the true  identity of this alleged
"co-pilot".

First of all I contacted Dagenhart directly on two occasions by
phone on May 11 and 12 and the following statement is taken
directly from shorthand notes transcribed immediately
afterwards:

"I was a passenger on a minibus which was travelling across the
Snake Pass towards Sheffield late on the night of March 24 last
year. When crossing the viaduct over the reservoir the bus was
flagged down by a man who was acting suspiciously.

"He spoke little English and was West Indian or Asian in
appearance, with short black hair and a round face. He did not
seem to know where he was and just said he wanted to get to
Sheffield.

"The guy was covered in fuel of some sort and from the smell I
thought it was paraffin or diesel, but since then I have joined
the RAF and I can say it was a smell like aviation fuel.

"We didn't give the man a lift because the bus was full and we
didn't like the look of him, but I thought it was odd because
there were no parked cars anywhere near and it was a deserted
spot.

"The next day I heard about the search for the crashed plane and
rang police to report the incident, thinking the man might have
been an immigrant or criminal they were searching for."

Questioned about the clothes this man was wearing, in the light
of Max's claims, Dagenhart told me: "They were just ordinary
dark clothes. He was definitely not wearing the sort of uniform
associated with RAF pilots. I would have recognised that uniform
immediately."

Dagenhart reported the incident to South Yorkshire Police on
March 25 and heard no more about it until he received a letter
from Max Burns, almost a year after the event.

Max had obtained this witnesses' home address from a copy of a
log belonging to South Yorkshire Police which had been provided
by another UFOlogist, Martin Jeffrey, of Sheffield.

According to Dagenhart, in the letter Max identified himself,
not as a UFOlogist, but as "a journalist working for a national
organisation."

After asking him to repeat his account of the events Max asked
if he could use his testimony in a story he was working on for a
national newspaper (as it turns out the downmarket News of the
World). Permission was granted, but according to Dagenhart's
statement on May 12 "at no stage in any of this conversation did
Max tell me he was going to use what I told him in a story
claiming I had seen the co-pilot of a Tornado which had been
shot down by a UFO.

"I don't believe the man I saw was a pilot and if my name were
to go in a national newspaper associated with such a claim I
could get into serious trouble with my employers, the RAF.

"I haven't been silenced by anyone, I just don't want my name
connected with a story like this and that is why I intend to
tell Max not to involve me any further.

"I just told him what I saw that night and that is all I know."

Shortly after this conversation, Jonathon phoned Max, withdrew
permission for the story to go ahead, and asked him not to use
his name in connection with these claims as it could put his
career in jeopardy.

As readers of UFO UpDates will know, Max has ignored Max's
request and spread his name and the nature of his employment
across the globe on the Internet.

As the transcript of Max's phone conversation with Dagenhart
reveals, Max is jubilant because he has obtained exactly the
sort of story he was wanting to hear, so jubilant in fact he
says he would buy the witness flowers if he was a woman!

Now I come to my point: Who was this man "covered in aviation
fuel" encountered by Jonathon Dagenhart on the Snake Pass?

You would think any objective investigator worth his salt would
not accept a story like this at face value but  would at least
ask some obvious questions, including: why would a stricken
pilot hitch a ride on a minibus rather than contact the military
or emergency services by radio? Would an RAF pilot whose plane
had been destroyed above his own country find it so difficult to
speak English? How many Tornado pilots are of Asian or West
Indian appearance anyway?

But this is besides the point. As a thorough investigator, I got
to the truth within just half an hour by asking those who were
there at the time: first port of call was Inspector Andy Howard,
the duty police inspector at Bakewell, Derbyshire, who was on
duty on the night of March 24, and Brian Jones, the senior Peak
Park Ranger who is based at Fairholmes in the Derwent Valley and
is responsible for the management of the whole area.

Surprise, surprise, Brian Jones - who has 30 years' experience
as a National Park ranger - remembered the incident straight
away. Details about a man covered in petrol or paraffin
wandering on the Snake Pass that night had in fact been reported
to him by the police the next morning.

"I do remember the incident as it was reported to the Peak Park
Ranger service the next morning," he told me. "I understand it
was a failed suicide attempt. It was someone who had driven out
to the country and poured petrol or some other inflammable
liquid over himself. But he had not gone through with the
suicide. It had been reported to South Yorkshire Police who had
passed it to Derbyshire to deal with. It's the sort of thing
that happens occasionally in a remote area like this."

I then contacted Insp Howard who confirmed the incident had
occurred as described by the Ranger, but due to its sensitive
nature no Press statement had been released at the time.

So there we have it folks, not a co-pilot after all, but a
disturbed and possibly mentally ill individual who had made an
attempt to take his own life that night.

However, add a UFO believer desperate to find evidence of
crashed spaceships, UFO dogfights and massive cover-ups of
evidence, and hey presto, what have you got. Every mundane and
unrelated incident is used to bolster the flimsy evidence to
support a theory which cannot be proved. In this case, a man who
attempted suicide and another who witnessed the incident have
been used by a UFO believer to promote a preposterous yarn about
a UFO dogfight.

In Dagenhart's case his evidence is still being used on Max's
website as "evidence" despite this man's express desire not to
be involved, and regardless of the harm it may cause to his
career.

As the saying goes Max - the game is up and you are rumbled.

Furthermore, and more importantly, you cannot answer to direct
questions I posed in a challenge on an earlier posting, and your
claims must therefore be relegated to the trash can.

I  rest my case.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 15

                   Re: Corso Suffers Massive Heart Attack

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 13:21:24 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 16:35:21 -0400
Subject: Re: Corso Suffers Massive Heart Attack

>From: Peter A. Gersten <UFOLAWYER1@aol.com>
>Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 17:53:01 EDT
>To: CAUSupdates@caus.org
>Subject: [CAUS updates] -  Corso Suffers Massive Heart Attack


>Dear CAUS Subscribers:

>I have just learned that Colonel Philip Corso suffered a massive
>heart attack this past Tuesday, June 9th.

>I have spoken to his son who has informed me that the Colonel
>suffered 90% heart damage and was not expected to survive when
>first brought into the hospital.

>His heart attack came within two weeks of his signing the CAUS
>affidavit swearing to the statements made in 'Day After
>Roswell.'

>Miraculously over the past five days, the Colonel has made a
>remarkable recovery and is now listed in stable condition. There
>is a possibility that he may be able to return home in five
>days.

>He is presently in the Jupiter Hospital in Jupiter, Florida. I
>am sure he would appreciate any and all prayers and support.

Hello All,

On behalf of myself, Budd Hopkins and all of the members of 'IF'
and 'AIC' we would like to add our wishes for  Col. Corso's
speedy recovery. We send our best wishes to his family and loved
ones as well.

John Velez, Webmaster, IF-AIC
Intruders Foundation/Abduction Information Center








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 15

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 14:00:26 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 16:42:46 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

>From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
>To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs
>Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 10:07:03 -0400

<snip>

>Good point, Jerry. And when Dennis (in another post mentioning
>this piece) calls this a typical New York Review article, I
>can't agree.

<snip>

>Greg

Greg:

I suppose it depends on what you mean by typical, doesn't it?

For example, my advice, if you wanted to write a typical article
for the New York Review of Books, would include the following:

1) Pretend you're the world's foremost authority on the subject
under review, even if all you nominally know about it is what
you read in the three or four books you knocked off in a single
sitting the day before;

2) Always review the subject itself. (See No. 1 above.) Only
occasionally refer to anything actually having to do with the
idividual books ostensibly under review.

Of course these are the same guidelines generally in use at the
NY Times Book Review, too, except that they only deal with one
book at a time.

So what you're really saying is, Crews's article is simply more
typical than most.

Do I detect a New England Establishment, an intellectual elite,
at work here?

Actually, to be pefectly honest (and non-paranoid), anytime
humans are involved in a situation, complexity is apt to rear
its ugly head. So to put the record straight -- if memory serves
-- didn't Mack's book get a fairly decent hearing (a more decent
one than I would have given it at any rate) in the Times Book
Review, and wasn't Carl Sagan's recent The Demon-Haunted World
taken out behind the woodshed in the NY Review of Books?

Hey, reviews happen!

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 15

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: RobIrving@aol.com
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 14:58:05 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 16:37:59 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


>From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
>To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs
>Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 09:26:51 -0400

Greg,

>No, Rob. When I don't know someone, I don't have a clue how
>they're going to answer any question.

Really. You apparently don't have a clue once they have answered
either. An example: You tell me...

>Having imagined that I invoked Kuhn's theories on scientific
>paradigms, you counter me with a shrug, saying that you
>personally don't think much of Kuhn's work. (And yes, you
>gave one quick reason, but hardly enough for any serious
>discussion of someone so well established.)

Which referred to the following exchange five days ago...

>>>It spreads new paradigms, and a more open attitude toward things
>>>unknown=85

>>Perhaps the Kuhnian picture of scientific knowledge held back by a
>>blind adherence to existing paradigms is itself a myth? I've changed
>>my mind on that recently - broadened my world-view you could say
>>- having realised that there aren't that many examples to support it.

I don't think I'm exaggerating in describing your summary of my
'opinion' about Kuhn as, um... loose. In fact, to say I have
respect for his works would be an understatement. As I said to
you, I've recently questioned what I had come to accept from
studying it.  Questioning assumption is not a bad thing, in my
opinion, especially when it is ones own.

It may interest you to know that this year I wrote a long piece
on these very issues, only to withdraw it having found myself in
the unenviable position of disagreeing with my own conclusions.
Kuhn featured often and favourably. Basically I now wonder how
'Science' is supposed to react in the face all the beliefs and
notions pestering it for acceptance.

Asking for verifiable evidence doesn't seem to be too
unreasonable in the circumstances, even if it often seems unfair
to those claiming they have such evidence.

Hence the question in my earlier post, which you falsely
characterise. Also, contrary to what you say, this question was
certainly sufficient to initiate serious discussion. If you
didn't feel up to it there's not much I can do.

Instead, you answered by complaining...

>As I typed "paradigms," I thought to myself: "Hmmm...not really
>the word I want. Too fancy." And yo! [New York variant of lo!]
>Rob pounces on it. I wasn't thinking of Kuhn, or of science
>blinded by a belief in older world-views. In fact, I was just
>using a two-dollar word for "world view."

In fact, in your original post you were saying precisely what
you now claim not to be talking about; you wrote...

>>>Conventional scientific wisdom has long believed that mature
>>>animals (including humans)don't grow new brain cells. Now it
>>>turns out that this is wrong -- new brain cells do grow, after
>>>all. Deep in the story was a sad little tidbit. Someone had
>>>already proved that new brain cells grow, in research published
>>>more than a decade ago. But nobody believed him. Science KNEW
>>>that the growth of new brain cells was simply impossible.

If not as an example of "science blinded by belief in older
world-views", what was the point of mentioning it? It appears
that your arguments are becoming as loose as your use of the
word "proof".

Anyway, back to your latest message...

>So now, like an eager puppy, you're dashing off to find out for
>yourself. There's nothing wrong with replicating research; I
>said I might do it myself (though both of us ought to offer more
>than a single sample, if we want our inquiries to mean very
>much). But you at least ought to acknowledge that you're tilling
>a well-plowed field here, and that whatever answer you get from
>your theoretical physicist won't be entered on a blank dossier.
>You are not, in other  words, going to find some data on a
>subject that has never been investigated before. You're simply
>going to discover whether this physicst says the same thing as
>the other scientists whose views are already known.

Duly acknowledged. I hope you will accept however, that a
current overview would be as - perhaps more - interesting and
relevant as relying on decades-old attitudes for your 'informed'
opinion...  doing exactly as you decry others of doing, btw.
It's possible times have changed since McDonald's day.

Rob






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 15

               Re: Jesse Jr., Again Sees Symbols From Roswell

From: Scott K. Hale <shale@columbus.rr.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 16:00:23 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 17:13:11 -0400
Subject: Re: Jesse Jr., Again Sees Symbols From Roswell


> From: Stig Agermose <wanderer@post8.tele.dk>
> Subject: Jesse Marcel, Jr., Sees Again Symbols From The Roswell "Flying
>         Saucer" Crash
> To: updates@globalserve.net
> Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 02:54:21 +0200

<snip>

When will these enhancements be posted online for everybody to
see?

Thanks,
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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 15

                                   Memory

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 17:09:41 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 17:16:15 -0400
Subject: Memory


>From: Cathy Johnson <cej@idirect.ca>
>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Asking Pamela Stonebrooke
>Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 14:48:30 -0400

>>Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 20:09:27 -0700
>>From: Skye Turell <turel33@west.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Asking Pamela Stonebrooke

>>>From: Cathy Johnson <cej@idirect.ca>
>>>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Asking Pamela Stonebrooke
>>>Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 10:07:31 -0400

>>>>Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 07:29:52 -0700
>>>>From: Skye Turell <turel33@west.net>
>>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Asking Pamela Stonebrooke

>>>>>Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 12:55:01 -0500
>>>>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>>>>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
>>>>>Subject: Asking Pamela Stonebrooke

>>>><snip>

>Dear Skye,

>For the sake of brevity I have snipped a bunch.

>Cathy Johnson

Hi Errol, hi All,

The original post in this series (which appears to have gotten
lost in the shuffle) was directed to Pamela Stonebrooke and
related to some specific questions about her statements. If you
look at the mess in the attribution headers you'll see that
Pamela herself has not responded or maybe not had an oportunity
to respond.

As for the comments being made about 'memory.' This series of
posts has served to illustrate the point that I made in my
response to Skye. Many people are confusing purely 'mental' (or
to use their own jargon,) "spiritual/astral" experiences with
actual-real time- physical events.

No-one anywhere is trying to differentiate between those who
claim to have-memories of actual events- and all the other stuff
that people are -calling- "abduction memories."

Part of what makes all this so hard to investigate is everyone
going around walking on eggs trying not to dismiss the claims of
others out of some 'distorted' sense of fairness or political
correctness. Hey man, head cases are head cases! Let's begin to
differentiate between the people who are reporting real time
(consciously) recalled physical events and those who "think"
they "may be" in contact.

It's high time that some distinctions were made. Five years ago
when I consented to do the NOVA segment I had invited the
producer to give me not only physical and psychological exams
but a polygraph test as well. My reasons for that were simple
and self explanatory.

Something(s) happened to me,

 . . .I remembered them,

 . . .I was telling the truth,

 . . .about an actual event!

What's with all the philosophical "maybe it's this, maybe it's
that" crap? If something happened then it happened. Let's
concentrate on verification. If it didn't or you're "not sure"
then all you're really doing is clouding the issue and making it
harder for people who have had -real world events- take place to
get any serious attention or even an investigation.

If you are 'going public' then I believe that you should be able
to:

1. Be willing to substantiate your claims.

2. Be willing to subject yourself to verification, ie;
psychological exam, MRI/x-ray, polygraph, or any other
(non-intrusive) form of testing or verification.

3. On a personal level- be willing to answer/respond to tough
questions, and to have the ability to question/explore the
nature of your own experiences in as (objective) a manner as
possible.

BTW, I know that a 'polygraph' cannot show the reality of an
event but it can sure help to eliminate those who are being
intentionally deceptive or who are trying to pass off pure
'imagination' as reality.

That's not a lot to ask of someone who publicly claims that they
are interacting with a non-human agent, don't you agree?
Everything else is just speculation and superfluous. It
contributes nothing new or of value and only serves to divert
attention away from what [I think] is -a very real core
phenomenon.-

The first thing I did was to have myself tested/evaluated by a
competent psychologist. When someone (validly) asks me, "How do
you know you're not crazy or imagining things?" I have a solid
answer for them based on my having put my sanity to the acid
test. I don't know, what do -you- offer in response to such a
question? Well gee, you gotta believe I'm not disturbed because
I'm telling you so! Sorry, not good enough. If you are telling
the truth, (publicly) you should be willing to do what you have
to in order to substantiate it. Otherwise, all you do is hurt
the (public) case not help it. It -is- up to us to substantiate
our claims not to others to disprove it! Abductees have to take
responsibility for what they are claiming or get off the public
stage. As I said anything less only serves to hurt the case.

It is -partly- because of all the confusion that surrounds this
subject that we are not taken seriously by a majority of people.
That, may prove to be the downfall of all. In another better
world the honest testimony of several hundred or thousands of
people would be all the "proof" that is needed. Sadly, such is
not the case in the world that we do live in. Abuctees
especially should be ready and willing to make their peace with
reality and be ready to substantiate their claims when they do
it in any public forum. For the benefit of all.

"Speculating" is just wheel spinning. Yours is as good or as
valid as anyone elses. We've had enough of that. We need to ask
all the hard questions and get some 'hard' answers.

It's simple, sh*t or get off the pot! Enough with the verbal
masturbation. Now, whadda ya got?

Nuff said.

Peace,

John Velez, Abductee

*(Notice I didn't say, "experiencer!" "Experiencer" is too
passive. I and others are being -taken.- The word "abduction"
fits it better and is more accurately descriptive. I poop on
"politically correct" yuppie new age jargon. If it's a spade
it's spade. Calling it a 'trowel' doesn't change a thing!"

**Still waiting for Pamela to respond to the original post!








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 15

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 18:01:11 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 21:29:39 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

>Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 22:56:02 -0400
>From: bruce maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
>Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

> I realize you were just giving a few examples, but here is
> another if you are interested in luminosity. This is important
> because it is one of the few where luminosity could be
> calculated because (a) the image on film indicated how much
> radation in the visible spectrum was captured by the camera,.
> and (B) a good estimate of distance was available. I refer to
> New Zealand, with multiple witnesses, radar and color movie
> film. Estimated radation in the bandwidth of the film (visible
> spectrum) was equivalent to several hundred thousand watts of
> incandescent light...i.e., several hundred thousand watts of
> light bulbs would be needed to make an equivalent image.

Thanks for reminding me, Bruce. Yes, it is an excellent case,
which can be read about at

http://www.primenet.com/~bdzeiler/papers/applied1.htm

Or by going to

http://www.primenet.com/~bdzeiler/

and picking UFO Literature, and then looking under Journal of
Applied Optics in the table, where you will find the paper. Like
most webmasters who have a site with frames, Jean and Brian
would probably prefer you use the second way...

One thing's for sure... there's nothing like several hundred kW
of light output to tell us that these objects have power to
spare.

BTW, this is a case that belongs in my calculations and
measurments catalog, so I am doubly grateful for the reminder.

------
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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 15

               Re: Jesse Jr., Again Sees Symbols From Roswell

From: Stanton T. Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 18:31:52 -0300
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 21:26:17 -0400
Subject: Re: Jesse Jr., Again Sees Symbols From Roswell


>From: Stig Agermose <wanderer@post8.tele.dk>
>Subject: Jesse Marcel, Jr., Sees Again Symbols From The Roswell "Flying
>        Saucer" Crash
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 02:54:21 +0200


>Date: 14 Jun 1998 19:28:03 -0000
>From: lclark@ibm.net
>To: <NYMUFON@listbot.com>
>Subject: Fw: Jesse Marcel, Jr., Sees Again Symbols From the
>Roswell "Flying Saucer" Crash
>Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 15:28:57 -0400


>From: James Bond Johnson <JBONJO@aol.com>
>To: JBONJO@aol.com <JBONJO@aol.com>
>Date: Saturday, June 13, 1998 9:31 PM
>Subject: Jesse Marcel, Jr., Sees Again Symbols From the
>Roswell "Flying Saucer" Crash

>Press Release
>Not for publication
>Prior to June 15, 1998
>(562) 426-3622

>Jesse Marcel, Jr. Sees Again the Symbols From the Roswell
>"Flying Saucer" Crash

>By James Bond Johnson

<snip>

>The symbols, described by many as the "fishhook", the "shark
>fin" and the "Ankh" and some others were back to remind him of
>that special night. Over the years Jesse had been asked to
>describe the symbols and he had sketched them for publication in
>books on UFOs.

>But now, thanks to high tech digital enlargement techniques,
>these symbols had been discovered on pieces of the debris shown
>with his dad in the 8th Air Force headquarters offices of Brig.
>General Roger Ramey in Fort Worth, Texas.

>Major Marcel was photographed along with General Ramey and
>Ramey's chief of staff, Colonel Thomas J. Dubose, all examining
>the wreckage which had been brought to Fort Worth by Major
>Marcel.

>The story of that Roswell crash has been told and retold so many
>times... and with so many conflicting details... in dozens of
>books and articles, a movie and several television shows over
>the years. But one thing always has been clear in the mind of
>Jesse Marcel, Jr. -- the symbols on the pieces of wreckage.

<snip>

>Meanwhile, Dr. Marcel, veteran of Pacific military combat and
>now proudly retired in the rank of full colonel after a total of
>38 years active and National Guard service as a helicopter pilot
>and flight surgeon, turned back to his computer screen to scan
>the debris photo even more closely.

>The symbol that he remembers best was a figure of a truncated
>pyramid with a ball floating over it. "I remember it best
>because it resembled a seal balancing a ball on its nose", he
>said. Maybe he will find it somewhere in those pictures where it
>has been hiding for 51 years.


I have been in close touch with Dr. Jesse A. Marcel over the
last few days re these pictures. Bond has very unfortunately
vastly overstated what Jesse says. He has NOT said that anything
in the pictures looks like the I-beam and symbols and other
wreckage he saw in July 1947.

Stan Friedman








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 15

                 Jesse Jr. Dissociates Himself From Johnson

From: Stig Agermose <wanderer@post8.tele.dk>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 02:00:45 +0200
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 21:45:42 -0400
Subject: Jesse Jr. Dissociates Himself From Johnson

Michael Lindemann from CNINews just sent this essential
update, which he has asked me to pass around.

Stig

*******

<---- Begin Forwarded Message ---->
From: Michael Lindemann <CNINews1@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 10:21:22 EDT
To: wanderer@post8.tele.dk
Subject: Re:  Jesse Marcel, Jr., Sees Again Symbols From
The Roswell "FlyingSaucer"Crash

Stig,

I've told James Bond Johnson in no uncertain terms that this
story of his is plain wrong. It's misleading at least, deceptive
at worst. Jesse Marcel has emphatically denied seeing anything in
the photos except weather balloon material. I've been in repeated
touch with Marcel over the last couple of days and I have his
written statement.

Marcel specifically does not see anything like the symbols he
remembers seeing back in 1947. It is very disappointing that
Johnson has, in effect, put words in Marcel's mouth.

Johnson must retract his story.

Pass this around.

Michael Lindemann









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 15

              Press Report From Fort Washington UFO Conference

From: Stig Agermose <wanderer@post8.tele.dk>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 02:15:31 +0200
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 21:48:52 -0400
Subject: Press Report From Fort Washington UFO Conference

>From the Philadelphia Enquirer. URL:

http://www.phillynews.com/inquirer/98/Jun/15/city/CUFO15.
htm

Stig

*******


June 15


Pressing for truth on UFOs


At a conference in Fort Washington, speakers talked of
real mysteries, not science fiction shows.


By Mark Binker

INQUIRER CORRESPONDENT


FORT WASHINGTON -- Keith Morgan says he believes that
there is -- or at least was -- life on Mars, but he won't
tell you about flying saucers, alien abductions, or
strange men clothed all in black.

"I try to look at this from a scientific standpoint,"
said Morgan, of Washington, D.C., after finishing a
presentation that covered artificial structures on Mars,
circumscribed tetrahedral geometry, and crop circles.

Morgan, a television technician for ABC News who is
urging NASA to take more and better pictures of the
Martian surface, was one of about 50 people who spent
yesterday in the Fort Washington Holiday Inn sorting
through the myths and data that are part of the
marketplace of ideas for UFO enthusiasts.

The conference was sponsored by Glenside-based CIRAEP, or
Council of Investigations and Research on Aerial/Earth
Phenomena.

No one in the audience was wearing Vulcan ears or toting
a Buck Rogers toy blaster. No one mentioned Mulder or
Scully, and there were only pejorative references to
little green men.

Instead, the conversations hinged more on secret budgets,
mathematical equations, and the possibility someone in
the U.S. government knows more about extraterrestrial
life than has been admitted.

"I've had clients that have reported seeing UFOs," said
Rita Corriel, an Allentown psychologist and Temple
University graduate.

Corriel, who said she had had an interest in the
possibility of alien life since seeing the movie Close
Encounters of the Third Kind, said she did not know
which, if any, of the UFO literature is accurate.

But, she said, "I believe that something is happening
that is real . . . and I would like to understand it."

Preston Nichols, one of the presenters, said he was not
so much interested in contact with alien species as
making the government accountable.

"Basically, like what a lot of other people are looking
for . . . I would like to bring the constitution back,"
said Nichols, a writer from Long Island.

Robert F. Eure, CIRAEP's president and founder, said his
interest in UFOs and alien life began in 1981 after he
was contacted by "two unusual beings" dressed as Catholic
priests.

In 1993, the 60-year-old Eure started CIRAEP to both find
evidence of extraterrestrial life and provide support for
those who say they have been contacted or abducted by
aliens.

"I've not made any money yet," said Eure, who wore a gray
suit and dark sunglasses even inside the Holiday Inn's
conference room.

A social worker and teacher by trade, Eure said he was
simply trying to bring together credible people who lend
credence to reports of extraterrestrial life.

During his presentation, Morgan did not make any claims
as to what life from Mars might be like.

But evidence such as the symmetrical geographic features
and humanoid face carved on the Cydonia portion of the
Martian surface, he said, is proof that someone is trying
to send a message through space and time.

"Nature doesn't make squared lines," said Morgan.

Another presenter, Richard Sauder, focused on the
existence of underground military and other
installations.

Sauder, a political scientist and author from Flagstaff,
Ariz., presented schematics of underground bases and
tunneling machines he obtained from government agencies,
along with pictures of surface vents and seemingly
out-of-place buildings throughout the United States.

While he would not vouch for alien life either, he said
certain aspects of abduction stories are consistent with
what is publicly known about underground military
installations.

None of the presenters would say they knew exactly what
is being hidden, obfuscated or avoided. Rather, the day
could be summed up with a line from the popular series
The X-Files.

The truth is out there.
=A0=A0

=A91998 Philadelphia Newspapers Inc.
=A0






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 15

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: John Rimmer <johnr@magonia.demon.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 00:44:55 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 21:41:48 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


>From: Jean-Luc Rivera <PSaintc798@aol.com>
>Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 12:42:20 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re:  UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

>>From: "Greg Sandow" <gsandow@prodigy.net>
>>To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs
>>Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 18:45:41 -0400

I see that Greg Sandow points out elsewhere that this original
posting is by me (John Rimmer) rather than him. I will take this
opportunity to reply to Jean-Luc Rivera's points.

>>If the PH is valid it implies that the UFO is most widespread in
>>countries which share social and economic conditions, and have
>>similar cultural values. As the UFO phenomenon seems most
>>widespread in the USA we would expect it to be experienced most
>>often in similar societies. This does seem to be the case. The
>>countries with the greatest number of UFO reports, and public
>>interest in ufology, besides the USA are either those which
>>share its cultural and social background, e.g. the UK, Western
>>Europe, Canada; or those which have wide exposure to US cultural
>>and social values, e.g. Central and South America (and no,
>>Jerry, this isn't some sort of Ameriphobia, I actually quite
>>*like* most American social and cultural values).

>>We would expect the UFO phenomena to be least widespread in
>>those societies which either do not share this social
>>background, or are actually hostile to it, e.g. the Islamic
>>countries, most of Africa, Asia (except Japan), and this is
>>indeed the case. This is not, of course, to say that no UFO
>>reports at all come from those countries.

>We don't know how widespread the UFO phenomenon is in these
>parts of the world: the lack of investigators or just of
>channels to receive the reports maybe the reason of the absence
>or quasi-absence. In Malaysia, thanks to the work of Ahmad
>Jamaludin, we have learned of the existence of UFO waves which
>would have gone unreported otherwise.

Even in Western Countries the presence of one active investigator
can skew reporting figures. Even after all these years it is
still unclear just how much of the Warminster phenomenon was
reporting of objectively real phenomena (possibly Army activity)
and how much was created by the atmosphere produced by Arthur
Shuttlewood and his cohorts.

>Furthermore the works of Bertrand Meheust (in Algeria and Gabon)
>and Thierry Pinvidic (in Algeria) published in France show that
>the UFO phenomenon exists in different cultures and apparently
>awaits to be reported. These 2 french researchers cannot be
>suspected of deep ETH bias in their investigations as the list
>members not familiar with french ufology must know that they are
>supporters of the PH.

I am certainly aware of this work. We have published a summary of
Pinvidic's Algerian work in Magonia in the 1980's. Pinvidic has
certainly shown that UFO activity *exists* in Algeria, I would
never doubt this, but he also demonstrates how untypical it is of
UFO activity in Europe.

><snip>

>>We are beginning to see more reports and film from the
>>Czech Republic for example, and elsewhere. And this is not
>>simply a factor of the freeing of press and other media in those
>>countries - even in the Communist era there seemed to be no
>>serious block to reports coming out of Eastern Europe. In the
>>Communist era the Eastern European country which seemed to have
>>the most UFO reports was Romania, which at the time was seen as
>>breaking from the Soviet Bloc.

>If you really believe that, please read Boris Shurinov history
>of the UFO movement in the former USSR. Don't you remember also
>how at one point only Juri Lina was able to translate for the
>FSR some UFO samizdats smuggled out of the country. You are
>right only for Romania with Ion Hobana.

As I say elsewhere, I may have over-emphasised the differences
between Eastern and Western bloc approaches to the UFO phenomenon
and underestimated the degree of Western cultural influence in
the Soviet Bloc even during the Cold War era. We meed further
research on this.

><snip>

>>I'll tell you what would disprove the Psychosocial Hypothesis: a
>>decent sized UFO wave, with abductions, in North Africa or the
>>Middle East, within the next few years. When that happens I'll
>>>start watching the skies!

>Do you really think that if there was a wave of " alien
>abductions " in Ahghanistan or in some middle eastern or african
>country torn by war and closed to foreigners we would hear about
>it?

Why Afghanistan or war-torn countries? Why not India (pretty
democratic, reasonably free press) or Tunisia (very open to
foreigners), or Taiwan or South Korea (good communications)?



--
John Rimmer
Magonia Online, a member of the P.L.A.Driftwood Organisation
http//www.magonia.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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 15

             DISPATCH # 95 -- the weekly newsletter of ParaScope

From: ParaScope@AOL.COM
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 19:33:11 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 21:38:56 -0400
Subject: DISPATCH # 95 -- the weekly newsletter of ParaScope

DISPATCH # 95 -- 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

6/15/98

Quote of the Week

"We offer no excuses for any of this, only our deepest apologies to all
concerned."

-- The editors of The New Republic Magazine, which published nearly two dozen
articles by reporter/fictionalist Stephen Glass containing �at least some made
up material,� including three stories which the magazine now confirms were
�completely made up.�


-----------------------

Rant of the Week: �An Operation State of Mind�

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, �S*****t� warns us all of the
dangers of Nitrous Oxide, �rapists paradise.� Enjoy.


�A tracer has been put in at least one of all pairs of my shoes. Do you have
any idea who on Earth I could speak with?

�Also, something is coming in the air of my apartment that is causing my CO
detector to go off. The police and fire department are not helping me. I don't
know if it is a chemical or radiation. I don't know where to get a radiation
monitor.

�I know people are doing these crimes against me, but I think it is part of
the same government cover-up that is suppressing information about ufo's.  I
believe some people plan on eventually taking control of the Earth.

�Any information would be most appreciated!  Thank you!

�Also, are you aware of the nitrous oxide cover-up? Nitrous oxide, an
anesthetic inhalent, is used in operations to put people in an �operation
state of mind.�  People usually don't remember anything that has happened to
them while under nitrous oxide.  The problem? Nitrous oxide is readily
available to everyone, yes, you, me, cults, and criminals.  Nitrous oxide,
rapist's paradise, is used in restaurants for a propellant for whipped cream
and it is used as a propellant for race cars."

------

All rants are printed �as is,� with spelling and grammar goofs left
uncorrected. Some rants may be edited for brevity or clarity, to the extent
such a thing is possible. If you�ve got a rant you�d like to share, send it to
pscplady@aol.com with �possible rant� in the subject line of your letter.

-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Coming Up This Week!

Catch a number of great stories this week on the ParaScope web and AOL sites,
including daily updates to our Conspiracy Newsline and Daily Dose features.
Among the articles you'll want to check out:


Parapsychology in Intelligence:
The Rise and Fall of the CIA's Psychic Spies

Long before "X Files" became a smash TV show, the CIA delved deep into the
paranormal. This week Dossier unveils a declassified CIA report which details
one of the most secretive -- and strangest -- science projects in the agency's
history. Read the account of a CIA officer who extensively researched "remote
viewing," a type of psychic spying, and witnessed its use in top secret
intelligence operations. Don't miss this startling report, published publicly
on ParaScope for the first time!

---------------------

The Cryptozoo Part III: Weird Predators Petting Zoo

At last, the time has come to unveil the long-awaited third and final
installment of the all-new Enigma Cryptozoo! Zookeeper D. Trull finishes up
this overview of animal oddities with a collection of things that go bump in
the night, and are likely to bite: here's your chance to get up close and
personal with El Chupacabras, Mothman, the Jersey Devil, the Loveland Frog,
the Dover Demon, the dreaded Mongolian Death Worm, the Beast of Bodmin Moor
and much, much more! Please keep all hands safely away from your web browser
at all times, and be sure not to bring your pets or livestock... unless you'd
like to feed the animals!

---------------------

Bildeburglary:
The Stench of a New Order, Blooming

Their seclusion guaranteed by a perimeter of heavily armed, black-clad police,
the 120 members of the Bilderberg Group met in total seclusion at the
luxurious Turnberry Hotel near Ayrshire, Scotland from May 14-17, to continue
molding their plans for global dominion. Organizing the New World Order is no
easy business; so if you don't like having your future planned without having
a say in the matter, tough dookey! Find out what the elite of the elite has
been up to in a special report on the Bilderberg's 1998 meeting.

---------------------

UFOs Over Chile: Part 2

Scores of UFO incidents have been reported in Chile in the 1990s.  One of the
oddest was the so-called "flying houses." A UFO was blamed for turning a house
sideways in the outskirts of the southern Chilean city of Los Angeles on April
16,1990. Two years later, the newspaper La Tercera published an account of a
similar case, also in Los Angeles, with the headline "They swear a UFO took
the roof off a house." Were these cases real or concocted tabloid tales? In
the second part of his special report on UFOs over Chile, J. Antonio Huneeus
interviews Raul Gajardo, a retired po lice Major from Angol, Chile, who
investigat ed the first incident, and also reports on strange events in the
skies over Easter Island.

---------------------

UFO Roundup

The latest UFOlogy news and sighting reports, courtesy of Joseph Trainor's UFO
Roundup. UFO startles crowd in northern Italy; flashing orange UFO seen over
west Texas prairie; Bigfoot startles motorist in South Carolina; scientists
debate strange geological features on Mars; lots more news.

---------------------
Conspiracy Newsline

As the saying goes, if you aren't paranoid yet, you just aren't paying
attention. Get all the latest updates for cognitive dissidents in Conspiracy
Newline, every day!




...All this, and much, much more!

-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

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 subscribe:

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





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 15

                               Re: Ford Fund?

From: Lehmberg@snowhill.com
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 98 20:52:16 +500
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 22:13:01 -0400
Subject: Re: Ford Fund?


>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: Ford Fund?
>From: Elaine M Douglass elaine26@juno.com
>Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 02:40:40 EDT

>>From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Date: Sun, 14 Jun 98 14:56:18 +500
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Ford Fund?

>>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Ford Fund?
>>>From: Elaine M Douglass <elaine26@juno.com>
>>>Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 21:18:08 EDT

>>>>From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>>Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 10:09:37 -0400
>>>>Fwd Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 10:09:37 -0400
>>>>Subject: Ford Fund?

>>Ms. Douglass, you wrote a very impassioned paper that got _me_
>>all stirred up. Subsequently, your tune has changed . . . you
>>now _buy_ the radium in the toothpaste foolishness?

>>With respect, madam, _you_ started this fire. Your casual
>>efforts to put it out _now_ only increases my suspicion,
>>anger, and sense of outrage.

>>With friends like you, it would seem, John Ford needs NO
>>enemies.

>>Lehmberg@snowhill.com

>>RESTORE JOHN FORD!

>Dear Alfred et al.:

>Your fuses are too short.

Sorry -- but it's that kind of world. Moreover, what would John
Ford have to say regarding the shortness of metaphoric fuses?

>My message contained simply facts, no opinions.

I have a talent for reading between the lines...


>You read into things, not a good policy.

..To the contrary, madam -- with regard to the condition of
*things*, I maintain it is an excellent policy! Certainly, the
only one left.

>I expended countless hours on the John Ford dilemma, you just
>tuned in.

Madam, that sounds a little like an accusation, but I'm sure
John was appreciative . . . what has compelled YOU to give up?

>Took a lot of guff for my trouble, seems that hasn't
>ended.

Again -- you started this, it hasn't ended because you haven't
finished it! Tell us how you took a lot of guff -- speculate on
why!

>I do not know what to do to gain freedom for John Ford.

>Elaine Douglass

All that remains then is to remember him. There but for the
grace of a convenient God goes any one of us.

Lehmberg@snowhill.com

Restore John Ford!





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 15

                 Search For Life On Mars With Your Computer

From: Stig Agermose <wanderer@post8.tele.dk>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 03:14:30 +0200
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 22:05:58 -0400
Subject: Search For Life On Mars With Your Computer

From the BBC.

URL:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_112000/112768.stm

Links are preceded by asterisks.


Stig


*******


Monday, June 15, 1998 Published at 12:59 GMT 13:59 UK


Sci/Tech


Search for life on Mars with your computer


(Image: Are they fossils or mineral grains?)


In August 1996 Nasa scientists stunned the world by claiming
they had found tiny fossilised micro-organisms in a
meteorite from Mars. Now anyone with a computer can help
look for some more. Our science correspondent David
Whitehouse reports.

The fossils that scientists claimed were in the Martian
meteorite were so small that 50,000 of them could fit across
the width of a human hair. They were far smaller than any
bacteria found on Earth.

Since that time not many scientists have been prepared to
believe that they are truly fossils rather than peculiarly
shaped mineral deposits.

Many have wondered if there are any more microfossil
structures in any of the 12 known meteorites from Mars. The
problem they have is that searching for them with a powerful
microscope would take far too long.

(Image: Are there fossils in these rocks?)

Now researchers are hoping to use thousands of computers
belonging to volunteers on the Internet.

"We hope to get young scientists from elementary school
through college to help us with the search by linking their
computers to ours," said Dr David Noever of Nasa.

Dr Noever hopes to use a sophisticated series of computer
programs to learn what various types of microbial life look
like and use that knowledge to look for life-like structures
in the Mars rocks.

One of the main challenges of the task is that many things
that look life-like are not life forms and many true life
forms do not look life like at all.

Developing one powerful computer to carry out this task
would be too expensive so it is hoped that thousands of
personal computers could work together instead.

A similar technique has already been tried by astronomers
looking for signals from extraterrestrial intelligence in
space.

Data from radio telescopes involved in the search has been
shared among hundreds of people who perform a part of the
analysis on their personal computers.



Relevant Stories


28 May 98=A0|=A0Sci/Tech
*More clues to life on Mars

11 Apr 98=A0|=A0Sci/Tech
*Life on Mars (again)

12 Mar 98=A0|=A0Sci/Tech
*Mars probe discovers 'ocean'



Internet Links


*Meteorites from Mars

*Life on Mars


The BBC is not responsible for the content of external
internet sites.


*Back to top | *BBC News Home | *BBC Homepage

=A9






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 15

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: John Rimmer <johnr@magonia.demon.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 00:22:38 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 21:35:04 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


>From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
>To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs
>Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 10:31:04 -0400

>Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 11:47:57 +0100
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: John Rimmer <johnr@magonia.demon.co.uk>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

>>From: "Greg Sandow" <gsandow@prodigy.net>
>>To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs
>>Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 18:45:41 -0400

My original text snipped

>John, many thanks for this.

>I see two problems with it.

>1. Beneath your reasoning lies an assumption that, if UFOs are
>real objects, they'd be seen equally often in all parts of the
>world. How can we assume that? (And yes, I could invent reasons
>why they would or wouldn't be, but I'd simply be speculating.)
>Aren't you putting the cart before the horse? That is, aren't you
>making declarations about how real UFOs would behave, before
>we've even proved that such things exist?

I was not specifically arguing this. I was pointing out that if
the psychosocial hypothesis was to be validated we would NOT see
the UFO phenomenon spread equally across the globe. It would
also be reasonable for a pro-ETHer to say that ET UFOs would
tend to congregate in the more industrialised countries, as they
would have more of what putative ETs would be most interested in
(this, of course, does not apply to the abducting-type ETs, who
presumably would want human genetic material from around the
world - unless they were racists!)

>2. You need to control for something fairly obvious. This is the
>possibility that, in your global survey, you're measuring
>something you don't consider in what you wrote here -- how likely
>people in various countries are to report UFOs. Yes, we have far
>more UFO reports from the US than from North Korea. Does that
>mean that cultural factors in the US are generating UFO reports,
>or that cultural (and political!) factors in the US make people
>more likely to report the UFOs they see?

Well, that is rather the point, isn't it. But why choose a
culture/political system as extreme as North Korea? There are
plenty of other countries in Asia and the Middle East, which
while maybe not perfect, Scandinavial-type participatoy
democracies, do have a reasonably free press, or in some cases
governments which don't bother too much what nonsense the
peasant get up to, so long as they don't rock the political
boat.

>Suppose we substituted "spousal abuse" for "UFOs" in what you've
>written here:

>If the PH is valid it implies that spousal abuse is most widespread
>in countries which share social and economic conditions, and have
>similar cultural values. As concern about spousal abuse seems most
>widespread in the USA we would expect it to be experienced most
>often in similar societies. This does seem to be the case. The
>countries with the greatest number of spousal abuse complaints, and
>public interest in spousal abuse, besides the USA are either those which
>share its cultural and social background, e.g. the UK, Western
>Europe, Canada; or those which have wide exposure to US cultural
>and social values, e.g. Central and South America (and no,
>Jerry, this isn't some sort of Ameriphobia, I actually quite
>*like* most American social and cultural values).

>We would expect reports of spousal abuse to be least widespread in
>those societies which either do not share this social
>background, or are actually hostile to it, e.g. the Islamic
>countries, most of Africa, Asia (except Japan), and this is
>indeed the case. This is not, of course, to say that no spousal
>abuse reports at all come from those countries.

>Would this suggest that spousal abuse isn't real, and that
>complaints about it are generated simply by cultural factors?
>Hardly.

I don't quite see the point here. Although spousal abuse is
present in all countries and cultures, I would be very surprised
if there was not *some* culturable variables in its
distribution. But I see Rob Irvine has taken this argument
further elsewhere in the Updates.

>We predicted that with the fall of the Iron Curtain, and the
>increasing penetration of western (predominantly US) culture
>into the former Soviet Bloc countries, we would see a rise in
>the level of UFO-related activity in those countries, and this
>does seem to be happening. Hungary, which even before 1989 was
>most open to the West, has developed its own crop- circle
>culture. We are beginning to see more reports and film from the
>Czech Republic for example, and elsewhere. And this is not
>simply a factor of the freeing of press and other media in those
>countries - even in the Communist era there seemed to be no
>serious block to reports coming out of Eastern Europe. In the
>Communist era the Eastern European country which seemed to have
>the most UFO reports was Romania, which at the time was seen as
>breaking from the Soviet Bloc.

>But, John....I, as an advocate of physically-existing UFOs, would
>have predicted the same thing. If UFOs are really up there, and
>we've had scattered reports of them from the Communist bloc, I'd
>expect more reports once those countries were politically free.
>That is, my working assumption would be that UFOs were in fact
>seen there, but the full extent of the sightings was masked by
>political tyranny, and the lack of a free press.

>You also, I think, need to be more careful in discussing the
>nature of these Communist countries. You say that Hungary was the
>Soviet-bloc country most open to the West (true), but then it
>turns out that Romania had the most UFO reports! You explain that
>by saying it was breaking from the Soviet bloc, but that ignores
>two factors.

>1. Romania had the most vicious tyranny of any Soviet-bloc
>nation.
>It's no accident that Caeucescu, the Romanian leader (whose name
>I may be misspelling) was the only Eastern-bloc tyrant to be shot
>the moment he was overthrown.

I'll accept that Romania was a bad example, my only excuse is
that I was putting my contribution together in a hurry before
going off for a few days holiday, which explains my late reply
to this posting (to culturally similar Belgium, by the way, but
no mysterious flying triangles put in an appearance!) I think I
may have overestimated the cultural/social differences between
Eastern and Western Bloc countries, as opposed to the purely
political differences. Certainly Western cultural values were
widely infiltrating these countries throughout the Cold War
years.

>2.  Albania and Yugoslavia broke with the Soviet Union long
>before Rumania did. If breaking with the Soviet Union is a factor
>in UFO reports, why weren't there more from these countries? And,
>yes, I know that Albania was the most isolated and least Western
>of any Eastern European Communist state, but Yugoslavia (which
>for most of its existence wasn't a member of the Soviet bloc at
>all) was by far the most open and most Western. Why did Romania
>have more UFO reports than Yugoslavia?

The most important reason why we have more reports from Romania at that
period was the activity of Ion Hobana who publicised what cases there
were. Even then the number of cases was very small compared to the USA,
Britain and South America.
>
>One more point. Your reasoning requires you, I think, to predict
>that searches of government archives in formerly Communist
>countries wouldn't reveal a large number of UFO reports we
>haven't known about. That prediction would appear to be false.
>George Knapp was acquired voluminous UFO reports from the former
>Soviet military.

Reports collated by the military obviously have a specific
purpose. How many of these were "sightings" by military
personnel, and how may were investigations of civilian reports?

>Again, you need to control here for cultural differences in
>general. You have free medical care, we can barely even discuss
>it. You have more dance music on your pop charts, we have more
>hiphop. You stand politely to the right on escalators, we stand
>anywhere we like, blocking the way for those who want to pass
>others. You have a monarchy, and, much as we adore your royals,
>we'd never institute such a thing. Etc. You may, for all I know,
>have your own style in academic disciplines like physics or
>economics. How do you know that the willingless to discuss
>certain types of UFO reports -- quite apart from their reality --
>isn't influenced by culture?

I can't really see that there is any inhibition to discuss
particular kinds of UFO reports, we have had *some* of every
type of report that you have had, and these have been reported
in much the same way. Certainly the populist US UFO literature
circulates in Britain at the same time as it does in on the
other side of the Atlantic.

>If you think reports of aliens have a racial component, here's an
>experiment you might try. In London, where there are large
>numbers of non-white people, is there also the same percentage of
>Nordic reports?

I was certainly not implying that white people or non-white
people have different types of experiences, although off-hand I
can't think of a great number (i.e. none) of Afro-Carribean or
Asian abductees in Britain. What I do find significant is that
in reports involving Nordics and "Aliens", it's always the tall,
blonde Nordics who are lording it over the smaller, darker
coloured guys, never the other way round. Coincidence? I think
not!

>One final question. When you say "we predicted," are professional
>historians and sociologists among the "we"?

No, just us Magonia Mobsters (those people from the North who
are blind to reality. (c) 1970 Arthur Shuttlewood.)

--
John Rimmer
Magonia Online, a member of the P.L.A.Driftwood Organisation
http//www.magonia.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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 15

                                 Re: Memory

From: Skye Turell <turel33@west.net>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 18:24:05 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 22:09:33 -0400
Subject: Re: Memory


>Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 17:09:41 -0500
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
>Subject: Was: Asking Pamela Stonebrooke, Now: Memory

>>From: Cathy Johnson <cej@idirect.ca>
>>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Asking Pamela Stonebrooke
>>Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 14:48:30 -0400

>>>Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 20:09:27 -0700
>>>From: Skye Turell <turel33@west.net>
>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Asking Pamela Stonebrooke

>>>>From: Cathy Johnson <cej@idirect.ca>
>>>>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Asking Pamela Stonebrooke
>>>>Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 10:07:31 -0400
>>>>>Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 07:29:52 -0700
>>>>>From: Skye Turell <turel33@west.net>
>>>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Asking Pamela Stonebrooke

>>>>>>Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 12:55:01 -0500
>>>>>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>>>>>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
>>>>>>Subject: Asking Pamela Stonebrooke

>>>>><snip>

>>Dear Skye,

>>For the sake of brevity I have snipped a bunch.

>>Cathy Johnson

<snip>
>If you are 'going public' then I believe that you should be able
>to:

>1. Be willing to substantiate your claims.

How do you propose to do that?  What do you offer as "evidence,"
that will be accepted by anyone, including the most hardcore
debunkers?

>2. Be willing to subject yourself to verification, ie;
>psychological exam, MRI/x-ray, polygraph, or any other
>(non-intrusive) form of testing or verification.

Which Whitley Strieber and others have already done (I don't
know about the polygraph test, but those aren't accepted
anywhere), to absolutely no avail.

>3. On a personal level- be willing to answer/respond to tough
>questions, and to have the ability to question/explore the
>nature of your own experiences in as (objective) a manner as
>possible.

How do you know Pamela hasn't done this?  Just because she
hasn't discussed her experiences with you, doesn't mean she
hasn't fully explored.  As a matter of fact, I know she has
talked to researchers/psychologists in the field.

>BTW, I know that a 'polygraph' cannot show the reality of an
>event but it can sure help to eliminate those who are being
>intentionally deceptive or who are trying to pass off pure
>'imagination' as reality.

No, it can't and that's why it's not admissible in a court of
law.

>That's not a lot to ask of someone who publicly claims that they
>are interacting with a non-human agent, don't you agree?
>Everything else is just speculation and superfluous. It
>contributes nothing new or of value and only serves to divert
>attention away from what [I think] is -a very real core
>phenomenon.-

When someone testifies at a murder trial, or in any eyewitness
situation, they are generally not expected to undergo such
"testing." The very idea of expecting this of an ET experiencer
demonstrates such a negative preconceived notion that it isn't
likely to alter their opinion at all.  So why bother?  I
certainly wouldn't.

A good example of this phenomenon is the CIA's "AIR" report that
was an evaluation of the military remote viewing unit.  There
were two primary researchers involved in the study.  One was a
member of CSICOP, well known for his anti-psi stance; the other
was one of the US's top statisticians, who is open to the
validity of psi.  Despite many factors that tended to reduce the
scores of the RV sessions being judged (that they were only
practice sessions, because the researchers didn't have the
necessary clearances to review the real world sessions...that
the data evaluated only included ONE remote viewer -- the rest
were tarot card readers and the like...that the study only
spanned the final two years of a 20-year program), the scores
were statistically better than chance.

What was the debunker's formal response to this?  That the
science of statistics obviously wasn't evolved enough and
therefore further analysis of the remote viewing program would
have to wait for 100 years!

This is roughly analogous to what's happened with ET experiencer
"testing."
>
>The first thing I did was to have myself tested/evaluated by a
>competent psychologist. When someone (validly) asks me, "How do
>you know you're not crazy or imagining things?" I have a solid
>answer for them based on my having put my sanity to the acid
>test. I don't know, what do -you- offer in response to such a
>question? Well gee, you gotta believe I'm not disturbed because
>I'm telling you so! Sorry, not good enough.

If it's any help, I have a degree in psychology and I say that
Pamela's as sane as anyone else running around Los Angeles.

<snip>

>It is -partly- because of all the confusion that surrounds this
>subject that we are not taken seriously by a majority of people.

No.  I think it's because most abductees are intimidated into
silence.  If the average person on the street knew how many of
their friends, co-workers, professors and other highly respected
people in their lives were abductees, they might pay more
attention.  I know many people who are not abductees themselves,
but have met enough individuals they respect enough who ARE
abductees, that they have become convinced of the validity.

It also doesn't help that many abductees are almost apologetic
about having the experiences they have.  They feel guilty.  They
question their sanity.  And they do this publically enough that
their stories are not very compelling.

BTW, Pamela DID write a response to your initial comments.  It's
all over the Internet.  Of course, since you didn't direct those
comments to her, I don't know why she'd feel compelled to send
her response to you.


--

Skye Turell <turel33@west.net>
ICQ Pager 6797092






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 15

                 C-E: The Wit and Wisdom of J. Bond Johnson

From: Francis Ridge <slk@EVANSVILLE.NET>
Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 21:33:17 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 22:42:03 -0400
Subject: C-E: The Wit and Wisdom of J. Bond Johnson


The Wit and Wisdom of J. Bond Johnson
R. J. Durant

Ufologists tend to be deadly grim people, sour, dour, never
cracking a smile. At first blush that would seem odd, because
there is plenty of UFO-related humor out there. Much of it
appears in the newspaper accounts of sightings, where reporters
who can't find an outlet for their creativity in stories about
dog shows or zoning meetings can let loose a barrage of
witticisms about "the silly season." After a while it gets
boring if you happen to care about the topic, and of course as a
serious student of UFOs you are either directly or tangentially
the butt of the joke. So the ufologists don't grin.

One unfortunate result of this mind-set is that we fail to
identify the truly creative ufological jokester on the rare
occasions when he appears in our midst. This is the case with
the humorist J. Bond Johnson. Even his name is funny, the J.
standing for James. Remember 007?

He's pushing 80, and after a very full life, he finds himself
sitting around worrying that the world has forgotten him and all
his accomplishments. Senility is not the only deficit brought
about by age. One also loses the companions of yesteryear who
would listen to the stories, and laugh and laugh, sharing the
mirth. So J. Bond has done the natural thing, which is to seek
another audience for his exceptional wit.

In 1947 J. Bond was working at the Fort Worth, Texas
Star-Telegram as a photographer and reporter. One day he was
sent to the office of Brigadier General Roger Ramey to
photograph some material thought to be a "flying disk." A
previous press release from the Roswell Army Air Field had
proclaimed the capture of same, causing an uproar. Johnson
arrived, Speed Graphic in hand, took the photos and delivered
them to the newspaper. That was all he did, or at least that is
the sum and substance of what he told Kevin Randle during three
hours of taped telephone conversations 42 years after the event.

Along with a great mass of other photographic material, the
original Ramey office pictures were donated by the newspaper to
the University of Texas, which maintains a huge photo archive.
The University has supplied prints to anyone willing to pay the
nominal copying fee. In this way Roswell researchers and even
the U.S. Air Force, and through them the CIA, got these famous
shots, and were able to study them with care.

J. Bond's first foray into ufological leg-pulling came about
when he teamed up with another jokester, William Moore. That's
the fellow who stood up at a MUFON symposium and admitted -- or
claimed -- that for many years he had been cooperating with
government agencies to furnish them with UFO data and to help
spread disinformation. Moore has written much on Roswell, and in
a refreshingly open self- assessment of his book he said it is
"...a disgraceful hodgepodge of fact and fiction."

Moore and J. Bond teamed up, which is not surprising, given
their mutual merry- making interests and proclivities. For years
the two proclaimed that the Ramey office photos showed the
"real" debris, meaning the material found on the Foster ranch,
and described in detail by various awed witnesses.

The literal-minded ufologists did not get the hint, missed the
nudge and the wink. They studied and studied those photos. So
did the Air Force, when it undertook to review the Roswell
matter, even enlisting the photographic analysis facilities of
the CIA for the purpose. But the photos show only a battered
radar reflector. Always have, and always will, because that --
and that alone -- is what was on Ramey's floor. Even J. Bond
eventually conceded, but only after much smoke had been blown in
many eyes. (Moore has long since dropped from sight.)

Now suddenly, after a long absence from the scene, J. Bond has
returned to pull more legs, yank more chains. This time he has
no partner, just the Internet. He composed a "press release,"
written as if it issued from some neutral reporter, and in this
way sprung his latest joke. The major claim is the old one,
slightly amended: the photos are of a radar reflector, but in
the foreground, thus unnoticed by myriad observers, is some of
the "real" debris.

J. Bond's "press release" begins this way: "It has been
announced by the University of Texas at Arlington that on June
1, 1998, a special exhibit will open in the Special Collections
Section of the Main Library featuring super-enlargements of the
more than half-century old famous Roswell UFO crash photographs.
In making the announcement, Dr. Gerald D. Saxon, Associate
Director for Special Collections, Branch Libraries and Programs,
University Libraries, stated that the special exhibit will be
offered in response to an unprecedented demand by the public to
view at close range details of the newly enhanced photographs of
the most famous and controversial UFO wreckage, which was
'captured' by Unites States military forces near Roswell, New
Mexico in 1947."

"Dr. Saxon stated that photographic exhibits at the library
usually are scheduled at least two years in advance, but that
this special photo exhibit has been arranged on very short
notice due to world wide attention once again being focused on
the UTA Library following a recent announcement that it has
finally been established that the photos are of portions of the
actual crash debris."

Of course, the "recent announcement" also emanated from the
smoking word processor of J. Bond Johnson, but the reader is
cleverly steered away from that fact.

A call to the UTA Library revealed that yes, they have received
many calls about the photos subsequent to J. Bond's "recent
announcement." Yes, they are making the photos available to
walk-through visitors. Contrary to J. Bond's breathless claims,
the UTA "special exhibit" consists only of the four Ramey office
photos in 16 by 20 inch format, the largest they make. These are
under plastic and laid out on a table. No special security
precautions are being taken, simply because none are required.

The Library hasn't a clue about what J. Bond means by
"super-enlargements." Nor do they know what he is talking about
when he claims the pictures show "portions of the actual crash
debris." They are concerned that their public service function
is being turned into a circus. It appears that the librarians
are just another group that has missed the point of J. Bond's
humor.

Elsewhere, J. Bond has claimed that when the Air Force studied
the Roswell issue in 1994, they engaged in a hot dispute with
the UTA Library over the photos, apparently demanding that the
originals be transferred to the U.S. government. I asked the
Library to comment on this claim, and received the following
reply from Dr. Saxon.

"Jane Klazura, a staff member in the Special Collections
Division of the UT- Arlington Libraries, forwarded me your
undated letter re the Roswell negatives/photos held by UTA. I
wanted to answer your questions so that there is no mistake as
to what we have done in the past with the negatives/photos.

"You mention in your letter that Mr. Johnson has said that an
agency of the U.S. government engaged in a "dispute" with UTA re
these photos. That simply is not true. There was no dispute. A
few years ago the Air Force wanted to analyze the Roswell
negatives, and we provided high quality copy negatives for them
to use. As a matter of policy and archival practice, we do not
send out original negatives to anyone or any institution. The
Air force was pleased with the quality of the copy negatives and
used them in their analysis and subsequent report.

"For your information I am speaking from firsthand knowledge of
this because I was in charge of Special Collections at the time.
Our staff member in charge of the Star- Telegram Photograph
Collection at the time, Betsey Hudon, has since retired. The
Roswell negatives/photos are a part of the Star-Telegram
Collection, which has close to one million images in it."

One would suppose that J. Bond would tell us just a bit more
about the means by which the photos have recently been magnified
or enhanced, revealing the "real" debris that all others have
failed to spot. Despite repeated requests for elucidation on
this vital point, his responses have been extremely obscure.
Michael Lindemann interviewed him, and wrote that the process
consisted of using a xerox machine to "blow up" the photos in
many steps!

Lindemann didn't catch on, and I suppose that out of desperation
to get a rise out of the ufologists, J. Bond came up with what
he thought would be the unmistakeable give-away. He started
saying that the "enhancement" work was done at Staples, an
office supply chain. According to this version, Staples provides
a service in which a photo or document is "digitized" and
transferred to a computer disc. The "digitized" image can then
be magnified almost infinitely. Professionals familiar with
image enhancement know how ridiculous all this is.

But once again, we failed to take the hint -- when J. Bond said
he did it at Staples, that should have been the occasion for a
big belly laugh, not the intense furrowing of brows that
afflicted the hopelessly literal ufologists.

I paid the U of T 24 dollars each for the seven photos they
offer, in the 16 by 20 inch format. Once again, the joke is on
me. A careful examination with a magnifying glass revealed none
of the exotic stuff J. Bond talks about.

Then a friend has used some sort of (real, not Staples) computer
enhancement to magnify the photos about sixty-fold. Still
nothing. My friend, who is in touch with J. Bond, has passed the
bad news on. J. Bond, ever the jokester, replied by angrily
claiming that my friend must be blind.


R. J. Durant
10 June 98






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 15

                                 Re: Memory

From: Cathy Johnson <cej@idirect.ca>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 22:12:56 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 22:50:33 -0400
Subject: Re: Memory


>Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 17:09:41 -0500
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
>Subject: Was: Asking Pamela Stonebrooke, Now: Memory

Dear John,

Thank you for pointing out that this conversation had indeed
strayed considerably.

>The original post in this series (which appears to have gotten
>lost in the shuffle) was directed to Pamela Stonebrooke and
>related to some specific questions about her statements. If you
>look at the mess in the attribution headers you'll see that
>Pamela herself has not responded or maybe not had an oportunity
>to respond.

You are right. Skye and I simply fell off in the deep end and I
am in the process of discovering that I cannot swim.

>As for the comments being made about 'memory.' This series of
>posts has served to illustrate the point that I made in my
>response to Skye. Many people are confusing purely 'mental' (or
>to use their own jargon,) "spiritual/astral" experiences with
>actual-real time- physical events.

You bring up a major point in that no one dares to segregate
channelling from actual abductions and contacts. The brown bag
of UFOology does have some curious contents, doesn't it.

>No-one anywhere is trying to differentiate between those who
>claim to have-memories of actual events- and all the other stuff
>that people are -calling- "abduction memories."

How do we fit in, John? I know we both have our sides to tell,
whether it be real or not. How do we tell the difference? Both
of us are so bent on telling our own side of the story that we
are willing to do all kinds of things to offer up our own proof.
Yet, it is proof that no one will listen to. Have we made any
impact with our honest sincerety? Is there really anyone out
there listening to people like us? Does their knowing of our
story help anyone?

Yes John, there are lots of people like us. There just as many
stories as there are people with experiences floating around.
And some of them have equalled, if not surpassed your own
efforts to confirm and validate truth as you know it. But, what
did it get you for all of that trouble? I can only hope it was
your money's worth. As for me, I didn't have that much money to
spare. Nor did I go to such lengths to try to prove myself or my
experiences to anyone. My fault about that, sorry.

I am not trying to provoke you in any way. I only hope that we
can work together to ask questions that need answers, have
needed answers for more than fifty years. How does all of this
affect us? How does it make any difference to us knowing what we
do? If all of the greatest minds of the world have failed to
fathom our perplexion, how are we supposed to?

All this talk about memories, about mental processes and so on
are only part of intangeable sciences. There is so much more to
learn, to discover, if only by listening to the tales we tell.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 15

                           Enhanced Roswell Images

From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 19:10:52 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 22:47:54 -0400
Subject: Enhanced Roswell Images


The Fund for UFO Research has obtained enlargements from the
University of Texas at Arlington of the James Bond Johnson
images that have been mentioned during the past two weeks.
While a conclusive study of them has not yet been completed,
Fund Chairman Don Berliner has issued a short statement
regarding them on the Fund's WEB site:


"A NEW LOOK AT ROSWELL PHOTOS: A set of newsphotos by James Bond
 Johnson when he was a reporter/photographer for the Ft. Worth
 Star-Telegram in 1947, have attracted renewed interest. Johnson
 claims he now can see I-beams with raised symbols, as described
 by Dr. Jesse Marcel, 1947 witness to the material. Large (16" X
 20") enlargements provided by the University of Texas have been
 studied by Fund Board members, none of whom could confirm
 Johnson's observations. It all looks like the remains of a
 weather balloon: sticks, metalized paper, and deteriorated
 neoprene. Additional study is planned."

This update, and others that may prove to be interesting, can be
found by selecting the "Breaking News" link on FUFOR's Home
page:

                    http://www.fufor.org

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 15

                   Re: Corso Suffers Massive Heart Attack

From: Michael Christol <mchristo@mindspring.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 21:45:18 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 23:06:48 -0400
Subject: Re: Corso Suffers Massive Heart Attack


>From: Peter A. Gersten <UFOLAWYER1@aol.com>
>Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 17:53:01 EDT
>To: CAUSupdates@caus.org
>Subject: [CAUS updates] -  Corso Suffers Massive Heart Attack

>Dear CAUS Subscribers:

>I have just learned that Colonel Philip Corso suffered a massive
>heart attack this past Tuesday, June 9th.


Peter...

Please pass my wishes and prayers along to Colonel Corso and
his family.

We may well disagree with each others opinions as researchers,
but we are all still family.  When it comes to health, we
can put those things aside and support each other.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 15

                Re: 'Popular Mechanics' Accuses US Government

From: James Easton <pulsar@compuserve.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 22:45:35 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 23:11:16 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Popular Mechanics' Accuses US Government

Regarding...

>From: Stig Agermose <wanderer@post8.tele.dk>
>Subject: 'Popular Mechanics' Article Accuses US Government Of UFO
>Cover-Up
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 02:21:45 +0200


Stig publicised:

>From the July edition of 'Popular Mechanics'.

>URL:

>http://popularmechanics.com/popmech/sci/9807STSPBM.html#UFO

>These UFO sightings continue to defy science and the skeptics.


>BY JIM WILSON

>POPULAR MECHANICS offers no opinion on whether these mysterious
>flying machines originate from secret military airstrips here on
>Earth or spaceports somewhere "out there." We do, however, feel
>comfortable making one prediction: When the shell of security
>surrounding UFOs finally cracks, it will be because one of the
>sightings we present here provided the wedge.

[...]


>BENTWATERS, ENGLAND December 27, 1980

>For three years Pope was assigned to the MOD office responsible for
>investigating UFO reports.

[...]

>Among the cases he examined was an incident that has come to be known
>as England's Roswell.

>It occurred over the last days of December 1980, near a now-closed
>U.S. Air Force base in Bentwaters. For two nights security patrols
>observed unusual lights in the Rendlesham Forest just beyond the
>base's fence. On the second night they entered the forest with
>generator-powered floodlights, Geiger counters and 2-way radios. At
>the critical moment when an angular, 20-ft.-wide, 30-ft.-tall craft
>appeared, the radiation-detecting instruments started to clatter and
>the spotlights and radios began to sporadically fail.


What an ill-researched mess.

There was no 'craft' witnessed during the second night's
incident, involving Col. Halt's investigation of the 'UFO'
reports, no 'clattering' of any instruments, no sporadic
communications failure and the 'light-alls' are testified to
have been unreliable.

>Daylight revealed broken tree limbs and three 1 1/2-in. deep,
>7-in.-dia. circular depressions, suggesting something had landed,
>just as the observers claimed.

'Daylight', as indicated here, relates only to the first night's
events when originally nobody claimed anything had 'landed'.

>Initially, skeptics dismissed this physical evidence as wind damage.

Currently, there's no evidence for other than a prosaic
explanation of any 'damage'.

>They explained the unusual lights by constructing a complex chain of
>events that included unusual astronomical activity, satellite debris
>burning up on reentry, and the rotating beam of a lighthouse several
>miles away.

And what d'ya know, it turns out there was an apparent satellite
re-entry of COSMOS-749 earlier that first night, on 25 December
1980, and the lighthouse is now a proven factor in a relatively
complex chain of events.


>What the skeptics couldn't explain, says Pope, is a scientific report
>he found in the MOD files.

He didn't find any such report in the Ministry of Defence (MoD)
files and doubtless has never claimed otherwise. Pope asked the
Defence Radiological Protection Service for an opinion about the
readings referenced on Halt's microcassette recording/memo to
the MoD.

>It revealed radiation levels 25 times higher than normal background
>levels in the soil and trees surrounding the landing site.

According to Pope, their opinion was that the readings were
_ten_ times higher, not twenty-five times higher than might be
expected in the area.

There is some further, relevant information which may not be
familiar outside the UK.

On 27 June, 1997, the UK ITV network broadcast a 'prime time'
televised TV debate on the subject of UFOs. The 'Strange But
True?' program featured the 'Rendlesham Forest' case and Frank
Close, a theoretical physicist, claimed to have contacted the
manufacturers of a circa 1980s geiger counter which was standard
issue to the US forces.

The manufacturers reportedly confirmed that the tolerance of the
minimum reading was similar to that mentioned on the 'Halt
tape', i.e., it was comparable to a car's speedometer which
would flicker even though the car was stationary at traffic
lights.

Even Jenny Randles accepts the 'radiation readings' seem to be
of no significance.


The televised debate also included a contribution from Vince
Thurkettle, at the time a local forester, who commented that the
'landing marks' were without question, in his opinion, simply
'rabbit scrapings'.


Incidentally, a word on Col. Halt.

I have been fortunate in contacting a number of personnel who
were stationed at the twin base RAF Bentwaters and RAF
Woodbridge complex at the time of the 'UFO' excitement. Offering
to place Col. Halt's background in perspective, the then Area
Defense Counsel, the "lawyer charged with defending personnel
charged with criminal offenses or facing adverse personnel
actions", recollects:

"At the time, I was a Captain.

Most of us on base were embarrassed by this "incident." We
didn't believe the UFO hype for one minute. The next day, I
personally read the "Security Police Blotter" describing the
incident in detail. It seemed to document hysteria rather than
hard facts.

The "Deputy Base Commander" title is misleading. The senior
officer on base is the Wing Commander, who had several
subordinate commanders, i.e., A-10 squadron commanders, etc. The
"Base Commander" was one of these subordinate commanders,
charged with overseeing the housekeeping operations on the base,
e.g., security, housing, personnel, etc. The position of "Deputy
Base Commander" was generally viewed as a dead-end job reserved
for lieutenant colonels officers who had not demonstrated great
potential and were being permitted to put in time until
retirement".


>Pope said the two Bentwaters episodes and others he investigated
>during his stint as England's top UFO investigator moved him from
>skeptic to believer, and inspired him to write a book titled Open
>Skies, Closed Minds.

>"As long as we are all afraid of ridicule, the UFOs are going to be
>ignored," says Pope. "Perhaps we ignore them at our peril."

In the UK UFO Network, IRC on-line conference, dated 23 May,
1998, Nick Pope was asked:

"What do you think of Easton's recent conclusions surrounding
Bentwaters? Also, what about Steuart Campbell's lightship (not
lighthouse) explanation, do you rate it higher than Klass'
lighthouse?"

Pope replying:

"I've spoken to Charles Halt about this at some length. He told
me that the lighthouse was visible at the same time as the UFO,
and was entirely separate. What's more, all the base personnel
were familiar with it, as it was a well-known local feature".


Apparently Halt, for some reason, didn't mention to Nick Pope
the critical original witness statements he had never disclosed.
That of the three security police officers who first
investigated the 'strange lights', John Burroughs wrote in his
testimony:

"Once we reached the farmer's house we could see a beacon going
around so we went towards it. We followed it for about 2 miles
before we could see it was coming from a lighthouse".

Or that Ed Cabansag confirmed:

"...we ran and walked a good 2 miles past our vehicle, until we
got to a vantage point where we could determine that what we
were chasing was only a beacon light off in the distance. Our
route through the forest and field was a direct one, straight
towards the light".


What's your opinion on the case now, Nick?


Whilst on the subject of the 'Strange But True' debate, I'm sure
we would all care to determine some facts and their
consequential reporting.

Facts:

1. Halt didn't take any witness statements until a full week
after the initial events, confirming in the April 1994 interview
for OMNI magazine that, "Around New Year's Eve, I took
statements and interviewed the men who had taken part in the
initial incident. The reports were nearly identical".

A full week elapsed between the incidents and Halt obtaining
crucial witness affidavits, proven by the dating on the
statements, during which time the evidence was susceptible to
what Halt acknowledges were rumours which were "out of control".

As has only recently become evident, following my disclosure of
the original statements, they were not only far from identical,
they revealed dramatic differences from the stories which later
emerged, especially Penniston's.


2. It is also proven from all of the statements that Burroughs,
Cabansag and Penniston chased a light through Rendlesham Forest
for some two miles, before they recognised it was a lighthouse
beacon.


3. Penniston originally claimed he was never able to determine
the source of the elusive lights, Burroughs still maintains he
never saw an actual object and Cabansag's account is 'much ado
about nothing'.


Perhaps proponents of the 'Rendlesham' case remaining
inexplicable would first care to explain the following claims
which Halt made on the 'Strange But True?' program and which
were made _prior to the original witness statements and all they
reveal being publicised_.

In response to the question of witness testimony having changed
over the years, Halt declared to a nationwide audience, as
recorded on video:

"The story so to speak as for the size and shape has not changed
through the years.

I took original statements from the three people that actually
approached the object and did it the day afterwards and they all
said the same thing when they were independently interviewed and
they all said it was approximately nine feet on the side and it
was triangular. They have not changed that story.

...These three people have said the same thing consistently and
do to this day".



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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 16

                Re: Popular Mechanics' Accuses US Government

From: "Jerome Clark" <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 98 21:16:46 PDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 10:05:45 -0400
Subject: Re: Popular Mechanics' Accuses US Government


> Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 11:37:56 -0400
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: 'Popular Mechanics' Accuses US Government Of
>   UFO  Cover-Up

> >From: Stig Agermose <wanderer@post8.tele.dk>
> >Subject: 'Popular Mechanics' Article Accuses US Government Of UFO Cover-Up
> >To: updates@globalserve.net
> >Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 02:21:45 +0200

> >>From the July edition of 'Popular Mechanics'.

> >URL:

> >http://popularmechanics.com/popmech/sci/9807STSPBM.html#UFO

> I noted that in his article, Jim Wilson referred to the J. Allen
> Hynek Center for UFO Studies as JAHCUS, rather than CUFOS.  Is
> JAHCUS a term that I've simply missed all these years, or is Jim
> making this up as he goes along?

Steve,

I was as startled as you to see myself identified as a spokesman
for something called JAHCUS.  No, you haven't missed anything.
It's still CUFOS.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 16

              Re: Vallee Hoaxed Corbin, UFO Sweden & Sightings

From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 03:55:02 +0100
Fwd Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 00:01:12 -0400
Subject: Re: Vallee Hoaxed Corbin, UFO Sweden & Sightings

Message from Clas Svahn:


Regarding the Philadelphia article UFO-Sweden has not removed it
from our web site. Please read the statement below. The article
is out on the net again since quite a few weeks. Please tell
others that we rely on Mr Vallees investigation and have been in
email contact with him in this matter:

(Mr Liljegren is a member of UFO-Sweden)


From: "Anders Liljegren"
<anders.liljegren@norrkoping.mail.telia.com>
Subject: SV: VALLEE
HOAXED CORBIN, UFO SWEDEN & SIGHTINGS
Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 15:48:25 +0200

Dear Friends,

Please note that the reference to the UFO-Sweden web site below
is outdated. The current url -- relevant since more than one
year -- is http://www.ufo.se . The old 'algonet' address is
still there, but you should use the new direct one instead.
There was obviously once a link from the old 'algonet' site to
the Philadelphia report because UFO-Sweden received a lot of
questions from (mostly unknowing) youngsters on the case and we
wanted to provide the best possible information.

The reference was removed when the UFO-Sweden site was
restructured. This was NOT because UFO-Sweden felt "fooled" by
the article, but because the reference fell out in the
restructuring process. The restructure was made because some
'hacker' had broken into the site and done a lot of damage to
it. Conspiracy seekers may tend to construct it otherwise but
this is the case as stated by Mikael Sjoberg, who is
UFO-Sweden=B4s webmaster. In fact, UFO-Sweden=B4s web place was once
again restructed, just recently, which is a normal procedure for
an active website.

Regards,
Anders Liljegren
Archives for UFO research (AFU)
afu@ufo.se

----------

JACQUES VALLEE HOAXED SCIENCE & UFO COMMUNITY WITH
HIS "ANATOMY"! UFO SWEDEN, PARANET'S MICHAEL CORBIN AND
"SIGHTINGS" AMONG THOSE TAKEN IN BY SCAM

Dateline San Francisco, 5/30/98: The title is featured
prominently at the center of their homepage located at
http://www.algonet.se/~ufo/english.html

"The Philadelphia Experiment Fifty Years Later" it says. It
appears again at a web page for the radio show "Sightings"
hosted by Jeff Rense,whom some say is more credible than Art
Bell. You can find it at:

http://www.sightings.com/ufo/philahoax.htm

but the problem is that the article that it refers to, written
by Jacques Vallee, has now been conclusively proven to be a
fraud and is under investigation.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 16

              2 'Celestial' Objects Spotted During 'Star Wars'

From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 05:49:01 +0200
Fwd Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 09:59:45 -0400
Subject: 2 'Celestial' Objects Spotted During 'Star Wars'

Received June 15.

Stig

*******

Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 13:51:27 -0700
From: "A.J. Craddock" <webmaster@cseti.org>
To: webmaster@cseti.org
Subject: 2 "Unconfirmed Celestial Objects" spotted during "Star Wars"
test


Follow the link from CSETI's Homepage for more information about
the two anomalous objects detected during the January 16th space
test of Raytheon's Exo-atmospheric Kill Vehicle, as described in
Aviation Week & Space Technology.

Regards

Tony Craddock
Web Administrator
CSETI
http://www.cseti.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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 16

                                 Re: Memory

From: Skye Turell <turel33@west.net>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 21:08:07 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 10:04:05 -0400
Subject: Re: Memory

> From: Cathy Johnson <cej@idirect.ca>
> To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Memory
> Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 22:12:56 -0400

> >Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 17:09:41 -0500
> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
> >Subject: Was: Asking Pamela Stonebrooke, Now: Memory

<snip>

> You bring up a major point in that no one dares to segregate
> channelling from actual abductions and contacts. The brown bag
> of UFOology does have some curious contents, doesn't it.

> >No-one anywhere is trying to differentiate between those who
> >claim to have-memories of actual events- and all the other stuff
> >that people are -calling- "abduction memories."

HELLO???  I can't think of a single experiencer that considers
channelling to be in any way equivalent to real life experiences.
(And how does one "channel" an abduction anyway???)

I would say virtually everyone is able to make a distinction
between a real-time real-world event and "abduction memories,"
which again, I assume you mean to be hazy memories recalled after
a period of forgetfulness.

Unless your friends and aquaintances are considerably different
from mine...

> If all of the greatest minds of the world have failed to
> fathom our perplexion, how are we supposed to?

Which "greatest minds" would those be?

--

Skye Turell <turel33@west.net>
ICQ Pager 6797092






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 16

                  Popular Mechanics/Popular Science & UFOs

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 01:19:45 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 10:20:52 -0400
Subject: Popular Mechanics/Popular Science & UFOs


> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
> re: 'Popular Mechanics' Accuses US Government Of UFO  Cover-Up

> >From: Stig Agermose <wanderer@post8.tele.dk>
> >>From the July edition of 'Popular Mechanics'.

> >http://popularmechanics.com/popmech/sci/9807STSPBM.html#UFO

> >... The numerous photos make it well worth a visit.
> >Links are preceded by asterisks.

<snip>

> .. it appears that Popular Mechanics is once again
> trying to increase their magazine sales by putting "UFOs" on the
> front cover  [snip again ]

> Unfortunately, "Popular Mechanics" (PM) and "Popular Science"
> (PS) are two magazines that have been very influencial in
> attracting those who are not familiar with the UFO genre..

<snip>

I agree. My 2-cents worth is this.

Anyone who wants a quick-and-dirty guage of the PS/PM readership
should look at the classified ads at the back.

I don't have a copy handy, but remember jewels like " Elijah
coming before Christ", endless get-righ-quick schemes, "train to
be a locksmith" etc. I'm sure you can find even better ones!

PM is not exactly the IUR, and PS is no Scientific American.

If there is any benefit to this, it might be a slight rise in
public 'UFO consciousness'; the perception that there may indeed
be an issue worth discussion, even by everyday working Joes who
would otherwise not give UFOs a thought.

OK, 6-cents worth.

Best wishes

-  Larry Hatch






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 16

                               Re: Ford Fund?

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 02:10:52 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 10:09:52 -0400
Subject: Re: Ford Fund?


>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: Ford Fund?
>From: Elaine M Douglass elaine26@juno.com
>Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 02:40:40 EDT

>>From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Date: Sun, 14 Jun 98 14:56:18 +500
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Ford Fund?

>>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Ford Fund?
>>>From: Elaine M Douglass <elaine26@juno.com>
>>>Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 21:18:08 EDT

>>>>From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>>Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 10:09:37 -0400
>>>>Fwd Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 10:09:37 -0400
>>>>Subject: Ford Fund?

>>>>In view of the interest in the John Ford case on UFO UpDates I'm
>>>>re-posting the following. I don't know if the E-Mail addresses
>>>>still work - I've Cc:'ed the interested parties.

>>>>ebk

>>><snip>

>>>Saturday June 13, 1998

>>>Dear UFO UpDates-Toronto:

>>>You must have received this message in a time capsule. It is out
>>>of date. As you can see, the date on Don Jernigan's message is
>>>1996.

>>I'm annoyed that that you seem to imply a shelf life for justice and
>>fair play.

>>Your light tone suggests that you have changed _your_ mind regarding
>>John's guilt or innocence...why! I think you owe me an explanation.
>>I think you owe us _all_ an explanation!

>>>John Ford is no longer in jail. He is in a mental hospital in
>>>New York state. Mr. Jernigan is no longer trying to raise money
>>>for John's legal expenses, nor am I, nor any other members of
>>>the now-defunct John Ford Defense Committee.

>>>Best regards,

>>>Elaine Douglass

>>Ms. Douglass, you wrote a very impassioned paper that got _me_
>>all stirred up. Subsequently, your tune has changed . . . you
>>now _buy_ the radium in the toothpaste foolishness?

>>With respect, madam, _you_ started this fire. Your casual
>>efforts to put it out _now_ only increases my suspicion, anger,
>>and sense of outrage.

>>With friends like you, it would seem, John Ford needs NO
>>enemies.

>>Lehmberg@snowhill.com

>>RESTORE JOHN FORD!

>Dear Alfred et al.:

>Your fuses are too short.

>My message contained simply facts, no opinions.

>You read into things, not a good policy.

>I expended countless hours on the John Ford dilemma, you just
>tuned in. Took a lot of guff for my trouble, seems that hasn't
>ended.

>I do not know what to do to gain freedom for John Ford.

>Elaine Douglass


Hello Elaine, hi All,

You have had access to much more information on the case than we
have. It's not important to air anymore of Johns' laundry in a
public forum either. Don't feel as if you have to answer for
him.

The fact that he has been commited to a mental hospital
(although questionable to some of us due to the 'nature' of
Johns' interests) is not beyond the reach of reason. Some of us
just wanted to make sure that this guy wasn't being "railroaded"
because of his interest/belief in UFOs.

Don't misread that concern for a peer as us giving you more
guff. It's not. (Als' "passion" aside! <G>) Thank you for
responding and updating us on the case. I published his (John
Fords') address, so if anyone needs more information or wishes
to follow up on the case they can write to -him- and ask him
directly.

Peace,

John Velez, Webmaster IF-AIC







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 16

                    Air Still Very Active Over North Sea

From: Joseph Trainor <Masinaigan@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 07:45:58 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 10:26:17 -0400
Subject: Air Still Very Active Over North Sea

Dear List:

I just received this item from one of UFO ROUNDUP's readers in
the UK. I have requested more details. It sounds like a repeat
of the A-10 incident with Capt. Craig D. Button in Arizona and
Colorado back in April 1997.

Does anyone else have any information about this missing Tonado
from RAF Coningsby?

____________________________________

To: "Masinaigan" <Masinaigan@aol.com>
From: "Paul Hunter" <gscribe@thefree.net>
Subject: Re: Air still very active over North Sea
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 98 21:28:36 PDT

Joe,

Another bit of _non-ufo_ info here, one more radar glitch case,
only this time a real vanishing act.

An RAF jet (Tornado I think) from RAF Coningsby, has just been
reported as missing after having disappeared from radar screens.
(15 June evening news); it's quite a big news item here both
nationally & locally.

Pilot feared dead etc; location North Sea (quite near us in
fact).

I appreciate that this is not a UFO story, but, so soon after
the 'Blue UFO' of last week...

Thanks for the coverage on the alleged meteor BTW - news on it
here was quite sketchy.

One wonders how the the hell you 'lose' a jet; a bit reminiscent
of a similar story from the US last year I think (an A11 went
missing?). It seems unusual.

Regards

Paul


Paul Hunter
gscribe@thefree.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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 16

               Re: Search For Life On Mars With Your Computer

From: Stig Agermose <wanderer@post8.tele.dk>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 05:33:05 +0200
Fwd Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 09:56:05 -0400
Subject: Re: Search For Life On Mars With Your Computer

A more comprehensive coverage than BBC's is given by
Florida Today. URL:

http://www.flatoday.com:80/space/explore/stories/1998/
061398a.htm


Stig


*******


FLORIDA TODAY Space Online

"Planet Earth's best source for online space news"

For June 13, 1998


Shape of life: How does a computer 'know' when it sees
it?


A NASA/Marshall Space Flight Center Space Science news
release


Looks may not be everything, but they may indicate
whether something was alive - here, or on Mars. To
find out if looks and shape can be a signature of
life, Dr. David Noever at NASA's Marshall Space Flight
Center plans to conduct what may be one of the world's
largest computations.

Noever is developing "Book of Life" technology to
identify and classify the tiniest life forms found on
Earth and in samples from Mars. The project recently
started under a grant from NASA's Advanced Concepts
Office in Washington.

Noever has also been recognized for his inventive use
of artificial intelligence to develop new drugs in
response to the medical challenges posed by leukemia,
E. Coli and HIV, among other important diseases.
Discover magazine's July issue, in its annual Discover
Awards for innovative technology, selected Noever's In
Virtuo program as the top computer software product.
"Artificial intelligence is the main link between
these projects," said Noever, a research scientist
specializing in biotechnology in the Space Sciences
Laboratory at NASA/Marshall. "The computer is the
engine that solves problems depending on what kind of
fuel - that is, what kind of questions - that you put
into it."



Remembering the morph man


The idea of recognizing life when you see it may seem
obvious, but its scientific grounding only dates back
to Professor D'Arcy Thompson of the University of St.
Andrews in Scotland and his 1917 book On Growth and
Form. "He's the original morph man," said Noever,
referring to Thompson and the image morphing process
used to create special effects in movies like
"Terminator 2" and "The Mask."

Now recognized as the world's first biomathematician,
Thompson applied the concepts of mathematics to the
differences of form he observed in various living
things. He introduced the idea of systematically
studying organisms by their geometric shape and found
that changes of shape between species could be
visualized by altering mathematical functions. In the
days before computer imaging technology, though,
Thompson could only draw figures by hand like the ones
here.

"Biological shape now ranks as one of at least four
principal criteria in analyzing the origin of
astrobiological samples," Noever said, citing the
importance of Thompson's contribution to astrobiology.



The unusual suspects


Noever plans to use shape to identify life forms just
as a detective uses fingerprints to identify suspects.
But sifting through the lineup of possible forms is an
unprecedented task, even for computers. In fact,
Noever expects it will take the largest computation
ever.

"Looking for life forms in Mars rocks means analyzing
microfossils - like potential nanometer-size bacteria
- so small that 50,000 could fit across the width of a
single strand of human hair," Noever explained.

>From the 12 known meteorites believed to have made
their way to Earth from Mars, Noever figures that
about 20 kg (44 lbs. - as much as three mid-size
bowling balls) of material are suitable for searching.
Examining these "small" samples of Mars rocks by
microscope would be like scouring a desert on foot in
search of an occasional dry bone.

Making the task more challenging, many things that are
not life forms appear lifelike, while many true life
forms appear to be non-life.

Buying or creating a single computer to conduct the
search is out of the question since at least 100
million images will have to be stored digitally and
scanned, and classifying these images will require
10,000 times the computing power it took to produce
the animated feature film "Toy Story", one of the
current standards in supercomputing.

Instead, Noever - working together with Dr. Subbiah
Baskaran, a visiting scientist from the University of
Vienna Institute for Molecular Biotechnology, and
Helen Matsos of NASA/Marshall - plans to borrow a few
thousand computers to build what might be called the
first D'Arcy Machine, a computer dedicated to
classifying images for tell-tale biological shapes.

Before considering extraterrestrial sources of life,
however, the technology must be in place for an
extensive classification of the only life forms we
know - life on Earth.



With a little help from my friends


Named after the original morph man, the D'Arcy Machine
will borrow processing power from volunteer computers
connected to the Internet around the world to perform
the giant task.

"We hope to get young scientists from elementary
school through college to help us with the search by
linking their computers to the D'Arcy Machine," said
Noever.

Noever and his colleagues plan to develop the "Book of
Life" technology using neural networks and evolvable
hardware - rewriteable computer chips capable of
learning multiple patterns or images as they process
information. Testing the system's image recognition
ability and cataloging life forms from Earth will be
the first of three project phases.

One of the Allan Hills meteorites after section was
cut off for examination. Studying large specimens at
high magnifications will be like scouring a desert by
hand in search of fossil fragments.

"In Phase One, we will construct image-based family
trees of living forms as distinct from inorganic shape
features," said Noever, who plans to feed the new
machine at least 100,000 images to get it started. The
goal for this phase is peer-reviewed publication and
presentation at the 1998 conference "On Growth and
Form" highlighting scientific progress in the 50 years
since D'Arcy Thompson's death.

In the second phase, the D'Arcy Machine will use
trained neural networks from Phase One while being
re-trained to simultaneously acquire and classify new,
often ambiguous images. Noever and his colleagues will
also throw the machine some curve balls with
artificial data to test its performance.

The goal of the third phase is for the D'Arcy machine
to automatically acquire and classify images with
minimal human supervision. At this stage, the machine
will be equipped for future search scenarios,
including the examination of meteorites found on Earth
and lunar or interplanetary samples retrieved from new
space missions.



A lab assistant that doesn't get tired


"The most exciting aspect of artificial intelligence
is the way it can be applied to so many different
problems," Noever said, such as his work on the In
Virtuo program which Discover magazine has selected as
the top computer software innovation the year. This
software grew from earlier work funded by NASA's
biotechnology research program to investigate the
structures of proteins.

Whereas traditional methods of searching for drugs, or
searching for life on Mars for that matter, require
scientists to labor through a lengthy process of trial
and error, artificial intelligence software evolves as
it searches.

Noever likes to compare it to solving Rubik's Cube. A
supercomputer randomly working all possible solutions
would take about a billion years to get the right
answer. In 1983, a Los Angeles high school student set
the world's record at just under 23 seconds. If a
random search takes too long, then teaching a computer
to see patterns like a human might interpret them
becomes the challenge to AI researchers: How to
empower a software program with some kind of
autonomous learning?

AI software starts with a few mediocre solutions to
problems, and then develops several variations on
these solutions based on the outcome of initial
calculations. The process repeats itself again and
again until a workable number of refined solutions are
found for human review.

Like evolution, Noever's AI technology finds the
fittest candidates. "Before putting the engineer's
precision to the final candidate, we first let the
computer go to work for us" said Noever.

But computers aren't doing all the work. Noever is
conducting innovative research in space flight
experiments to make improved forms of Aerogel, a
superinsulation with broad applications, and other
areas.


This World Wide Web site is copyright =A9 1998 FLORIDA
TODAY.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 16

                      XPI Director Has Close Encounter

From: Stefan Duncan <duncan@tarheel.net>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 06:06:20 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 10:22:59 -0400
Subject: XPI Director Has Close Encounter


Stefan Duncan, editor of AUFON and director of XPI, went to High
Rock Lake early this morning and was suddenly surprised by an
over head triangular shaped craft that beamed him with red
light, then departed slowly, making a roll over, and moved
sideways along the lake.

At 12:30 a.m., June 16, 1998, I arrived at Panther's Point at
High Rock Lake. I took a moment, as I always do, of clearing my
mind of stress and problems, and walked toward the pier. I was
carrying my binoculars and a high beam flashlight.

The sky had several whispy clouds. I cast light on the ground to
see my way to the pier. I walked on to the pier and turned to
the east. I rose my head upward with the beam of light shining.
I flashed the beam three times over the horizon of trees on the
east and continued to bring the light upward.

A black ceiling was over my head. The beam of light struck the
overhead object and was so startling to me that I dropped the
light on the pier.

Then an high intense beam of red light engulfed me. It was so
sudden and startling, I froze and forgot to breath. All I could
see was red and the sound as if I was under water.

Several seconds passed and the beam was suddenly gone. I
breathed and staggered back, trying to regain my sight, and
watched this huge triangular craft drift to the east. It wasn't
a 100 yards over my head. The craft was at least five commercial
airplane sizes. There was no sound. On the back end of the each
corner was a rectangular white light. At the front tip, I was
unable to see, but a white difussed light was being emitted and
a small red light was flashing.

When this craft moved toward the center of the lake, it did a
slow roll over and stopped turning when it was upside down. It
continued forward movement at about 20 miles an hour then moved
sideways up the north branch of the lake until it disappeared in
the cover of trees at the bend.

I was home at 3:30 a.m. and stood underneath a black neon light
but could not see any dust residue. I will be returning to the
sight and bringing a Geiger counter to test for any
radioactivity.



XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Stefan Duncan
Director of XPI
Editor of AUFON
4055 Hwy. 152E #8
Rockwell, NC 28138
http://www.aufon.com
ICQ 11878618







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 16

                      Re: Jesse Jr., Again Sees Symbols

From: KRandle993@aol.com
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 11:45:44 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 18:16:38 -0400
Subject: Re: Jesse Jr., Again Sees Symbols


>Subj: UFO UpDate: Re: Jesse Jr., Again Sees Symbols
>Date: 98-06-15 23:35:36 EDT
>From: updates@globalserve.net (UFO UpDates - Toronto)
>To:    updates@globalserve.net

>Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 18:31:52 -0300
>From: Stanton T. Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Jesse Jr., Again Sees Symbols


>>From: Stig Agermose <wanderer@post8.tele.dk>
>>Subject: Jesse Marcel, Jr., Sees Again Symbols
>>       Saucer" Crash
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 02:54:21 +0200


>>Date: 14 Jun 1998 19:28:03 -0000
>>From: lclark@ibm.net
>>To: <NYMUFON@listbot.com>
>>Subject: Fw: Jesse Marcel, Jr., Sees Again Symbols From the
>>Roswell "Flying Saucer" Crash
>>Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 15:28:57 -0400


>>From: James Bond Johnson <JBONJO@aol.com>
>>To: JBONJO@aol.com <JBONJO@aol.com>
>>Date: Saturday, June 13, 1998 9:31 PM
>>Subject: Jesse Marcel, Jr., Sees Again Symbols From the
>>Roswell "Flying Saucer" Crash

>>Press Release
>>Not for publication
>>Prior to June 15, 1998
>>(562) 426-3622

>>Jesse Marcel, Jr. Sees Again the Symbols From the Roswell
>>"Flying Saucer" Crash

>>By James Bond Johnson

 <snip>

>>The symbols, described by many as the "fishhook", the "shark
>>fin" and the "Ankh" and some others were back to remind him of
>>that special night. Over the years Jesse had been asked to
>>describe the symbols and he had sketched them for publication in
>>books on UFOs.

>>But now, thanks to high tech digital enlargement techniques,
>>these symbols had been discovered on pieces of the debris shown
>>with his dad in the 8th Air Force headquarters offices of Brig.
>>General Roger Ramey in Fort Worth, Texas.

>>Major Marcel was photographed along with General Ramey and
>>Ramey's chief of staff, Colonel Thomas J. Dubose, all examining
>>the wreckage which had been brought to Fort Worth by Major
>>Marcel.

>>The story of that Roswell crash has been told and retold so many
>>times... and with so many conflicting details... in dozens of
>>books and articles, a movie and several television shows over
>>the years. But one thing always has been clear in the mind of
>>Jesse Marcel, Jr. -- the symbols on the pieces of wreckage.

 <snip>

>>Meanwhile, Dr. Marcel, veteran of Pacific military combat and
>>now proudly retired in the rank of full colonel after a total of
>>38 years active and National Guard service as a helicopter pilot
>>and flight surgeon, turned back to his computer screen to scan
>>the debris photo even more closely.

A minor point here but one that might be relevant. Jesse served
in Southeast Asia which, I suppose could be considered part of
the Pacific. That statement, however, seems to suggest a World
War II connection which isn't precisely accurate.

>>The symbol that he remembers best was a figure of a truncated
>>pyramid with a ball floating over it. "I remember it best
>>because it resembled a seal balancing a ball on its nose", he
>>said. Maybe he will find it somewhere in those pictures where it
>>has been hiding for 51 years.


>I have been in close touch with Dr. Jesse A. Marcel over the
>last few days re these pictures. Bond has very unfortunately
>vastly overstated what Jesse says. He has NOT said that anything
>in the pictures looks like the I-beam and symbols and other
>wreckage he saw in July 1947.

>Stan Friedman

Like Stan, Michael and R.J. Durant, I have been very concerned
about what J. Bond Johnson has to say. Like the others I have
contacted Jesse Marcel. He told me he was disturbed by the
misrepresentation and that Johnson was putting words in his
mouth. His comments were taken out of context by Johnson and
don't seem to reflect reality. Given my history with Johnson,
I'm not surprised.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 16

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 13:59:25 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 18:30:36 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

>Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 00:44:55 +0100
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: John Rimmer <johnr@magonia.demon.co.uk>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

To no individual in particular, but Jerry Clark recently
mentioned Charles Fort as an influence on this thread, and as
coincidence would have it, I was working on some Fort material
today and came across the enclosed, from p. 62 of Fort's The Book
of the Damned. I call the excerpt "Honest Opinion," but of course
everyone is free to choose their own title:


"Our own acceptance is that justice cannot be in an intermediate
existence, in which there can be approximation only to justice or
to injustice; that to be fair is to have no opinion at all; that
to be honest is to be uninterested; that to investigate is to
admit prejudice; that nobody has ever really investigated
anything, but has always sought positively to prove or disprove
something that was conceived of, or suspected, in advance."


Remember, Fort said it, not me. Although on Mondays, Tuesdays,
Wednesdays and Saturdays, I definitely tend to agree.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 16

                    Air Still Very Active Over North Sea

From: Joseph Trainor <Masinaigan@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 15:23:40 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 18:39:37 -0400
Subject: Air Still Very Active Over North Sea

Dear List:

Here's the latest on the disappearance of the RAF Tornado
over the North Sea yesterday. It's beginning to sound like a
repeat of last year's incidents involving Capt. Craig D. Button
and Capt. Amy Svoboda of the USAF.

------

To: Masinaigan@aol.com
From: "Paul Hunter" <gscribe@thefree.net>
Subject: Re: Air still very active over North Sea
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 98 15:53:34 PDT

Dear Joe,

Please read all of this, as it was composed 'on the hoof', I
think I eventually got most of your info on this awful tragedy,
I went straight to source as far as I could.

----------

Update:

We don't receive a local paper, so all I can tell is this:-

The first I heard of it was on ITV/ITN's 6 o'clock evening news
on Monday June 15, this was then followed up by our local news
supplements on both BBC1 and ITV:- "Look North" (BBC1), and
"Calendar" (ITV/Yorkshire TV).

But by late evening, the story had been relegated to a local
news item only. By this time the bad news was that the wreckage
had been found 20 miles North of Flamborough Head (a promontory
in between the North East coast English resort towns of
Scarborough and Bridlington), this makes the crash site about 60
miles North of where I am, and about 85 miles North of RAF
Coningsby).

At this point only one body had been found (dead), I don't know
which one, but there were two airmen involved:

Derek Lacey and William Vivian. I'm sorry but I didn't catch
their respective ranks, & I'm unsure of the correct spelling of
their names. Both were from Lancashire though.

Maybe a quick check of the BBC's new site or perhaps the
Electronic Telegraph - both have search facilities to verify
names etc?

The late evening "Look North" on BBC1 told us that the body and
wreckage had been found at 7pm after a "massive" search
involving RAF Sea King helicopters and also RAF Nimrods. A Sea
King found the site. We were told that three Tornados had been
out on a "routine training exercise", when one of the jets had
gone missing from radar screens at 1pm June 15th, after that a
search was mounted.


-------------


More:

I'm now on a self imposed lunch break, & so I've just checked
with the Grimsby Evening Telegraph's newsdesk (our local paper):
they're putting the story in todays edition Tuesday 16 June.
They were able to tell me this:-

William Vivian was the Squadron Leader which is a surprise - the
man in charge of the "routine exercise";

Flight Lieutenant Derek Lacey was navigator.

They were not sure who is still missing, although a new search
is supposed to be going on as I type, so this could become clear
soon.

-------------

Ok, I've just phoned RAF Coningsby in Lincolnshire (about 25
miles South of where I am) at 3:05pm on [44] (01526) 342581 and
I've established the following:

It was No 29 Squadron. Apart from that they don't know which
airman is still missing.

As a sidebar I'll just mention that Angela Walsh the Community
Relations Officer who I spoke to at 3pm today June 16 was quite
suspicious of me, even slightly hostile, even though I was very
careful not to seem ghoulish - she very quickly wanted to know
who I was etc. (It's hard to express sorrow for people you don't
know over the phone even if you feel it, though I was tactful).
Also, the man at reception claimed not to know which squadron
was involved, which is not credible to me.

One last piece of late breaking news. At 3.20pm the local ITV
afternoon "Calendar East" has just this minute reported that the
salvage operation has found the flight recorder, hopes are all
but gone for the remaining airman

Hope this is useful. If you're busy I'll check things out again.


------------


BTW on June 12 BBC1's "Look North" it was reported that there
had been a power surge of 400 volts reported as happening in the
Yorkshire region (I don't what date, but presumably recently).
No explanation was given, but it was revealed that Yorkshire
Electricity had to replace a lot of parts due to 'burn out'.
Reminds me of New Zealand - no explanation, burnt out
transformer etc.

Three different meteors? World-wide, this has been happening a
little too much for coincidence lately. Can I ask you where
you're getting the info on this story - I tried all day Saturday
and Sunday with limited results, is it just news agency sites?

I've been on this msg so long it's nearly time for another meal!

Regards

Paul Hunter

gscribe@thefree.net

----------

> Dear Paul:

> You're right. It was 14 months ago when Capt. Craig
> R. Button inexplicably turned his A-10 away from a
> training flight in southern Arizona and flew 800 miles
> to the north, disappearing from radar over the Sawatch
> Mountains of Colorado. The crashed A-10 was eventually
> found on New York Mountain, a high wilderness peak
> near the ski resort of Vail.

> The RAF Tornado's disappearance over the North Sea
> is equally puzzling. Especially considering June 11's
> "meteor" incident, which I understand has now been
> "explained" as three separate meteors, and the June 12
> UFO sighting over in Boyle, Eire. (Yes, Boyle is active
> once again.)

> On which news broadcast did the Tornado item
> appear? Was it BBC-1 or BBC-2? Was there anything
> on this case in the local newspapers? If so, could you
> email me a copy of the newspaper story, listing the
> paper's name and the date the item appeared? Failing
> that, can you send me the basic details--pilot's name,
> time of disappearance, RAF squadron number, etc.
> I look forward to hearing from you. Thanks!

Joe Trainor








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 16

                             UK Research Request

From: Paul Hunter <gscribe@thefree.net>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 98 20:57:44 PDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 18:40:40 -0400
Subject: UK Research Request

UK Research request

This on behalf of Yorkshire based UFO investigator,
Andrew Ellis.


Can any one advise of an abduction researcher in the Leeds area,
or anybody in the Birmingham area.

Please contact Andrew on (01132)  482973, or through me:-

Paul Hunter

gscribe@thefree.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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 16

                                 Re: Memory

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 16:55:35 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 19:09:40 -0400
Subject: Re: Memory


>From: Cathy Johnson <cej@idirect.ca>
>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Memory
>Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 22:12:56 -0400

>>Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 17:09:41 -0500
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
>>Subject: Was: Asking Pamela Stonebrooke, Now: Memory


Hi Cathy, hi All,

>Dear John,

>Thank you for pointing out that this conversation had indeed
>strayed considerably.

That's why I changed the subject header! I didn't want to
_stop the thread_ only to seperate it from the original post
which was specifically directed to Pamela with questions
regarding some statements that she made.

Actually what I was did was to respond to it as a seperate
thread! <G>

>>The original post in this series (which appears to have gotten
>>lost in the shuffle) was directed to Pamela Stonebrooke and
>>related to some specific questions about her statements. If you
>>look at the mess in the attribution headers you'll see that
>>Pamela herself has not responded or maybe not had an oportunity
>>to respond.

>You are right. Skye and I simply fell off in the deep end and I
>am in the process of discovering that I cannot swim.

Me neither kid! That's why I try to keep things simple. K_I_S_S!
(Keep It Simple Stupid) "Simple" is about all I can handle
myself nowadays. Must be middle-age! <VBG>

>>As for the comments being made about 'memory.' This series of
>>posts has served to illustrate the point that I made in my
>>response to Skye. Many people are confusing purely 'mental' (or
>>to use their own jargon,) "spiritual/astral" experiences with
>>actual-real time- physical events.

>You bring up a major point in that no one dares to segregate
>channelling from actual abductions and contacts. The brown bag
>of UFOology does have some curious contents, doesn't it.

You bet! But I do think that it's important to draw the
distinctions for the sake of those who have had their lives
turned upside-down and need a serious investigation and some
sound answers. No-one is going to give us much credence as long
as we are being lumped in with the 'channelers' and the UFO
cults, and the many pseudo-religious cults and groups that have
attached themselves to the phenomenon.

You know me Cathy - you know why, and where I'm coming from.
Others are happy thinking that my motivations are "ego based"
but I know that _you_ know better! It's nice to be able to
disagree or even argue with someone who is not using the
converation for personal attacks. It's refreshing and something
that friends/peers should be able to do. Sadly, such is not
always the case. "Some folks" have their little personal agendas
to take care of! <G>

>>No-one anywhere is trying to differentiate between those who
>>claim to have-memories of actual events- and all the other stuff
>>that people are -calling- "abduction memories."

>How do we fit in, John? I know we both have our sides to tell,
>whether it be real or not. How do we tell the difference? Both
>of us are so bent on telling our own side of the story that we
>are willing to do all kinds of things to offer up our own proof.
>Yet, it is proof that no one will listen to. Have we made any
>impact with our honest sincerety? Is there really anyone out
>there listening to people like us? Does their knowing of our
>story help anyone?

Oh for sure Cathy! That's what I'm talking about. If we can
seperate the wheat from the chaff intelligent and thoughtful
people _will pay_ more attention. It won't be long after that
that (hopefully) a serious investigation will begin. I just
don't think it'll happen unless we drop the -deadweight- of the
New Age movement, and all of those who only "think" they are
being abducted and muddy the waters with their idle and
sometimes bizzare speculations/stories.

>Yes John, there are lots of people like us. There just as many
>stories as there are people with experiences floating around.
>And some of them have equalled, if not surpassed your own
>efforts to confirm and validate truth as you know it. But, what
>did it get you for all of that trouble? I can only hope it was
>your money's worth. As for me, I didn't have that much money to
>spare. Nor did I go to such lengths to try to prove myself or
my >experiences to anyone. My fault about that, sorry.

No Cat, it was my choice. As I have said, it was what my
conscience dictated that I should do. I stood up to be counted
and offered myself to them so they could look for their proof-in
their own way. It was a sacrifice I was willing to make on their
behalf. Personally I could give a shit who believes me or not.
But that is a selfish attitude and because of all the
'unknowing' masses of humanity it was one that my conscience
would not allow me to indulge.

I am doing what I have to do. I don't claim that its what
everyone should do nor do I recommend it. As you well know it
can get pretty rough out here on the range! It's a role that I
assumed on my own, and because a few close freinds thought that
I'd be able to do some good as an abductee rep and contribute
something of value to the (public) effort. Probably because I
have such a big mouth! <G>

>All this talk about memories, about mental processes and so on
>are only part of intangeable sciences. There is so much more to
>learn, to discover, if only by listening to the tales we tell.

I listen to all the "tales" you want me too as long as the
person telling it is willing to back it up!

Take good care Mother-trucker, and try to stay between the
ditches! Say hi to Big Bob for me! <G>

Warmest regards,

your friend always,

John 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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 16

                Re: Popular Mechanics/Popular Science & UFOs

From: Al Baier <baiera@meau.mea.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 13:18:36 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 19:01:30 -0400
Subject: Re: Popular Mechanics/Popular Science & UFOs


>Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 01:19:45 -0700
>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Popular Mechanics/Popular Science and UFOs.

> I agree. My 2-cents worth is this.

> Anyone who wants a quick-and-dirty gauge of the PS/PM readership
> should look at the classified ads at the back.

> I don't have a copy handy, but remember jewels like " Elijah
> coming before Christ", endless get-righ-quick schemes, "train to
> be a locksmith" etc. I'm sure you can find even better ones!

> PM is not exactly the IUR, and PS is no Scientific American.

> If there is any benefit to this, it might be a slight rise in
> public 'UFO consciousness'; the perception that there may indeed
> be an issue worth discussion, even by everyday working Joes who
> would otherwise not give UFOs a thought.


Larry and list:

I must take exception to your characterization of Popular
Science, by associating it with Popular Mechanics. They are very
different magazines.

PS has a long and distinguished history of science reporting for
the layman. One of the best articles on Area 51 ever printed
anywhere appeared in PS a few years ago.

PM, on the other hand, has been justly criticized for its
UFO-related articles.

I've read PS, PM, and Scientific American for 40 years. Believe
me, if or, when UFOs, ETs etc. are proven fact, you won't read it
in SA first.

Best Regards,
Al







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 16

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 09:09:18 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 19:12:05 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

> Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 14:00:26 -0500 (CDT)
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

> >From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
> >To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net>
> >Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs
> >Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 10:07:03 -0400
>
> <snip>
>
> >Good point, Jerry. And when Dennis (in another post mentioning
> >this piece) calls this a typical New York Review article, I
> >can't agree.

> <snip>

> >Greg

> Greg:

> I suppose it depends on what you mean by typical, doesn't it?

> For example, my advice, if you wanted to write a typical article
> for the New York Review of Books, would include the following:

> 1) Pretend you're the world's foremost authority on the subject
> under review, even if all you nominally know about it is what
> you read in the three or four books you knocked off in a single
> sitting the day before;

> 2) Always review the subject itself. (See No. 1 above.) Only
> occasionally refer to anything actually having to do with the
> idividual books ostensibly under review.

> Of course these are the same guidelines generally in use at the
> NY Times Book Review, too, except that they only deal with one
> book at a time.

> So what you're really saying is, Crews's article is simply more
> typical than most.

> Do I detect a New England Establishment, an intellectual elite,
> at work here?

> Actually, to be pefectly honest (and non-paranoid), anytime
> humans are involved in a situation, complexity is apt to rear
> its ugly head. So to put the record straight -- if memory serves
> -- didn't Mack's book get a fairly decent hearing (a more decent
> one than I would have given it at any rate) in the Times Book
> Review, and wasn't Carl Sagan's recent The Demon-Haunted World
> taken out behind the woodshed in the NY Review of Books?

> Hey, reviews happen!

Perfectly reasonable, Dennis. I remember the NY Times review of
Mack -- by Dean Koontz, wasn't it? His open-mindedness, stretched
in the direction of naivete, was really sweet. (Or wait -- maybe
that was Koontz's review of C.D.B. Bryan's abduction book.)

Anyhow, I wasn't trying to make any overall point about the
treatment of UFOs in the high-tone media. As I might have made
more clear, I was talking about a subset of UFO reviews, in which
disbelief reaches the level of hysteria. The tone of Crews's
article isn't something I normally find in the NY Review, but
you're certainly right when you say the form of the piece was
typical.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 16

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: Jean-Luc Rivera <PSaintc798@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 16:43:34 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 19:06:18 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


>Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 00:44:55 +0100
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto >updates@globalserve.net>
>From: John Rimmer <johnr@magonia.demon.co.uk>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

Dear John,

I had sent a second message indicating I was answering to you
and not Greg Sandow but it seems it never made it through.


<snip>

>Even in Western Countries the presence of one active investigator
>can skew reporting figures. Even after all these years it is
>still unclear just how much of the Warminster phenomenon was
>reporting of objectively real phenomena (possibly Army activity)
>and how much was created by the atmosphere produced by Arthur
>Shuttlewood and his cohorts.

We agree on this point. Generally speaking it is next to
impossible to find out and Warminster is certainly a good
example. The only  beginning of an answer are some studies ( no
exact references in mind right now ) that I seem to recall
indicated that a UFO wave always begins long before it starts to
be reported in the papers.

<big snip>

>>Do you really think that if there was a wave of " alien
>>abductions " in Ahghanistan or in some middle eastern or african
>>country torn by war and closed to foreigners we would hear about
>>it?

>Why Afghanistan or war-torn countries? Why not India (pretty
>democratic, reasonably free press) or Tunisia (very open to
>foreigners), or Taiwan or South Korea (good communications)?

As I indicated in my original posting, it is a no win situation:
I have had this discussion with some of my PSH friends in France
before. Countries like Tunisia or Taiwan or others similarly
open to Western influence can be deemed "contaminated"
culturally and therefore whatever reports come from them cannot
be considered valid. If the reports come from countries less
exposed to Western influences but through a western
investigator, we get the same objection: the investigator
imposed consciously or unconsciouly his/her own expectations
during the reporting and translation process. Pinvidic faced it
in Algeria with the djinns: did the Algerians see "real djinns"
or was it UFOs interpreted in the only terms of reference
available to them ?

>John Rimmer
>Magonia Online, a member of the P.L.A.Driftwood Organisation
>http//www.magonia.demon.co.uk

You have started a very important and fascinating discussion. I
hope Greg and other list members will continue to bring their
input.

Jean-Luc Rivera







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 16

                                 Re: Memory

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 12:29:04 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 18:23:29 -0400
Subject: Re: Memory


>>From turel33@west.net Mon Jun 15 21:26:37 1998
>Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 18:24:05 -0700
>From: Skye Turell <turel33@west.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Memory

>>Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 17:09:41 -0500
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
>>Subject: Was: Asking Pamela Stonebrooke, Now: Memory

>>>From: Cathy Johnson <cej@idirect.ca>
>>>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Asking Pamela Stonebrooke
>>>Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 14:48:30 -0400

(snipped a few headers for brevity)

Hello Skye,

I wrote:

>>If you are 'going public' then I believe that you should be able
>>to:

>>1. Be willing to substantiate your claims.

Skye asks:

>How do you propose to do that?  What do you offer as "evidence,"
>that will be accepted by anyone, including the most hardcore
>debunkers?

I am willing to subject myself to empirical testing of anykind
(as long as it's not surgical or threatening to my health) in
the name of obtaining some answers. There is physical evidence
in the form of X-rays, marks and scars, ground trace evidence,
and independant witnesses. The problem is that it all gets
poo-pooed before any of it has even been looked at bnecause
there is always so much blather mixed in. Factual verification
of individual accounts is the grail. Speculation the grave.

>>2. Be willing to subject yourself to verification, ie;
>>psychological exam, MRI/x-ray, polygraph, or any other
>>(non-intrusive) form of testing or verification.

>Which Whitley Strieber and others have already done (I don't
>know about the polygraph test, but those aren't accepted
>anywhere), to absolutely no avail.

Polygraph tests were performed as a matter of course on those
claiming abduction in the early years of investigation and
research. They ought to bring the practice back! Court or not,
it would show up an obvious or blatant liar. You'd probably thin
the (public) abductee ranks consideraby in one fell swoop. Then,
the hard to explain cases and material can be concentrated on. I
don't know about you but I'm tired of all the putzing around, I
want some answers!

>>3. On a personal level- be willing to answer/respond to tough
>>questions, and to have the ability to question/explore the
>>nature of your own experiences in as (objective) a manner as
>>possible.

>How do you know Pamela hasn't done this?  Just because she
>hasn't discussed her experiences with you, doesn't mean she
>hasn't fully explored.  As a matter of fact, I know she has
>talked to researchers/psychologists in the field.

See, again you read something into my comments that wasn't there
Skye! I wasn't talking about _Pamela_ specifically, but all
those who have "stories" to tell on the internet and on these
lists. People who expect to be taken seriously without any
willingness to offer verification of anykind. Even if only a
willingness to be examined. Anyone can tell a story. How many
are willing to back it up?

>>BTW, I know that a 'polygraph' cannot show the reality of an
>>event but it can sure help to eliminate those who are being
>>intentionally deceptive or who are trying to pass off pure
>>'imagination' as reality.

>No, it can't and that's why it's not admissible in a court of
>law.

See response above. We're not going to "court" Skye. I think it
speaks volumes for someone who claims that a UFO came down and
kidnapped them to have passed a polygraph examination. I think
that many others would agree whether it's accepted in a court of
law or not.<G>

>>That's not a lot to ask of someone who publicly claims that they
>>are interacting with a non-human agent, don't you agree?
>>Everything else is just speculation and superfluous. It
>>contributes nothing new or of value and only serves to divert
>>attention away from what [I think] is -a very real core
>>phenomenon.-

>When someone testifies at a murder trial, or in any eyewitness
>situation, they are generally not expected to undergo such
>"testing." The very idea of expecting this of an ET experiencer
>demonstrates such a negative preconceived notion that it isn't
>likely to alter their opinion at all.  So why bother?  I
>certainly wouldn't.

How is it "negative" to expect/ask someone to substantiate an
admittedly outrageous claim? Are you sure you're not a lawyer
rather than a psychologist? Your post sounds like dialog from an
old Perry Mason episode for some reason. <G>

>>The first thing I did was to have myself tested/evaluated by a
>>competent psychologist. When someone (validly) asks me, "How do
>>you know you're not crazy or imagining things?" I have a solid
>>answer for them based on my having put my sanity to the acid
>>test. I don't know, what do -you- offer in response to such a
>>question? Well gee, you gotta believe I'm not disturbed because
>>I'm telling you so! Sorry, not good enough.

>If it's any help, I have a degree in psychology and I say that
>Pamela's as sane as anyone else running around Los Angeles.

That's not saying much on her behalf Skye! <VBG>

I never said Pamela wasn't sane! Where are you getting this
stuff? From the air? You read and see what you want to Skye, not
what is actually there. You make me wonder why you are so
defensive about Pamela. No-one is attacking her, I didn't
mention her, why are you defending so hard? Very 'revealing'
madam psychologist! Very revealing indeed.

><snip>

>BTW, Pamela DID write a response to your initial comments.  It's
>all over the Internet.  Of course, since you didn't direct those
>comments to her, I don't know why she'd feel compelled to send
>her response to you.

She could have responded to UpDates which is where I posted it!
Unlike others who live their lives on the internet maintaining
their 'public persona' I only subscribe to this list. If it
doesn't get published here, I simply don't see it or even know
about it. I have too much other work and a 'real life' to
dedicate so much of my time to what's being said "all over the
internet!" The stuff that's out there on those lists is mostly
BS anyway and a _complete_ waste of time. Some of those folks
should get out every now and then and take in a ball game or a
movie, or have a beer with some buddies or better yet, go out
and get laid once in awhile. Sex can be a terrific cure for
internet addiction! I know I shut down for three minutes once in
awhile for it! <G>

UpDates is good enough for me thank you. If she wants me to see
her response I guess she can post it to the list that it came
from eh? How can I respond if I don't see it or even know that
it exists?

However, I'm not surprized that she responded to my post
"somewhere else" _I'm no pushover_! (as you well know) and it is
'safer' to do it _that way_ I suppose! <EG>

Pamela has to come at me with all the "real" and "genuine" that
she has Skye. We've had enough unsubstantiated abductee
pulp/garbage published already. All I had to go on originally
was that godawful sensationalistic news review of her upcoming
book.

If she's for real then I'll be one of her staunchest supporters.
If she's full of sh*t, I'll have an answer for why. BTW, I'm not
saying anything here that I haven't already said to her face
privately. She wrote to me after my first post. It was a bit of
a "kiss-up" e-mail so I showed her my "hard face." If I wanted
smoke blown up my ass I'd be home with a pack of cigarettes and
a short length of rubber tubing! <G> I don't need Pamela (or
anyone else) for that.

Pamela knows where to find me, (if she wants to) I'll be right
here.

Always an 'experience' talking to you Skye! ;-)

John 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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 16

              Re: Vallee Hoaxed Corbin, UFO Sweden & Sightings

From: Jack Hudson <true.x-file.news@n2news.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 12:57:44 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 18:58:11 -0400
Subject: Re: Vallee Hoaxed Corbin, UFO Sweden & Sightings

---

"If The Truth Is Out There...We'll Find It!"
June 16, 1998
For Immediate Release:

UFO SWEDEN PLAYS FAST AND LOOSE WITH THE FACTS TO SAVE FACE

by Denny Seeters

June 14, 1998 True.X-File.News received a message sent by Anders
Liljegren, a member of UFO Sweden, the Swedish UFO group that we
had cited first for having been hoaxed by Jacques Vallee's
Anatomy Of A Hoax and then for disconnecting the link to it. In
the message we were told that the disconnecting of the link to
the article abstract was not because they were "fooled" but
because of a change in their web site. True.X-File News
publisher Jack Hudson decided to not respond by publicizing the
message because we had never said that they disconnected the
link due to their being "fooled", we determined that the link
was disconnected because the article had been proven to be an
indefensible fraud, which it has. In addition, the time frame
that was given for the change in the web site was in obvious
error for the link had been operating at the time of our
original story. Only a few days had gone by when we decided to
check back and found that the link was no longer in operation.
True.X-File.News also provided two ifferent URLs that had been
the location of the abstract and neither one of them were
working. We went to the site of the new address for the
organization and found that not only had the design of the page
completely been altered but there was still no link to the
Vallee article abstract at that time. As such, Mr. Hudson
decided there was no point in reporting a non-issue.

However this morning the following message was sent to the UFO
UpDates mailing list, for which we must respond publically:

>From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
>Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 03:55:02 +0100
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Message from Clas Svahn

>Message from Clas Svahn:


>Regarding the Philadelphia article UFO-Sweden has not >removed
it from our web site. Please read the >statement below. The
article is out on the net again >since quite a few weeks. Please
tell others that we >rely on Mr Vallees investigation and have
been in >email contact with him in this matter:

>(Mr Liljegren is a member of UFO-Sweden)


This statement is not only untrue but is the kind of deception
that has now become part and parcel of the cover-up of the
Philadelphia Experiment story. The facts are that of this date
the new URL http://www.ufo.se links you to an all Swedish page.
Only when you look for the British/American flag icon do you go
to the original site where they have now reconnected the link to
a new version of the abstract. We searched all through the
Swedish site and as of yet, could find no version of the
abstract for the "(mostly unknowing)youngsters" who were to
benefit from the abstract's information. We at True.X-File.News
can hardly believe that these youngsters were only english
reading and not Swedish. We supposed it is only the english
speaking world that must be told Jacque Vallee's lies.

In addition, at the times that we cited that the URL was
disconnected, it was. The time frame given by Anders Liljegren
is completely wrong since he first claims that the new address
was relevant for "more than a year" and then says that it fell
out when it was restructured, yet it was functioning and
verifiable when True.X-File.News first broke the story and
provided the links so that people could see them for themselves.
Only then did it become disconnected and then we immediately
reported it as soon as we found out and verified that fact, on
more than one computer, and after repeated attempts at both URLs
that we listed.

That UFO Sweden would reestablish a link to an obvious fraud
says only that they owe no loyalty to the truth. They have now
proven that they are as hypocritical as the Journal For
Scientific Exploration when they say at
http://www.ufo.se/english/statement.html under the heading
"Scientific Basis" beginning at the end of the second sentence
that says "Only through an unpredjudiced research on a
scientific basis can we increase any knowledge of UFO phenomena
and come closer to a solution to this enigma." It is clear that
when the situation suits them, UFO Sweden can ignore their  own
idicts, and promote falsehoods with the best of snake oil
salesmen. So the reestablishing of the link to the Anatomy
abstract is no reflection what-so-ever on the accuracy of the
True.X-File.News story of the investigation by Marshall Barnes,
which no one, not Michael Corbin, Jacques Vallee, Bernhard
Haisch or Clas Svahn has been able to prove one statement to be
in error, and except in the case of Corbin(who has still to
answer arshall Barnes' challenge to put him on Corbin's radio
show under oath where he would argue his case under penalties
for perjury)all of them have failed to even make an attempt.
Instead, there is a reliance on the behind-the scenes
connections that exist in the area of intelligence agency
related scientists and the covert agendas that they serve. That
Vallee has been quiet on the matter surrounding these events
shows that he cannot defend himseld unless it is in the shadows,
using unknown arguments of persuasion to try to hold on to what
credibility he has left. That Clas Svahn would still "rely on
Mr. Vallee's investigation" shows a lack of objective thinking
when the evidence is clearly contradictory. It is doubtful that
UFO Sweden is unpredjudiced in any observations that it makes
concerning such an enigmatic subject as UFOs when they fail so
miserably at discerning fraud from fact when the evidence is
right before their eyes.

We at True.X-File.News rely not on the cult of personality as
Clas Svahn, but on the truth that documentable evidence bears
out. That is the scientific method. That is the legal method. We
always attempt to bring our readers that evidence so that they
can see it for themselves instead of making grandiose statements
and pointless proclamations. Still, we can never, no matter what
we do, force them to open their eyes.


The message from Anders follows:

>From: "Anders Liljegren"
><anders.liljegren@norrkoping.mail.telia.com>
>Subject: SV: VALLEE
>HOAXED CORBIN, UFO SWEDEN & SIGHTINGS
>Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 15:48:25 +0200

>Dear Friends,

>Please note that the reference to the UFO-Sweden web site below is outdated. Th
e current url -- relevant >since more than one year -- is http://www.ufo.se . Th
e >old 'algonet' address is still there, but you should use the new direct one i
nstead. There was obviously once a link from the old 'algonet' site to the Phila
delphia report because UFO-Sweden received a lot of questions from (mostly unkno
wing) youngsters on the case and we wanted to provide the best possible informat
ion.

>The reference was removed when the UFO-Sweden site was restructured. This was N
OT because UFO-Sweden felt "fooled" by
>the article, but because the reference fell out in the
>restructuring process. The restructure was made because some
>'hacker' had broken into the site and done a lot of damage to
>it. Conspiracy seekers may tend to construct it otherwise but
>this is the case as stated by Mikael Sjoberg, who is
>UFO-Sweden=B4s webmaster. In fact, UFO-Sweden=B4s web place was once
>again restructed, just recently, which is a normal procedure for
>an active website.

>Regards,
>Anders Liljegren
>Archives for UFO research (AFU)
>afu@ufo.se








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 16

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 09:00:44 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 19:13:25 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


> Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 00:22:38 +0100
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> From: John Rimmer <johnr@magonia.demon.co.uk>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

> >One more point. Your reasoning requires you, I think, to predict
> >that searches of government archives in formerly Communist
> >countries wouldn't reveal a large number of UFO reports we
> >haven't known about. That prediction would appear to be false.
> >George Knapp was acquired voluminous UFO reports from the former
> >Soviet military.

> Reports collated by the military obviously have a specific
> purpose. How many of these were "sightings" by military
> personnel, and how may were investigations of civilian reports?

All of them, I believe, were sightings by military personnel.
This was an internal Soviet military matter, entirely
unpublicized. Soviet military personnel had UFO sightings of
various kinds, and reports of them were filed with the military
authorities -- who were given a mission to collect them. There
are hundreds of these sighting reports, though of course in
Russian, so I couldn't skim through George's collection of Soviet
military documents to get an independent idea of what they're
like. From his description, the sightings sounded like the kind
we're all familiar with -- lights at night, disks in the daytime,
radar reports, and so forth.

I do think this is an interesting test cases for the theory that
UFO sightings and reports are generated by cultural factors. Here
we have an institution remote, one would think, from the western
media, sensational journalism, widely publicized UFO flaps,
widely publicized UFO books, and a general fascination with space
and the beyond. Yet its members reported the same kinds of UFO
sightings we're familiar with here..

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 17

                          SPIN-2 Satellite Imagery

From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 20:49:57 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time)
Fwd Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 00:58:04 -0400
Subject: SPIN-2 Satellite Imagery

Hi everyone,

Starting on June 24, high resolution Russian satellite imagery
will become readily and very cheaply available (eg. $7.95 for
1 square mile) to the public through the following web site:

http://www.terraserver.com

To my knowledge, the SPIN-2 satellite images show the finest
details seen yet of the Earth with any unclassified photo
reconnaissance satellite pictures currently available and one
can browse for FREE at his/her leisure at anything of interest
on the Earth's surface, including your house and backyard.

If one cannot travel to the mountains in Kirghizia in search
of the alleged huge UFO which crashed there, SPIN-2 satellite
imagery should provide us with the next best thing, a virtual
visit there by computer.

Nick Balaskas








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 17

              Re: Vallee Hoaxed Corbin, UFO Sweden & Sightings

From: Bruce Lanier Wright <magnus@io.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 21:42:24 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 01:07:03 -0400
Subject: Re: Vallee Hoaxed Corbin, UFO Sweden & Sightings

>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 12:57:44 -0700
>From: Jack Hudson <true.x-file.news@n2news.com>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Vallee Hoaxed Corbin, UFO Sweden & Sightings

>---

>"If The Truth Is Out There...We'll Find It!"
>June 16, 1998
>For Immediate Release:

>UFO SWEDEN PLAYS FAST AND LOOSE WITH THE FACTS TO SAVE FACE

I assume this is a troll, though I admit it's a pretty damned funny one.
ACC may have found some new staff writers.

Yours in Christ,
Bruce W.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 17

                          VJ Enterprises - New URL

From: Dave Vetterick <veterick@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 16:08:12 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 00:54:03 -0400
Subject: VJ Enterprises  - New URL


Greetings to the list.

Please make a note of the new URL's for the VJ Enterprises site
per the following.

Thanks
Dave Vetterick

=====================

Dave

Our new URLl is functional

Please share with your key UFO contacts that to visit
our UFO pages and home page its now:

HOME PAGE FOR VJ:  http://www.v-j-enterprises.com

For the UFO HOME PAGE:  http://www.v-j-enterprises.com/vjufos.html

For Roswell:  http://www.v-j-enterprises.com/roswell.html

Joshua Shapiro







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 17

                Re: Popular Mechanics/Popular Science & UFOs

From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 21:00:55 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 01:05:22 -0400
Subject: Re: Popular Mechanics/Popular Science & UFOs


>From: Al Baier <baiera@meau.mea.com>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: Popular Mechanics/Popular Science & UFOs
>Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 13:18:36 -0500

>Larry and list:

>I must take exception to your characterization of Popular
>Science, by associating it with Popular Mechanics. They are very
>different magazines.

>PS has a long and distinguished history of science reporting for
>the layman. One of the best articles on Area 51 ever printed
>anywhere appeared in PS a few years ago.

>PM, on the other hand, has been justly criticized for its
>UFO-related articles.

>I've read PS, PM, and Scientific American for 40 years. Believe
>me, if or, when UFOs, ETs etc. are proven fact, you won't read it
>in SA first.

>Best Regards,
>Al

Popular Science and Popular Mechanics are associated by the fact
that they are published by the same company; however, that
doesn't mean that they share the same editorial staff (and I
would suspect that they do not). On the other hand, as noted
earlier, PS is a far cry from Scientific American and their
articles reflect an attempt to attract a large (and young)
non-scientifically trained readership. The article about Area 51
in PS was fairly well written, as I recall. It should not be
confused with the PM article last year, which left a lot to be
desired.

But the last point raised is one that I would echo. Many young
people obtained their first view of science through the eyes of
PS and PM, before the bombardment of other media that in many
respects have since taken their place. I only wish the first
exposure of young people to the UFO genre was more accurately
portrayed. PM was obviously trying to spark sales with their
front page story, and like most other media it was really more
about money than truth.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 17

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 98 19:17:59 PDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 00:59:50 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


> Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 13:59:25 -0500 (CDT)
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

> >Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 00:44:55 +0100
> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> >From: John Rimmer <johnr@magonia.demon.co.uk>
> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

> To no individual in particular, but Jerry Clark recently
> mentioned Charles Fort as an influence on this thread, and as
> coincidence would have it, I was working on some Fort material
> today and came across the enclosed, from p. 62 of Fort's The Book
> of the Damned. I call the excerpt "Honest Opinion," but of course
> everyone is free to choose their own title:

> "Our own acceptance is that justice cannot be in an intermediate
> existence, in which there can be approximation only to justice or
> to injustice; that to be fair is to have no opinion at all; that
> to be honest is to be uninterested; that to investigate is to
> admit prejudice; that nobody has ever really investigated
> anything, but has always sought positively to prove or disprove
> something that was conceived of, or suspected, in advance."

Hi, Dennis and everybody,

Wise, but Fort's expression particularly of the last sentence is
one of the now-obvious, with few outside CSICOP believing in what
Henry Bauer calls-- in a generally dismissive sense -- "textbook
science" (others have more unflattering phrases).
I sort of think of science -- and ufology and any other inquiry
-- as a kind of marketplace, with stiff competition among a whole
lot of interested parties, some, a few, or one or two turn out to
have the real goods and get to stay in business longer than the
rest, though not necessarily forever.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 17

                   Re: ORTK and CAUS endorse Bryant effort

From: Jeff King <Boroimhe@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 20:08:12 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 00:56:52 -0400
Subject: Re: ORTK and CAUS endorse Bryant effort


>From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
>Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 21:19:20 -0400
>Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 09:10:33 -0400
>Subject: Re: ORTK and CAUS endorse Bryant effort

>Forgive me if this question is answered on a website somewhere,
>but....what jurisdiction can a county grand jury legally claim over
>things the military allegedly did 50 years ago? According to the
>statutes of New Mexico, what's the general jurisdiction of any grand
>jury? Is it required to find that laws were violated, in order to
>bring any indictments? What laws might have been violated during the
>Roswell affair?

While not familiar with New Mexican law (which means everything
I say from here on out is subject to complete contradiction, the
law and logic not being synonymous), I can offer some logical
deductions from the state laws I am familiar with and, more
importantly, basic federal Constitutional issues.

The fundamental problem with this scheme is that, generally,
federal officials are not liable for violation of state laws in
the performance of their duties.  The exceptions are when the
federal gov't consents to state jurisdiction by statute or
waiver.  So it is highly unlikely that a county grand jury would
have jurisdiction over Air Force personnel.

Even assuming that this important Constitutional hurdle is
cleared, there are still major problems with any grand jury
investigation at this late date.  A county grand jury only has
jurisdiction to investigate violations of state law that occur
within the boundaries of the county (how many crash sites are we
up to now?).  To bring an indictment, the grand jury must find
that there is sufficient evidence to believe that a crime has
been committed to permit a trial.  The indictment not only needs
to allege that an offense has occurred, but due process requires
that it describe the alleged offense with enough detail that the
accused has sufficient notice of the specific criminal act with
which he is charged.  In other words, you need pretty
significant detail about who, what and where, especially, what
specific law you're alleged to have violated.  Based on the
various Roswell accounts, the only state law violation I can
think of off the top of my head is that the alleged death
threats may constitute a violation of an applicable terroristic
threat statute (assuming New Mexico had one in 1947).

Finally, we are left with another important problem, the fact
that it is almost certainly past the time of the applicable
statute of limitations.  I did take a quick look at the New
Mexico limitations statute and found that the limitation periods
for second degree felonies is 6 years, while that for third and
fourth degree felonies is 5 years. There is no limitation period
for first degree or capital murder.  So, unless someone has
sufficient evidence to show that a first degree or capital
murder took place, the limitations periods have all run. I
didn't bother to research the New Mexico courts' interpretations
of the limitations statute, but many states hold that if the
limitation period has run (and the indictment has to allege when
the crime occurred) the state cannot even issue an indictment.
The only way around the problem is to prove that one of the
reasons for tolling the statute (i.e., not counting the time
that is running) applies, but that is highly unlikely given the
fact that no contemporary complaint or other means of initiating
an investigation was filed, at least that I am aware of.
Before anyone offers, killing a space alien probably doesn't
fall under the state's homicide statutes.  Homicide is generally
defined as killing a person, and the jurisprudence about
personhood boils down to a person is a born alive human being.
(Some animal rights activists have tried to have animals defined
as a person, and failed, with pro-life activists trying to
include the unborn.  I'm not about to get into a discussion
about hybrids or unborn hybrids, by the way).

So, to sum up, there are many reasons why a grand jury
investigation of Roswell is not only unlikely, but probably
barred by applicable law.

Now, if anyone would like a further discussion of the
intricacies of criminal procedure, I can only offer this advice:

You are one sick puppy and you should immediately seek
professional help!


Regards,

Jeff







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 17

                    CNI News: Report On Corso's Condition

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 00:50:10 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 00:50:10 -0400
Subject: CNI News: Report On Corso's Condition




From: CNINews1@aol.com
To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 17:24:47 EDT
Subject: CNI News -- Vol. 4, No. 8, Part 1 -- June 16, 1998

[Excerpt posted with permission --ebk]



COL. PHILIP CORSO SUFFERS NEAR-FATAL HEART ATTACK
Now Recovering, Family Says; But Appearances Canceled

[This story was prepared jointly by Deon Crosby of the Roswell
International UFO Museum and CNI News, with the express
knowledge and consent of the Philip Corso family. CNI News
thanks Philip Corso, Jr. for providing additional information.]

Roswell, NM -- In a brief statement made to the Roswell
International UFO Museum, the Philip Corso, Jr. family stated
that on Tuesday, June 9, Philip Corso, Sr. suffered a severe
heart attack. At that time, doctors stated that the attack
resulted in 95% damage to the heart and that they feared Col.
Corso would not recover. Corso is 83 years old.

Col. Philip Corso (U.S. Army, ret) is the author of the
controversial 1997 best-seller "The Day After Roswell," in which
he states that, during the course of his military duties, he
personally saw an alien body, alien autopsy reports, pieces of
wreckage and other evidence from a UFO that crashed near Roswell
in 1947.

At last report, Col. Corso's condition was greatly improved.
Doctors are somewhat baffled by Corso's unexpected recovery and
will be watching him closely in the immediate future.  (CNI News
expects to gather more information on Corso's recovery and will
report further details in the July 1, 1998 edition of the news.)

Phil Corso, Jr., in a conversation with Deon Crosby, Director of
the International UFO Museum, stated that the entire Corso
family would be retreating completely from public life, asking
that anyone wishing to contact Col. Corso do so through the
International UFO Museum in Roswell, NM. (see contact
information below).

Col. Corso and the Corso family have been under considerable
strain in recent months, as explained in a statement written by
Col. Corso only days before his nearly fatal heart attack. That
statement, sent to CNI News by Phil Corso, Jr., reads as
follows:

"Certain elements have laid claim to all my future writings.
They have involved me in legal proceedings. I will not foster on
the world cheap sensationalism, half-truths, errors passed off
as reality, etc. for the purpose of personal gain.

"The U.S. government and the Army have not attempted or even
hinted to me not to make the truth on Roswell or UFOs that I
possess known to the world. But other elements have stopped me,
by using the courts. I will not under any condition put the
knowledge I possess into their hands to exploit for their ends;
so the story may never be told.

"I survive on my military retirement pay. It is not sufficient
to live on and pay my legal fees, although my attorneys have
been most tolerant. I have not received any royalties from "The
Day After Roswell" and as such cannot continue my work because
of the heavy financial burden.

"Therefore, I wish to establish the Col. Philip J. Corso Legal
Fund. All donations and questions may be referred to [my
attorney, Deborah L. Taylor. See further information below].

"I wish to add that I have received [speaking] invitations from
Italy-San Marino (accepted expenses only), China-Beijing UFO
Research Organization, Moscow, England, Germany, Australia,
Japan, Brazil, Mexico, France and numerous scientific
organizations worldwide and in the United States. I have not
been able to accept because of possible legal implications by
those that wish to exploit the situation. They have even
involved my family into the fracas and legal matters." [end Col.
Corso's text]

The International UFO Museum will post regular updates on
Corso's condition on their website, http://www.iufomrc.com,
beginning June 18. Due to the circumstances, Col. Corso has
canceled all future public speaking engagements. Corso was
scheduled to speak during the Roswell UFO Encounter '98 Lecture
Series taking place July 3-5.  Individuals wishing to receive
refunds for those tickets are asked to contact the Museum. CNI
News editor Michael Lindemann will be speaking in place of Col.
Corso.

To contact Col. Philip Corso or the Phil Corso, Jr. family,
please direct all requests to the International UFO Museum,
Attn: Phil Corso, PO Box  2221, Roswell, NM  88202; by phone
(505) 625-9495 or fax (505) 625-1907.  Email messages will be
delivered to Phil Corso through Crosby's email:
deon@roswell.net.  Get-well messages are welcome and encouraged
by the Museum staff.

Questions specifically regarding the Col. Philip J. Corso Legal
Fund may be directed to Deborah L. Taylor, Attorney at Law,
Wilner & Taylor, Wedge International Tower, 1415 Louisiana Suite
4175, Houston, Texas 77002.

[NOTE: The above text may be redistributed and posted freely as
 long as it is reproduced in its entirety without change or
 omission.]


   ==+++===+++===+++===+++===+++===+++===+++===+++===+++==

CNI News is a twice-monthly electronic newsletter addressing UFO
phenomena, claims of human-alien contact, space exploration and
related issues, including the cultural and political impacts of
contact with other intelligent life. CNI News is edited by
Michael Lindemann and distributed by the 2020 Group.

CNI News is a subscription newsletter. First-time recipients may
receive two free issues before subscribing. Questions and
comments may be addressed to: Editor, CNINews1@aol.com.

If you are ready to subscribe, here's how.

-- Choose six months (12 issues) for $12, or twelve months (24
issues) for $24. You can pay by check or money order, or by
credit card (VISA, MasterCard, Discover, American Express).

-- If paying by check or money order, make payable to CNI News
and mail to: CNI News, 2100 W. Drake Rd. #277, Fort Collins,
Colorado 80526 USA. IMPORTANT: Please make sure to include your
EMAIL address with your payment.

-- To subscribe by credit card, you can call our toll-free phone
service: 1-800-898-0284; or email the following information to
CNINews1@aol.com: Your full name, email address, postal address,
type of credit card, card number, expiration date, and daytime
phone number (in case of a problem with your order). Be SURE to
tell us whether you're paying $12 (for six months) or $24 (full
year). Thanks for your interest and support!

SEEN OUR WEB SITE? If not, be sure to visit soon at
http://www.cninews.com/  While there, check out our unique
"Search CNI News" feature, the only keyword searchable UFO news
archive in cyberspace.

-----







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 17

                        Re: FBI Puts UFO Files Online

From: Stig Agermose <Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk>
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 05:29:51 +0200
Fwd Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 01:13:41 -0400
Subject: Re: FBI Puts UFO Files Online

From the Boston Globe.

URL:

http://www.boston.com/dailynews/wirehtml/167/FBI_files___on_Hitler__Amel
ia_and_U.htm


Stig


*******


FBI files _ on Hitler, Amelia and UFOs _ on the Internet


Associated Press, 06/16/98 16:20


WASHINGTON (AP) - Dear FBI: You'll want to know that I just saw Adolf
Hitler and a woman in Seat 40, Car 10 of the Illinois Central Railroad.
...

Dear FBI: I saw an unidentified aerial object. It moved due north, it
was three times the size of the evening star, it was stationary for
five to 10 seconds, it was blue but turned white and then "went out
like a light. ..."

Dear FBI: About the disappearance of Amelia Earhart: I believe there
were stowaways. After takeoff, the plane was taken over by people from
some other country. ...

Anyone with computer access to the Internet now can browse through FBI
files on some of the cases that have intrigued millions of Americans.

So far, the FBI has made 16,000 pages from 37 investigations
accessible. It intends ultimately to post all 1.3 million pages of
files already opened to the public and available for perusal in FBI
headquarters. Names of informants and correspondents are blacked out
for privacy.

The FBI's Internet motive is simple: When people request copies of
files under the Freedom of Information Act, it is cheaper to refer them
to the Web than to make photocopies, says spokesman John Collingwood.
Since last July, 1.4 million visits to the FBI site have been recorded.
Four hundred people work full time handling freedom-of-information
requests.

The bureau started with historic cases that once were matters of
intense interest.

Among them: the explosion of the German zeppelin Hindenburg in 1937;
the 1940 pickax murder in Mexico of exiled Russian revolutionary Leon
Trotsky; the 1962 escape of three Alcatraz inmates who fashioned a raft
from rubber raincoats.

Or the 1934 shooting by FBI agents of John Dillinger; the disappearance
of flying pioneer Earhart in 1937 over the Pacific Ocean; the St.
Valentine's Day killing of seven members of the Bugs Moran gang in
Chicago in 1929; the crime spree of Bonnie Parker and Clyde Barrow that
ended with their roadside killing by police in 1934.

Some don't involve criminal investigations at all: the 1972 gift of
$75,000 by John Lennon to the Allamuchy Tribe, headed by New Left
activist Rennie Davis with plans to disrupt the Republican Convention
later that year; the 1953 congressional investigation into why actress
Lucille Ball registered to vote as a communist in 1936. (It was at her
grandfather's insistence.)

As for Hitler, reports that he was alive kept coming for years after
World War II, possibly because no body was ever recovered after he
committed suicide in his bunker in Berlin as allied forces closed in.
Historians now generally agree that that the body was burned to ashes.

In the bureau's mail about Hitler was a letter from someone who had
registered in a hotel in Quebec, Canada, and was dumbfounded to look
around the lobby and see a man who "appeared identical in every respect
with Adolf Hitler."

Another correspondent claimed to have seen Hitler jump out of a
railroad boxcar. Another saw him in a New York boarding house. Another
reported that Hitler had written him recently from Argentina. Another
said Hitler - minus mustache - had arrived by submarine in Argentina
with a group of henchmen and headed for the Andes.

The most popular file concerns unidentified flying objects, even though
these sightings chiefly fell into the purview of the Air Force. UFO
observations became so common five decades ago that the bureau devised
a 28-question form for use in questioning eyewitnesses. People were
asked about the "apparent size," "color of object," "shape," "sound and
odor," "maneuvers," "manner of disappearance." Then there is a line for
"comments of interrogator relative to intelligence and character of
observer."

Also on file is a July 8, 1947, teletype from the Dallas office
reporting a call from the Air Force advising "that an object purporting
to be a flying disc was recovered near Roswell, N.M., this date." That
was a critical day for UFO followers.

Like so many other historically interesting cases, this one came to
nought: Lots of questions asked, lots of paperwork generated, but no
conclusions reached. Case closed.

That was certainly the outcome of some other Hitler documents of
interest for people with a what-if bent: These were letters received in
1933 by the German ambassador reporting overheard conversations - in
Yiddish - plotting the assassination of the new German chancellor.

The FBI Web site is: http://www.fbi.gov

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


=A9Copyright 1998 Globe Newspaper Company






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 17

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: The Duke of Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith]
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 09:07:26 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 10:03:50 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


With the compliments of the Duke of Mendoza:

>Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 22:19:54 +0200
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Jean van Gemert <jeanvg@dds.nl>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

>It's not enough that a hypothesis be "simple", It
>must also explain *all* the evidence to which it is directed.
>E.g., you argue earthlights are preferred to the ETH but in many
>of the cases that would require deliberately *filtering* out
>aspects of the observations the earthlight theory wouldn't be
>able to cope with.

Yes, you're quite right. And I didn't make it clear enough that I
think "earthlights" (aka the ELH) may explain some, but not all,
genuine UFOs. That would still leave some/many UFO sightings
unexplained.

>if the evidence suggests phenomena are more complex than one
>would like you can't call on the Razor to dismiss the
>contradictory evidence.

No, I agree, and I hope I wouldn't suggest that you can.

>Here's that "they saw something" again, and you seem afraid to
>more precisely describe this "something".

Not afraid, just not willing to complicate the issue for the sake of
that part of the argument. I simply wanted to establish that there
was an "objectively existent object" agreed on by the mythical
parties in my mythical case. The question then is of interpretation,
and how the different sides fall out.

In cases where "anomalous, metallic-appearing, structured, luminous,
high performance objects" are described, Occam's razor can still be
used in favor of a prosaic explanation. That doesn't necessarily
make the explanation true, or close the case, but does provide a
logical basis for saying, in effect, "Well, I'll go with that for
the time being." (Note: the mind as well as the case remains open.
How far - well, dilute to taste, as they say.)

>>The non-ETHers - in this case - say: Sorry, can't explain
>>it, but perhaps it was an aircraft on an illegal or unfiled
>>flight path. The ETHers say: Can't explain it, so it must
>>have been an alien spacecraft. The non-ETHers have no

>That's absolutely *not* what reasonable ETH proponents would say.

Er... who is it that says "Not made here, must be one of theirs",
and who says "What else is there?" with much emphasis. Clue: two
persons whom many apparently regard as "reasonable ETH proponents".
I regard these "conclusions" as jumped-to, not least because we are
dealing with reports ("stories") not hard data, and there are so
many problems attached to that. Also, I *was* caricaturing to some
extent to make the argument easier to follow.

>You seem to believe the ETH interpretation comes from nowhere and
>is bunk because people only report "something". That's a silly
>strawman and a stereotype.

The ETH, IMO & after nearly two decades of thinking about it, comes
out of a particular moment in history and a particular culture. That
doesn't make it wrong, but looking at it like that does offer
another way of asking how right it may be. Okay, so relativity
theories sprang from a particular moment in history and a particular
culture, too - but with centuries of observation & experiment - and
an increasing raggle-taggle mob of unresolved problems - behind
them; of which relativity made mathematical sense, and the means
were available with which one could test the theories. This isn't
the case with the ETH. The ETH and its ufological sympathizers bear
a much greater resemblance to (say) political "truths" and theories
than to anything in the scientific tradition, and to that extent can
be analyzed best with the tools of logic - informed by scientific
logic & method and, besides some wherewithal as to scientific
knowledge, a great deal of non- (not un-) scientific knowledge.
Which is why Occam is not only handy but really rather important.

Over there in that thread "Air still very active over North Sea" you
can see what happens when Occam is not applied early. A Tornado
crashes in the North Sea, and suddenly people are jumping about
trying to entangle the incident in ufology, and suggesting there is
some connexion with the renegade A-10 incident - although there are
dozens of prosaic reasons for the crash yet to be eliminated. My
impression is that this kind of behavior is much more prevalent in
ufology than that of what you call "reasonable ETH proponents". (I
also get the impression that "reasonable" is a term more often
applied to the proponents' tone of voice than to the rigor or
robustness or accuracy of their arguments. Now there's a nice little
study for a sociologist.)

>we also know (a) that intelligent life
>in the universe does exist (I think Peter must have missed the
>point that we ourselves are proof of the concept of the ETH)

We know intelligent life exists in the Universe (yes, here we are)
but we don't know it exists elsewhere. Current theories of planetary
formation say there's no guarantee that a planet will end up within
the "life zone", let alone have a handy tilt to its axis or a large
moon to create evolutionary pressures. Given the importance of
contingency in evolution there's no guarantee life will ever move
beyond the microbial even where those pressures exist, and certainly
none that something vaguely humanoid will emerge. All this before
you even begin to worry about why anyone would want to start
spacefaring, and how they'd go about it, &c.

Then, we have astronomers detecting a pretty titchy chunk of rock
god knows how far away that isn't going to hit or miss Earth for 30
years, and amateur atronomers photographing our own space hardware
at thousands of miles distance... and not a peep about alien
spacecraft from the same quarter. Being as astronomy (like
ornithology) is so dependent on amateurs, you can explain this
silence only by recourse to a theory of cover-up & conspiracy of
truly diabolical proportions... and where is your Occam's razor in
all of that?

>You're arguing, fallaciously I might add, that we should know
>beforehand whether X or Y exists before we assign causes. That's
>*not* how science discovers novel phenomena, with you missing the
>point that "proving" X or Y tends to be done with those
>observations in the first place.

I'm saying we should have some kind of clue or direction, not a
totally open-ended set of possibilities, of what we are discussing
in our current account before assigning causes to it. Besides, there
is no fallacy here: science *does* tend to work by proving the
existence of X or Y to its own satisfaction before assigning causes
(i.e. developing a theory to account for the data, most urgently
when the data doesn't fit current theory: look at those neutrinos
Greg has been telling us about). Look too at all the dead ends -
some of them political! - that AIDS research went into before
pinning down the HIV, and consider too how many leads HIV research
now has to follow before it can pin down how it actually affects the
immune system. Theory altered constantly before the HIV was
identified, and is still being tested.

But the major difference here is that AIDS/HIV data and theory are
testable, whereas the ETH is not: it's either provable - the
traditional landing on the lawn - or just an unfalsifiable notion
with a lot of cultural baggage dragging behind it. That makes me
very interested in the baggage, but I've never said - indeed I've
publicly denied - that that interest is amenable to a strictly
scientific means of pursuit.

For me, that makes Occam's razor a crucial tool, because it's one of
logic - in turn the best bit of kit we have in the laboratory of the
mind, which is the prime testing station we have in the ufological
debate, with or without the ETH.

Anyway, green or gray, they're welcome to land on one of Castle
Despair's many rolling acres any time they want. All I ask is they
don't frighten the horses.

best wishes
Pilchard D. Melbatoast
Cool Mix








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 17

                Re: Popular Mechanics/Popular Science & UFOs

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 02:43:29 -0700
Fwd Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 09:15:08 -0400
Subject: Re: Popular Mechanics/Popular Science & UFOs


>From: Al Baier <baiera@meau.mea.com>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: Popular Mechanics/Popular Science & UFOs
>Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 13:18:36 -0500

>>Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 01:19:45 -0700
>>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Popular Mechanics/Popular Science and UFOs.

>>I agree. My 2-cents worth is this.

>>Anyone who wants a quick-and-dirty gauge of the PS/PM readership
>>should look at the classified ads at the back.

>>I don't have a copy handy, but remember jewels like " Elijah
>>coming before Christ", endless get-righ-quick schemes, "train to
>>be a locksmith" etc. I'm sure you can find even better ones!

>>PM is not exactly the IUR, and PS is no Scientific American.

>>If there is any benefit to this, it might be a slight rise in
>>public 'UFO consciousness'; the perception that there may indeed
>>be an issue worth discussion, even by everyday working Joes who
>>would otherwise not give UFOs a thought.

>Larry and list:

>I must take exception to your characterization of Popular
>Science, by associating it with Popular Mechanics. They are very
>different magazines.

>PS has a long and distinguished history of science reporting for
>the layman. One of the best articles on Area 51 ever printed
>anywhere appeared in PS a few years ago.

OK, I should retreat a little here. I was thinking mainly
of Popular Mechanics (PM) and had rashly lumped the two together.

>PM, on the other hand, has been justly criticized for its
>UFO-related articles.

>I've read PS, PM, and Scientific American for 40 years. Believe
>me, if or, when UFOs, ETs etc. are proven fact, you won't read it
>in SA first.

Here we agree!  Sci. Amer. would be among the very last I think.


>Best Regards,
>Al

Likewise

-  Larry Hatch







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 17

                           Science Line News [UK]

From: Philip Mantle <el51@dial.pipex.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 23:56:00 +0000
Fwd Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 09:56:39 -0400
Subject: Science Line News [UK]


Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 12:19:00 +0000
To: @bss.org
From: Science Line <scienceline@bss.org>
Subject: Science line news

Hello

We thought you might be interested in receiving a short update
on Science Line's activities on a regular basis (say 3 or 4
times a year) so here's the first one! If you don't want to
receive these little snippets, do let us know.

Firstly we wondered if you could spread the word about Science
Line amongst your colleagues and students. We're always looking
for extra areas of expertise and knowing that we can contact
other people when you're on holiday or too busy would be very
useful. If anyone is interested in helping us out, they can fill
in a form at:
http://www.sciencenet.org.uk/intro/forms/expert.html or contact
us at the office on 0181 735 5015.

You may well remember receiving a message thanking you for your
help last September when we took our 50,000th call. Well we've
now doubled that! In just 6 months Science Line dealt with
50,000 enquiries - the same number we dealt with in the first 3
years existence. And we still answer between 60 and 70% of these
immediately.

If you haven't heard from us recently, we do apologise. We try
to spread the load, but we're not always successful. However
we're about to introduce new database software that should
enable us to track more accurately when we've contacted you. In
addition, having your email address (if we didn't have it
before) should make it easier for us to contact you.

And finally, the BBC, with whom we have close links, has let us
know of a service they offer that might be of interest to you.
The BBC Alert service lets users with particular interests know
what BBC programmes are to be broadcast each week in their
chosen topic, either by a searchable website or by free weekly
e-mail: http://www.bbc.co.uk/alert.

So you need never again miss out on TV or radio programmes on
your favourite topics. Alert is a quick and easy way to
highlight things that you want to hear about. Five topics are
covered - Science & Technology, Nature, Health, Countries &
Cultures, Literature & the Arts. As well as programmes, users
will be provided with information on relevant events in their
region plus suggestions of books which suit the topic.

If you have any comments about Science Line or would like any
further information, or would like one of us to come and talk
about Science Line, please let me know.


Nicole

================================================================
Science Line is a free public science information service.

We answer questions on all aspects of science, medicine,
technology and engineering.

Our phonelines are open from 1-7pm Monday to Friday on the
lo-call number 0345 600 444

Our office number is    +44 (0)181 735 5015
Fax:                    +44 (0)181 735 5096

The electronic equivalent, ScienceNet, is available on the world
wide web. It contains all the questions we have answered over
the years in an online searchable database.

ScienceNet's URL is

          http://www.sciencenet.org.uk

If you would like to answer Science Line questions in the future
please fill in the form at:
http://www.sciencenet.org.uk/intro/forms/expert.html

This address is for answers and experts only, to ask us a
question, use the form at:
http://www.sciencenet.org.uk/intro/forms/askaq.html
or email to sci.net@campus.bt.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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 17

                Arctic Crater Expedition to Seek Mars Science

From: NASANews@hq.nasa.gov
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 17:01:29 -0400 (EDT)
Fwd Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 09:28:52 -0400
Subject: Arctic Crater Expedition to Seek Mars Science

Douglas Isbell
Headquarters, Washington, DC                       June 16, 1998
(Phone:  202/358-1753)

Michael Mewhinney
Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA
(Phone:  650/604-3937)

Anne Watzman
Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA
(Phone:  412/268-3830)

RELEASE:  98-105

ARCTIC CRATER EXPEDITION TO SEEK MARS SCIENCE
INSIGHTS AND TEST FUTURE EXPLORATION TECHNOLOGIES

     NASA scientists soon will explore a barren Arctic meteorite
impact crater to attempt to learn more about Mars and its early
history, while testing technologies useful for future robotic and
human exploration of the planet.

     From June 22 to July 26, a 20-member science team from NASA and
several other research organizations will explore the Haughton Impact
Crater and its surroundings on Devon Island in the Arctic Circle.

     Scientists consider the site a potential Mars analog because many
of its geologic features, such as the crater's ice-rich terrains, its
ancient lake sediments and nearby networks of small valleys, resemble
those reported at the surface of Mars.  The site may shed light in
particular on the early history of Mars, when the planet's climate may
have been wetter and warmer.

     "The cold, relatively dry, windy and unvegetated environment at
the Haughton site is milder and wetter than present-day Mars, but it
may give us an idea of what early Mars was like and how some of its
surface features were formed," said Principal Investigator
Dr. Pascal Lee of NASA's Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA.

     During the expedition, Dr. Omead Amidi and other engineers from
Carnegie Mellon University's Robotics Institute, Pittsburgh, PA, will
conduct field tests of an experimental, robotic helicopter.  "The
mission provides a great opportunity to demonstrate the feasibility
and the value of robotic aircraft for mapping and surveying
applications," Amidi said.

      Carnegie Mellon's small, 160-pound autonomous helicopter has
vision-based stability and position control, as well as an onboard
navigation computer, laser rangefinder and video system for site
mapping.  More information about the unpiloted helicopter may be found
at the following website:
http://www.ri.cmu.edu/project/chopper

     In addition to the tests with the autonomous helicopter,
scientists also will conduct experiments with a ground-penetrating
radar system, a field spectrometer, drilling equipment and a stereo
camera.

     The radar system will be deployed in an attempt to map ground-ice
and other subsurface conditions within and outside the crater's 12-
mile (20-kilometer) diameter.  "The ability to find underground ice,
both for human consumption and geologic studies, will be critical in
the exploration of Mars," said Dr. Aaron Zent of Ames, Dr. Lee's post-
doctoral research advisor.

     Scientists will use a field spectrometer to determine the site's
reflective qualities and better understand the crater's compositional
evolution.  In another experiment, scientists will use a portable
drill to obtain core samples from ten feet deep in the frozen ground.
Core samples of sediments from a lake that once occupied the crater
will provide information about local climate evolution.  Since the use
of liquid drilling lubricants might be precluded on Mars, none will be
used in this test.

     A portable stereo camera system previously used by Carnegie
Mellon's Nomad rover during its unprecedented 133-mile wheeled trek
through Chile's Atacama Desert last summer will provide high-
resolution images of the site, and produce images for a 360 degree
photo-realistic virtual reality project being developed by Ames'
Intelligent Mechanisms Group.

     Using laptop computer systems and "mobile workstations" developed
by Ames' Intelligent Mobile Technologies Team, scientists will
communicate with other field team members and send live images via a
wireless link.  Team members will operate from a base camp on a
terrace of the Haughton River within the crater's perimeter and
explore the site with All-Terrain Vehicles.  Supplies will be brought
in by Twin Otter airplane, while a helicopter will aid exploration of
remote sites.

     As part of the expedition's educational outreach program, the
following website will be updated regularly with new data and images
as available:  http://www.arctic-mars.org

     The total cost of the project is $80,000.  NASA is partially
funding the project through a National Research Council grant.
Additional support is provided by Ames Research Center; NASA's Johnson
Space Center, Houston, TX; the Geological Survey of Canada; the Polar
Continental Shelf Project of Canada; the Nunavut Research Institute,
Canada; the Robotics Institute of Carnegie Mellon University; NovAtel
Communications, Calgary, Alberta, Canada; and the National Geographic
Society.

                                -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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 17

                          Sighting in Marion, Ohio

From: Steve Neeley <stneeley@mail.bright.net>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 17:38:10 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 09:50:22 -0400
Subject: Sighting in Marion, Ohio


**********************************************************
Three witnesses, very shiny cigar, makes 90 degree turn
**********************************************************

On Monday June 14 at about 8:15 to 8:30 pm while at the Marion
Fish and Game club we noticed an object in the sky (3000 to 5000
ft). Very shiny, which was strange, as the sun was very low on the
horizon. By then, Kyle using his rifle scope (3 by 9), looked at
the object and asked me to look using my scope.

The object was cigar shaped very shiny (metallic) almost a mirror
look and we estimate the size at 65 ft to 80 ft in length. We
watched it traviling north for about 5 min it then made a 90
degree turn to the east and moved away at a high rate of speed
the entire event lasted about 6 to 7 min.

My son Doug also witnessed this event.

Thank you for allowing me to report this to you.

Steven J. Neeley, Director
Ohio Skywatch International

http://www.geocities.com/soho/5782

stneeley@bright.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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 17

                          Re: Who Is Jerome Clark?

From: The Duke of Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith]
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 09:07:36 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 10:04:44 -0400
Subject: Re: Who Is Jerome Clark?


With the compliments of the Duke of Mendoza:

>From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
>To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Who Is Jerome Clark?
>Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 09:05:16 -0400

>Maybe I can offer a modest clarification.

The tale that Greg relates of, er, quaint old-fashioned
behavior on Phil Klass's part may "clarify" some aspect of
his character. But it wasn't Klass's character or motives
that I was addressing, intriguing as they may be. It was the
nature of Jerome's reactions to Klass and his writing.
Greg's post sheds no light on those at all.

best wishes
Pyrenees D. Mountainside
Slow Mover







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 17

                Re: Popular Mechanics/Popular Science & UFOs

From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 06:15:35 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 09:59:11 -0400
Subject: Re: Popular Mechanics/Popular Science & UFOs

>From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Popular Mechanics/Popular Science & UFOs
>Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 21:00:55 -0400

>>From: Al Baier <baiera@meau.mea.com>
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: Popular Mechanics/Popular Science & UFOs
>>Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 13:18:36 -0500

>>Larry and list:

>>I must take exception to your characterization of Popular
>>Science, by associating it with Popular Mechanics. They are very
>>different magazines.

>>PS has a long and distinguished history of science reporting for
>>the layman. One of the best articles on Area 51 ever printed
>>anywhere appeared in PS a few years ago.

>>PM, on the other hand, has been justly criticized for its
>>UFO-related articles.

>>I've read PS, PM, and Scientific American for 40 years. Believe
>>me, if or, when UFOs, ETs etc. are proven fact, you won't read it
>>in SA first.

>>Best Regards,
>>Al

>Popular Science and Popular Mechanics are associated by the fact
>that they are published by the same company; however, that
>doesn't mean that they share the same editorial staff (and I
>would suspect that they do not). On the other hand, as noted
>earlier, PS is a far cry from Scientific American and their
>articles reflect an attempt to attract a large (and young)
>non-scientifically trained readership. The article about Area 51
>in PS was fairly well written, as I recall. It should not be
>confused with the PM article last year, which left a lot to be
>desired.

>But the last point raised is one that I would echo. Many young
>people obtained their first view of science through the eyes of
>PS and PM, before the bombardment of other media that in many
>respects have since taken their place. I only wish the first
>exposure of young people to the UFO genre was more accurately
>portrayed. PM was obviously trying to spark sales with their
>front page story, and like most other media it was really more
>about money than truth.

>Steve


As a magazine industry insider, I know that Popular Science has
changed in major ways recently. Their Science and Technology
Editor for many years was Arthur Fisher. Art is an old and dear
friend of mine. His name is still on the masthead, but he no
longer has much authority.

A good example is a story on dinosaur extinction which appeared
under his byline last year. It was utter nonsense. I called Art
when I read it and asked him how in the world he could write
such claptrap. He got angry, and picked up a copy of the
magazine.

He glanced at the article and apologized to me profusely. What
had appeared in print bore only scant similarity to what he had
written. Someone had condensed the article to fit in a smaller
space, and in the process of "rewriting" had changed the whole
flavor and royally screwed up the facts.

The truth is that both PS and PM have been taken over by young,
liberal, recent journalism school graduates with little
knowledge of science or mechanics, and no interest in learning.
Both magazines are on a serious downhill slide in terms of
editorial quality.

You are right, all the new people care about is selling
magazines. They don't give a damn about truth or technical
accuracy.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 17

                          Re: Who is Jerome Clark?

From: The Duke of Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith]
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 09:06:41 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 10:02:28 -0400
Subject: Re: Who is Jerome Clark?


With the compliments of the Duke of Mendoza:

>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Who Is Jerome Clark?
 [was: Corso, Stacy & Birnes]
>Date: Thu, 11 Jun 98 20:51:56 PDT

Congratulations on a masterly demonstration of smoke-blowing,
Jerry. I'm sure your many fans will have admired it & learned much
from the techniques deployed & displayed. An exquisite performance
indeed.

Now, those with longer memories than Jerome will recall that far
from dragging from the mire some ancient piece of private
correspondence in order to defend Phil Klass, I cited Klass's
assertion that Jerome had once believed that Klass had uttered a
"serious 'death threat'" against Jerome's august person, in order
to illustrate the truth of a pithy epigram of the said Jerome (in a
message to UpDates dated Thu, 04 Jun 98 10:13:00 PDT), viz: "some
people will believe anything".

It struck me that Jerome might welcome this opportunity to comment
on Klass's version of events, and so purge himself of the suspicion
that he too has believed an "anything" or two in his time, even if
one a good deal dafter than the notion that Kenneth Arnold saw
pelicans.

In responding, Jerome then - despite having had his inexactitude
very recently tweaked a bit by yours truly - rashly repeated his
favorite factoid about Klass & communism. I suppose I was supposed
to let this pass by in meekness and reverence? Having made the
provocation, Jerome can hardly complain that his time is being
taken up in unpaid toil in trying to obfuscate everything.

>Here the "joke" has Klass implying that it is he who will
>have me murdered. Let's have a show of hands out there. How many
>of you would take as a "joke" -- not even from a friend here,
>mind you, but a longtime adversary -- a remark intimating a
>desire to have one done in?

>> "Clark replied on May 21, saying that he considered my May 14
>> letter to be a 'death threat,' and not a joke. 'Unless you make
>> a full, immediate and unqualified apology, all communication
>> between us will cease and I will have nothing further to do with
>> you.'

>The "joke" was so staggeringly tasteless, rude, and offensive
>that an apology was clearly called for. How many of you out
>there would make a "joke" like that? No, Mr. Brookesmith, as I
>said before, you've already voted. Any further votes in favor?
>No?

(Actually, Jerry, on this question I haven't voted. For many good
reasons, I don't make *jokes* about bumping people off. And I
wouldn't have made the first of Klass's jokes, let alone the
second. Like the ETH, I can't prove that, but I did say I didn't
find it particularly funny: another fit of meiosis.)

The question was, and remains, whether Jerome took Klass's joke
literally, as Klass implies ("he considered my May 14 letter to be
a 'death threat,' and not a joke"), or as a somewhat lesser thing,
an exercise in black humor.

Incompetent at reading, and obtuse, as I allegedly am, that first
paragraph quoted above does seem to imply that despite the obvious
connexion between Klass Joke 1 and Klass Joke 2, i.e. the context,
Jerome really did think Klass would push him overboard, possibly
having shot him first.

>The remark about having no sense of humor shows the depth to
>which one has to sink when one chooses to apologize for Klass'
>excesses.

And remarks about competency in reading and kindergarten requests
for shows of hands show a mature and incisive intellect, natch. I
am not attempting to apologize for Klass or to defend him. Read my
lips, Jerry: at this point I am trying to find out (a) if his
account is accurate (b) if you really thought he was really
threatening you.

After a lot of ad-hominemery & flannel, which must have pained his
knee considerably, Jerome parades the nearest he has yet come to an
accurate representation of Klass's actual complaint, in quoting his
1992 piece from IUR:

>My point was simply this: In disputing official pronouncements,
>Klass contends, ufologists are equivalent to Communists in their
>effect, which is to undermine faith in the American government.

But not all ufologists dispute official pronouncements. And of
those that do, some are more extreme than others. Yet, within a few
lines, Jerome has Klass saying, "In what he thought would be a
private conversation, he likened ufologists to Communist agents."
The distinction between fans of a cover-up (let us then distinguish
between them and conspiracy addicts, though I fail to see the
difference in Keyhoe's or Friedman's cases), I contend, and repeat
that I contend, is real.

To say that Jerome misrepresents Klass habitually in this respect
is also no more to defend Klass or his subsequent behavior than to
remark that beheading Charles I was a truly dumb move is to defend
Cromwell & his appalling Puritan hordes. (Likewise, to say John
Brown - he of Harper's Ferry &c - was a crackbrained ignoramus is
not to defend the peculiar institution of slavery.)

For the third time of asking: if we knew - if I knew - the names of
the cover-up artists invited to speak at the Lincoln conference of
which Klass was complaining, one would be better able to judge how
eccentric Klass's complaint actually was. Who, exactly, in this
case, is Jerome defending?

>I refer readers to Brad Sparks' extended treatment of the case
>in The UFO Encyclopedia, Volume 2, pp. 761-90, for an eye-
>opening study of the numerous fatal errors Klass made in his
>imaginative recreation of the RB-47 case.

As I said, I am looking forward to seeing this.

Mysteriously, in his brief commercial interlude, Jerome did not
answer my question as to why he omitted, in the first edition of
his Encyclopedia, the fact that members of that RB-47's crew agreed
with Klass's analysis. Did they too "imaginatively recreate" their
experience? Such things have been known.

Finally, I might address a question raised earlier in Jerome's
post:

>Is there
>possibly something wrong with somebody (e.g., Klass) -- or his
>publication -- that he and/or it actually devotes space to a
>private 1984 exchange between him and me, on a subject that
>could be of no interest to anybody [...]?

Apart from what I've already said, it was of interest to me because
it bore on the matters of representation, accuracy in scholarship,
objectivity, and misrepresentation (by whatever sleight of hand). I
was not interested in defending Klass per se. I can see a clear
connexion between Klass Joke 1 and Klass Joke 2 that Jerome cannot
- and that connexion seriously undermines the purport, if not the
dubious taste, of KJ2.

I can also join up the dots between that, the misrepresentation of
Klass's remarks about cover-up fans and Soviet agents, and the
omission of a key point about Klass's analysis of the RB-47 case. I
wonder if there is not another line to be drawn between those items
and Jerome's failure to answer the actual questions raised, and his
preference for whole paragraphs of ad-hominemery ("If you can't
attack the data, attack the man"--STF) & darting out and about
among the bushes of related, but not relevant, issues.

Jerry, please answer the questions. If you'd done that
unambiguously, or at all, in the first place, you'd have had so
much more time to catch up on your deadline.

best wishes
Pierrot-le-fou D. Mountainbike
Dream Pedlar








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 17

                Re: Popular Mechanics/Popular Science & UFOs

From: Al Baier  <baiera@meau.mea.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 08:40:28 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 10:09:23 -0400
Subject: Re: Popular Mechanics/Popular Science & UFOs


>From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Popular Mechanics/Popular Science & UFOs
>Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 21:00:55 -0400

>>From: Al Baier <baiera@meau.mea.com>
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: Popular Mechanics/Popular Science & UFOs
>>Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 13:18:36 -0500

>>Larry and list:

>>I must take exception to your characterization of Popular
>>Science, by associating it with Popular Mechanics. They are very
>>different magazines.

>>PS has a long and distinguished history of science reporting for
>>the layman. One of the best articles on Area 51 ever printed
>>anywhere appeared in PS a few years ago.

>>PM, on the other hand, has been justly criticized for its
>>UFO-related articles.

>>I've read PS, PM, and Scientific American for 40 years. Believe
>>me, if or, when UFOs, ETs etc. are proven fact, you won't read it
>>in SA first.

>>Best Regards,
>>Al

>Popular Science and Popular Mechanics are associated by the fact
>that they are published by the same company; however, that
>doesn't mean that they share the same editorial staff (and I
>would suspect that they do not). On the other hand, as noted
>earlier, PS is a far cry from Scientific American and their
>articles reflect an attempt to attract a large (and young)
>non-scientifically trained readership. The article about Area 51
>in PS was fairly well written, as I recall. It should not be
>confused with the PM article last year, which left a lot to be
>desired.

>But the last point raised is one that I would echo. Many young
>people obtained their first view of science through the eyes of
>PS and PM, before the bombardment of other media that in many
>respects have since taken their place. I only wish the first
>exposure of young people to the UFO genre was more accurately
>portrayed. PM was obviously trying to spark sales with their
>front page story, and like most other media it was really more
>about money than truth.

>Steve

You are correct about the way UFO 'science' is portrayed in the
media in general.

It is too bad that most people (not just young people) get their
UFO info from the popular press.

Maybe the Web can begin to change that, but hey, people have to
learn to think for themselves.

That's a even more critical with anything you find on the Web,
where there is NO pressure to be responsible.

Al







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 17

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: The Duke of Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith]
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 09:06:59 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 10:05:25 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


With the compliments of the Duke of Mendoza:

>From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
>To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs
>Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 18:07:59 -0400

>C'mon, Duke....you don't think ufology give us training
>in compact thinking? <big horselaugh>

Nicker, whinny, blow. In my department of Hell certain ufologists
(you know who you are) & I will discourse in Latin, and every few
aeons I shall report to higher headquarters on whether their
thinking has become more disciplined as a result. There are no
jacuzzis in Hell, no weather balloons, no pelicans, no
temperature inversions - least of all, temperature inversions! -
no misperceptions, no corn circles, no black triangles and no
hypotheses. It is a very miserable place for ufologists. I am not
a ufologist. I shall not stay overnight in Hell.

But to our sheep.

>But there are two problem with what Peter wrote. The first is
>that UFO reports -- at the moment we set Occam to work on them
>-- have nothing to do with ET visitors. As Mark Cashman so
>eloquently put it in a recent post, we're dealing only with the
>"Objectively Existent Hypothesis" -- whether there's some new
>phenomenon, or more concretely, some new physical object
>creating the reports, or whether the reports are due only to
>conventional stimuli. [etc]

Entirely true. However, 'twas Greg that raised the question of ET
visitors ("Which is more likely, that they're all
misinterpretations of known phenomena (or of course lies), or
that they're ET visitors? Occam's Razor forces us to assume the
former." --Message dated  Fri, 5 Jun 1998 10:24:55 -0400); and so
in the example I invented, I suggested a skeptical vs an ETHist
response, and assumed in the example that both "sides" had agreed
that an "objectively existent object" was in question. So forgive
me if I disclaim ownership of the "problem" here. What Greg has
to say in his following paragraphs on this point is
unexceptionable, but he is starting his argument over from a
different place than before.

However, he goes on to say:

>And certainly those inclined to conventional explanations can
>NOT say: "It's not likely to be an ET spaceship, because here's
>why that's improbable...it's not likely to be an experimental
>military craft, because here's why that's improbable...it's not
>likely to be some new kind of air-borne animal, because that's
>improbable...." And so on through every conceivable
>explanation. That's simply circular reasoning. "It can't be,
>therefore it isn't."

"It can't be, therefore it isn't" is certainly circular
reasoning, but it isn't good Occamry and anyway doesn't follow
from (or describe) the process previously described. What this
says is: from everything we know about A, this phenomenon doesn't
seem to be A. And all the way up to Z. Marine biologists, notably
Andrew Shine, have done exactly this with the Loch Ness monster
and come to the conclusion that, if indeed there is a large
animal in the Loch, then it is either a very strange, a-typical
example of a known animal (mammal, reptile, fish &c) or it is
none of them.

Circular thinking - of a very different kind from circular
reasoning - begins only when then one goes back to square one and
asks: Well, is there really anything to these reports or not? The
honest answer is: Don't know. Then the needle gets in a groove:
If there is, it's not likely to be anything we know about - in
our present state of knowledge. For instance, we don't know of
any animal that would swim by making vertical humps of its body
in the water: fish, eels &c make lateral motions to propel
themselves efficiently... and so on. So, as a necessarily
provisional conclusion, one is *inclined* to think the "monster"
is a product of misperception of something (maybe several
different things) else... and we know for sure that some of the
pictures are hoaxes. That is an Occamist conclusion.

Here's another one for Greg's own invented sighting:

>Suppose I say I saw a light in the
>sky at night, and that I first thought it was a plane. But it
>couldn't have been a plane, I continue, because it zigzagged
>freely, making right angle turns, and stopping dead, to hover.
>Finally it descended straight toward the ground, ending up
>behind some trees. I add, of course, that it made no noise.

>To explain this as a plane, don't you have to form a few
>hypotheses? For instance, [several new hypotheses follow]

Yer actual Occamist, I'd've thought, would rule out a plane quite
swiftly, not concoct bad reasons for squeezing a plane out of
this report on the (here) flaky grounds that the "plane
hypothesis" is more elegant than the "flying saucer hypothesis".
On the basis of this information, it don't sound like no plane.
It might be a lighted balloon, or some burning rubbish, being
batted about by the wind, though.

>I submit that in the case
>I've invented above, the conventional explanation requires more
>and more awkward new theories than the simple possibility that
>something new was out there.

On the information provided, it doesn't. Because the obvious next
question is: "New what?" Species of fire-breathing winged reptile
(this was a young, skittish one)? There are loads of mundane
things that *could* explain the sighting, even if we don't know
which one it was, and while the cause may remain forever
unexplained, they remain more economic *possibilities* than
"Something New". "Something New" opens up an infinity of
possibilities and improbabilities. The "simple possibility that
something new was out there" is not, on close inspection, simple
at all. From the Occamist point of view the limits of human
knowledge are a virtue, even when a phenomenon remains
unexplained by human knowledge, because it allows you to label it
"unexplained", not waste precious resources on baseless &
unproductive speculation, and either get on with the next thing
or think very hard about how to investigate this phenomenon
further - if that's possible.

(None of which is to deny Brian Straight's point - in a message
dated Wed, 10 Jun 1998 09:34:18 -0500 - that what one considers
"simplicity" or elegance may itself be a many-splendored thing,
"simple" only by virtue of unspoken assumptions. Polanyi, no
deconstructionist he, refers to this as "implicit meaning". But
it does I hope put the kybosh on Stan Friedman's proposition (in
a message dated Wed, 10 Jun 1998 11:38:10 -0300) that I am asking
"the wrong question (What are UFOs.. as opposed to 'Are any UFOs
ET Spacecraft')". Assuming for a moment that unexplained UFO
reports are not just noise in the signal of IFOs, I don't think
genuine UFOs are necessarily any *one* thing - some *may* be "new
things" such as earthlights, some *may* be ET craft. But how do
you decide which are ET craft without eliminating the rest in any
given instance? Reports of engines, flames &c don't keep me awake
at night in light of the Zond IV sightings (analysed at length in
Condon). I speak as one who thinks my field investigations,
visits to archives and current & former security clearances
entirely without relevance to this discussion or any other.
"Theoretical claptrap", in this instance Occam's useful tool, is
what ought to inform, discipline & guide field investigations &
library research - and can even be quite handy in security
matters too - and a good grasp of said claptrap comes *before*
them. Read your Hendry again, Stan, and mark the pages in which
he disposes of BBSP#14's statistics, too, while you're at it.
When theory or a principle such as Occam's doesn't inform
investigation, ufologists, for example, find themselves
embarrassed by a Max Burns, who thinks an object traveling at
Mach 75 won't make a sonic boom. End of slight digression.)

>And if you think real skeptics don't behave this way, consider
>Philip Klass's "explanation" of the Soccoro sighting.

So that we aren't distracted, let's establish that I think
Klass's *justifications* for saying the Soccoro incident was a
hoax are specious at best. (However, if Zamora could hear the
roar of the "craft" from inside his car while chasing a speeder,
then the non-witnesses should have been able to as well. And the
highway in question isn't that busy, even today. Nothing in
Soccoro is.) I don't have a pat solution to the case. But to
suggest it is a hoax is certainly more Occamist than saying
Zamora saw ETs and their craft, as some insist & others strongly
suggest. Klass's justifications may not work out, but they are no
means impossible. This bears directly on

>The number -- the actual,
>countable number -- of hypotheses involved on either side of
>any Occam's Razor problem is subject to vast intepretation.
>Eventually it comes down to a linguistic question -- how many
>separate parts can any question be divided into? Sensible
>people won't want to go down that road, and therefore won't
>want to follow Peter down the road where we meet Frank Drake.
>Common sense, I believe, will lead us to  a simpler, far more
>comprehensible approach. If we want to think about alien
>visits, we allow for only one hypothesis -- that such visits
>do or don't occur, with all the subsidiary reasoning (the seven
>or 15 or 95 hypothesis that later come into play) assigned only
>to the calculation of whether alien visits are likely. More
>generally, when we face an Occam's Razor problem, we simply
>observe the intellectual contortions required for various
>conclusions, and note which ones our instinct tells us are
>simpler. We don't try to count hypotheses, because that way
>lies madness.

Well, yes, it would (although the exercise might keep
Deconstructionists in work over the winter, which some would say
amounts to the same thing). I'm a bit surprised to be taken so
literally - well, by Greg, anyway - because so many hypotheses,
theories, and bits of knowledge & experience are implicit in the
way we think. Thus we get the colloquial notion of "common
sense". However, the existence of ETI does depend on satisfying
*at least* Drake's seven conditions, and I dragged them out
because ETHers so often don't think them through. Even if you
reduce them to Greg's one, they remain implicit, but more to the
point they remain problematic, and "unsolved". They are assumed
to be solved by the ETH enthusiast (e.g. Michael Swords),
sometimes at the expense of ignoring the findings of entire
academic disciplines. Now clearly, you can take Occamism too far:
by saying that because the extra-solar planets we've found so far
won't support life, we're alone in the Universe, for instance.
Even so keen a young blade as myself would say that's a
premature, not even a provisional, conclusion, from that one set
of evidence.

So, no, generally one doesn't waste time counting hypotheses:
whether explicitly or implicitly, though, one does consider
whether the "likelihoods" involved in one's exercise of "common
sense" are robust or not. And the point here is that every item
in the Drake equation is up for grabs. Drake admits he's
guessing, all the time. It's all one big wobbly blancmange, and I
would rather stick to what we know - even when the answers are
unsatisfying to one's human tendency (and I don't have all that
many of those) to like answers to questions.

>If we take Peter absolutely literally, then it's impossible --
>or radically difficult -- to gather evidence for any new
>phenomenon. And especially for any new phenomenon that defies
>conventional understanding! Each new piece of evidence would be
>subjected to Peter's test of elegance. "Hmm. Do neutrinos have
>mass? My measurements say they do, but....can't be, because we
>don't know that they do!"

Okay, this is "purposely taking [my] thinking to extremes". To
extremes where they do not actually go, even, except insofar as
it's a daily chore for a scientist to ask exactly those kinds of
questions - as those involved in that work on neutrinos did,
until they were obliged to consider their findings real. (And
someone somewhere is no doubt trying to replicate those findings,
and confirm that neutrinos have mass. Which is the way it ought
to be.) But that doesn't make it impossible to gather evidence
for any new phenomenon. It simply makes the process subject to
extreme scrutiny: the "principled" process of ensuring an
experimental result is genuine, the practical process of
replicated experiment, and the intellectual one of fitting the
verified results into existing theory (or producing a new
theory). History shows that new theories are more elegant than
older ones in that they explain *more* than local events. So the
discovery of the electron & the neutron & the attendant theory
explain why oil and water don't mix, and also why your lamp
lights up when you flip the switch on, and what makes the Sun
work and pulsars pulse. (Yes, I simplify, but you get the gist.)

Applying that, and what I said before about the wobbly nature of
the solutions to Drake's equations, to where we started - is any
given UFO an ET craft? - I won't go into the *likelihood* of
aliens visiting, which is a whole other discussion, but stick to
the Occamist point: which is that we don't *even* know whether we
are dealing with a "new phenomenon" with UFOs, or
misapprehensions - reinterpretations, if you prefer a more
neutral term - of old ones. (Likewise with abductions: the
experience is there, but *of* what is it an experience? How far
is it culturally shaped? And so on. Please don't look any further
into this can of worms! I merely draw a parallel between similar
sets of problems.)

Greg then reveals that the new discovery about neutrinos has
opened its own can of theoretical worms - no need to recycle
that, but he then remarks:

>In other words, neutrino mass will have to be accepted even
>though it isn't nearly as elegant as Peter thought. Sometimes,
>new data blows up even elegant theories -- and if we're not
>ready to accept that, then how open are our minds?

Well, it still seems to be as elegant in the *way* I thought it
was, but I did have to chuckle at the thought of thousands of
scientists going cross-eyed at how to fit it all into "local"
neutrino theory. I can't dispute the rhetorical question. I could
very well have asked it myself.

My position hasn't changed much: Occam is a useful principle, and
it leads me to remain skeptical [doubtful; thoughtful about] of
larger claims for UFOs than mundane, if hidden, solutions. While
Mark Cashman at least had the guts so lacking in others to name
his cases, none by itself leads inevitably to an ET solution -
and single-witness cases I'd exclude as evidence of *any*thing on
principle - and it would be a curious scientific principle to
extract an hypothesis from a set of experiments none of which is
itself conclusive. Isn't that how people concluded that European
swallows buried themselves in the mud of ponds over the winter,
rather than migrating to Africa?

Because ufology is essentially the study of reports - or stories,
as Rob Irving rightly reminds us - and not hard data, we're left
having to measure what data there is by principles and "givens" &
QEDs in the scientific and technological and psychological and
social (and historical and cultural) theorems of which we wot.
That's why Occam is important in ufology, and it's also why, for
want of something better, I will tend to err - which could be a
pun - on the side of psychosocial interpretations (which are not,
and as far as I know have never pretended to be, scientific in
any practical sense) of UFOs & ufology. And if it turns out I was
wrong all along, well - that's just tough tittie on me, what?

best wishes
Pyromaniac D. Matchboxer
Lightweight Contender

PS: "Specious" means "superficially attractive", not "spurious".








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 17

                          Re: Who Is Jerome Clark?

From: "Jerome Clark" <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 98 12:13:33 PDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 14:25:24 -0400
Subject: Re: Who Is Jerome Clark?


> Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 09:07:36 -0400
> From: The Duke of Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith]
> Subject: Who Is Jerome Clark?
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

> >From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
> >To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net>
> >Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Who Is Jerome Clark?
> >Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 09:05:16 -0400

> >Maybe I can offer a modest clarification.

> The tale that Greg relates of, er, quaint old-fashioned
> behavior on Phil Klass's part may "clarify" some aspect of
> his character. But it wasn't Klass's character or motives
> that I was addressing, intriguing as they may be. It was the
> nature of Jerome's reactions to Klass and his writing.
> Greg's post sheds no light on those at all.

Sigh. Here in the colonies, Mr. Brookesmith, we call the
above "blaming the victim."

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 17

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: John Rimmer <johnr@magonia.demon.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 15:08:06 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 14:18:19 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


>From: Jean-Luc Rivera <PSaintc798@aol.com>
>Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 16:43:34 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

>>Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 00:44:55 +0100
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto >updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: John Rimmer <johnr@magonia.demon.co.uk>
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

>Dear John,

>I had sent a second message indicating I was answering to you
>and not Greg Sandow but it seems it never made it through.

><snip>

>>Even in Western Countries the presence of one active investigator
>>can skew reporting figures. Even after all these years it is
>>still unclear just how much of the Warminster phenomenon was
>>reporting of objectively real phenomena (possibly Army activity)
>>and how much was created by the atmosphere produced by Arthur
>>Shuttlewood and his cohorts.

>We agree on this point. Generally speaking it is next to
>impossible to find out and Warminster is certainly a good
>example. The only  beginning of an answer are some studies ( no
>exact references in mind right now ) that I seem to recall
>indicated that a UFO wave always begins long before it starts to
>be reported in the papers.

I recall that there was a study in Britain some time in the
seventies - I'll try to dig out a reference, I think it was in a
BUFORA Journal - which distinguished between "positively skewed"
and "negatively skewed" waves. I can't remember which way round
it was, but one kind started off slowly, built up in an
increasing curve, then dropped off rapidly. The other kind built
up to the maximun quickly they faded out over a long period of
time. Warminster was certainly of the latter type. The rapid
build up was certainly helped by Shuttlewood being a reporter on
the local paper, and getting the story into the nationals
quickly - he was a "stringer" for the mass-market tabloid Daily
Mirror, feeding them interesting local stories. The fade-out
took many years.

> ><big snip>

> >>>Do you really think that if there was a wave of " alien
>>>abductions " in Ahghanistan or in some middle eastern or african
>>>country torn by war and closed to foreigners we would hear about
>>>it?

>>Why Afghanistan or war-torn countries? Why not India (pretty
>>democratic, reasonably free press) or Tunisia (very open to
>>foreigners), or Taiwan or South Korea (good communications)?
>>As I indicated in my original posting, it is a no win situation:

>I have had this discussion with some of my PSH friends in France
>before. Countries like Tunisia or Taiwan or others similarly
>open to Western influence can be deemed "contaminated"
>culturally and therefore whatever reports come from them cannot
>be considered valid. If the reports come from countries less
>exposed to Western influences but through a western
>investigator, we get the same objection: the investigator
>imposed consciously or unconsciouly his/her own expectations
>during the reporting and translation process. Pinvidic faced it
>in Algeria with the djinns: did the Algerians see "real djinns"
>or was it UFOs interpreted in the only terms of reference
>available to them ?

On this occasion I must differ from your Psychosocial
colleagues. I don't think "contamination" is a major issue here.
It would be impossible to find any part of the world which is
*totally* isolated from Western (i.e. usually American) culture.
There was a TV documentary about Mackal's dinosaur hunting
expeditions in central Africa a few years ago. While he was
explaining how remote from Western civilization the village was,
there was a young lad playing around in the background wearing a
Michael Jackson T-shirt!

As far as I am concerned the issue is just how similar the
society as a whole is to those societies where UFOs are a major
ingedient in the entire social and cultural background. No
matter how many episodes of the Simpsons or copies of US comics
a child in a remote Cameroon village has seen, he is still
living in a society which is very different from anything in
which, I suspect, contributors to this list find themselves.

Yes, there is a problem with the biases and expectations that an
outside investigator might bring to research. I think that in
his studies in Algeria Thierry Pinvidic (is he still around in
the UFO scene, BTW?) was well aware of this. He was certainly
aware of the way in which people unfamilar with the phenomenon
reported a rare snowfall in the Atlas Mountains.

An unfamilar natural phenomenon such as snow, reported in terms
which make it seen strange and unnatural to those more familar
with it, brings us to the "Existing Objective" hypothesis. We
know snow exists, but some people may not see it in a lifetime,
so we can make allowances for perceptual and descriptive
problems when they report it. The "EOH" proponents do not have
this advantage. Although their analysis of reports suggests to
them that *something* physical was reported to create the
report, they have no idea what it might be. The only people who
are coming up with any suggestions are the ETHers. Ultimately
both are dependent on the quality of the original narrative. And
despite all the impassioned arguemt over that past few days,
that is all we have - narratives. Even the so-called "physical
evidence" is dependent on the narrative to put it into a
puzzling context: a few crushed lavender plants, scratches on a
gravel path, a dent in a railway sleeper ("tie" in US English?),
the occasional burn mark. They are all meaningless without the
narrative.

Hey, analysing "narratives" - maybe English majors do have a
role to play after all!

>>John Rimmer
>>Magonia Online, a member of the P.L.A.Driftwood Organisation
>>http//www.magonia.demon.co.uk

>You have started a very important and fascinating discussion. I
>hope Greg and other list members will continue to bring their
>input.

Thank you. I hope so too.

--
John Rimmer
Magonia Online, a member of the P.L.A.Driftwood Organisation
http//www.magonia.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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 17

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: Sean Jones <Tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 18:18:50 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 14:28:10 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

>Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 09:06:59 -0400
>From: The Duke of Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith]
>Subject: Occam's Razor and UFOs
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>With the compliments of the Duke of Mendoza:

Huge amounts snipped because I want to deal with just one bit of
what Peter said.

>Because ufology is essentially the study of reports - or stories,
>as Rob Irving rightly reminds us - and not hard data, we're left
>having to measure what data there is by principles and "givens" &
>QEDs in the scientific and technological and psychological and
>social (and historical and cultural) theorems of which we wot.
>That's why Occam is important in ufology, and it's also why, for
>want of something better, I will tend to err - which could be a
>pun - on the side of psychosocial interpretations (which are not,
>and as far as I know have never pretended to be, scientific in
>any practical sense) of UFOs & ufology. And if it turns out I was
>wrong all along, well - that's just tough tittie on me, what?

With all the best wishes Peter I must point out a few things
here, if I may interject.

You are correct in saying Ufology is the study of reports,
stories and yes (should Paul be reading this) folklore BUT there
have been many cases where there has been photographic evidence,
many cases where there have been video evidence. Ok so this
does'nt in itself "prove" anything but it certainly goes an awful
long way to "prove" that the object in that question is not an
unidentified IFO.

It has also been mentioned before that, for some no matter what
evidence you give them nothing will prove beyond any doubt that
life outside our planet exists. The hard data that you and others
crave (myself included actually :-)  ) will turn up its just a
matter of when, IMHO

btw would you like me to send round one of my serving wenches
when you wounded breast needs ointment rubbed in?

>best wishes
>Pyromaniac D. Matchboxer
>Lightweight Contender

Why have youi been on a diet my good fellow? :-)

>PS: "Specious" means "superficially attractive", not "spurious".

I am well aware of how good Peter's diction is, well above
average. BUT could Peter be using his vast wordly knowledge to
put others off base or merely to make them reach for the
dictionary from their armchair?

---
      People can have it any colour, as long as its black!
                       Sean Jones
 Homepage--http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Zone/1745/index.htm
         Research 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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 17

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: John Rimmer <johnr@magonia.demon.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 15:32:22 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 14:19:51 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


>From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
>To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs
>Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 09:00:44 -0400

>> Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 00:22:38 +0100
>> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>> From: John Rimmer <johnr@magonia.demon.co.uk>
>> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

>>> Reports collated by the military obviously have a specific
>> purpose. How many of these were "sightings" by military
>> personnel, and how may were investigations of civilian reports?

>All of them, I believe, were sightings by military personnel.
>This was an internal Soviet military matter, entirely
>unpublicized. Soviet military personnel had UFO sightings of
>various kinds, and reports of them were filed with the military
>authorities -- who were given a mission to collect them. There
>are hundreds of these sighting reports, though of course in
>Russian, so I couldn't skim through George's collection of Soviet
>military documents to get an independent idea of what they're
>like. From his description, the sightings sounded like the kind
>we're all familiar with -- lights at night, disks in the daytime,
>radar reports, and so forth.

This certainly sounds interesting, and I would be glad to see
any published details if/when they become available. The problem
is, of course, the quality and depth of the investigation of
these reports. Many ufologists are contemptuous of what they see
as the slapdash way in which UFO reports are handled by the
British and US miltary. What we have learnt of the "mighty
Soviet war machine" over the past few years suggests that may
not have been doing it any better than us, and they were handled
by the Soviet equivalent of Nick Pope (Nicolau Popeski?) at a
desk in the Kremlin.

>I do think this is an interesting test cases for the theory that
>UFO sightings and reports are generated by cultural factors. Here
>we have an institution remote, one would think, from the western
>media, sensational journalism, widely publicized UFO flaps,
>widely publicized UFO books, and a general fascination with space
>and the beyond. Yet its members reported the same kinds of UFO
>sightings we're familiar with here..

I just can't agree with this. The idea that military personnel
in the old Soviet Air Force were "remote... from Western media,
sensational journalism... UFO flaps ...UFO books ...fascination
with space and the beyond" is absurd. Many of the accounts we
have of UFO events behind the Iron Curtain came from popular
magazines aimed at servicemen. Science fiction is a much more
popular, mainstream, literary genre in Russia than it is even in
the USA, with many books and magazines being published. The
whole propaganda effort for the Soviet space programme was built
around a fascination with space and the beyond, even to serious
discussions that any advanced form of alien life would
inevitably have created a Marxist society!

As I admitted in an earlier posting, I overestimated the
differences in cultural terms between Western society and the
pre-1989 Eastern Bloc. I still think the arguement is valid
however for many Asian and Third World societies: when the
abductions start coming from these countries in any numbers I
will have to do a re-think - but not just yet.

--
John Rimmer
Magonia Online
http//www.magonia.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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 17

                          Re: Who is Jerome Clark?

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 11:20:10 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 14:24:11 -0400
Subject: Re: Who is Jerome Clark?

>Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 09:06:41 -0400
>From: The Duke of Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith]
>Subject: Who is Jerome Clark?
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

<giant snip>

>For the third time of asking: if we knew - if I knew - the names of
>the cover-up artists invited to speak at the Lincoln conference of
>which Klass was complaining, one would be better able to judge how
>eccentric Klass's complaint actually was. Who, exactly, in this
>case, is Jerome defending?

Someone may correct me, but I believe the occasion was the 1988
MUFON Symposium in Lincoln, the theme of which was "Abductions
and the E.T. Hypothesis."

The speakers (from the table of contents of the Proceedings) were
as follows: Marge Christensen, Walter N. Webb, Dr. Barry H.
Downing, Jerome Clark, Raymond Boeche, David Jacobs, Budd
Hopkins, Bruce Maccabee, William Moore and Stanton Friedman.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 17

                          Re: Who is Jerome Clark?

From: "Jerome Clark" <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 98 12:11:15 PDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 14:31:44 -0400
Subject: Re: Who is Jerome Clark?


>Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 09:06:41 -0400
>From: The Duke of Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com>[Peter Brookesmith]
>Subject: Who is Jerome Clark?
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Who Is Jerome Clark?
>[was: Corso, Stacy & Birnes]
>>Date: Thu, 11 Jun 98 20:51:56 PDT

>Congratulations on a masterly demonstration of smoke-blowing,
>Jerry. I'm sure your many fans will have admired it & learned much
>from the techniques deployed & displayed. An exquisite performance
>indeed.

Thank you. I try to please. Sadly, the truth continues to hurt,
and I imagine that is the real source of the wounded sarcasm
above.

>It struck me that Jerome might welcome this opportunity to comment
>on Klass's version of events, and so purge himself of the suspicion
>that he too has believed an "anything" or two in his time, even if
>one a good deal dafter than the notion that Kenneth Arnold saw
>pelicans.

I'm afraid I just can't quite manage a belief in supersonic
pelicans. I realize there must be something wrong with me.

>For many good
>reasons, I don't make *jokes* about bumping people off. And I
>wouldn't have made the first of Klass's jokes, let alone the
>second.

Good. Then why are you apologizing for them?

>The question was, and remains, whether Jerome took Klass's joke
>literally, as Klass implies ("he considered my May 14 letter to be
>a 'death threat,' and not a joke"), or as a somewhat lesser thing,
>an exercise in black humor.

Does anybody besides Mr. Brookesmith believe, or pretend to
believe, that I thought Klass' "joke" -- in which he explores
the comic potential of a death threat -- an ACTUAL death threat,
that I was in literal peril of losing my continued existence?
Are we supposed to be taking Mr. Brookesmith seriously here? Is
he claiming psychic powers or something? (If so, there's plenty
of static on the mental radio.) Or is he launching a suicidal
effort to make himself look ridiculous?

>After a lot of ad-hominemery & flannel, which must have pained his
>knee considerably, Jerome parades the nearest he has yet come to an
>accurate representation of Klass's actual complaint, in quoting his
>1992 piece from IUR:

>>My point was simply this: In disputing official pronouncements,
>>Klass contends, ufologists are equivalent to Communists in their
>>effect, which is to undermine faith in the American government.

>But not all ufologists dispute official pronouncements. And of
>those that do, some are more extreme than others. Yet, within a few
>lines, Jerome has Klass saying, "In what he thought would be a
>private conversation, he likened ufologists to Communist agents."
>The distinction between fans of a cover-up (let us then distinguish
>between them and conspiracy addicts, though I fail to see the
>difference in Keyhoe's or Friedman's cases), I contend, and repeat
>that I contend, is real.

What's your point? Again, in none of the extended correspondence
I had with Klass, wherein he tried desperately to extricate
himself (never, however, acting as any sensible person would,
namely admitting he was wrong and cutting his losses), did he
seek to divide ufologists into separate camps -- i.e., innocent
and guilty, anti- and pro-cover-up -- as Mr. Brookesmith does
here. Nor did Klass make that distinction in his conversation
with Robert Mortenson of the University of Nebraska. If the
distinction was never important to Klass, why is to Mr.
Brookesmith? Or is he that desperate to save his idol from
perdition? Or is he simply being what he so often is, knee
thumping bottom of desk, disingenuous?

If Mr. Brookesmith keeps this up, I'm going to start quoting
from the letters Klass and I exchanged in the months and years
after the conference, wherein Mr. Brookesmith's pal just dug
himself in deeper and deeper.

My commentary on Klass and ufologists-as-tantamount-to-
Communists stands. If this is the best you can do, the
discussion is over.

>>I refer readers to Brad Sparks' extended treatment of the case
>>in The UFO Encyclopedia, Volume 2, pp. 761-90, for an eye-
>>opening study of the numerous fatal errors Klass made in his
>>imaginative recreation of the RB-47 case.

>As I said, I am looking forward to seeing this.

I'm sure it will do you good and maybe, after seeing Sparks'
expose of the numerous errors in Klass' account of the RB-47
incident, give you a whole new range of Klassian excesses to
rationalize away, or Klassian sentences to parse so that they
don't say what they seem to say.


>Mysteriously, in his brief commercial interlude...

Sorry, Mr. Brookesmith -- no commercial interlude, brief or
otherwise. Omnigraphics, the publisher of the encyclopedia,
gives money upfront (received and spent long ago) but no
royalties. In other words, I have seen every cent I will ever
see on the encyclopedia. My interest now is simply in having
people with minds less hermetically sealed than yours read it
and maybe learn something therefrom. Sorry to disappoint you
again.

>Jerome did not
>answer my question as to why he omitted, in the first edition of
>his Encyclopedia, the fact that members of that RB-47's crew agreed
>with Klass's analysis. Did they too "imaginatively recreate" their
>experience? Such things have been known.

Interestingly, so did Lawrence Coyne -- briefly -- of the Coyne
CE2. Coyne later told Jennie Zeidman (the only real investigator
of the case), "When Klass first called me, I thought, `Fine,
this guy seems to know what he's talking about,' and he had an
engineer on the line. I accepted his explanation because I had
been scared and he offered an explanation. But when he sent me
his book and we all read his explanation, we all said, `This guy
is full of beans'." (Jennie Zeidman, "Major Coyne and the UFO:
The True Story," Fate, August 1978, p. 69)

I also recall my own impression, on first reading Klass' account
of the Travis Walton case, that it sounded right. Later, of
course, I learned otherwise, as did we all. Marcello Truzzi, who
defines himself as a skeptic, has said that on first reading
Klass' UFOs Explained he thought PJK had demolished all the
leading cases -- until, that is, he read the refutations by
ufologists. A common enough experience, one should think.

Like every other student of the RB-47 case, I place no
particular significance in the crew's off-the-cuff response to
Klass' lawyerly reinvention of the incident, and it is not
mentioned in the half- sentence I devote to his "explanation" of
the case (The Emergence of a Phenomenon, p. 286). (I don't
mention Coyne's comment either in the Coyne CE2 entry.) To the
best of my recollection, Sparks doesn't mention it either.

For that matter, not a single other investigator of the case,
including the skeptical Roy Craig of the Condon Committee (who
calls the RB-47 incident "inexplicable"), has deemed it
significant enough to mention, either, and none accepts the
Klass theory. Brad Sparks proves that theory is impossible on a
number of different grounds. If Mr. Brookesmith feels this is
the central issue, or even a major one, he can make all he wants
of it when or if he writes about it. It will not, of course,
change the physics -- but hey, that never stopped a debunker
before, did it? (See McDonald and Maccabee on Menzelian physics
for some amusing specifics.)

>Jerry, please answer the questions. If you'd done that
>unambiguously, or at all, in the first place, you'd have had so
>much more time to catch up on your deadline.

Can there be any deeper circle of hell than the one occupied by
those who rationalize Phil Klass' excesses, not excluding
"comic" death threats or parallels drawn between ufologists and
Communists/Ku Klux Klanners/neo-Nazis? One would think that any
sober skeptic would be putting as much distance between himself
and Klass as a rational UFO proponent tries to put between
him/herself and the true believers out there. Some skeptics, to
their credit, have. Others, to their discredit, have not. I am
afraid we know into which camp the always excitable Mr.
Brookesmith has repaired himself.

I'm glad I don't have to be there with him. There but for the
grace of good sense go the rest of us.

Shudder,

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 17

                          Re: Who is Jerome Clark?

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 98 13:50:38 PDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 20:57:26 -0400
Subject: Re: Who is Jerome Clark?


>Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 09:06:41 -0400
>From: The Duke of Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com>[Peter Brookesmith]
>Subject: Who is Jerome Clark?
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Who Is Jerome Clark?
> [was: Corso, Stacy & Birnes]
>>Date: Thu, 11 Jun 98 20:51:56 PDT

>Congratulations on a masterly demonstration of smoke-blowing,
>Jerry. I'm sure your many fans will have admired it & learned much
>from the techniques deployed & displayed. An exquisite performance
>indeed.

Hi, everybody,

After posting my response to the screed that begins above (see
elsewhere on this thread), I went to my mail box and there found
the new Fortean Times (112), which carries the letter I wrote
(p. 50) that set Mr. Brookesmith off.

Rereading it, I had occasion to reflect on yet more evidence of
Mr. Brookesmith's smoke-blowing talents, not to mention Klass'.
Though he has repeatedly accused me of misrepresenting Klass'
curious equation of ufologists and Soviet propagandists (both
destroy faith in Washington-certified versions of reality, you
will recall), he has never been able to demonstrate such, and he
accuses me of things even Klass has known enough to avoid. More
to the point at the moment, he ignores the revealing tactic
Klass has used whenever reminded of the equation charge.

Mostly recently, Klass employed it when FT columnist Bruce
Lanier Wright referred in passing to the episode. Klass
responded (FT 110, 51), as he has done to me and, for all I
know, others in the past, by offering to contribute money to
some worthy third party if the accuser "can cite in one of my
six [or however many in print at the time of the offer] books or
more than [however many years] of my Skeptics UFO Newsletter" an
instance where he has equated ufologists and Communists.

Note, significantly, that the offer is not dependent on the
proposition that he never said any such thing -- Klass carefully
avoids denying that -- or that his sentiments have been
misrepresented. The offer depends on Klass' awareness that the
equation was not made in PUBLIC. (Actually, if it had been, the
rest of us would have been forced to grant him a degree of at
least perverse respect for the courage of his, uh, unusual
convictions.)

As anyone who's followed this hilarious controversy knows, the
charge was made in a PRIVATE phone conversation -- NOT in a
published forum -- to a University of Nebraska administrator. We
wouldn't even know about it if the administrator had not written
a memo immediately after undergoing the dubious pleasure of
having Klass bend his ear. It is worth noting that Klass went on
to make legal threats against the university for the crime of
letting others know of the (presumably highly embarrassing)
conversation's existence.

Sort of makes you wonder what Klass has done and said that we
DON'T know about, doesn't it?

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 17

                         Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: RobIrving@aol.com
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 18:30:57 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 21:24:49 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

>From: Jean-Luc Rivera <PSaintc798@aol.com>
>Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 16:43:34 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

Jean-Luc,

>>Even in Western Countries the presence of one active investigator
>>can skew reporting figures. Even after all these years it is
>>still unclear just how much of the Warminster phenomenon was
>>reporting of objectively real phenomena (possibly Army activity)
>>and how much was created by the atmosphere produced by Arthur
>>Shuttlewood and his cohorts.

>We agree on this point. Generally speaking it is next to
>impossible to find out and Warminster is certainly a good
>example. The only  beginning of an answer are some studies ( no
>exact references in mind right now ) that I seem to recall
>indicated that a UFO wave always begins long before it starts to
>be reported in the papers.

With regard to Warminster, Shuttlewood was the main proponent
as well as being a leading writer for the local newspaper. It could
be argued in this instance that this 'flap' took off as a direct result
of (his) media coverage.

This coverage also directly influenced the start of the crop circles
'phenomenon' in the immediate area some years later, btw.

Rob








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 17

                          Re: Who is Jerome Clark?

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 98 14:51:24 PDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 20:57:38 -0400
Subject: Re: Who is Jerome Clark?


>Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 11:20:10 -0500 (CDT)
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Who is Jerome Clark?

>>Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 09:06:41 -0400
>>From: The Duke of Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith]
>>Subject: Who is Jerome Clark?
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

> <giant snip>

>>For the third time of asking: if we knew - if I knew - the names of
>>the cover-up artists invited to speak at the Lincoln conference of
>>which Klass was complaining, one would be better able to judge how
>>eccentric Klass's complaint actually was. Who, exactly, in this
>>case, is Jerome defending?

>Someone may correct me, but I believe the occasion was the 1988
>MUFON Symposium in Lincoln, the theme of which was "Abductions
>and the E.T. Hypothesis."

Dennis,

It wasn't. This wasn't a MUFON conference or specifically a UFO
conference. It was held in the fall of 1983 and organized by Ray
Boeche. Through his legal threats and blusterings Klass
prevented a sequel and pronounced himself satisfied with that.

In fact, Klass was there at the 1988 Lincoln, Nebraska, MUFON
confab right up in the front row, flashing a tape recorder and
making pains to be sure speakers (such as the undersigned) saw
him taking photographs of them. I have a wonderful photo
somebody took of Klass taking a photo of me.

Quite amusing, really. Everybody took it as Klass' childish
notion of speaker intimidation, and many were the chuckles about
it.

Ya gotta love the guy. I have the strange feeling that we'll
actually kind of miss him when he's no longer stalking among us.
And poor Mr. Brookesmith: whom, following that sad day, is he
going to have to parse sentences for?

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 17

                          Re: Who Is Jerome Clark?

From: RobIrving@aol.com
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 18:30:55 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 21:07:44 -0400
Subject: Re: Who Is Jerome Clark?

>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: "Jerome Clark" <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Who Is Jerome Clark?
>Date: Sun, 14 Jun 98 13:54:36 PDT

Jerome,

>Hard, too, to believe the good opinion I had, a couple of years ago,
>of somebody named Rob Irving, apparently not to be confused with
>you, who wrote the delightful "Henry X File" in Fortean Times. I
>assume the two of you are unrelated.

This is the second time you have felt it necessary to mention
this, as if mentioning it twice somehow makes it more relevant,
and/or amusing -- a deadly mistake for any comedian.

(Under the circumstances, I had better add that the above remark
was certainly not intended as a death threat).

Anyway, as must be transparently obvious to any Shakesperean
scholar, William Shakespeare's plays were written not by William
himself, but by another author of the same name. I'm sure that
the author of the delightful 'Henry X Files' appreciates these
mentions of it, despite their irrelevance to the discussions.

Rob








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 17

              Re: Arctic Crater Expedition to Seek Mars Science

From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 17:19:03 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time)
Fwd Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 20:59:05 -0400
Subject: Re: Arctic Crater Expedition to Seek Mars Science

> Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 22:05:58 -0400
> From: Stig Agermose <wanderer@post8.tele.uk>
> Subject: Search For Life On Mars With Your Computer

> <snip>

> "We hope to get young scientists from elementary school
> through college to help us with the search...

> <snip>

> Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 17:01:29 -0400 (EDT)
> From: NASANews@hq.nasa.gov
> Subject:  Arctic Crater Expedition to Seek Mars Science Insights
>           and Test Future Exploration Technologies

> <snip>

> From June 22 to July 26, a 20-member science team from NASA and
> several other research organizations will explore the Haughton Impact
> Crater and its surroundings on Devon Island in the Arctic Circle.

> Scientists consider the site a potential Mars analog because many
> of its geologic features, such as the crater's ice-rich terrains, its
> ancient lake sediments and nearby networks of small valleys, resemble
> those reported at the surface of Mars.

> <snip>

Hi everyone,

Sudbury, Ontario resembled the surface of the Moon and now Devon
Island is like Mars.  We, as Canadians (where The X-Files got
started, flying saucer shaped drive-in restaurants and home of
Stanton Friedman) should be proud.  I just hope that any Mars
rock images school children are given to examine do not show
things that look like Inuit sculptures.  NASA may then conclude
that not only is there life on Mars but that there is intelligent
life there too.  A reason why NASA didn't observe these Martians
when it took photos over the Martian City Square recently is that
they were likely all indoors from the bitter cold watching the
Stanley Cup playoffs on CBC (using satellite dishes, of course).
If it does happen like this here, then it is likely to be the
same elsewhere under the same conditions (Occam's Razor).

Nick Balaskas








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 17

                              Re: The Ten Cases

From: RobIrving@aol.com
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 18:30:53 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 21:20:21 -0400
Subject: Re: The Ten Cases

>Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: The Ten Cases
>From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
>Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 00:21:19 -0400
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

Mark,

Re: Valensole

>I have seen no rebuttal of this case.

In Brookesmith & Devereux's UFOs and Ufology, the authors
mention that the French sixth fleet was in the area, possibly
with helicopters, but do not offer that as any kind of concrete
explanation. It strikes me that on the strength of only one
witness and little material evidence it would be very hard to
form a conclusion either way.

>>>> For instance, Valensole has beings, sample gathering, unusual
>>>> traces, and the startling performance normal to UFO cases.

>>The case, the scenario, the story has beings. That's how I see
>>it, not that that makes it untrue, of course.

>The beings were seen examining a lavender plant. The object
>departed at a speed so high as to seem almost instantaneous. The
>beings aimed a device at Masse which seemed to prevent him from
>moving when he came close. So there's more than just beings.

You miss my point. You are discussing the case as if it were
positively concluded. Elsewhere I introduced the question of
whether belief bore any effect on the scientific aspect. You
appear to have no doubt about this story whatsoever. Besides the
farmer's testimony, what evidence do you base this on? Or are
you simply believing the story on the basis that it hasn't been
disproved, so therefore it's more likely to be true?

>The Sheffield case is already embroiled in controversy that
>seems to be going badly for it. That is the sort of thing that
>one would expect to find happening to Valensole if it were an
>unreliable case.

For what it's worth, there are crucial differences. The main
protagonist of the Sheffield case is an ET-believer purporting
to be investigating the case after the event, rather than its
sole witness. It is not without other witnesses and events, from
which David Clarke has been able to glean a reasonable account
of what probably happened, and which is utterly incongruous to
Mr ET-believer's version. If the Valensole case consists of only
one witness to the events described, then I can't agree; it is
not the sort of thing one would expect to find happening. The
more factors the higher the likelihood of finding either fault
or confirmation in a story.

>Remember, the witness was also interviewed by the police, who
>have extensive experience in dealing with frauds and unreliable
>people.

What was the police's interest in coming to a conclusion either
way?

If their response was any more than a Gallic shrug, please alert
me.

>Yes, a report which has been investigated many times over many
>years and which retains consistency over that time is certainly
>more reliable than one which has not. That's the point.

I can't agree. Surely the older a story becomes, so the
opportunities for investigation (and conclusions) also diminish.
What you seem to be telling me is that this somehow works
differently, that the older a story is the greater its veracity.
Far from being "the point", it doesn't make sense.

I could tell you I saw a man with a tangerine for a head walking
up my street today, and without any fear that anyone could prove
otherwise.  That wouldn't mean that in 20 years time it would be
any more true.

By your reasoning, countless stories involving lake monsters,
ghosts, BVMs, what have you, are more likely to be true, simply
by default. Is
this what you're saying?

>Single witness reports (not "stories") are generally not granted
>a probability higher than 3 (according to Hynek) regardless of
>the credibility of the witness. Nonetheless, the standard which
>allows it to attain that level of probability requires a stable
>witness with a good reputation, with no problematic history
>before or after.

Even the most reputable reporters make up stories. But let's not
get hung up on semantics. Perhaps we should settle for
'accounts'.

I don't place much credence in 'probability of truth' ratings.
What did Hynek base his numerical rating on? Equally, from my
experience of what's commonly known around these parts as
'hoaxing' I can't see the relevance of 'stability' and
reputation in determining any veracity to what people say.

Sure, one might be more suspicious of a story coming from a
known fabulist, but this doesn't mean that those with no such
reputation are automatically telling the truth. Similarly, our
talent for misperception is equally distributed throughout
society.

I'm not saying that I disbelieve the Valensole account, nor am I
arguing against your apparent belief in it... only that you seem
not to recognise the incongruity of accepting stories on little
evidence and your claim to be taking a scientific approach in
investigating them.

Rob






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 17

              Re: Are Aliens Among Us? Go Beyond The Government

From: Rebecca Schatte <RSchatte@aol.com?
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 19:24:57 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 22:00:11 -0400
Subject: Re: Are Aliens Among Us? Go Beyond The Government


From: AOLNews@aol.com
Subject: Are Aliens Among Us? Go Beyond The Government Cover-up...
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 08:47:48 EDT


Are Aliens Among Us? Go Beyond The Government Cover-up in
"Sightings: The UFO Encyclopedia"

NEW YORK--(ENTERTAINMENT WIRE)--June 17, 1998--

Learn what the U.S. Government Denies Exists from Expert
UFOologists and Take a 3-D Walk through a Top-Secret Military
Base

Is the United States government covering up the truth about
aliens and UFOs visiting Earth, or is it all a big hoax? Simon &
Schuster Interactive gives PC owners the knowledge to draw their
own conclusions with -- Sightings: The UFO Encyclopedia (Windows
95(R)/Windows 3.1, CD-ROM).

Containing detailed information on famous (or non-existent,
according to the U.S. government) landmarks such as "Area 51,"
Wright Patterson Air Force Base, and the alleged UFO crash site
at Roswell, New Mexico, you embark on a journey through time
learning detailed information on these and other historical
places from expert UFOologists such as Dr. Stanton T. Friedman.

Close Encounters of the Fourth Kind

For many years stories have been told of alien beings abducting
citizens and performing scientific experiments on them.
Sightings presents several famous stories for you to judge as
fact or fiction -- the Betty and Barney Hill abduction, the
Travis Walton abduction and the Allagashy abduction incident.
Each is recreated with video, still photos and, some, with the
actual victims to give you the facts.

I Dream of Dreamland

Can't make it to Area 51, or at least without being shot?
Sightings offers a much safer and legal alternative -- a virtual
3-D "top secret" bunker. There, you will learn about the
government's "classified" installations, theories on why these
are so secretive and why they are long believed to be the place
where aliens are being kept. You'll hear the story of Bob Lazar,
a man who claims to have worked as a physicist at Area 51 on the
propulsion systems of alien aircraft. He also provides details
of the top secret area known as "S4."

Roswell Autopsy: True or Hoax?

In 1995 a film surfaced of what has been called an autopsy of an
alien at Roswell, New Mexico from the year 1947. Clips of this
famous film are included in the Sightings CD-ROM so you can see
for yourself what is either the most elaborate hoax ever staged
or the insides of an alien.

If after watching the alien autopsy you're still not sure if
it's real or fake, let the experts help you arrive at a
conclusion. Sightings: The UFO Encyclopedia gives you interviews
with 11 experts ranging from Hollywood makeup artists to the man
who discovered the autopsy film, Ray Santilli.

Aliens Online

Sightings: The UFO Encyclopedia allows UFO watchers from around
the world to file their observations via the Internet. In a
special online section of the CD-ROM, you can fill out a form
and electronically send observations to the Sightings web site
to share with other UFO fans. Also in this special online area,
UFO fans can search the online database for up-to-the-minute
observations from around the world, chat with other UFO fans and
read recent de-classified documents from the U.S. government.

Sightings: The UFO Encyclopedia is now available for Windows 95
and Windows 3.1 with an estimated street price of $29.95.

Minimum system requirements for Sightings: The UFO Encyclopedia
are: PC, 486-33 MHz processor, Windows 3.1 with 8 Mb of RAM or
Windows 95 with 16 megs of RAM, VGA display, CD-ROM and a 100
percent SoundBlaster compatible sound card and speakers.

Simon & Schuster Interactive (www.ssinteractive.com), based in
New York, is the consumer software publishing unit of Simon &
Schuster Consumer Group.

Simon & Schuster Inc., the publishing operation of Viacom Inc.,
is the world's largest educational, computer book and English
language book publisher. With operations in 43 countries and
book multimedia product distributed in 150 countries, its
imprints include Simon & Schuster, Simon & Schuster Interactive,
Simon & Schuster Audio, Pocket Books, Scribner, The Free Press,
Prentice Hall, Silver Burdett Ginn, Allyn & Bacon, Computer
Curriculum Corporation, Educational Management Group and
Macmillan Publishing USA.

Viacom Inc. is one of the world's largest entertainment and
publishing companies and is a leading force in nearly every
segment of the international media marketplace. The operations
of Viacom include Blockbuster, MTV Networks, Paramount Pictures,
Paramount Television, Paramount Parks, Showtime Networks, Simon
& Schuster, television stations, and movie screens in 12
countries. Viacom also owns approximately 80% of Spelling
Entertainment Group, as well as a half- interest in Comedy
Central and UPN. National Amusements, Inc., a closely held
corporation which operates approximately 1,100 screens in the
U.S., the U.K. and South America, is the parent company of
Viacom. More information about Viacom is available at the
Company's Web site located at
http://www.viacom.com.

NOTE TO EDITORS: All brand and company/product names are trademarks or
registered trademarks of their respective companies.

CONTACT:

Simon & Schuster Interactive, New York

Peter Binazeski, 212/632-3544

e-mail: peter-binazeski@prenhall.com

To edit your profile, go to keyword <A HREF="aol://1722:NewsProfiles">
NewsProfiles</A>.
For all of today's news, go to keyword <A HREF="aol://1722:News">News</A>.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 17

                          Re: Who is Jerome Clark?

From: Stanton T. Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 20:17:16 -0300
Fwd Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 21:51:56 -0400
Subject: Re: Who is Jerome Clark?


>Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 09:06:41 -0400
>From: The Duke of Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com>[Peter Brookesmith]
>Subject: Who is Jerome Clark?
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Who Is Jerome Clark?
>[was: Corso, Stacy & Birnes]
>>Date: Thu, 11 Jun 98 20:51:56 PDT

>Congratulations on a masterly demonstration of smoke-blowing,

>It struck me that Jerome might welcome this opportunity to comment
>on Klass's version of events, and so purge himself of the suspicion
>that he too has believed an "anything" or two in his time, even if
>one a good deal dafter than the notion that Kenneth Arnold saw
>pelicans.

>In responding, Jerome then - despite having had his inexactitude
>very recently tweaked a bit by yours truly - rashly repeated his
>favorite factoid about Klass & communism. I suppose I was supposed
>to let this pass by in meekness and reverence? Having made the
>provocation, Jerome can hardly complain that his time is being
>taken up in unpaid toil in trying to obfuscate everything.

>>
>>>you.'

>>I guess I am cover up artist as well
>s
>ag,

>>y

>>But not all ufologists dispute official pronouncements. And of
>between them and conspiracy addicts, though I fail to see the
>difference in Keyhoe's or Friedman's cases), I contend, and repeat
>that I contend, is real.

>For the third time of asking: if we knew - if I knew - the names of

>>I refer readers to Brad Sparks' extended treatment of the case
>>in The UFO Encyclopedia, Volume 2, pp. 761-90, for an eye-


>Finally, I might address a question raised earlier in Jerome's
>p
>>p


>I can also join up the dots between that, the misrepresentation of
>Klass's remarks about cover-up fans and Soviet agents, and the

>Jerry, please answer the questions. If you'd done that
>unambiguously, or at all, in the first place, you'd have had so
>much more time to catch up on your deadline.

Thank you, Duke, for  demonstrating all 4 of Friedman's laws for
Debunkrs, even if you only paraphrased #3 If you can't attack
the people, attack the data. 1.What the public doesn't know , I
am not going to tell them. 2. Don't bother me with the facts,my
mind is made up; and 4. Do your research by proclamation, not
investigation. It is much easier.

Peter ,you really have gone off the deep end by calling me a
conspriacy addict. : Conspiracy: "a joining secretly with others
for an evil purpose". Addict: "person addicted to something
harmful"..I don't see how being addicted to the truth and to
facts (that nasty word again) is harmful. Try it sometime. I
essentially never use the term conspiracy. My 21pg, paper "UFOs:
Earth's Cosmic Watergate" uses it not at all., However, it
contains a number of quotes from important documents proving
that agencies of the US government are witholding UFO
information. Has a lot of facts, though I guess , from the lack
of facts in your lengthy ramblings, you prefer to avoid them .I
guess I am a coverup artist too.. this coming from a man whose
ratio of blather to facts is astronomical. Incidentally, you
might also enjoy my paper "Flying Saucers, Noisy Negativists ,
and Truth:". Klass is one of the star performers. With disdain
for debunkers,

Stan Friedman






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 17

                Re: Popular Mechanics/Popular Science & UFOs

From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 20:54:04 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 22:29:35 -0400
Subject: Re: Popular Mechanics/Popular Science & UFOs


>Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 01:19:45 -0700
>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Popular Mechanics/Popular Science and UFOs.

>Anyone who wants a quick-and-dirty guage of the PS/PM readership
>should look at the classified ads at the back.

>I don't have a copy handy, but remember jewels like " Elijah
>coming before Christ", endless get-righ-quick schemes, "train to
>be a locksmith" etc. I'm sure you can find even better ones!

Here are a few of my favourites:

Alternative Energy - Fantastic self-running motors, generators
and anti-gravity.Free Information.Energy Research, CA

or

Automobiles - Mugged by Mr. Badwrench?Auto Repair Rip-Offs
Exposed!

or

Aviation, Hand Gliding - Nuclear Flight - The USAF's 1950's
program to build nuclear powered jets, missiles and rockets.
$35.00 216 Pgs.

or

Business Opportunities - Secrets of Refrigeration Revealed.

or

For The Home - Clean Windows - Step-by-step Guide to Clean
Streakless Windows Like the Professionals

or my favourite

Special Services - Information On Anything, Ferguson Research
Specialist, N.Y.

Let's put this last one to the test with regard to the Popular
Mechanics Article shall we.

>If there is any benefit to this, it might be a slight rise in
>public 'UFO consciousness'; the perception that there may indeed
>be an issue worth discussion, even by everyday working Joes who
>would otherwise not give UFOs a thought.

I don't think the everyday working Joe reads Popular Mechanics
or Popular Science, but it will most definitely make the
existing readers more aware.Unfortunately the magazine made
cigarette ads look more appealing and even as I, as a 'ufo
enthusiast', flipped through the magazine, I found I just
flipped past the UFO segment like it was filler with nothing
much to say really and went on to the Technology Watch section
to find out more about nanotechnology, mutant frogs, space trash
worries, and Mining Water On The Moon (pg. 32).The cover lost
it's momentum being surrounded by 'Create a Killer Website',
'Drag Racing Runs Wild', 'Plant Heirloom Seeds' and 'Buy a
Riding Mower and More!', but 'UFOs' does get your attention.
It's good for the collection.

And be sure to check out
http:/www.monolithicdome.com
for the latest in disaster-resistant buildings.

>OK, 6-cents worth.

Is that before tax?

Happy reading.

Sue Kovios







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 18

                      Re: CSICOP condemns X-Files Movie

From: Jared Anderson <jared@valuserve.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 00:24:12 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 04:36:06 -0400
Subject: Re: CSICOP condemns X-Files Movie

CSICOP member Matt Nisbell has written an article suggesting the
X-Files movie will increase nationwide belief in the paranormal
and government conspiracies.

I'm not sure whether this is the case or not but I don't think
the Council for Media Integrity stands to benefit from the
crybaby style in which the article was written.

Observe:

http://www.csicop.org/articles/x-files-movie/



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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 18

                      Re: CSICOP condemns X-Files Movie

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 04:46:17 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 04:46:17 -0400
Subject: Re: CSICOP condemns X-Files Movie





From: http://www.csicop.org/articles/x-files-movie/

Movie Release Could Usher in Turn-of-the-Millennium
Era of the Paranormal

Contact Matt Nisbet at 716-636-1425 x219

In the late 1970's, Close Encounters of the Third Kind ignited
imaginations across the world, and helped spur popular
fascination with alien visitation and abduction. Now The
X-Files: Fight the Future film is scheduled to be released June
19, and if the movie is well-received by critics and viewers on
opening weekend, it will likely draw hordes of moviegoers beyond
its 25 million television following.

Tapping into themes of government conspiracy and the paranormal,
The X-Files: Fight the Future has the potential to catapult
interest and belief in a range of paranormal phenomena above
already historic levels.

Many prominent scientists, skeptics and academics are concerned
with the portrayal of science in the series. In every episode of
The X-Files, science fails. FBI agent Dana Scully, the series'
symbol of rational skepticism, is incapable of positing
satisfactory scientific explanations for extraordinary plot
developments. It is always Fox Mulder's mystical speculation
that is on to something.

"In the entertainment media, just short of sex and violence,
conspiracy- mongering and paranormal fantasy sells" says Paul
Kurtz, member of the coordinating committee for the Council for
Media Integrity and Professor Emeritus of Philosophy at the
State University of New York at Buffalo. "The X-Files taps into
the fascination market, feeding on viewer gullibility. Science
is portrayed as weak and critical thinking is pushed aside."

Magical thinking became a national pastime last summer during
the mythological 50th anniversary of the crash of an alien
spacecraft at Roswell, New Mexico. According to a Gallup poll,
31% of Americans believed an *actual* alien craft had crashed in
1947. In a previous poll, 71% of Americans indicated a belief in
some kind of U.S. government cover-up of UFOs.

Many defend the series as mere fiction. In response to that
assertion, Oxford University's Richard Dawkins in the
March/April issue of Skeptical Inquirer magazine asks us to
imagine for a minute that The X-Files' weekly choice between
rational theory and paranormal theory were turned into a crime
series. In each case one suspect is white and the other black,
and at the conclusion of every episode, like science in The
X-Files, the black suspect is found to be guilty. Could
Hollywood defend that kind of myth-making as "only fiction?"

In 1996, X-Files creator Chris Carter appeared before a "World
Congress" of skeptics at the State University of New York at
Buffalo, fielding hard-hitting questions from noted standard-
bearers of no-nonsense reality that included author/entertainer
Steve Allen, astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson, and philosopher
Paul Kurtz. A transcript of that question and answer session is
available by calling 1-800-634-1610 or 716-636-1425 outside the
U.S.

About the Council for Media Integrity

The Council for Media Integrity is a network of distinguished
international scientists and academics concerned with the
balanced portrayal of science in the media. Members of the
Council include E.O. Wilson, Stephen Jay Gould, Martin Gardner,
and Sir John Maddox. Co-chairs of the Council are Nobel laureate
Glenn T. Seaborg and entertainer Steve Allen.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 18

                              Re: The Ten Cases

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 00:46:02 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 04:31:30 -0400
Subject: Re: The Ten Cases


> From: RobIrving@aol.com
> Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 18:30:53 EDT
> To: updates@globalserve.net
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: The Ten Cases

<large snip of material basically summed below>

> I'm not saying that I disbelieve the Valensole account, nor am I
> arguing against your apparent belief in it... only that you seem
> not to recognise the incongruity of accepting stories on little
> evidence and your claim to be taking a scientific approach in
> investigating them.

And, Rob, you seem every so often to forget exactly what
the point was of listing these cases. It wasn't to prove that
UFOs exist. It was to list cases "suggestive" of ETH.

Now let's take the concepts you put forward

1) That I "believe in" "stories"...

2) That I accept the "stories" on little evidence of their
   truth.

3) That Valensole and other older cases are essentially no
   different from any other tall tale.

First, I don't "believe in" things. I grant a certain weight to
various reports based on what we know about the reporter(s), the
investigator(s), and the circumstances in each case. As for
Valensole, we have no reason to doubt the witness' veracity
based on his reputation in the community, his lack of reason to
create a hoax, and the several investigations carried out by
police, reporters, and known field investigators. Further, the
fact that between 1 and 2 percent of cases have been found to be
hoaxes tends to lower the probability of this case being a hoax.
Finally, the presence of corroborating physical traces at the
site, which were apparently not normal for the area, adds
additional weight to the report.

To argue that a case is invalid because a hoax is easier to
accept than the content of the report is ridiculous. To claim
that the police simply shrugged concerning this case is a claim
with no evidence.

As far as dealing with such a report scientifically, I will
refer you to the basis of the scientific method. The scientific
method requires first, something to explain - for instance, this
case. It next requires a hypothesis to explain it - for
instance, that it is a hoax, or the product of mental
derangement, or that it is some sort of wild perceptual fault.
It then requires a discriminator to determine whether or not the
hypothesis is supported by the evidence - for instance, did the
witness show a propensity for hoaxes, did advantage accrue to
the witness as a result of the story, did the witness have a
history of mental illness, were the characteristics of the
object and its occupants similar to what might be expected of
military air personnel and aircraft. The discriminator is then
compared to the evidence - in this case, there appears to be no
support for misperception, hoax, or hallucination.

Having determined this, the case is then moved from the initial
report classification to the UFO category, where further
hypotheses can be tested against it.

Over time, other investigators have an opportunity to examine
the witness and the evidence. For instance, if the witness
develops a case of psychosis, this might suggest a hallucination
was in fact responsible. Or a hoaxer may reveal the hoax. Such
events have not apparently occurred in this case.

You suggest that this case is not necessarily any different from
"sea-serpent" stories. Yet, why choose this analogy, except to
follow a standard debunker's line of guilt by association? Is
there any other salient point of comparison other than your
personal sense of a common strangeness in the resulting reports?
It is that sort of fallacious reasoning which has led to the
baroque theories of the debunkers on the one hand and the
bizarre associations in PNH on the other.

As I pointed out in another message, UFO reports are
qualitatively different from many types of "tales" - in their
lack of a conventional narrative structure, their lack of a
resolving explanation, and in the attempt of the witness to
generate several levels of conventional explanation prior to
admitting the presence of a novel stimulus. Furthermore, the
presence of multiple independent witnesses in many cases, the
ability to detect the UFO with instruments that indicate the
same location for a luminous phenomenon observed by a witness
and an instrumental detection, take them far from any ghost or
sea-serpent story I am familiar with.

------
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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 18

                Re: 911/UFO Pursuit - Interview with WYTV 33

From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@connectmmic.net>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 08:01:54 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 10:12:40 -0400
Subject: Re: 911/UFO Pursuit - Interview with WYTV 33


>Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 03:42:52 -0700
>From: Kenny Young <task@fuse.net>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Trumbull County Investigation: Interview with reporter

[...]

>Following my June 8 phone call, I assumed that reportage of this
>incident would shortly commence. This has not been the case, and
>I am under the impression that the staff of Channel 33 longs for
>this matter to be swiftly swept aside and forgotten.

>During my June 12 conversation, Adger even acknowledged that her
>initial fears were unfounded, and the understandable concerns
>for the job safety of others were largely exaggerated. Despite
>no expressed interest in addressing this incident with the
>Channel 33 news forum, Adger agreed with me that the tapes are
>shocking and are of extreme
>news-interest.

Kenny,

Hair raising case.

Are you getting the impression that Adger is starting to back off
on the whole story ?

Serge







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 18

                     Santilli Comments On 'Tent Footage'

From: Philip Mantle <el51@dial.pipex.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 00:13:58 +0000
Fwd Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 10:08:28 -0400
Subject: Santilli Comments On 'Tent Footage'

The following is from Ray Santilli:


THE TENT FOOTAGE

Philip Mantel has informed me that he has secured an interview
from someone claiming to have information regarding the "Tent
Footage".

As a great deal has been made of the so called "Tent Footage" I
would like to clarify the situation and place the following on
record:

The Tent Footage was the first film material I collected from
the cameraman, it was in the form of 16mm film and in very poor
condition. I brought it back to England and asked a studio
facility in Buckinghamshire to retrieve whatever image they
could from it. A few weeks after delivery the Studio presented
me with the film which has become known as the ""Tent Footage" I
was told that this was all that could be retrieved from the
film.

I had informed the cameraman by telephone that we were able to
retrieve some image and indeed showed the film to Philip Mantel
and other interested parties.

I returned to the States later to collect the main film and
showed the "Tent Footage" on VHS to the cameraman. At this point
he stated that he DID NOT remember either the image being
portrayed or the style in which it had been filmed. I was
concerned but collected the remaining film (which was in far
better condition) and returned to the United Kingdom.

Upon my return I contacted the studio to find out more about the
images from the "Tent Footage".  I got the impression that as a
joke the film had been interfered with, but nobody was owning
up. This meant that with regard to the "Tent Footage" I was
uncertain as to what was real and what was not, and if the film
had been interfered with, I could not use it. THIS IS WHY I
COMPLETLY PULLED BACK FROM USING THE FILM.

As a result I INFORMED ALL PARTIES that had come into contact
with the Tent Footage (and I am sure they will confirm this)
that I was NOT CONFIDENT with regard to the Tent Footage and
further that it should NOT be used in conjunction with the
autopsy film, this instruction went to all broadcasters
including Fox (Kiviat).

Indeed when Kiviat wanted to use the Tent Footage for a
subsequent program I was totally against it. However he still
wished to use it and to that end he provided me with a written
disclaimer dated NOVEMBER 1995 which was to be used during the
broadcast. In the end I won the point and the film was not used.
The situation regarding the Tent Footage was known to all, it
was not appropriate to use as it may have been interfered with.

It was the only thing I could do, as I did not want it to
compromise the main autopsy film.

I believe I did the responsible thing in removing the "Tent
Footage" from circulation at the very beginning.

My position regarding the Autopsy film and the reels recovered
remains unchanged. Any discussion regarding the Tent Footage is
completely irrelevant. I DID NOT USE THAT STUDIO AGAIN, AND
NEITHER THE STUDIO OR ANYONE ASSOCIATED WITH THE STUDIO HAD
ANYTHING WHATSOEVER TO DO WITH THE AUTOPSY FILM.

THE AUTOPSY FILM IS WHAT IT IS, AND NOTHING WILL CHANGE THAT.



Ray Santilli








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 18

                           Re: UK Research Request

From: Philip Mantle <el51@dial.pipex.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 00:57:01 +0000
Fwd Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 10:09:52 -0400
Subject: Re: UK Research Request


> To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
> From: Paul Hunter <gscribe@thefree.net>
> Subject: UK Research request
> Date: Tue, 16 Jun 98 20:57:44 PDT

> UK Research request

> This on behalf of Yorkshire based UFO investigator,
> Andrew Ellis.

> Can any one advise of an abduction researcher in the Leeds area,
> or anybody in the Birmingham area.

> Please contact Andrew on (01132)  482973, or through me:-

> Paul Hunter

> gscribe@thefree.net


Dear Paul,

I've researched quite a few abductions cases and would gladly help.

Philip Mantle,
1 Woodhall Drive,
Batley, WF17 7SW.
[UK]
Tele: 01924 444049. E-mail:
el51@dial.pipex.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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 18

                Re: Popular Mechanics/Popular Science & UFOs

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 03:08:53 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 09:57:12 -0400
Subject: Re: Popular Mechanics/Popular Science & UFOs


>Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 20:54:04 -0400
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Popular Mechanics/Popular Science & UFOs

>>Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 01:19:45 -0700
>>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Popular Mechanics/Popular Science and UFOs

>>Anyone who wants a quick-and-dirty guage of the PS/PM readership
>>should look at the classified ads at the back.

>>I don't have a copy handy, but remember jewels like " Elijah
>>coming before Christ", endless get-righ-quick schemes, "train to
>>be a locksmith" etc. I'm sure you can find even better ones!

>Here are a few of my favourites:

<snip>

>For The Home - Clean Windows - Step-by-step Guide to Clean
>Streakless Windows Like the Professionals

>or my favourite

>Special Services - Information On Anything, Ferguson Research
>Specialist, N.Y.


Hi Sue!

I knew I had missed some goodies! I think there was one which
offered training to "become an astronaut at home" but that might
have simply been a satire printed elsewhere.

Best wishes

-  Larry Hatch.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 18

                Santilli's 'Tent Footage' Thrown Into 'Doubt'

From: Philip Mantle <el51@dial.pipex.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 23:58:56 +0000
Fwd Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 10:03:49 -0400
Subject: Santilli's 'Tent Footage' Thrown Into 'Doubt'

SANTILLI'S TENT FOOTAGE THROWN INTO DOUBT BY PHILIP MANTLE 17.6.98.


On 30 March, l998, I received an e-mail message simply titled
'Blowing The Whistle - Roswell, from someone named K----
G------. The message simply read " Ok, I know something about
the Santilli footage, I can identify without a shadow...Call me.
K---- G------.

I took me a while before I reached KG on the phone and he went
on to tell me an intriguing, but so far unconfirmed story. I
again interviewed KG on 11.6.98 this time tape recording the
conversation.

The following is an interview I conducted with KG: Nothing has
been deleted or added and the interview is complete.


INTERVIEW:

PM: This is 11.6.98, Philip Mantle (PM) and K---- G------ (KG)

KG: Yep.

PM: Philip Mantle and K---- G------.

KG: Absoloutely.

PM: Have you any objections to me tape recording this
conversation Keith.

KG: I don't Philip, at all.

PM: Do you mind if I publish it at all.

KG: I don't mind if you publish it.

PM: Right, OK. Well ,it was on 30 March, l998, you originally
e-mailed me K----.

KG: Certainly, yes it was.

PM: And, er, you claimed at that time you had some information
on the er, Roswewll film.

KG: I certainly did.

PM: First and formost can you give us a bit of information on
your background and then I'll ask you another question.

KG: OK, er, my background is primarily, well certainly for the
last, up until about 5 years ago, was as a video games
programmer, erm, I then came to work for a company in Milton
Keynes, which is where I now live, about 5 years ago, erm, as a
video games programmer. They were actually a hardware designing
company. I erm, sort of worked my way up through the eons of
that company and until I was eventually part of the management
team, erm, and it was during the period of working there, with a
business contact that I first met the people that we are gonna
talk about.

PM: OK. Now like I said, in your first e-mail you askeds me to
give you a all, which I did, aat that time you told me you had
some information about, er, the Santilli film. Could you tell us
what that information is please K----.

KG: OK. Basically, erm, I had er, an association, I had a
colleague erm, that had an audio/visual company, erm making, at
the time they were making a lot of Karaoke videos for third
party publishers, erm, and soundtracks for childrens films and
that sort of thing. I actually first came across this company
erm, in the capacity as a games programmer, erm, and in fact
contracted them to provide music for some video games that I was
working on.

Erm, I, er,  I'm just trying to think of the story,events here,
I erm, I'd known, I got to know them pretty well, I spent a lot
of time working in their studios with them while we were playing
around with different ideas for theme tunes for games and sound
effects and so forth. So I would say, most of the staff in there
I was very well acquainted with and had a very good relationship
with the erm, owners of the company. Erm, about, some time,
about a year and a half ago I went to actually visit this
company, I hadn't seen them for a while, it was all, it was just
a social visit, just pop-in to see how everybody was, and, while
I was there the phone wrang, and, it, erm, the secretary put the
phone call to the colleague I was with, the owner of the
company, erm, who had a phone conversation with Ray Santilli.
Erm, when the phone, the conversation had finished, I said to my
colleague 'the Ray Santilli'. He said,well, what do you mean
'the Ray Santilli', I said the guy with the Roswell film. With
that my colleague actually fell about almost in hysterics, I
mean he would have fallen of his chair I think, given a chance,
and he said didn't you realise we made that. And I said well,
hang on, no, no, no. He said, no, we made that, didn't you
recognise Elliot. And I said well, no, quite frankly I didn't
recognise anybody. Erm, and then, he said er, well, you know, we
made that, was Elliot. Amblings went on, carried on, and
eventually he took me into the studio and erm, he showed me a
video tape of what, I didn't recognise as being the Roswell
footage, and he showed me some film, but it was quite clearly I
could see that the main character in this footage was Elliot,
who was one of the sound engineers there, erm, but it wasn't
what I recognised as the Roswell footage. Erm, and then I sort
of, I wasn't, at that time, that particularly impressed, erm, I
just thought well maybe he thought he'd made something, but that
wasn't the Santilli, certainly wasn't the Santilli footage. Erm,
and he gave me a copy of the video cassette that they'd made but
for some reason had never published, erm, and I went off quite
happy. Erm, one night I'm sat here, whenever it was I first
contacted you Phil.

PM: Erm, it was March the 30th.

KG: March the 30th.

PM: Yes.

KG: I was sat in, sat in my office at home, surfing the
internet, and, I had no real contrived or planned reason, just
typed Roswell into Yahoo to do a search, erm just to see, you
know, see what the latest is, whatpeople are currently thinking
about the Roswell film. And I found a page, erm, that was, erm,
that was a web page, where they were doing analysis of the tent
footage. Now I'd never realised  that there were, I'd never
followed the story close enough to know that there different
segments of footage and different pieces of this so-called
Roswell film, and erm, they had sort of a web page analysis of
the, of the Roswell footage on there, on there, of the tent
sequence, and I clearly identified that tent sequence with the
video that I'd seen.

Well within about 10 minutes I was downstairs searching through
my video library trying to find this video cassette that I'd
been given, and basically matched up frame for frame with the
copy that I had which clearly showed Elliot the sound engineer
with the pages on the internet and sure enough the tent footage
was the same footage that claimed to be made by erm, by my
colleagues, and was undisputable that, that was Elliot. I
watched the film through and through again and without a shadow
of a doubt it was definitely Elliot and it definitely matched up
with the pages on the internet reporting to be the tent footage;

PM: Yes.

KG: At which point, I thoght mmm, I should inform somebody about
this, and just found a few key figures, that were er, that were
erm, involved in investigating Roswell from a UK end, and erm,
sent you e-mail.

PM: OK, is the name of this company -- -----.

KG: -- -----.

PM: Or is it --- -----.

KG: No, --.

PM: -- -----.

KG: --, er,.-- actually stood for A--- and K---- which were the
names of the two owners.

PM: Right.

KG: Erm, and they ceased trading earlier this year.

PM: And is one of those owners a chap by the name of K----
B------.

KG: K---- B------, yes, that's it...B------.

PM: Ok, how did you know about the Roswell film itself and make
the connection with Santilli.

KG: Erm, only from the original Channel 4 and the Fox
televisions films, both of which I saw, I used to travel a lot
in America and I saw the Fox one and I also saw the Channel 4
one. Erm, and just, just loosely followed it but hadn't paid any
keen interest, I'm not what one would call a ufologist or any
such thing. So it wasn't with over keen interest, but you know,
it was something that just sits there and you check now and
again and see what's going on, but obviously in those programmes
they's interviewed Santilli and er, you know, it was just one of
those names that when I heard it crop up, when I was at --
-----, erm it was just one of those things that wrung little
alarm bells, hang on, Ray's in touch, Santilli, there's a name I
know.

PM: Did your colleagues at -- ----- at the time when you were in
their office and Santilli phoned, did they give you any other
information about their dealings with Santilli and selling the
film to him or something of that nature.

KG: I believe the film was made for a, erm, was made, basically
for another company. They were making a video called, erm,
something to do with the web, Beyond the Web ?

PM: Penetrating the Web ?

KG: Penetrating the Web. Erm, it was part two or something, and
they were actually putting this video together for them. Erm,
they, now this is how I understood it, they had shown the
footage that they made to Ray Santilli to which point Ray
Santilli tried to but it, acquire it, whatever. The upshot of it
was, was that Penetrating The Web was never released in the UK,
at the the time it was made, and in fact in the copy that I had
was, pre-dated all of this by a year or so, erm, Ray Santilli
had then used this as part of his Roswell collection and there
had been sums of money passed hands to make sure that it wasn't
actually published as Penetrating The Web, erm, at it's original
scheduled release date.

PM: Right, well Penetraing The Web was released, are you aware
of that.

KG: I had no idea it was released over here, I knew it had been
released in Italy.

PM: It's been released in the UK because we have a copy.

KG: Right, OK.

PM: The gentleman who made that...

KG: B---- B------.

PM: B---- B------, do you know B----.

KG: No ideas at all, I wouldn't know him from Adam.

PM: He told us at the time that he'd bought it from a third
party, but he wouldn't say who. So you're saying that -- -----
made it especially for B---- B------- company.

KG: However it happened, but I believe that it was originally
made for B---- B------, I wouldn't confirm that, but that's as I
believe it.

PM:OK, very interesting. Any information you'd like to add.

KG: I can't think of anything else I'd would like to add, I
can't think of anything else at all really.

PM: Do you still have a copy of the video that was given to you.

KG: No I don't unforunately, I'm trying to get it back, it was
give to Bob Kravitz, Bob bo..

PM: Kiviat ?

KG: Kiviat, yes, he actually has my copy at the moment.
Basically so he had a first generation copy and could try and
lift a clear picture, oh, I say a first generation a, er, an
original copy and he can try and lift some decent footage off of
that clearly showing Elliot.

PM: Yes. Just for the record, are you aware of how Bob Kiviat
got in touch with you.

KG: Er, via yourself I believe.

PM: That's correct, yes.

KG: Yes, yes.

PM: It's for Kiviat's programme later in the year.

KG: Yes.,

PM: So once again you understand that this conversation has been
recoded.

KG: Yes.

PM: And you have no objection to it being published either in
written form or on the internet or whatever.

KG: No, not particularly Phil.

PM: Is there any of the details that you've told me that you
wish not to be made public, ie: the name of the company.

KG: No, I have no problem with that at all.

PM: Well, thank you very much.

KG: That's alright Phil.

PM: Don't go off I'll just turn the machine off.

END

I have so far purposely withheld all of the names of the
individuals allegedly involved and the company also. Efforts are
being made to contact those allegedly involved and colleagues
and I have already obtained information on the company allegedly
involved. If any further information is gleaned from our
contining investigations into these allegations it will be
posted on the internet.

If anyone would like to assist us with these investigations
please do not hesitate to contact me at:

Philip Mantle,
1 Woodhall Drive, Batley, West Yorkshire, WF17 7SW.
Tele:01924 444049.
E-mail: el51@dial.pipex.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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 18

                              Re: The Ten Cases

From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@connectmmic.net>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 09:19:02 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 10:14:15 -0400
Subject: Re: The Ten Cases


>Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: The Ten Cases
>From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
>Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 14:38:15 -0400
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 09:43:15 +0200
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: JJ Mercieca <mufor@maltanet.net>
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: The Ten Cases

>> Wouldn't escape velocity depend on the type of technology being used?

>>That is, our rocket technology has to accelerate to Mach 25 to
>>leave the Earth.  However, if antigravity is what propels UFOs
>>all they'd have to do is counter the Earth's gravity and
>>literally "float" away from it.
>>Is this correct or am I missing something here?

>The cheapest form of antigravity is the thrust of a rocket. Even
>an "antigravity" field would "effectively" exert a thrust. An
>antigravity field which allowed an object to escape the earth's
>field and penetrate into non-orbital space, would counteract the
>object's weight and the local field to the same extent as a
>rocket battles against it.

>I suspect that an antigravity vehicle would have to appear to be
>travelling at escape velocity, or it would not escape.


Mark,

... or maybe, when you turn on the anti-gravity gismo, the whole
universe , or at least the local planet, starts moving around you
until you turn it off.  If you don't know where you're going
then, why not trigger the magnetic-surfing device to ride the
tides of the local magnetic field?  That should give us some
steering - though shaky - capabilities.

I am still working on the carburator.

Serge







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 18

                                How It Works

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 09:38:00 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 16:54:21 -0400
Subject: How It Works

To List:

Ok, all you overly bright boys and girls out there, anyone want
to tell me how this works?

[Yeah, yeah, Doc..... how _duz_ it woik? --ebk]

http://pw2.netcom.com/~sleight/rabbit1.html

We can solve this minor little saucer problem later.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 18

                      Re: CSICOP condemns X-Files Movie

From: Donald  Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 10:16:01 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 16:34:10 -0400
Subject: Re: CSICOP condemns X-Files Movie


> Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 00:24:12 -0700
> From: Jared Anderson <jared@valuserve.com>
> To: updates@globalserve.net
> Subject: CSICOP condemns X-Files Movie

> CSICOP member Matt Nisbell has written an article suggesting the
> X-Files movie will increase nationwide belief in the paranormal
> and government conspiracies.

> I'm not sure whether this is the case or not but I don't think
> the Council for Media Integrity stands to benefit from the
> crybaby style in which the article was written.

> Observe:

> http://www.csicop.org/articles/x-files-movie/

> Jared.

Hello Jared and List,

Well now, after having just read the little piece "Skeptics
verses Science" subtitled "Scientisits concerned by Portrayal of
Science" I am just devastated that "science" is, for a change,
behind the eightball taking the licks it so richly deserves for
sticking its cowardly head up its own ass all these years on the
UFO phenomenon.  It never ceases to amaze me at the two-headed
approach that "science" takes on the pursuit of truth, which is
[1] their truth and [2] the great unwasheds' truth. The latter of
course is all of the other ignoramouses that are not those
shining knights of the first truth, the "scientisits". Without
them, we would not have been on the verge of the "big"
breakthrough, for instance' on a cure for cancer for the last
50-60 years-probably one of the biggest moneymakers of all time
for scientists at several hundreds of billions of dollars. Or
heart disease or,arthritis, or altzeimers, or the common cold or
obesity or one of the newer moneymakers, AIDs.

How about the science of astronomy for instance. There was the
truth of 50 years ago and now the present day truth, mostly made
clearer it seems not by science but by engineering, meaning
electronics and optics.[We'll ignore the monumental screwup with
Hubbles vision problem for the moment, which one astronomer told
me could have been discovered using an amateur's instrument used
for measuring the curve of a lens costing about $100.00]

The monumental blunders made in the world of science over the
last 50 years would fill several of Jerome Clark's encylopedias,
with each blunder being satisfactorly being covered or explained
away by their own invisible college of spin doctors. Can't have
the great unwashed thinking that the scientists aren't the Gods
that they and the geat unwashed think them to be.

The doctors have been taking a well deserved hosing for the last
few years so now maybe its time for the "scientists" to take
their licks.

From one who has been profoundly dissappointed over the last few
years by the performance of the so called "people who seek the
truth".

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 18

                A Grand Jury's Focus And Impact: More On The

From: Mike Jamieson <MDJ50@webtv.net
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 08:25:11 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 17:13:20 -0400
Subject: A Grand Jury's Focus And Impact: More On The

Larry Bryant just sent me some comments after he had a chance to
review the initial feedback to his efforts in convening a grand
jury in Chavez County, NM to examine the 1947 Roswell case.

First, Larry noted that he would be sending me "excerpts from a
Pennsylvania Law Review essay (by Professor Jeffrey Stern) on the
history and utiity of 'the grand jury reporting function'."

"Even though a state grand jury may not subpoena evidence from
the feds, it may request access to such evidence--and of course
solicit same from the public.  So, more than just a publicity
maneuver, the people's forum can serve as a retro-watchdog, if
you will, at getting at the loose ends of the truth."

"And, of course, the grand jury report can serve as a notice to
Congress that the evidence/findings produced from the grand jury
process could justify the holding of open congressional hearings
of the entire UFO cover-up/foulup."

"Remember: the mere existence of a convened grand jury might
justify this effort if it acts as a magnet for the coming-forward
of other Corso-type whistleblowers........"

The text of the CITIZENS PETITION FOR THE CONVENING OF A 'ROSWELL
INCIDENT' GRAND JURY explains the intent and focus: "........for
the express purpose of investigating, and reporting upon, the
events, principals, and aftermath of the so-called 'Roswell
Incident" of early July 1947.  In particular, we seek the grand
jury's collection, analysis, and reporting of any and all
evidence discoverable in the form of sworn testimony and
subpoenaed documentation as regards any official misconduct to
the U.S. Army air force's retrieval of one or more 'flying
saucers' from their Roswell-area crash site...."

That is only part of the text.  To take this effort out of the
dugout, help is needed from within Chavez County to gather
signatures for filng with the county.  Please let us know if you
can help in any way!






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 18

                      Re: CSICOP Condemns X-Files Movie

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 13:42:23 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 17:27:47 -0400
Subject: Re: CSICOP Condemns X-Files Movie


>Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 00:24:12 -0700
>From: Jared Anderson <jared@valuserve.com>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: CSICOP condemns X-Files Movie

>CSICOP member Matt Nisbell has written an article suggesting the
>X-Files movie will increase nationwide belief in the paranormal
>and government conspiracies.

>I'm not sure whether this is the case or not but I don't think
>the Council for Media Integrity stands to benefit from the
>crybaby style in which the article was written.

>Observe:

>http://www.csicop.org/articles/x-files-movie/

Hi Jared, hi All,

I don't know _squat_ about what's going on. It never ceases to
amuse me however how many 'others' think they do! <G>

It is my contention that those who dedicate so much of the time
of their lives in a (negative) persuit such as (trying to
'disprove' something,) do so because deep down they fear the
possibility that it may be true. Fear it to the point where they
dedicate their lives to following and vilifying anyone who
espouses a beilief in it. (Whatever "it" may be on any given day
for them!)

Never forget that CSICOP represents _closed mindedness_ in one
of it's more 'concrete' manifestations. Psychic phenomena of
-any kind,- - - belief that there is "Mind" or "Intelligence"
behind (or anywhere else in) the Universe, or a belief in
anything that doesn't fit into _their_ world view is dismissed
out of hand, and any who dare to suggest it are hunted down.
(Stalked through the media.)

Professional debunker! To me that's like calling yourself,
Professional Shithead. When the mind entertains negativity long
enough, like the slave to the Will that it is, it will form the
habit. These guys all eventually succumb to the poisons that rot
them from within.

They become a bunch of ninny naysaying sourpusses! A human life
is like a work of art that can only be appreciated when
completed. Is _that_ how these guys want to be remembered?

They don't bother me. As far as I'm concerned, they made their
beds and they can sleep in them! Let em stew in the bile and the
acids that the 'thoughts' they embrace generates within their
systems. It'll eat their stomachs and livers not to mention
hardening their (Human) hearts, as the years go by. They have
_condemned themselves_ to fates worse than any that anyone could
_ever_ wish on them. That, is the result of ignorance of one of
the "Universal Laws" that they don't acknowledge or believe in!
<EG>

Truly, it all begins and ends in -Mind & Heart-

Life is short. Enjoy the ride. "Follow your Bliss!"

John Velez, Alien Spawn





======================================================
                         AIC INTERACTIVE CONFERENCE
                                  jvif@spacelab.net
======================================================
 INTRUDERS FOUNDATION /ABDUCTION INFORMATION CENTER
                              http://www.if-aic.com
======================================================
             AIC -MEMBERS ONLY- /ACCESS CODES REQUIRED
======================================================








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 18

                      Re: CSICOP Condemns X-Files Movie

From: Scott K. Hale <shale@columbus.rr.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 13:09:31 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 17:23:55 -0400
Subject: Re: CSICOP Condemns X-Files Movie


>From: http://www.csicop.org/articles/x-files-movie/

>Movie Release Could Usher in Turn-of-the-Millennium
>Era of the Paranormal

>Contact Matt Nisbet at 716-636-1425 x219

>In the late 1970's, Close Encounters of the Third Kind ignited
>imaginations across the world, and helped spur popular
>fascination with alien visitation and abduction. Now The
>X-Files: Fight the Future film is scheduled to be released June
>19, and if the movie is well-received by critics and viewers on
>opening weekend, it will likely draw hordes of moviegoers beyond
>its 25 million television following.

>Tapping into themes of government conspiracy and the paranormal,
>The X-Files: Fight the Future has the potential to catapult
>interest and belief in a range of paranormal phenomena above
>already historic levels.

<snip>

I thought I'd post my e-mail response I came up with, simply
because I'm bored today.


Dear CSICOP,

I just wanted to comment on your recent X-files Movie article. I
found this to be the best review of a movie that isn't out yet
since all the early critics were predicting Titanic's failure
before it came out, simply because of the budget of the movie.

I know tons of people who watch the X-files. Very few of these
people "believe in the paranormal". Many prominent scientists,
skeptics, and academics need to learn how to get out and have a
good time, instead of knitpicking every piece of paranormal
related fiction that hits the market.

Science *usually* fails. What about Anasazi, where the "alien"
is found to be a radiation test victim? Isn't exposure to
radiaton a cause of pysiological defects? I don't understand how
one can make a comparison between violence and sex selling, and
the paranormal. After all, Dark Skies failed, and Stargate SG-1
is doing terrible. Yet the X-files continues to thrive. Perhaps
it's just a good TV show?

Now I just have to ask: What is the black/white crime scene
analogy good for? The X-files isn't a crime show, and there's
nothing racial in the show. There is no way you can make that
sort of comparison between a racially biased crime show and a
paranormal show. It just makes no sense!

I"m proud of Chris for fielding questions "from  noted standard-
bearers of no-nonsense reality" because these people just don't
know how to have fun. No nonsense reality... You guys should
start a campaign to eliminate those fiendish paranormal
figures.. you know: The Easter Bunny, Santa Claus, The Tooth
Fairy, Superman, ect. Our children's minds are being polluted
with this rubbish! Give me a break guys.

A "Council for Media Integrity" should examine organizations
such as yourselves who seek to control or limit the media we are
exposed to. Short of that, you just complain about everything.
Perhaps you should just leave some things as they are, heavan
forbid we have to make up our own minds on something.

I have one last closing remark regarding Paul Kurtz' quote: "The
X-Files taps into the fascination market, feeding on viewer
gullibility..." I know a FBI agent who watches the X-files. My
physician watches the X-files. I'm sure some of your illustrious
skeptics have a closet X-files addiction. We are in no way
gullible, we just enjoy good entertainment. Perhaps you need to
rethink your statement, given that you think we're all going to
start believing in aliens because of a movie...


Gulliby Yours,
Scott Hale

CSICOP wrote:










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 18

                      Re: CSICOP Condemns X-Files Movie

From: JJ Mercieca <mufor@maltanet.net>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 12:52:10 +0200
Fwd Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 17:16:00 -0400
Subject: Re: CSICOP Condemns X-Files Movie

>Many prominent scientists, skeptics and academics are concerned
>with the portrayal of science in the series. In every episode of
>The X-Files, science fails. FBI agent Dana Scully, the series'
>symbol of rational skepticism, is incapable of positing

<snip

>Magical thinking became a national pastime last summer during
>the mythological 50th anniversary of the crash of an alien

What does CSICOP want us to do?  Ask them to start censoring all
films for "unscientific magical thinking"? Repeat "UFOs are a
figment of our imagination" a 1000 times each morning?

I watch X-Files occasionally but it has not modified my views on
UFOs, cover-ups, whatever.  I just enjoy it as fiction.

Regards,

JJ Mercieca

http://www.mufor.org/
Malta UFO Research






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 18

                          Re: Who is Jerome Clark?

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 98 10:42:49 PDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 17:19:11 -0400
Subject: Re: Who is Jerome Clark?


> Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 20:17:16 -0300
> From: Stanton T. Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Who is Jerome Clark?

> >Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 09:06:41 -0400
> >From: The Duke of Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com>[Peter Brookesmith]
> >Subject: Who is Jerome Clark?
> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

> >>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
> >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
> >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Who Is Jerome Clark?
> >[was: Corso, Stacy & Birnes]
> >>Date: Thu, 11 Jun 98 20:51:56 PDT

> >>But not all ufologists dispute official pronouncements. And of

> Peter, you really have gone off the deep end by calling me a
> conspriacy addict. : Conspiracy: "a joining secretly with others
> for an evil purpose". Addict: "person addicted to something
> harmful"..I don't see how being addicted to the truth and to
> facts (that nasty word again) is harmful. Try it sometime. I
> essentially never use the term conspiracy. My 21pg, paper "UFOs:
> Earth's Cosmic Watergate" uses it not at all.

It is unfair, not to mention false, to characterize Stan Friedman
-- or Donald Keyhoe, for that matter; Mr. Brookesmith also
mentioned him in the same breath -- as a conspiracy theorist.
Stan's view, like Keyhoe's (and my own, for that matter, at least
on some days), is that a small official group of individuals with
the proper clearances and need to know is holding significant UFO
secrets.  Stan was an early and forceful critic of the real
conspiracy theorists (Lear, Cooper, and their ilk), who conjure
up a Secret Government not only hiding UFO truths but controlling
the world.

By the loose definition Mr. Brookesmith has of conspiracy
theorist (or "addict"), anybody who believes governments keep
sensitive information--on any subject--classified is a conspiracy
 theorist (or "addict").  We all occasionally indulge in
polemical excess, but this excess seems especially lead-headed.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 18

                      Re: CSICOP Condemns X-Files Movie

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 13:48:14 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 17:29:58 -0400
Subject: Re: CSICOP Condemns X-Files Movie


>From: http://www.csicop.org/articles/x-files-movie/

>Movie Release Could Usher in Turn-of-the-Millennium
>Era of the Paranormal

>Contact Matt Nisbet at 716-636-1425 x219

>In the late 1970's, Close Encounters of the Third Kind ignited
>imaginations across the world, and helped spur popular
>fascination with alien visitation and abduction. Now The
>X-Files: Fight the Future film is scheduled to be released June
>19, and if the movie is well-received by critics and viewers on
>opening weekend, it will likely draw hordes of moviegoers beyond
>its 25 million television following.

Heaven forbid that more than 25 million people should have a
good time at the movies!

<Tremendous snip of unbelievable nonsense!>

>About the Council for Media Integrity

>The Council for Media Integrity is a network of distinguished
>international scientists and academics concerned with the
>balanced portrayal of science in the media. Members of the
>Council include E.O. Wilson, Stephen Jay Gould, Martin Gardner,
>and Sir John Maddox. Co-chairs of the Council are Nobel laureate
>Glenn T. Seaborg and entertainer Steve Allen.

These poor saps ought to get out of the house/office more often.
Maybe take in a movie!

Steve Allen? <LOL>

John Velez


======================================================
                         AIC INTERACTIVE CONFERENCE
                                  jvif@spacelab.net
======================================================
 INTRUDERS FOUNDATION /ABDUCTION INFORMATION CENTER
                              http://www.if-aic.com
======================================================
             AIC -MEMBERS ONLY- /ACCESS CODES REQUIRED
======================================================








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 18

                          Re: Who Is Jerome Clark?

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 98 10:31:57 PDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 17:17:16 -0400
Subject: Re: Who Is Jerome Clark?


> From: RobIrving@aol.com
> Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 18:30:55 EDT
> To: updates@globalserve.net
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Who Is Jerome Clark?

> >To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
> >From: "Jerome Clark" <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Who Is Jerome Clark?
> >Date: Sun, 14 Jun 98 13:54:36 PDT

> Jerome,

> >Hard, too, to believe the good opinion I had, a couple of years ago,
> >of somebody named Rob Irving, apparently not to be confused with
> >you, who wrote the delightful "Henry X File" in Fortean Times. I
> >assume the two of you are unrelated.

> This is the second time you have felt it necessary to mention
> this, as if mentioning it twice somehow makes it more relevant,
> and/or amusing -- a deadly mistake for any comedian.

> (Under the circumstances, I had better add that the above remark
> was certainly not intended as a death threat).

> Anyway, as must be transparently obvious to any Shakesperean
> scholar, William Shakespeare's plays were written not by William
> himself, but by another author of the same name. I'm sure that
> the author of the delightful 'Henry X Files' appreciates these
> mentions of it, despite their irrelevance to the discussions.

Rob,

All kidding aside: it was a terrific article.  And no, I am not
threatening you with death either.

Cheers,

Jerry







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 18

                              Re: How It Works

From: Diane Lovett <RAMBLD@worldnet.att.net>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 18:37:09 +0000
Fwd Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 19:16:58 -0400
Subject: Re: How It Works

> Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 09:38:00 -0500 (CDT)
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: How It Works

> To List:

> Ok, all you overly bright boys and girls out there, anyone want
> to tell me how this works?

> [Yeah, yeah, Doc..... how _duz_ it woik? --ebk]

> http://pw2.netcom.com/~sleight/rabbit1.html

> We can solve this minor little saucer problem later.

> Dennis

Slightly off topic Dennis, but I understand since it drove me
crazy the first time I saw it too! It is quite literally a head
game. You are so busy picking out and remembering your special
card that you don't really take much notice of the other cards.
Once the cards are "mixed up", what you actually see are ALL new
cards, so of course the one you picked is missing! Try it again,
but this time write down all of the original cards, and compare
that with the next line up. You will find none of the original
cards there. This thing is so easy, but has truly freaked a lot
of folks! If only our little "saucer problem" were so easy to
figure out!


Diane





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 18

                              Re: The Ten Cases

From: John Rimmer <johnr@magonia.demon.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 22:36:10 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 18:56:51 -0400
Subject: Re: The Ten Cases


>Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: The Ten Cases
>From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
>Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 00:46:02 -0400
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>> From: RobIrving@aol.com
>> Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 18:30:53 EDT
>> To: updates@globalserve.net
>> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: The Ten Cases

>The scientific
>method requires first, something to explain - for instance, this
>case. It next requires a hypothesis to explain it - for
>instance, that it is a hoax, or the product of mental
>derangement, or that it is some sort of wild perceptual fault.
>It then requires a discriminator to determine whether or not the
>hypothesis is supported by the evidence - for instance, did the
>witness show a propensity for hoaxes, did advantage accrue to
>the witness as a result of the story,

Why is the cry "he had nothing to gain from a hoax" almost
invariably proposed as evidence that a particular incident could
not have been a hoax. Apart from a certain smug satisfaction that
one of the great unwashed has got one over on smug would-be
scientific-type investigators who can't belive that anybody who
does not have their  level of academic achievement could *ever*
fool their massive intellect, (what Peter Rogerson has dubbed the
'Herr Professor' Syndrome) what does *anyone* gain from a UFO
hoax? There must only be a tiny minority of hoaxes where the
perpetrators *have* 'gained anything' from them, and quite a few
where they have ended worse off as a result. So let's drop this
silly argument.

Most hoaxes are done for the hell of it.


--
John Rimmer
Magonia Online, a Dot Weighbridge Production
http//www.magonia.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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 18

                              Re: How It Works

From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 18:25:14 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 19:17:51 -0400
Subject: Re: How It Works


> Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 09:38:00 -0500 (CDT)
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: How It Works

> To List:

> Ok, all you overly bright boys and girls out there, anyone want
> to tell me how this works?

> [Yeah, yeah, Doc..... how _duz_ it woik? --ebk]

> http://pw2.netcom.com/~sleight/rabbit1.html

> We can solve this minor little saucer problem later.

> Dennis


Elementary, my dear Stacy.  All the first six cards are missing!

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 18

                              Filer's Files #24

From: George A. Filer <Majorstar@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 16:24:54 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 19:10:49 -0400
Subject: Filer's Files #24

Filer's Files #24-1998 MUFON Skywatch Investigations
George A. Filer, MUFON Eastern Director,
June 18, 1998, Majorstar@aol.com (609) 654-0020

Sightings increase in New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and
Georgia!

NEW YORK

Alex Cavallari reports he photographed a UFO over the Sheepshead
Bay area of Brooklyn on May 28, 1998. The 747 jet aircraft in
the picture had just departed Kennedy Airport and is climbing
and turning towards the southeast. As it slowly flew overhead, I
noticed the UFO enter the camera view finder, and I took this
picture. I tried to take more pictures as fast as the camera
would take them. However, the UFO was traveling at a great rate
of speed and was out of my field of vision within two seconds.
By the time I took the next picture the UFO was gone. The UFO
appeared to be a gray or silver colored spherical orb shaped
craft. There was no tail or smear seen during the filming, but
the picture shows a tail or smear behind the UFO. The UFO
traveled north toward New York City. I believe the craft was
about 50 to 75 feet in diameter. It appeared much rounder or
spherical when viewed even though the picture shows it to be
more donut shaped. I believe this difference in appearance is
possibly due to the high speed of the craft. The film and camera
were too slow in response time to capture the craft�s image in a
still or motionless position. This is what produced the motion
blur seen behind this craft. It is also possible that the tail
or smear is some form of plasma or vapor emission that the film
captured. This picture clearly shows a craft of unknown origin
flying within 500 feet to commercial air traffic. This UFO flew
within one half mile of this aircraft and within ten miles of
Kennedy Airport at about 10,000 feet in altitude. The UFO flight
path flew over Kennedy (NY), La Guardia (NY), and Newark (NJ)
airports. The flight path this UFO took put it within about ten
miles of all three airports at some time during its flight. The
UFO passed within one half mile of this aircraft and almost
directly over it. The UFO may have been traveling faster then
our airport radar systems can image. These UFO flights present a
hazard to flight. It was a hazy day with temperature in the mid
70's (*F). The camera was a Minolta Freedom Zoom 90C, using
Kodak ASA 400 color film. The photo can be seen at:
http://members.aol.com/xelaufo/index.html. Thanks to Alex
Cavalari NY State Director Investigator Skywatch International
Inc.

NEW JERSEY:

Investigator Evelyn Galson reports on an update on the Mullica
Hill family who has had several sightings and odd occurrences in
recent weeks. On Tuesday, June 9, 1998, a meeting of local MUFON
members was held at the Glouceseter County Library in Mullica
Hill. A mile a way, and an hour earlier a grayish circular UFO
was observed hovering over a row of trees behind their home.
David, a ten year boy spotted the craft at 6:30 P.M.. His father
and later his mother also observed the craft for an extended
period of time. The mother has been trying not to think about
these things, so she hesitated in coming outside right away. The
craft moved up and down and very, very slowly in an erratic
fashion. The home is backs up to a large farmer's field. They
viewed the UFO for 30 minutes, but it stayed there for a longer
period of time. The UFO hovered in a position ten miles south of
the Philadelphia Airport just above a treeline about 200 yards
away. The craft was as big as a quarter held at arm's length.
When an aircraft flew near the UFO, it would descend below the
level of the trees. Once the plane passed overhead and was gone,
the UFO went back to the previous higher altitude. It again
lowered below tree top level, when a helicopter passed and rose
again to the previous altitude after it departed. On Friday,
June 12, 1998, David's mother found two circles on her ten year
old son's face. The marks are located in the muccobucco fold,
which is the area between his mouth and cheek. Several weeks ago
I examined the boys face and the scars were not apparent. These
are new scars, that are each one centimeter in size. Several
members of the family have silver fluorescence marks on their
skin. (Also see last article)

PENNSYLVANIA

Stan Gordon reports that a UFO was spotted at 10:20 P.M., on
June 10, 1998, over Bethel Park, a suburb of Pittsburgh. The
witness first observed a bright round light with a yellow
coloring around the outside edge, moving from the northwest to
southeast. A few seconds later, it was followed by an identical
light that moved in the same direction. Seconds later a third
similar light followed the same path, then disappeared in
seconds just like the other two. About five minutes later, a
fourth light moved from west to east and disappeared in seconds.
This was succeeded by a fifth light, which also moved from west
to east and disappeared in a few seconds. The strange thing
about the observation was that all five lights seemed to
disappear in the same position of the sky. The first thee lights
appeared to be evenly spaced in time, appearing one behind the
other. There was no smoke trail or other emissions associated
with the round lights. No sound was apparent. Thanks to: Stan
Gordon, P.O. Box 936, Greensburg, PA 15601.

Dan Hageman of the Butler Organization For Research of the
Unexplained (BORU) in Butler County, PA. BORU is investigating a
low level UFO incident that occurred. on May 7, 1998. A Butler
County farmer was riding his tractor doing some late night
planting of a corn field at 3:30 A.M. Three hundred yards away
he noticed brilliant lights near a wheat field. At first he
became upset thinking that someone was driving through the
wheat. He realized the object was moving about four feet above
the ground. It was 30 to 40 feet long and about five feet in
height. The object was a dark color and was hovering over his
wheat field. It was domed shaped in the front with a lights, but
the structure thinned out towards the back and rounded off.
Towards the front section of the object, there were five to six
lights along the edge on both sides. There was also five lights
on either side near the rear of the object. The square shaped
lights were very bright orange, blue and light pink. The lights
seemed to pulsate on and off, but never cut out completely. The
entire object appeared to be surrounded in a vapor or gas. As
the witness was turning to make another pass of the field, he
began to have problems with his tractor. The engine began to
sputter, but did not stop. A monitor on the tractor used for
corn planting made a constant beeping noise and had to be shut
down. As the farmer watched, the object moved in a straight
line, barely clearing the tree tops estimated at 60 feet high.
Then suddenly the object appeared to evaporate into thin air.
There are high tension powerlines in the vicinity. Soil samples
are being analyzed in a local laboratory. Butler County has had
UFO events since the late 1960's. Thanks to Stan Gordon, his UFO
Hotline is 724-838-7768, www.westol.com/~paufo

GEORGIA:

MUFON's John C. Thompson reports a UFO sighting during the
evening of June 13, 1998. The object was traveling in a line at
a very slight arc at 3000 to 4000 feet altitude. It appeared to
be at a level compared to the planes that land at GSP, twenty
miles away. Using an angle of sight when the object was at its
closest, and an apparent size of 3 mm calculates out to about 20
feet in diameter. An estimate of distance covered in 55 to 60
seconds indicates the object was traveling between 500 to 600
mph. The object seemed to have a more defined outline at the
front than at the rear, but it was oval in shape and there was
no vapor trail. Thanks to , Terry Kimbrell at
JJLJ45A@prodigy.com

John Thompson writes, �My mail had a mother�s written account
and drawings' signed by two boys who saw a UFO on Sunday, June
7, 1998, at 10:00 PM.� The twelve years old boys saw the UFO
while lying outside on their backs on a trampoline. The drawings
that the two friends made show a white non-blinking light with a
red glow around it moving south. The sighting took place near
the Troup-Harris County line and is on the same road where two
other UFOs were seen in recent years. During a phone interview,
one of the boys said, 'They saw the light move for about 15
seconds before it disappeared. It was much higher than a
commercial airliner and had the apparent size of the brightest
stars but was smaller than Venus.� The impression given by the
boy is that this UFO was as high as a satellite orbit. The red
glow around the light suggests some kind of artificial object or
meteorite entering our atmosphere. Thanks to John Thompson.

On June 16, 1998, the owner of a local garage and large taxi
company in LaGrange reported seeing what I have dubbed, a
"weather UFO." The witness said he was stopped at the
intersection of Colquitte Street and Ogletree Street, at 12:10
AM facing west, when he saw a "rolling fireball" come across
Colquitte street going northeast. The "fire-engine red ball" was
of compact "car size" and was at an elevation of 100 feet high
and only 150 feet away. It moved at a speed in excess of "a 100
mph." The two second sighting took place when a violent storm
system moved through West Georgia. The 50-80 mph winds
accompanying the wide weather front uprooted trees and downed
power-lines in LaGrange and the surrounding area. Power was out
until the next morning. The fiery plasma ball made a "roaring
noise." It was his impression that the ball was more of a
heat-related as opposed to an electrical nature. No area near
the "fireball" was seen to burn. The ball seemed to track from
the storm area as it came out of the southwest. A 90 foot tall
sycamore, the tallest tree around, was uprooted under the path
of the low-flying fireball. The garage owner's business, also in
the track of the fireball, had roof damage. Unfortunately, since
it was dark when this sighting took place it is not know for
certain if this damage was caused by the fireball or had
occurred earlier when the storm first hit LaGrange.  A similar
incident occurred last April when a �weather UFOs� appeared to
hit immediately before a large storm front moved into our an
area. Both the National Hurricane Center in Miami, and the
National Weather Service in Peachtree City, Georgia said they
had never heard of fireballs being generated by large storms.
Meteorologist Scott Carroll thought, perhaps, the witness saw
ball lightning or an electrical discharge from power lines
during the storm. However, La Grange Old-timers have said that
these balls "lead" storms and on touching anything explode with
tremendous fury. A strange, giant, inverted cone-shaped UFO that
changed color in a repeatable fashion was seen in October of
1995 by several witnesses when Hurricane Opal moved through
LaGrange. Thanks to John Thompson.

TEXAS

On Wednesday, June 14, 1998, at about 8:34 PM, Pappie and son
were parked beside a country road two miles west of Leander
skywatching. They saw two lights in the clear sky that traveled
at a steady speed. One crossed the entire sky moving towards the
southwest. The other was traveling in a southern direction. The
son witnessed a third light. Each light was seen within the same
minute. The first two seemed to cross each other. All were too
low to be satellites. The lights were not aircraft. A valley
close by was lit up from the ground for about five seconds with
a light blue colored light. The illuminated area covered about a
football field. Then, a scream was heard from the woods to their
southwest Rapid movement was heard in the woods traveling from
southwest to south east. In about four seconds, a scream came
from the southeast. No human could have traveled that distance
in that amount of time. The scream did not sound human. Thanks
to Pappie and Skywatch International Inc.

CANADA

Sean Malloy in Saskatchewan reports seeing a strange greenish
glow that became an almost white disc at 12:30 AM on June 15,
1998. It moved sporadically and quickly across the sky. It made
a very frightening a whining sound. Thanks to Sean Malloy
sem837.mail.usask.ca

UNITED KINGDOM

The Daily Telegraph Saturday, 13 June 1998. A meteor speeding
across the night sky prompted a UFO alert across England,
yesterday. Police forces in at least eight counties received
calls from hundreds of onlookers who saw bright blue lights
travelling from Devon to the Midlands. The British Astronomical
Association confirmed that the speeding object was a meteor, the
result of cosmic debris burning up in the Earth's atmosphere.
Howard Miles, spokesman, said; �it was quite spectacular,
crossing the sky at about midnight and fragmenting as it burnt
up in the atmosphere, causing bright sparks.� "It appears to
have been a meteor, which burned up before it reached the
ground." It was seen across Shropshire, Deryshire, Berkshire,
Sussex, Hampshire, Gloucestershire and North Wales. A spokesman
for Staffordshire Police said, "People told us they had seen a
single, blue light that was bigger than a car. Some people
described a tail behind the light, while others said it looked
like it was burning or flaming." A Ministry of Defence spokesman
said, "We are satisfied this was a meteor which broke up on
entering the Earth's atmosphere, causing the bright glow, which
people saw." Jon Jennings says, "I have it from a reliable
source, a pair of Tornado's fighters were sent to investigate."
Thanks to Jon Jennings <jonj@easynet.co.uk

ALIEN VIDEO:

On the May 8, 1998, edition of Hard Copy featured a UFO story
with a sensational shot of aliens looking out window of the
craft. The footage was first aired nation wide on Strange
Universe on November 24, 1997. The footage was apparently shot
on a Super 8 film camera by Dorothy Izatt. Dorothy claims to
have been in contact with the aliens for over 25 years. She shot
several hundred rolls of Super 8 film of UFOs. Her previous film
footage has never been explained. Her most remarkable piece of
footage is of what shows a Grey looking out the window. During
this recent sighting Dorothy started filming a diamond shaped
UFO and asked if the aliens could come closer, and they did. She
could see a couple of Grey aliens looking out a window of the
space ship . She asked them if they could turn their bright
lights off so she could film them, and they did. The light turns
off in a bizarre flash. Then a small square window appears and a
classic Grey alien figure is clearly seen and appears to turn
its head. At least one of the aliens looks out the window. He
has a very long thin neck, a bulbous head with oversized black
eyes. The alien appears have be clothed in a white cloth like
gown. Another Grey is seen about five feet behind the Grey in
the front, and there might be a third Grey to the right partly
behind the window. Also seen on the footage is a strobe light
above the this window. Could this be a hoax? Not so according to
UFO Researchers Peter Guttila and Monica Ward they have studied
this film and other films by Dorothy Izatt. The investigators
plan to write about book about these sightings. If this video is
authentic we can conclude that some UFOs are alien space craft
unless you think the government is flying around in UFOs with
Grey costumes. If it�s a hoax it's an elaborate one for a 75
year old lady to make. I urge you to visit Tom King�s web site
and decide for yourself OVNI Chapterhouse. Thanks to Bob Collins
http://www.ufovideo.com/alien/alien.htm

ROSWELL PHOTOS SYMBOLS? MARKINGS?

Or Much Ado About Nothing? By Ronald S. Regehr

The Internet is a buzz with all manner of stories related to the
latest efforts of some to discern, once and for all, whether or
not the (in)famous photographs of the "Roswell Debris" taken on
that fateful July 8, 1947 afternoon by James Bond Johnson do or
do not include strange images reminiscent of those reported by
both Major Jesse Marcel and his son, Jesse Marcel, Jr. that
started it all? And what is the current status of the
investigation? That is the subject of this article. My
involvement began innocently enough when I received a call from
Debbie Stock telling me that one of our previous speakers, J.
Bond had recently discerned "symbols" on a large- format (11x14)
print of one of the photos he had taken many years ago. These
"symbols" seemed to him to vindicate Gen. Roger Ramey of any
wrong-doing. Ramey has long been accused of swapping some junk
for the actual debris transported from Roswell to Ft. Worth by
Major Marcel. We met at a local restaurant, had a good lunch,
and proceeded to discuss the events surrounding Bond's
involvement with Roswell, UFOs, and the photographs of the
alleged crashed UFO debris. A cursory examination of the
photograph sometimes referred to as "Marcel Right" (indicating
Marcel is looking to his right) did show several items of
interest: what can be described as an "I" beam, a "chrome"
strip, a pile of baseball-sized black "chunks" of black stuff,
Major Marcel's scuffed "boondockers", and most significantly
what appeared to be some raised marks on one of the pieces of
debris. Bond stated he was reluctant to become embroiled in
further controversy, and that the information on the photographs
should be allowed to stand or fall on its own merits and not
rely on memories of events 50+years past. He then asked Debbie
and I to head the analysis, with his assistance, where needed.
We then went to a local STAPLES supply store to obtain
preliminary copies from Bond's "master." When we asked for their
finest reproductions, the clerk told us those would be from
their digital laser color-copy machine. We ordered the copies
and 5X enlargements of the area containing the "marks." I then
went home and wrote a press release under my company's name
(Research/Investigations). The press release was sent to UPI,
AP, Reuters, and ? On Monday, I ordered two 16 x 20 copies of
each of the four negatives from the University of Texas. Current
plans are to produce a large-format negative from the prints to
use for further analysis, protecting my "originals" for further
use. In addition, I spoke with Don Berliner and requested that
Dr. Maccabee, Maryland MUFON State Director, perform sufficient
image enhancement as he deems necessary to validate or to
repudiate the indication of "marks" and other anomalous items in
the photographs. Will the analysis of these photographs be "the
answer" to the Roswell mystery. Or with they only prove to be
just more salt in the otherwise pungent brew known as the
Roswell Incident? What have we discovered to date? My first area
of research was to review the USAF record and explanation of
their claims-that the debris was actually the remains of a
crashed Project Mogul balloon. This proved interesting, but not
surprising. Their records indicate that there is no Mogul
balloon that could have been the source of the debris. Further,
an official drawing of a Rawin radar reflector indicated that
the Rawin did not have any material that could be mistaken for a
"chrome strip" or an "I" beam. What did Bond unpack and strew
over Gen. Ramey's floor that fateful afternoon? We'll let you
know as soon as we find some definitive answers. Until then,
relish in speculation. Thanks to Ron Regehr. Editors Note: Our
enhancement of the photographs has revealed two possible symbols
and markings such as< 22. This appears to be a carpenter's
marking used in the construction of the object.

SILVER FLOURESCENCE OR GLOW MARKS

Donna Bahor writes that she had glow marks on her arm that were
about three inches long and a magic marker wide. Under a
magnifying glass the mark looked like a zipper. She also had a
similar mark on her thigh. There was a similar cluster of marks
on the bottom of her feet. Donna states, "My feet had been cut
and connected back together some how. Some of the areas were
coming apart. My husband didn't take seeing this too well and I
was worried, because the seams were coming apart. My physician
started doing laser surgery and he told me that there is
glowing, but that this glowing can be wiped off. He also said
that there is different type of laser surgery." Thanks to Donna
Bahor, ludvik@juno.com

Eve Frances Lorgen writes: Have any results come back from the
silver powder analysis? Did this material leech into the skin
subdermally? Were any other colors of fluorescence observed post
abduction? Check the person periodically for fluorescence even
if she does not think she is been abducted. Also was this silver
material found anywhere else like on bedroom furniture? It makes
me wonder what kinds of chemical and even quantum energetic
modifications can take place when the abductee is transferred
through walls or glass. In two cases a different kind of
fluorescence (light green and greenish yellow) was observed
right before or as the aliens entered. In one case the
fluorescence was like a smoke or gas running through the ceiling
downward, as if responding to gravity and the wall surface as
smoke would. In the other case the residue was seen rising above
the floor about six inches, yet staying low to the ground before
finally dissolving and disappearing. This occurred as the aliens
just arrived. Other fluorescence is subdermal on abductees'
bodies, sometimes in designs or brand marks, or where aliens
handled them. I think there are several etiologies with this.
The silver stuff you observed is different from ours. Thanks to:
Eve Frances Lorgen LORGEN Editors Note: We are waiting for
laboratory results that will take several weeks.

Convey your reports and e-mail to George Filer at 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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 18

                   Re: Santilli Comments On 'Tent Footage'

From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 21:09:07 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 21:55:56 -0400
Subject: Re: Santilli Comments On 'Tent Footage'


>  Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 00:13:58 +0000
>  From: Philip Mantle <el51@dial.pipex.com>
>  To: updates@globalserve.net
>  Subject: Re: Tent Footage By Ray Santilli

>  The following is from Ray Santilli:

>  THE TENT FOOTAGE

>  Philip Mantel has informed me that he has secured an interview
>  from someone claiming to have information regarding the "Tent
>  Footage".

>  As a great deal has been made of the so called "Tent Footage" I
>  would like to clarify the situation and place the following on
>  record:

>  The Tent Footage was the first film material I collected from
>  the cameraman, it was in the form of 16mm film and in very poor
>  condition. I brought it back to England and asked a studio
>  facility in Buckinghamshire to retrieve whatever image they
>  could from it. A few weeks after delivery the Studio presented
>  me with the film which has become known as the ""Tent Footage" I
>  was told that this was all that could be retrieved from the
>  film.

<snip>

Since we have never gotten the promised proof from Santilli,
I am inclined to believe that this is just more Santilli tales
and storys so that he can cover his butt.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 18

                              Re: The Ten Cases

From: RobIrving@aol.com
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 21:38:04 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 22:05:14 -0400
Subject: Re: The Ten Cases

>  Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: The Ten Cases
>  From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
>  Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 00:46:02 -0400
>  To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

Mark,

>  And, Rob, you seem every so often to forget exactly what
>  the point was of listing these cases. It wasn't to prove that
>  UFOs exist. It was to list cases "suggestive" of ETH.

Actually, my memory appears to be considerably clearer than
yours. Here's Dennis's original challenge...

>> Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 18:46:27 -0500 (CDT)
>> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>> From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
>> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

>> Yes, the British blokes are being both obnoxious and vexing,
>> aren't they? At the same time, their original question remains
>> unanswered. So, Jerry and Greg, take but a minute to tell us
>> which ten cases you would consider most indicative and evidential
>> of extraterrestrial visitation. That's all; just the ten specific
>> *cases* that you personally would want to defend in the court of
>> public (or scientific) opinion. You know, the ones that support
>> your case. Just ten.

I can't find "suggestive" anywhere. "Indicative and evidential"
was the crucial phrase. How's your memory? Or did you quietly
move the goal posts while no-one was paying attention?

>  Further, the
>  fact that between 1 and 2 percent of cases have been found to be
>  hoaxes tends to lower the probability of this case being a hoax.
>  Finally, the presence of corroborating physical traces at the
>  site, which were apparently not normal for the area, adds
>  additional weight to the report.

For reasons you may or may not be aware of, this segment was of
particular interest to me. Can you explain the methodology by
which you determine 'hoaxing'? How was this 1-2% arrived at?

>  To argue that a case is invalid because a hoax is easier to
>  accept than the content of the report is ridiculous.

I have never argued that. It's ridiculous to suggest that I have.
I have no opinion on whether the Valensole case is 'genuine' or
otherwise.

>  To claim
>  that the police simply shrugged concerning this case is a claim
>  with no evidence.

Similarly I have never claimed that. I asked you to tell me if
there is any evidence that the police gave credence to the
farmer's story.

>  You suggest that this case is not necessarily any different from
>  "sea-serpent" stories. Yet, why choose this analogy, except to
>  follow a standard debunker's line of guilt by association?

That analogy was one of three.  Instead of illuminating us with
your reactionary side, why not confront the issue. What is the
difference between reported 'visions' of, say, the BVM, and
reported sightings of extraterrestrials? Is it simply because you
- that's you Mark - are more inclined to believe one than the
other?

Rob






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 18

                              Re: How It Works

From: "Serge Salvaille" <sergesa@connectmmic.net>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 21:11:19 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 22:00:01 -0400
Subject: Re: How It Works


>Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 09:38:00 -0500 (CDT)
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: How It Works

>To List:

>Ok, all you overly bright boys and girls out there, anyone want
>to tell me how this works?

>[Yeah, yeah, Doc..... how _duz_ it woik? --ebk]

>http://pw2.netcom.com/~sleight/rabbit1.html

>We can solve this minor little saucer problem later.


Dennis,

You choose from:

King - Hearts
Jack - Clubs
King - Spades
Queen - Diamonds
Jack - Hearts
Queen - Clubs

No matter which of the later bunch you choose (you may even
choose the whole bunch), NONE is PART of the following and last
series:

Queen - Hearts
King - Clubs
JAck - Diamonds
Queen -Spades
King - Diamonds

That is why your selected card(s) has 'disappeared'.

What about the saucer problem? The same, now it's there, now it
ain't.

:)

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 18

                          Re: Who is Jerome Clark?

From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 19:24:00 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 21:48:56 -0400
Subject: Re: Who is Jerome Clark?

>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Who is Jerome Clark?
>Date: Thu, 18 Jun 98 10:42:49 PDT

<snip>

>It is unfair, not to mention false, to characterize Stan Friedman
>-- or Donald Keyhoe, for that matter; Mr. Brookesmith also
>mentioned him in the same breath -- as a conspiracy theorist.
>Stan's view, like Keyhoe's (and my own, for that matter, at least
>on some days), is that a small official group of individuals with
>the proper clearances and need to know is holding significant UFO
>secrets.  Stan was an early and forceful critic of the real
>conspiracy theorists (Lear, Cooper, and their ilk), who conjure
>up a Secret Government not only hiding UFO truths but controlling
>the world.

<snip>

All well and good, Jerry, but no one, you and Friedman included,
has ever explained how this "small official group of
individuals" would operate in reality. Or, for that matter, how
it could have remained small in light of so much "significant
UFO secrets" (Roswell crash, possible bodies, and dare I say
abductions?) to withhold. Friedman at least admits that he
believes ET wreckage was recovered 50 years ago at Roswell,
bodies possibly included, and that something very much like
MJ-12 arose in its wake.

Do you believe in MJ-12, even if only rhetorically, as the small
group of individuals withholding significant UFO secrets, and if
so, isn't that pretty much the definition of a conspiracy to
cover-up and withhold?

But how could bodies and recovered ET technology be limited to
such a small official group of individuals with the proper
clearances and need to know? If you had this sort of secret in
your possession, you would bring in the people necessary to
ultimately solve the problem, no matter how many were required,
just as happened with the Manhattan Project. You wouldn't keep
the investigating (or, rather, "knowledgeable") group small just
*because* the evidence was so monumental in its importance. Just
the opposite.

In fact, if anything remotely resembling
Roswell-as-half-advertized had actually happened, there would be
no way that a small official group of individuals could clamp a
lid on anything -- because they could never be sure that another
Roswell wouldn't happen the next month or year anywhere in the
country or the world, thus invalidating the "secret." They would
had to have had at least a local contingency plan for any
possible scenario, say, the crash of another UFO in downtown
Cincinatti or Cleveleand, as opposed to the conveniently remote
desert Southwest.

The number of those that would have to be brought into the know,
even if only a partial-know, grows exponentially from the moment
Roswell as a UFO crash is admitted as a reality. You can't just
recover real ET wreckage (and possible bodies) and say, wow,
this is really something, we better let only a small official
group of individuals in on this.

President Truman: "OK, we'll let 12 people in on this, but no
more!"

General Twining: "I think we're going to need 24 if we're ever
going to find out what really happened and what this stuff does.
Another 12 if we want the bodies thoroughly analyzed."

Truman: "But that's 36. I don't want this to get out."

Twining: "But what if one crashes in downtown Cincinatti?
Shouldn't we have a contingency plan?"

Truman: "OK, you can tell one more person, but no more. That's
thirteen already!"

Twining: "You're the president! Thirteen it is, then."

Yes, this is exaggerated rhetoric. On the other hand, so is the
whole notion that the news of repeated extraterrestrial
visitations on a worldwide basis could be neatly limited solely
to a small official group of individuals, especially over a
50-year time span. (After all, who tells *them* that something
new has happened? And what does the small group do with said
news -- sit on it? Do they scramble interceptors -- to look for
what, the secerets they're already concealing?)

I'm sorry, but this absurd scenario simply won't wash. And I say
that only after having run it through my own washer several
times in expectation that it might. It just grows weaker with
every rinse cycle. Run it through the dryer and it virtually
evaporates into thin (hot) air.

There is an alternative, though, in the form of Corso's The Day
After Roswell. He explains quite neatly how a small official
group of individuals managed to not only maintain, but exploit,
"significant UFO secrets." But perhaps you believe that scenario
as well? No?

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 18

                      Re: CSICOP condemns X-Files Movie

From: "Jerome Clark" <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 98 18:36:01 PDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 21:36:26 -0400
Subject: Re: CSICOP condemns X-Files Movie


> From: http://www.csicop.org/articles/x-files-movie/

> Movie Release Could Usher in Turn-of-the-Millennium
> Era of the Paranormal

> Tapping into themes of government conspiracy and the paranormal,
> The X-Files: Fight the Future has the potential to catapult
> interest and belief in a range of paranormal phenomena above
> already historic levels.

> Many prominent scientists, skeptics and academics are concerned
> with the portrayal of science in the series. In every episode of
> The X-Files, science fails. FBI agent Dana Scully, the series'
> symbol of rational skepticism, is incapable of positing
> satisfactory scientific explanations for extraordinary plot
> developments. It is always Fox Mulder's mystical speculation
> that is on to something.

As a longtime CSICOP watcher, I have always regarded it as
among the most consistently hilarious outfits going, but this
time it's outdone itself. Even by its own batty standards,
it has reached new heights -- or  plumbed new depths -- of
side-splitting self-parody.

Rumor has it, by the way, that CSICOP is marshaling forces
to combat belief in Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, Old Man
Winter, Jack Frost, the bogey man, and Godzilla (which,
according to a recent CSICOP fund-raising letter, figures
in a current film many moviegoers believe to be a
documentary).

> "In the entertainment media, just short of sex and violence,
> conspiracy- mongering and paranormal fantasy sells" says Paul
> Kurtz, member of the coordinating committee for the Council for
> Media Integrity and Professor Emeritus of Philosophy at the
> State University of New York at Buffalo. "The X-Files taps into
> the fascination market, feeding on viewer gullibility. Science
> is portrayed as weak and critical thinking is pushed aside."

Any organization that exists for one principal reason (after,
that is, counting the take from the chronically frightened rubes, er,
members) -- which is to congratulate itself on how rational it
is -- is bound to sound this idiotic.  Br'er Kurtz (see "Starbaby")
has been living in debunkified unreality so long that he has
fallen victim to the most deadly of indulgences: believing
your own bullshit.

> Many defend the series as mere fiction.

Gosh.  What CAN they be thinking?

> In response to that
> assertion, Oxford University's Richard Dawkins in the
> March/April issue of Skeptical Inquirer magazine asks us to
> imagine for a minute that The X-Files' weekly choice between
> rational theory and paranormal theory were turned into a crime
> series. In each case one suspect is white and the other black,
> and at the conclusion of every episode, like science in The
> X-Files, the black suspect is found to be guilty. Could
> Hollywood defend that kind of myth-making as "only fiction?"

Does this analogy make any sense to anybody whose
brain has not atrophied due to prolonged exposure to
debunking rays?  It is so specious as to defy digestion by
normal mental processes, and it can only offend those
whose problems in life are far graver than any the comfortable,
pompous Prof. Dawkins, whose idea of an injustice is an
opinion he doesn't subscribe to, will ever be exposed to.
What an ass. What a fool. What, in both senses of funny,
a funny, funny man.

Thank you, CSICOP, for coming through yet again.

Your admirer,

Jerry Clark


P.S.  I hadn't planned to see the X Files movie.  Now, however,
I intend to go out of my way to take it in.  I encourage the rest
of you to do the same.












   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 18

                 Re: 'Fortean Times' article on Mexican UFO

From: RobIrving@aol.com
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 21:37:58 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 22:03:29 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Fortean Times' article on Mexican UFO

>  Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 13:26:19 +0100
>  From: Steve Woods <S.Woods@elsevier.co.uk>
>  To: updates@globalserve.net
>  Subject: 'Fortean Times' article on Mexican UFO flap/wave

Steve,

>  Greetings from Oxford, England
>  11 June 1998

>  Those of you who read this item might be interested in a letter
>  I sent to FT which they didn't print. Using this
>  enhanced-democracy medium it will now see the light of day, so
>  to speak ! Here it is ............

>  "RE: 'MEXICAN WAVE'   by R.Irving

>  Mr Irving, in his hatchet debunk job that generations of the US
>  military would be proud of (cf 'Blue Book' etc)...

If you are implying that your letter was passed over due to some
sort of breakdown in the 'democratic' process you are correct. I
was offered a choice of letters to respond to, and subsequently
ignored yours for two reasons; due to its either/or tone - either I
agree with your view or I'm a "hatchet-wielding debunker" - and
because others made your points more sensibly and politely. It's
weird how that works, eh.

>  What Mr Irving has done (a common technique) is to highlight a
>  few ambiguities/mistakes and extrapolate that the whole range of
>  phenomena are likewise.

See my response to Rupert Knapman's letter (which makes a similar
point) in FT 112.

>  FT should do the right thing and publish a 'pro' article. My
>  apologies if you have already done this (I am not a regular
>  reader). FT is normally quite unbiased - a great mag I think !!

Publishing a 'pro' article is not necessarily the right thing,
unless you scrape together a sensible argument to support it.  If
so, you should write it up and send it in. If FT aren't convinced
by it there are others that probably will be.

>  "I suppose a lot of this 'is-it-real/Occam's razor/ETH' etc
>  debate boils down to what actually constitutes 'proof'.
>  My cynical alter-ego thinks that this could be only when the
>  tabloid press of the world 'accept' 'it'. Only then will the
>  un/under-educated masses and mainstream job/reputation-clinging
>  so-called scientists admit belief.

So you think that flooding the market with junk like (and
including) the Genesis III videos will somehow have a positive
effect on concensus opinion, which will in turn filter through to
refresh the parts of society that other, more sensible,
approaches cannot reach? I don't think so. I mean, even Richard
Hoagland doesn't seriously believe that there's a WWII bomber on
the moon (as far as I know).

Rob






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 19

                        FBI Posts The Real 'X Files'

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 01:39:25 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 01:39:25 -0400
Subject: FBI Posts The Real 'X Files'




From: http://www.news.com/News/Item/0%2C4%2C23343%2C00.html?dd.ne.tx.fs

FBI Posts The Real "X Files"
By Courtney Macavinta <courtm@cnet.com>
Staff Writer, CNET NEWS.COM
June 18, 1998, 1:55 p.m. PT

As fans rush to see the anticipated X-Files movie tomorrow,
another unusual phenomenon is unraveling.

The truth, it seems, is out there. And it can be found where
special agents Fox Mulder and Dana Scully might never look--on
the FBI's own Web site.

The agency has been quietly posting documents on the Net about
reported unidentified flying objects and alien abductions. More
than 1,600 pages dating back to the 1940s are now public on the
site, although most contain blacked-out passages and missing
names.

The Freedom of Information Act files may not reveal all there is
to know about life on other planets, but they give true
believers--and even skeptics--a peek at the government's
investigations into decades of mysterious sightings.

Included in the batch are random reports, such as a September
19, 1947 memo to FBI director J. Edgar Hoover regarding "flying
discs" near Seattle, Washington. "[A man] sighted a silver
object streaking across the sky," the memo states. "It was
observed by these three people while they drove from 20 to 30
miles. All three people saw it, they decided they must be
'seeing things.'"

There also is only one document about the infamous craft that
reportedly crashed in Roswell, New Mexico. A July 1947 memo to
the FBI office in Cincinnati about the craft states, "The object
resembles a high-altitude weather balloon with a radar
reflector=85Disc and balloon being transported to Wright Field by
special place examination=85National interest in case=85National
Broadcasting Company, Associated Press, and others attempting to
break story of location of disc today."

On the site there are 12 pages from "Project Blue Book," the Air
Force program to investigate UFOs, which was shut down in 1969
on grounds that "there has been no evidence indicating that
sightings categorized as 'unidentified' are extraterrestrial."

It's no coincidence that the documents were released the same
year Walter Andrus started investigating UFOs. He is glad to see
the FBI opening its files, but he doesn't expect to find much.
All the files posted on the site were at one point made public
to individuals or organizations such as the Mutual UFO Network,
which he founded in 1968.

"They don't make things convenient even if they say they do,"
Andrus said today.

"This is one way to pass people off if they ask for a
document--they'll just refer people to the Web site to dig
through all those files," he added. "It is good that the FBI has
gone this far. It's advantageous because the government has been
very uncooperative in releasing information."

Although some Net users complain that files can take several
minutes--and up to 30 minutes in some cases--to download, the
FBI says it's no conspiracy.

"We hadn't really had complaints about it," FBI spokesman Paul
Presson said today. "It's a pretty enormous volume of
information we put up there. This is a technical issue--it's not
a speed bump we were trying to put up to keep people from
viewing [the material]."

Presson said there are a total of 16,000 Freedom of Information
Act files online, including details about the 1962 Alcatraz
Prison escape, Amelia Earhart's disappearance, and the agency's
goods on Marilyn Monroe, Pablo Picasso, Elvis Presley, and
Bonnie and Clyde.

The agency plans to put up to 1.3 million documents on the Net.

Some X-Files fans are glad to see part of the real-life mystery
being unveiled.

"The institutional bureaucracy of the FBI has always been to
keep anything that embarrassed the county or FBI close to the
vest," said Dawson Rambo, who runs an extensive X-Files fan
site.

Despite what the files say, Rambo said he doesn't believe it is
scientifically possible for distant space travelers to reach
Earth. So he turns to the X-Files to explore the possibility.

"Some of the stuff related to UFOs probably hasn't been released
and we'll never know because none of us has the security
clearance to peer deep enough into the files," he added. "Do I
believe we've been visited by extraterrestrial life? No. But the
show is fascinating. I'll say that."

Still, Andrus of the Mutual UFO Network suggested that the FBI's
Web site itself could be part of a bigger government conspiracy.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 19

              A Reason For CSICOP Condemning The X-Files Movie?

From: William Hand <ufotruth@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 22:27:44 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 02:11:41 -0400
Subject: A Reason For CSICOP Condemning The X-Files Movie?

Everyone,

First of all lets all think about CSICOP for a moment. What is
CSICOP? Well, it is an organization of people that for some
reason try and bash, trash, irrationally debunk, and discredit
anything that could possibly be even slightly "different" from
what the mainstream and government accepts as "reality".

They have tried to trash, bash, and discredit every single thing
to do with UFOs, ETs, coverups, creatures like big foot,
telepathy, phychokinesis, and other phenomenon that are very
interesting and could show that there is more to this world, the
mind, and the universe than what is commonly accepted by the
government and "mainstream" science.

Now, why would they be doing this? They claim that it is because
there is no chance of any of the above phenomenon being real or
actually existing! They claim that it is dangerous for people to
believe in anything that is even possibly "not real". Well, this
seems sort of odd. Because if these people really don't think
that any of these interesting phenomenons are real then why in
the heck have some of them spent years of their life trying to
irrationally and with any justification debunk them?

I don't think they would. I know if I did not believe in some
thing like lets say "vampires" I would not be trying my hardest
to debunk and disprove that they exist. Most definantly I would
express my opinions if someone asked me but I would not spend
years of my life trying to disprove what I do not believe in.

I would simply spend my time doing something productive in
something that I did believe in and not just waste years of my
life trying to disprove something that I already did not believe
existed......

In my opinion there must be other reasons that CSICOP does tries
to constantly trash and bash everything to do with anything that
has not been proven for 500 years by 1000 mainstream scientists
and that is totally politically correct.

In my opinion it is very possible that the governmnet could be
involved with CSICOP. They could use this organization to try
and do damage to claims about anything they did not want the
public knowing the truth about. Also, the military or private
organizations might be interested in CSICOP as well! What if,
and this is only an example, the technology recovered from the
Roswell Crash was what helped the transistor come into
existence? Then several companies might not want the truth to
come about about Roswell because then their secrets might be
revealed......

I think all of us here know full well, because of all the
evidence that has been gathered, that UFOs/ETs DO exist and
there is a government/military coverup of them. UFOs/ETs seem to
be one of the main things that CSICOP tries to irrationally
debunk. Maybe there is a reason for this irrational
debunking....

Maybe some people who work for CSICOP are really government
agents.

Maybe some of the people who work for CSICOP have just been
encouraged all along in secret by various organizations that
really wanted them to continue their debunkery of topics they
did not want exposed to the world....

Well, who really knows.... But the motives of CSICOP, and those
who are members, really seem suspicious in my opinion....

Maybe, just maybe, the reason they have condemned the X Files
move is because there is something in that movie that they do
not want the public to think could even possibly be real.

Maybe it is just the fact that the X Files Movie might make more
people believe that there is a UFO/ET coverup (which we all here
know already exists).

Or maybe there is something, more specific in the movie that
they do not want anyone to think is true!

Then again it is possible that everyone in CSICOP are just very
closed minded skeptics... But I doubt that....

Best Regards,
William

PS: Because CSICOP has CONDEMNED the X FILES movie I know I
REALLY want to see it now!







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 19

                           Floating Frogs and UFOs

From: Rick Goldsmith <rgoldsm@synapse.net>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 23:05:02 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 01:53:07 -0400
Subject: Floating Frogs and UFOs

List Members;

As I was browsing pictures of the floating frog in the
superconductor, I couldn't help but wonder if this technology
now in it's infancy, could be used as a sort of inertia control
for an airborne vehicle. Think about it; The frog seems to
gravitate to the center of the tube if I am percieving it
correctly. You make a larger, wider ring of this type and run it
horizontally about the inside of your disc shape craft. When you
go into one of your high G right angle turns, you boost the
power to the ring accordingly and perhaps try to be sitting
close to the centre of the craft.

I don't doubt that the power required to do this would be great.
Coolant such as liquid helium would also be a consideration
until high temp. superconductors are possible.

If it worked you could move the ring out to incorporate the hull
of the craft and it might hold it together too. Can we turn the
sucker inside out and use it for a shield? Jeez, I'm halfway to
a flying saucer already!

I could be completely overlooking some blatantly obvious (or
not) physical law here but it seems to me that if your
acceleration is pushing you back in your seat and the ring is
pushing you toward the center with the same amount of force,
they should cancel each other out. Please feel free to enlighten
me if I'm out to lunch on this. I am assuming that the floating
frog effect works on all the stuff in the frog and is not just a
surface effect of some kind.

Looking forward to your comments. Now, about those black
triangles... :)

Cheers,
Rick. Goldsmith







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 19

                              Re: The Ten Cases

From: RobIrving@aol.com
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 22:05:57 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 01:49:11 -0400
Subject: Re: The Ten Cases

>Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 22:36:10 +0100
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: John Rimmer <johnr@magonia.demon.co.uk>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: The Ten Cases

John,

>Apart from a certain smug satisfaction that
>one of the great unwashed has got one over on smug would-be
>scientific-type investigators who can't belive that anybody who
>does not have theirlevel of academic achievement could *ever*
>fool their massive intellect, (what Peter Rogerson has dubbed the
>'Herr Professor' Syndrome).

I keep a terrific book behind my armchair cushion. 'Can You
Speak Venusian? A Guide to Independent Thinkers' by Patrick
Moore... in which, on page 75, it offers the following
amusement:


~~ Seventy years later a German scientist, Professor Johan
Beringer of Wurzburg, published a book in which he claimed that
fossils were of divine origin. Actually, the fossils concerned
had been faked and planted by the students in his University
class - a fact which he finally realised when he unearthed a
fossil which had his own name inscribed on it. (According to
legend, he then did his best to buy up all the surviving copies
of his book - without much success.) ~


Unlike the Herr Professor I suspect you're talking about, and
plenty more besides, at least Herr Professor Beringer had the
intellectual honesty to admit his error.

Rob








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 19

                          Re: Who Is Jerome Clark?

From: RobIrving@aol.com
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 22:05:40 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 01:46:24 -0400
Subject: Re: Who Is Jerome Clark?

>  To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>  From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>  Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Who Is Jerome Clark?
>  Date: Thu, 18 Jun 98 10:31:57 PDT

Jerome,

>  All kidding aside: it was a terrific article.

FT90 ~~ Well worth the effort (and the cover price).

>  And no, I am not threatening you with death either.

Um, is that a death threat?

Rob






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 19

                               Re: Fast Walker

From: Greg St. Pierre <StrmNut@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 23:43:05 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 02:14:51 -0400
Subject: Re: Fast Walker


Dear ladies and gentlemen,

I must confess a certain level of surprise at the lack of cases
discussed here. "Fast Walker" is a good example. A military
satellite detects a hot object approaching from space, watches
it pass within ten miles, and then sees it depart back into
space. Some questions present themselves here: First, if the
object came from space, why was it hot? Second, how was it's
trajectory changed? It was not interacting with earth's
atmosphere, on that I think we can all agree, given the distance
from the satellite. I suppose Phil Klass would say that the
satellite saw Venus, while being bumped by a piece of meteoric
dust giving the planet the illusion of motion. If Carl Sagan
were here, he might say the satellite was merely seeing the
modern equivalent to fairies or leprechauns, due to some deeply
rooted desire for there to be "more to life than a boring
orbit". The nice thing about this case is that the satellite
made a wonderfully inpartial and accurate observer. It simply
called it as it saw it, and we are left to interpret the event.

It seems to me that the discussion about Occam's Razor is moot.
It has become subjective to each party, and therefore rendered
dull. What is the point of discussing it if you all have
different interpretations of it? As long as data is collected
scientifically, you don't need the Razor. The truth is the
truth, and if UFO investigators and skeptics alike are HONEST in
their work, the truth will be arrived at sooner or later,
hypotheses or no. I submit that absolutely NOTHING can be done
about guys like Phil Klass. Nothing will ever change their
minds, not even a sighting of their own. The energy wasted on
them could, in my opinion, be better spent on research, and
public relations campaigns. Most popular poles in the US
indicate that at least half of the citizens believe UFOs exist.
That isn't bad. If it's more scientists you want, then take the
offensive. Don't let guys like Phil have the last word all the
time. Inform the public, make commercials telling folks about
sightings in their area, with phone numbers or other ways to get
in touch with researchers. Give the skeptics a real run for
their money! As long as broad statements are being made about
the UFO phenomenon, skeptics are happy. This saves them from the
unpleasant task of analyzing each case for its individual
merits. It's time to publicly force the skeptics to deal with
the best quality sightings, not "distant lights". Don't let them
get away with that anymore, guys!

Greg St. Pierre
Strmnut@aol.com

PS....please visit the website of Dr. Bruce Cornet, PhD for
scientific analysis of his many sightings and pictures of UFOs
in Pine Bush NY.
http://www.abcfield.force9.co.uk/bcornet/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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 19

                          Re: Who is Jerome Clark?

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 98 22:39:13 PDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 08:49:42 -0400
Subject: Re: Who is Jerome Clark?


> Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 19:24:00 -0500 (CDT)
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Who is Jerome Clark?

> >To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
> >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Who is Jerome Clark?
> >Date: Thu, 18 Jun 98 10:42:49 PDT

> <snip>

> >It is unfair, not to mention false, to characterize Stan Friedman
> >-- or Donald Keyhoe, for that matter; Mr. Brookesmith also
> >mentioned him in the same breath -- as a conspiracy theorist.
> >Stan's view, like Keyhoe's (and my own, for that matter, at least
> >on some days), is that a small official group of individuals with
> >the proper clearances and need to know is holding significant UFO
> >secrets.  Stan was an early and forceful critic of the real
> >conspiracy theorists (Lear, Cooper, and their ilk), who conjure
> >up a Secret Government not only hiding UFO truths but controlling
> >the world.

> <snip>

> All well and good, Jerry, but no one, you and Friedman included,
> has ever explained how this "small official group of
> individuals" would operate in reality. Or, for that matter, how
> it could have remained small in light of so much "significant
> UFO secrets" (Roswell crash, possible bodies, and dare I say
> abductions?) to withhold. Friedman at least admits that he
> believes ET wreckage was recovered 50 years ago at Roswell,
> bodies possibly included, and that something very much like
> MJ-12 arose in its wake.

Dennis,

Really, this is a whole different subject from the issue I was
addressing: namely, the difference between someone who believes
governments keep secrets and those who believe in a Secret
Government in control of the world.  Moreover, I wasn't
discussing crashed saucers.  I am certain I never even mentioned
the phrase.

> Do you believe in MJ-12, even if only rhetorically, as the small
> group of individuals withholding significant UFO secrets, and if
> so, isn't that pretty much the definition of a conspiracy to
> cover-up and withhold?

Naw. Just secret-keeping, not the same as conspiracy-maintaining.
The former is much easier to do, for one thing.

> But how could bodies and recovered ET technology be limited to
> such a small official group of individuals with the proper
> clearances and need to know? If you had this sort of secret in
> your possession, you would bring in the people necessary to
> ultimately solve the problem, no matter how many were required,
> just as happened with the Manhattan Project. You wouldn't keep
> the investigating (or, rather, "knowledgeable") group small just
> *because* the evidence was so monumental in its importance. Just
> the opposite.

Actually, to repeat: if you go back to read my post, I did not
say "crashed- saucer wreckage." I said "UFO secrets" or somesuch
general term.

> In fact, if anything remotely resembling
> Roswell-as-half-advertized had actually happened, there would be
> no way that a small official group of individuals could clamp a
> lid on anything -- because they could never be sure that another
> Roswell wouldn't happen the next month or year anywhere in the
> country or the world, thus invalidating the "secret." They would
> had to have had at least a local contingency plan for any
> possible scenario, say, the crash of another UFO in downtown
> Cincinatti or Cleveleand, as opposed to the conveniently remote
> desert Southwest.

I really think you ought to take this up with Stan, Kevin, Bruce,
and others, who have given the specifically crashed-saucer
question, which is the focus of all your remarks, far more
concentrated thought than I have.  I was thinking more generally,
of less contentious stuff such as jet intercepts, gun-camera
films, and the rest, where we have a lot of testimony and no
paper trail.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 19

                Re: Who Is Phil Klass? [was: ...Jerome Clark]

From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 18:15:37 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 08:53:00 -0400
Subject: Re: Who Is Phil Klass? [was: ...Jerome Clark]

> Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 09:07:36 -0400
> From: The Duke of Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter
> Brookesmith]
> Subject: Who Is Jerome Clark?
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

> With the compliments of the Duke of Mendoza:

> >From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
> >To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net>
> >Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Who Is Jerome Clark?
> >Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 09:05:16 -0400

> >Maybe I can offer a modest clarification.

> The tale that Greg relates of, er, quaint old-fashioned
> behavior on Phil Klass's part may "clarify" some aspect of
> his character. But it wasn't Klass's character or motives
> that I was addressing, intriguing as they may be. It was the
> nature of Jerome's reactions to Klass and his writing.
> Greg's post sheds no light on those at all.

Let me be more explicit, then. Peter, I don't know if you've ever
been on the receiving end of one of Phil's rages.

He's nasty. Brutal. If you've seen that enough, some of his jokes
don't seem so funny. He'll talk about your body turning up in the
Chesapeake, and put it in the frame of a joke. But if it's you
he's talking about, and you've been the target of his rages, it
reads much more like a fantasized threat.

And no, I'm not asking you to think I believe he'd actually kill
Jerry. You're not that dumb, and neither am I. But it's
completely reasonable for Jerry to think that the climate on
Phil's boat wouldn't be exactly pleasant -- and for him to wonder
how often Phil might dream about his body floating there.

If that doesn't make sense to you, then (a) you've never seen one
of Phil's rages, and (b) you weren't there when he told the dirty
joke to my former girlfriend. "Quaint and old-fashioned" are not
the words that would have occurred to you.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 19

                         Revolutionize Space Travel?

From: Doc Barry <authority@webtv.net>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 02:51:50 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 09:54:06 -0400
Subject: Revolutionize Space Travel?

A rocket without engines or fuel on board has lifted off,
propelled by a land-based laser beam only.  Story at:

http://www.angelfire.com/az/docbarry






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 19

                    Britannica: Ockham's Razor Reference

From: Sherry Cardinal <cardinal@bconnex.net>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 07:53:34 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 10:32:37 -0400
Subject: Britannica: Ockham's Razor Reference

Hi all...

Thought I would post this for those who are wondering.. "WOT is
this Occam's Razor???"  I wondered for the longest time.  ;-)

Take care,
Sherry

----------

William (of) Ockham/Occam and Ockham's Razor

William of Ockham, also called William Ockham (Ockham also
spelled " Occam") (1285-1347/49), was a medieval monk.. (a
scholastic)

Ockham's razor, also spelled "Occam's razor", but also called
"law of economy" or "law of parsimony", is a principle stated by
William of Ockham, that entities are not to be multiplied beyond
necessity (non sunt multiplicanda entia praeter necessitatem).
This principle was, in fact, invoked before Ockham by Durand de
Saint-Pourcain, a French Dominican theologian and philosopher of
dubious orthodoxy, who used it to explain that abstraction is
the apprehension of some real entity. Galileo did something
similar by defending the simplest hypothesis of the heavens, and
other later scientists stated similar simplifying laws and
principles. It is called "Ockham's razor" because he mentioned
the principle so frequently and employed it so sharply. For
instance, he used it


1. To dispense with relations which he held to be nothing
   distinct from their foundation in things;

2. With efficient causality, which he tended to view merely as
   regular succession;

3. With motion, which is merely the reappearance of a thing in
   a different place;

4. With psychological powers distinct for each mode of sense;

5. And with the presence of ideas in the mind of the Creator,
   which are merely the creatures themselves.

Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc., 1994

----------






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 19

                      Re: CSICOP condemns X-Files Movie

From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 06:41:25 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 10:10:08 -0400
Subject: Re: CSICOP condemns X-Files Movie


>Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 12:52:10 +0200
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: JJ Mercieca <mufor@maltanet.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: CSICOP condemns X-Files Movie

>What does CSICOP want us to do?  Ask them to start censoring all
>films for "unscientific magical thinking"? Repeat "UFOs are a
>figment of our imagination" a 1000 times each morning?

>I watch X-Files occasionally but it has not modified my views on
>UFOs, cover-ups, whatever.  I just enjoy it as fiction.

>Regards,

>JJ Mercieca

>http://www.mufor.org/
>Malta UFO Research


It appears that CSICOP has a serious problem distinguishing fiction
from reality, and assume that everyone else has that same problem.
Even issuing such a statement makes them look extremely silly.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 19

               Re: Secrets & Conspiracies [was: Who is Jermome

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 08:55:51 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 11:32:50 -0400
Subject: Re: Secrets & Conspiracies [was: Who is Jermome


> Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 19:24:00 -0500 (CDT)
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Who is Jerome Clark?

 >>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Who is Jerome Clark?
 >>Date: Thu, 18 Jun 98 10:42:49 PDT

<snippity do da>

> In fact, if anything remotely resembling
> Roswell-as-half-advertized had actually happened, there would be
> no way that a small official group of individuals could clamp a
 >lid on anything -- because they could never be sure that another
 >Roswell wouldn't happen the next month or year anywhere in the
 >country or the world, thus invalidating the "secret." They would
 >had to have had at least a local contingency plan for any
 >possible scenario, say, the crash of another UFO in downtown
 >Cincinatti or Cleveleand, as opposed to the conveniently remote
 >desert Southwest.

This is not how it works in intelligence. No one considers that
the information might be rendered obsolete by subsequent events.
Instead, they are only concerned with protecting the secret they
now possess. They do not concern themselves with what might
happen tomorrow.

Take, for example, the lowly intelligence officer toiling in his
office.
He is in possession of some classified information through
official sources. To his horror, Time magazine publishes that
information in a cover story. He knows the story is accurate
because he has read the classified documents. Now Joe Reporter
wants to verify the story but the intelligence officer tells Joe
he knows nothing about it. Joe rages, telling the officer he is
incompetent because the information is in Time magazine.

The problem is if the officer acknowledges it in any fashion,
then there are those who will belief that an "official" source
has confirmed the data.

The regulations are quite specific. If you are privileged to read
classified data, then you are not to acknowledge the veracity of
that data to sources not cleared to receive it, even if they are
in full possession of that data from other sources.

The point is that those who know about the Roswell crash would
not be worried about a future event. Their job would be to keep
this information classified because it was originally
classified.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 19

               Re: Secrets & Conspiracies [was: Who is Jermome

From: "Stanton T. Friedman" <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 09:29:25 -0300
Fwd Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 11:32:38 -0400
Subject: Re: Secrets & Conspiracies [was: Who is Jermome


> Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 19:24:00 -0500 (CDT)
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Who is Jerome Clark?

> >To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
> >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Who is Jerome Clark?
> >Date: Thu, 18 Jun 98 10:42:49 PDT

> <snip>

> >It is unfair, not to mention false, to characterize Stan Friedman
> >-- or Donald Keyhoe, for that matter; Mr. Brookesmith also
> >mentioned him in the same breath -- as a conspiracy theorist.
> >Stan's view, like Keyhoe's (and my own, for that matter, at least
> >on some days), is that a small official group of individuals with
> >the proper clearances and need to know is holding significant UFO
> >secrets. Stan was an early and forceful critic of the real
> >conspiracy theorists (Lear, Cooper, and their ilk), who conjure
> >up a Secret Government not only hiding UFO truths but controlling
> >the world.

> <snip>

> All well and good, Jerry, but no one, you and Friedman included,
> has ever explained how this "small official group of
> individuals" would operate in reality. Or, for that matter, how
> it could have remained small in light of so much "significant
> UFO secrets" (Roswell crash, possible bodies, and dare I say
> abductions?) to withhold. Friedman at least admits that he
> believes ET wreckage was recovered 50 years ago at Roswell,
> bodies possibly included, and that something very much like
> MJ-12 arose in its wake.

> Do you believe in MJ-12, even if only rhetorically, as the small
> group of individuals withholding significant UFO secrets, and if
> so, isn't that pretty much the definition of a conspiracy to
> cover-up and withhold?

> But how could bodies and recovered ET technology be limited to
> such a small official group of individuals with the proper
> clearances and need to know? If you had this sort of secret in
> your possession, you would bring in the people necessary to
> ultimately solve the problem, no matter how many were required,
> just as happened with the Manhattan Project. You wouldn't keep
> the investigating (or, rather, "knowledgeable") group small just
> *because* the evidence was so monumental in its importance. Just
> the opposite.

> In fact, if anything remotely resembling
> Roswell-as-half-advertized had actually happened, there would be
> no way that a small official group of individuals could clamp a
> lid on anything -- because they could never be sure that another
> Roswell wouldn't happen the next month or year anywhere in the
> country or the world, thus invalidating the "secret." They would
> had to have had at least a local contingency plan for any
> possible scenario, say, the crash of another UFO in downtown
> Cincinatti or Cleveleand, as opposed to the conveniently remote
> desert Southwest.

> The number of those that would have to be brought into the know,
> even if only a partial-know, grows exponentially from the moment
> Roswell as a UFO crash is admitted as a reality. You can't just
> recover real ET wreckage (and possible bodies) and say, wow,
> this is really something, we better let only a small official
> group of individuals in on this.

<snip>

> There is an alternative, though, in the form of Corso's The Day
> After Roswell. He explains quite neatly how a small official
> group of individuals managed to not only maintain, but exploit,
> "significant UFO secrets." But perhaps you believe that scenario
> as well? No?

> Dennis


Sorry, but Dennis has misrepresented my views about secrecy and
MJ-12 and "smalll group"'. Chapter 10 "Scope of the Majestic 12
Activity" in TOP SECRET/MAJIC discusses this.

Keeping secrets is expensive but easy, and can involve
thousands of people.

The Enigma program, breaking and decoding German and Japanese
coded messages in WW 2 involved 12,000 pople.. nothing in
public for 30 years after the war according to a recent
article.

The Corona spy satellite program, our first spy satllite, was
revealed in 1992 .. more than 30 years after it began. It
involved thousands of people and billions of dollars.

The Director of Central Intelligence has admitted the annual
black budget for work done under him is about 26$B. Billions
were spent developing and building stealth aircraft etc etc. I
don't consider Classified Development programs as
conspiracies... nor to be evil.

I demonstrate the coverup in my lectures with my infamous
heavily censored NSA and CIA UFO documents,with the OSI memo
telling its people NOT to follow their own rules when they
respond to FOIA requests from me about UFOs.

I read USAF Sectretary Quarles lies about BB SR 14 and then show
the data. Gets great laughs when I show the newly NSA "Released"
UFO documents. A couple of lines per page, but now using white
out instead of black ink.

Facts are the name of the game. Yes, of course, if people ask me
about motivations, I provide the best guesses I can. 40 years of
serious investigation and 14 years under security , and visits
to 18 Archives, and answering well over 30,000 questions at
colleges, professional groups, and in the media certainly should
have given me some insights.

Stan Friedman








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 19

               Re: A Reason For CSICOP Condemning The X-Files

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 98 08:11:29 PDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 11:35:16 -0400
Subject: Re: A Reason For CSICOP Condemning The X-Files


> From: William Hand <ufotruth@ix.netcom.com>
> Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 22:27:44 -0500 (CDT)
> To: updates@globalserve.net
> Subject: A Possible Reason Why CSICOP Has Condemned The X-Files Movie!

> They have tried to trash, bash, and discredit every single thing
> to do with UFOs, ETs, coverups, creatures like big foot,
> telepathy, phychokinesis, and other phenomenon that are very
> interesting and could show that there is more to this world, the
> mind, and the universe than what is commonly accepted by the
> government and "mainstream" science.

I think you mean "psychokinesis."

> Now, why would they be doing this? They claim that it is because
> there is no chance of any of the above phenomenon being real or
> actually existing! They claim that it is dangerous for people to
> believe in anything that is even possibly "not real". Well, this
> seems sort of odd. Because if these people really don't think
> that any of these interesting phenomenons are real then why in
> the heck have some of them spent years of their life trying to
> irrationally and with any justification debunk them?

There is something rather sad -- or amusing, if your humor runs
to the perverse (CSICOP tends to bring out my perverse side) --
about people organizing around something they don't believe in.
(I guess that's why I'm not an atheist: so I don't have to go to
meetings.)  The ideological and theological roots of the
organized debunking movement are discussed in Paul Kurtz's The
Transcendental Temptation (Kurtz is founder and
president-for-life of CSICOP) and elsewhere.  The rationale is
that  acceptance of unorthodox phenomena is a variety of
religious belief, and the hardcore CSICOP types are strongly
against religion (or at least any religion other than their own).
This does not, however, describe every CSICOP figure; Martin
Gardner, for example, is a deist  whose fundamental philosophical
position seems to be  that the idea of the paranormal trivializes
God.  (He once, for example, decried experiments testing the
power of prayer as mockery of God.)

> I don't think they would. I know if I did not believe in some
> thing like lets say "vampires" I would not be trying my hardest
> to debunk and disprove that they exist. Most definantly I would
> express my opinions if someone asked me but I would not spend
> years of my life trying to disprove what I do not believe in.

Yours is the position most sane humans hold.  All of us,
including CSICOPs, believe at least some things that aren't true.
Being wrong is a part of being human.

So long as the mistaken belief is harmless, it does not require
an emotional response, a big organization, a huge p.r. operation,
and relentless fund-raising to combat it.  Well, actually, this
last may be, in the end, what it's about.  CSICOP and affiliated
Kurtz enterprises generate an enormous amount of money.  Kurtz is
a genius at separating the frightened from their cash.  If you
were to believe CSICOP's many fund-raising letters, and
apparently many do, you'd be scared silly.  Let me emphasize
"silly."

> I would simply spend my time doing something productive in
> something that I did believe in and not just waste years of my
> life trying to disprove something that I already did not believe
> existed......

Of course.  Want to do something?  There are hungry people
out there.  This world, full of injustices and horrors, needs the
services of decent people.  One of those injustices and horrors
is not the forthcoming X-Files movie.

> In my opinion it is very possible that the governmnet could be
> involved with CSICOP. They could use this organization to try
> and do damage to claims about anything they did not want the
> public knowing the truth about. Also, the military or private
> organizations might be interested in CSICOP as well! What if,
> and this is only an example, the technology recovered from the
> Roswell Crash was what helped the transistor come into
> existence? Then several companies might not want the truth to
> come about about Roswell because then their secrets might be
> revealed......

Here you've lost me.  There is not the slightest reason to
believe CSICOP is financed by anybody but private citizens
with more money and time on their hands than they need.
The average CSICOP supporter may not know all that much
about anomalies and the paranormal, but he or she knows
they're bad.  The debunking of such matters has a long,
long history.   Debunking, of course, is not always a bad
thing; a lot of things deserve to be debunked.  The problem
with CSICOP-style debunking is that it's so ideologically
driven that it is often incompetent or dishonest debunking,
which is no more useful than inept or corrupt advocacy of
the claims at issue.

> Maybe some people who work for CSICOP are really government
> agents.

> Maybe some of the people who work for CSICOP have just been
> encouraged all along in secret by various organizations that
> really wanted them to continue their debunkery of topics they
> did not want exposed to the world....

> Well, who really knows.... But the motives of CSICOP, and those
> who are members, really seem suspicious in my opinion....

To every available indication, this is not remotely true.  When
you speculate like this -- without a whiff of evidence -- you play
into CSICOP's hands.  On one issue I do agree with CSICOP:
conspiratorial thinking is harmful both to individuals and to
society.  (Fortunately, one does not have otherwise to be in
sympathy with CSICOP to come to that conclusion.)

The history of CSICOP and the debunking movement general, as
well as the biographies of the leading figures in same, is
part of the public record, and you should familiarize yourself
with it before you wander off into paranoia-laced speculation.
When you have educated yourself in these matters, I think you
will find that the individuals may be misguided from our point
of view, but their logic and motivation are clearly apparent.
Conspiratorial interpretations are simply unnecessary.

> Then again it is possible that everyone in CSICOP are just very
> closed minded skeptics... But I doubt that....

You shouldn't.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 19

                      Re: CSICOP Condemns X-Files Movie

From: The Duke of Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 10:06:37 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 18:49:27 -0400
Subject: Re: CSICOP Condemns X-Files Movie


With the compliments of the Duke of Mendoza:

>Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 12:52:10 +0200
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: JJ Mercieca <mufor@maltanet.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: CSICOP condemns X-Files Movie

>>Magical thinking became a national pastime last summer during
>>the mythological 50th anniversary of the crash of an alien

>What does CSICOP want us to do?  Ask them to start censoring all
>films for "unscientific magical thinking"? Repeat "UFOs are a
>figment of our imagination" a 1000 times each morning?

If you did the latter, it would soon become a meaningless mantra,
and lull you into an altered state of consciousness. Ooop-aah!

What I really like about tendencies to censorship - as opposed to
trenchant criticism - is the implicit belief that the would-be
censors believe they are impervious to the evil influences
emanating from whatever limb of Satan they have discerned, but the
rest of us peons, churls, plebs, braceros, rude mechanicals & serfs
lack the moral fibre, or access to top-quality garlic, to withstand
them.

Reminds of my old friend Lord Birdwood's stepmother, who was vastly
against naughtiness of all sorts. Back in 1969 Lady B. became
incensed about the nude revue "Oh! Calcutta!" and took herself off
to the Roundhouse to see it - four times: first to gain a general
impression, second to observe the dancing, third to listen to the
song lyrics, and fourth to confirm that her unkind notions of the
show were correct. Thus satisfied, she called for its closure at
every opportunity.

My only complaint about "The X-Files" is that there isn't enough
shagging in it.

best wishes
Poontang D. Mousebiter
Sex'n'Violence






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 19

                              Re: The Ten Cases

From: Jan Aldrich <jan@cyberzone.net >
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 11:14:08 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 19:09:06 -0400
Subject: Re: The Ten Cases


>From: John Rimmer <johnr@magonia.demon.co.uk>
>Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 22:36:10 +0100
>Fwd Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 18:56:51 -0400
>Subject: Re: The Ten Cases

>>Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: The Ten Cases
>>From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>> From: RobIrving@aol.com
>>> Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 18:30:53 EDT
>>> To: updates@globalserve.net
>>> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: The Ten Cases

<snip>

>Why is the cry "he had nothing to gain from a hoax" almost
>invariably proposed as evidence that a particular incident could
>not have been a hoax. Apart from a certain smug satisfaction that
>one of the great unwashed has got one over on smug would-be
>scientific-type investigators who can't belive that anybody who
>does not have their  level of academic achievement could *ever*
>fool their massive intellect, (what Peter Rogerson has dubbed the
>'Herr Professor' Syndrome) what does *anyone* gain from a UFO
>hoax? There must only be a tiny minority of hoaxes where the
>perpetrators *have* 'gained anything' from them, and quite a few
>where they have ended worse off as a result. So let's drop this
>silly argument.

>Most hoaxes are done for the hell of it.

Agreed. In "A Preliminary Report on the 1947 UFO Sighting Wave"
(Shameless plug. Perhaps the Coalition can recover some of the
misspent dollars they invested here.) on pages 46-7, there is a
memo from Dr. James McDonald concerning an interview he had with
Retired USAF Colonel C. H. Welsh. Welsh said the USAF, in the
early period, was plagued with hoaxers who would go to great
lengths to carry their UFO hoaxes.

During and soon after the Japanese balloon bomb attack, there
were balloons with various devices put up by hoaxers. One in
California was more effective than the enemy attack. It started
a fire in a populated area.

Hoaxers send out false rescue calls all the time. During the
1947 wave there was a big rescue effort for a man supposedly
stuck in a cave. Later, without any remorse or sincere apology,
he cames forward and announced he had never been in the cave.
The effort, cost, and risk of live and limb seemed to mean
nothing to the hoaxer.

The current UFO belief threshold makes it easy for hoaxers.
Recently, we have been treated to the criteria one person uses.
If the person looks you straight in the eye and has a firm
handshake, he is believable. These are the *first* things a used
car salesman learns to do!

With some hoaxes, I would think, some of these stories are just
from people trapped in telling "war-stories." The leg pulling
escalates to almost unbelievable heights. In many cases the
claims are accepted outright without even cursory checking. Such
checking or application of a little uncommon "common sense"
would consign these stories to their proper place.

During my Army career, in certain places, I was authorized to
administer oaths or take sworn statements. I was amazed what
some people would bring me.

Recently we have been told that the penalty for perjury applies
to affidavits. Yes, there is that chance the charges of perjury
will be applied. However, false swearers are seldom pressed by
the legal system. If you would mislead Congress, under oath, why
is an affidavit to a court somehow special?

Have I been hoaxed? Yes! However, I have caught several people
in lies at the beginning.

One fellow told me, "My father was a special investigator for
Army Air Force Chief Hap Arnold on Roswell, and Arnold gave him
a special citation for his work."

"Good, send me a copy of the citation and explain how Arnold who
had had a stroke and was recalled to duty at this time for only
for ceremonial duties concerned with recruiting and celebrating
the creation of the USAF was active in this area."

At this the fellow wilted. A more glib person could have
probably brought this off. He could have said the citation was
lost. The vital evidence is always missing!

(Five-Star ranks are always considered on active duty as a
courtesy to their service.)

There are always people who come forward with all kinds of UFO
claims of having documents, vital information, or unusual
contacts. People who take these things at face value, without
investigation, are wonderful candidates for the "get-rich quick"
telephone scam artists who inhabit California, Nevada, and
southern Florida.

--
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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 19

                          CNN Interactive QuickPoll

From: Laura Hutton <boudicca9@yahoo.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 09:39:48 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 19:09:57 -0400
Subject: CNN Interactive QuickPoll

I notice that CNN Interactive's (http://cnn.com/) QuickPoll question
has to do with "real-life X-files where the government documents alien
activities".  So far, with over 13,000 hits, the poll is 56% yes,
real-life X-files exist.

Thought it was amusing.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 19

                        Re: Ockham's Razor Reference

From: Max Burns <AlienHype1@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 13:13:41 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 19:13:03 -0400
Subject: Re: Ockham's Razor Reference


>Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 07:53:34 -0700
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>From: Sherry Cardinal <cardinal@bconnex.net>
>Subject: Ockham's Razor Reference

>Ockham's razor.

>States that after all possibilities have been considered in all
>likelihood, the correct answer to a problem is probably the
>simpliest explanation

Personally I disagree with Ockham's razor the statement is too
broad....

Max Burns






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 19

                           Re: Who Is Phil Klass?

From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 11:13:11 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 18:50:59 -0400
Subject: Re: Who Is Phil Klass?

Phil Klass was featured as one of the "experts" on an A&E program
last evening, and in answer to one of the questions expressed the
evidence that would prove ET visitation to his satisfaction
(gasp!) [ . . er, sorry, personal comment].

Klass said that if a message was received from a visitor who gave
the location of an unknown object in the solar system (such as a
small undiscovered planetoid far beyond Pluto), that we could
point our telescopes to and confirm, that would prove to him that
the visitor was really from some other place and had ET knowledge
that we (at this point) do not possess.

I would suspect that Phil would likely come up with a "logical
explanation" if actually faced with this scenario.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 19

                               Re: Fast Walker

From: bruce maccabee >brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 11:23:35 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 19:03:53 -0400
Subject: Re: Fast Walker


>From: Greg St. Pierre >StrmNut@aol.com>
>Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 23:43:05 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Fast Walker


>Dear ladies and gentlemen,

>I must confess a certain level of surprise at the lack of cases
>discussed here. "Fast Walker" is a good example. A military

<snip>

>It seems to me that the discussion about Occam's Razor is moot.
>It has become subjective to each party, and therefore rendered
>dull. What is the point of discussing it if you all have
>different interpretations of it? As long as data is collected

<snip>

>The energy wasted on
>them could, in my opinion, be better spent on research, and
>public relations campaigns. Most popular poles in the US
>indicate that at least half of the citizens believe UFOs exist.
>That isn't bad. If it's more scientists you want, then take the
>offensive. Don't let guys like Phil have the last word all the
>time. Inform the public, make commercials telling folks about
>sightings in their area, with phone numbers or other ways to get
>in touch with researchers. Give the skeptics a real run for
>their money! As long as broad statements are being made about
>the UFO phenomenon, skeptics are happy. This saves them from the
>unpleasant task of analyzing each case for its individual
>merits. It's time to publicly force the skeptics to deal with
>the best quality sightings, not "distant lights". Don't let them
>get away with that anymore, guys!

>Greg St. Pierre
>Strmnut@aol.com

HEAR, HEAR!  I posted a message over a week ago in which I
pointed out that if we really wanted to advance ufology, rather
than chopping ourselves to bits with both sides of Occam's
Double Edged Sword, we would leave the ODES to others of a
strictly philospphical bent, pick one or several sightings/cases
and argue it until we arrive at a conclusion that (a) it/they
can reasonably be explained, or (b) data are missing
(insufficient information..... why missing?) and therefore a
positive conclusion cannot be obtained (without more
information) or (c) it appears that the sighting(s) simply
cannot be explained in a reasonable manner in terms of
known/understood phenomena (e.g,, ball lightning is known but
not "understood") and therefore the possibility of TRuly
Unxplainable Flying Objects (TRUFOs) cannot be rejected. (Of
course, once there is copnscensus that at least one sighting
cannot be explained, then there is good reason to speculate as
to what this might be..... a "natural", which in this context
means UNINTELLIGENT phenomenon, or a phenomenon which
gives indications of NON-HUMAN INTELLIGENCE.

(Note that this really is the big dividing line between
"acceptable" and unexceptable explanations from the point of
view of conventional science. If TRUFOs represent new but
unintelligent phenomena conventional science/scientists will
likely accept them without too much fuss. But, if at least some
TRUFOs give indications of new and intelligent phenomena, but
not related to known fauna of the world - especially not related
to mankind - then scientists will reject them until the evidence
becomes overwhelming. In ored to determine whether or not there
is sufficiently overwhelming evidence it is necessary to study
"the ten best cases" or the hundred, or thousand or.....

even 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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 19

                      Nua Blather: Prophecies Fulfilled

From: Dave Walsh <dave@nua.ie>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 16:34:45 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 19:15:40 -0400
Subject: Nua Blather: Prophecies Fulfilled

****************************************************************
NUA BLATHER  NUA BLATHER NUA BLATHER
Weekly free email of Dogma Destruction,
Forteana and High Weirdness

By Daev Walsh   Email: blather@nua.ie
Web: http://www.nua.ie/blather/
****************************************************************
June 19 1998  Published By:  Nua Limited  Vol 2. No. 6
****************************************************************

PROPHECIES FULFILLED
It was but a fortnight ago, on June 5th, that Blather casually
predicted that an Irish UFO summer flap had begun, following rumours
of UFO sightings in Co. Tipperary. That lackadaisical forecast proved
to be surprisingly accurate, with reports of *more* allegations of
HibernUFOs popping up on page 1 of the Roscommon Herald on Wednesday
June 10th, 1998.

The small sidebar mentions the newly formed *Western UFO Society*
[first I heard of 'em too], who have already been deluged with
reports of "flying saucers" in the sky above the Ballymote Road out
of Boyle, Co. Roscommon, [Yes, *there* again - search Blather for a
mention of Boyle (http://www.nua.ie/blather/at-blatherquery.html)]
which could be seen for many miles around on the night of the 6th and
morning of June 7th. The Herald claims to have come across several
reports of 'three bright blue lights moving back and forwards slowly
in the heavens'. No witnesses were named. More as we hear about it.
(http://www.nua.ie/blather/archives2/issue2no4.html)
(http://www.irish-times.com/irish-times/paper/1998/0615/opt4.html )

Thanks to the kind opitulation of Julie at the *Tipperary Star*,
Blather has procured a copy of an article with a headline of *U.F.O.
-- couple claim sighting at Killenaule* from the Saturday 16th of May
1998 issue, penned by one John Guiton.

The piece tells of how an unnamed but 'highly respected' husband and
wife claim to have witnessed 'an enormous object, resembling "a
battleship" moving slowly over a vast area of bogland at Killeens,
near Killenaule', not far away from Derrynaflan where a famous
Christian treasure hoard was unearthed in 1980.
(http://homepage.tinet.ie/~abbeydorney/book/hangbowl.html)


It was 10:15 on a Saturday night -- February 28th last, the weather
dry and clear. The couple were in the Cooldine area while travelling
from Killenaule to Littleton. The wife was in the passenger seat, and
she asked her husband to stop the car to look at an airborne object
said to be 250ft wide (76.2m) and 100ft (30.48m) high. It hovered at
around 400ft (121.9m) before silently drifting off towards
Derrynaflan, a distance of about a mile, where it suddenly
disappeared.

According to the article, before noticing the UFO, she had sighted an
aircraft -- however, there is no explanation as to the significance
of this -- could the UFO have been a plane? Could the the plane have
been misidentified, or rather become unidentified?

The husband said that 'the object seemed to hover for a few seconds,
as if its occupants had seen their car'. This, as many Blather
readers will realise, is a common experience associated with BOL
(ball of light) phenomena, an impression of interaction which appears
even in cases of so-called 'ball-lightning' when seen *in* peoples
homes. There are stories of witnesses, such as geologists Wright and
Kenney playing desert *cat-and-mouse* with phenomena such as the
Marfa Lights (http://www.marfalights.com/) on March 19th 1973:

"They both had the distinct impression that it knew exactly where
they were and that it was just daring them to chase it".

(Kenney, Pat and Wright, Elwood, *The Enigma of Marfa - An
Unexplained Phenomenon*, unpublished account, written in third person
and quoted at length in Paul Devereux's 'Earth Lights Revelation'
Blandford 1989 ISBN 0-7137-2209-6. The book contains many other
accounts of apparent intelligence displayed by anomalous lights)


The *Tipperary Star* quoted the man's description of the UFO; "The
object had lights, three on one side and two on the other, but they
were not flashing lights. There was no beam from them at all. It had
panels, as distinct from windows, with vertical lines in the panels.
Although there no intensity of light from the object it was clear to
see in the distance. I kept my eyes firmly fixed on it all the way,
but while I blinked it suddenly disappeared."


The couple informed the *Tipperary Star* that while they were *aware*
of UFOs, they hadn't paid too much attention to the matter. After
their experience however, they were "convinced that it must have been
a U.F.O.". One wonders what they would have identified it as rather
than identifying it as an Unidentified Flying object.

They kept quiet about the matter for some time, in fear of ridicule,
but decided to come forward in May, after reading of various alleged
sightings in the UK. The are said to be anxious to get to the bottom
of this matter. . .


. . .and so am I. If any readers in the midlands have comments to
pass on this matter, feel free to contact Blather -- allegations of
alcohol abuse will be instantly disregarded. . .



ATTEMPTED ABDUCTION IN CO. WICKLOW
Or so read the headline in *UPDATE* (email news service from RTE
Online http://www.rte.ie) on June 11th.

Unfortunately for the pro alien-abductionists who walk among us,
this near-miss abduction was not quite so fantastic as to include
greys, saucers and anal probes, but instead involved a sinister Bogus
Social Worker (BSW).

A woman described as being her late 20s, 5'7" (1.7m) in height,
blonde, wearing a brown skirt suit, a white polo neck and carrying a
briefcase called to a house near Blessington, Co. Wicklow, Ireland,
claiming that she was a Public Health Nurse who had to take a baby
boy away for vaccinations. She knew the boy's name and date of birth,
but when the mother requested identification, the BSW upped sticks
and left. The Eastern Health Board has issued warnings following he
incident, advising people to be vigilant.

This kind of carry-on is not unknown -- and perhaps not linked to
child abuse. The BSWs are generally well-spoken, well
dressed and well informed, especially of many personal details
about their potential victims. Females BSWs seem to be the most
common, but couples and the odd male are not unknown. According to
Bob Rickard in Fortean Times 77:36, British police feel that the
cases are mixture of legitimate callers, e.g. Mormons or even *real*
council workers, self appointed child abuse vigilantes, private
detectives or relatives involved in child-custody cases or marital
disputes, burglars reconnoitring prospective victims, while a select
few are thought to be connected to alleged *networks* of paedophiles,
who somehow get 'off' on the thrill of the chase. As Rickard says,
'this is pure conjecture'.

As Rickard points out in FT66:48, 'like the enigmatic Men-in-Black
(MIB) of UFO fame, the BSWs are sometimes quite ignorant about those
they have come to see; yet, at other times, they seem to know
intimate details.'

As women are *generally* speaking (with, of course, exceptions) not
involved in paedophilia, the BSWs apparently hidden agenda lends
itself to a creation of hysteria, not unlike the speculation
prevalent in MIB lore. One agenda doesn't seem to have been pondered
upon however -- could some of these cases be matters of
attempted kidnapping by distraught women, who have perhaps lost a
child or cannot have one? This cause has been linked to
infant-snatches from incubators in maternity hospitals. . .



Fortean Times has kept an eye on waves of BSW appearances, with
articles in the following issues:


FT57:43-5       The Case of the Phantom Social Workers - Mike Dash
FT61:36         Social Panics - Bob Rickard
FT66:48-9       The Spectral Inspectorate - Bob Rickard
FT77:36-8       Fear on the Doorstep - Bob Rickard
FT87:18         It's All Right Missus, We're From the Social - Joe
                        McNally
FT98:14-15      Return of the Bogus Social Workers


The last one, FT98, includes several Irish cases from 1996, one in
Limerick where a four year old was examined by a BSW in late
November, December 11th, when a man and woman tried to snatch a 17
month old girl from her mother in Berrings, Co. Cork, while two days
later --just a few miles away, two unspecified BSWs were sent packing
by a baby minder in Blarney when they didn't produce identification.
(Irish Times Dec 17th 1996
http://www.irish-times.com/irish%2Dtimes/paper/1996/1217/hom13.html)

(Thanks to Mike Dash, Paul Sieveking, Bill Jacobs and Andy Cobley for
helping me track down the FT articles)


FAILED MEMORY SYNDROME
While conjuring up last week's treatise on the Mothman, this
harum-scarum Blatherbunion managed to magically omit mentioning the
forthcoming Mothman movie. Fortunately, occasional Blatherer Loren
Coleman (http://www.agate.net/~cryptozoo/cryptohome.html) was quick
to inform Blather's ranting rantipole of his glaring omission.


According to *Done Deal*, Lakeshore Entertainment are making the
movie of *The Mothman Prophecies* which 'centers on the life of a
reporter who, when his wife dies, decides to leave his paper and set
out on a new adventure--that of investigating a small Southern town
where strange events have been occurring and this ex-reporter comes
to
the conclusion that there has been an alien visitation'.
(http://www.primenet.com/~wwwill/ArchivesFebMar98.htm)
(http://www.nua.ie/blather/archives2/issue2no5.html)


Dave Walsh
June 19th 1998

Feedback and comments to <blather@nua.ie>

Have your say: http://www.nua.ie/blather/blabber

*******************************************************************

CALL FOR PAPERS CALL FOR PAPERS CALL FOR PAPERS CALL FOR PAPERS

Internet World Ireland Conference
Venue: Dublin   Date: Tuesday, October 20th 1998
Conference Title: The Network Economy
Conference Organisers: Internet World Ireland, Nua

The Internet creates a Network Economy, a network connecting people
and business, not machines. This conference will explore the business
rules for operating with a network environment.

The conference organisers are honoured to have Esther Dyson as
keynote speaker. Naming her Number 12 in Upside's Elite 100, Upside
recently wrote that Dyson's "stature is based entirely on her
ability to influence others with her ideas rather than directly
control companies or huge amounts of capital."

The topics that the Network Economy Conference will to cover include:
principles for doing business within a network, online communities,
relationship marketing, online brand building success stories, case
studies that illustrate best business practice within a network
environment.

Send a 200 word synopsis of proposed talk before July 15th to:
speak@nua.ie


********************************************************************


NUA INTERNET SURVEYS
A weekly newsletter, Internet Surveys is a free digest of the most
interesting surveys containing data relating to the Internet.
It is available by sending an email to
<surveys-request@lists.best.com>
with the word "subscribe" in the body of the message.

NUA WHAT'S NEW
A monthly newsletter, What's New is a free monthly newsletter
highlighting the new additions, happenings and changes at Nua.
It is available by sending an email to
<whatsnew-requestlists.best.com>
with the word "subscribe" in the body of the message.

NUA NEW THINKING
New Thinking is a free, weekly, 500-word email column, whose
objective is to contribute to a practical philosophy for The
Digital Age. It is available by sending an email to
<newthinking-request@lists.best.com> with the word "subscribe" in
the body of the message.

*******************************************************************

SPONSORSHIP:
While Blather will always remain free to the subscriber, Nua is
always willing to talk to interested parties with regard to
sponsorship.
Contact Daev Walsh: <daev@nua.ie>

*******************************************************************

For the Blather archives, please go to:
http://www.nua.ie/blather/archives/index.html


*******************************************************************
NUA MISSION STATEMENT
*******************************************************************

To excel in the establishment and development of online relationships and
brands.

For further information on how Nua can help your organisation get the best
out of the Internet, contact our marketing director, Mary Gorman
<mary@nua.ie> or our representative in New York, Niall Swan <nswan@nua.ie>

Mary Gorman:   mailto:mary@nua.ie
Niall Swan:    mailto:nswan@nua.ie


*******************************************************************

NUA LIMITED
Nua, a vibrant, innovative, Irish company whose focus is in helping
progressive organisations adapt to the new environment created by the
Internet. We have the management/marketing, design and technical
skills to truly understand your unique situation, and to translate
that understanding into a successful Internet presence for you.

Nua has received an array of awards since its genesis in 1996. Among
those are the coveted "Best Overall World Wide Web Business
Achievement" the top prize for website development in Europe.
http://www.nua.ie/about/review.html
SUBSCRIBING TO BLATHER
Send an email to:
<blather-request@lists.best.com>
with the word
subscribe
in the body of the message. An automatic acknowledgement
should be returned to you by e-mail within a few minutes.

UNSUBSCRIBING
Send an email to
<blather-request@lists.best.com>
with the word
unsubscribe
in the body of the message.

TECHNICAL PROBLEMS
If you are having any technical problems,
please email the Nua Webmaster at: <web@nua.ie>.

*******************************************************************

____________________________________________________________________
NUA : Internet Consultancy & Developer         http://www.nua.ie/
Dave Walsh <daev@nua.ie> Tel: +353-1-676-8996  Fax: +353-1-661-3932
Read Blather: http://www.nua.ie/blather - weekly weirdness by email







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 19

                           Re: Who Is Phil Klass?

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 14:43:01 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 19:24:46 -0400
Subject: Re: Who Is Phil Klass?

>From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
>To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Who Is Jerome Clark?
>Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 18:15:37 -0400

>> Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 09:07:36 -0400
>> From: The Duke of Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter
>> Brookesmith]
>> Subject: Who Is Jerome Clark?
>> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>> With the compliments of the Duke of Mendoza:

>> >From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
>> >To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net>
>> >Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Who Is Jerome Clark?
>> >Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 09:05:16 -0400

>> >Maybe I can offer a modest clarification.

>> The tale that Greg relates of, er, quaint old-fashioned
>> behavior on Phil Klass's part may "clarify" some aspect of
>> his character. But it wasn't Klass's character or motives
>> that I was addressing, intriguing as they may be. It was the
>> nature of Jerome's reactions to Klass and his writing.
>> Greg's post sheds no light on those at all.

>Let me be more explicit, then. Peter, I don't know if you've ever
>been on the receiving end of one of Phil's rages.

>He's nasty. Brutal. If you've seen that enough, some of his jokes
>don't seem so funny. He'll talk about your body turning up in the
>Chesapeake, and put it in the frame of a joke. But if it's you
>he's talking about, and you've been the target of his rages, it
>reads much more like a fantasized threat.

Hello Peter, Greg, Jerry, All,

Just jumping in for a minute! While we were doing the NOVA
segment (1994) Budd and I found out that Klass had spent some
time with Denise DiIanni (the segment producer) and that the
reason why she didn't want to put Klass on camera was, "His
behavior is too unpredictable" and that she was afraid that he'd
"lose it" and "go into one of his tirades in front of the
camera."

I don't know, what does all that say to you? Denise DiIanni
(allegedly) spent considerable time with Klass in close quarters
while weekending/putzing around on his boat. I would imagine
that not having known him prior to that occasion that she had
formulated her opinions of him during the privacy/intimacy of
the boatride.

BTW, if you guys want to throw one of Klass's lieutenants Joe
Nickel into the mix I can tell you from first hand experience
that that is one nasty sourpussed cowpoke! Maybe having piss and
vinegar running through your veins is a prerequisite for
becoming a CSICOPer!

Klass had _absolutely no business_ making threats of _anykind_
(veiled, humorous, or otherwise) to _anyone_ at _anytime!
Period. It's just not done. Klass also thinks nothing of using
someones 'manhood' as fodder for his jokes either. (source
witheld) Maybe it's just some 'macho New York guy thing' but
people have gotten injured (for real) joking that way here in
the Big Apple. I'm sure you'll agree that making threatening or
defamatory jokes at someone elses expense is risky business at
best. Especially
if the butt of your jokes forgot to take his Prozac that morning! <G>

Solamente mis dos centavos! Carry on gentlemen.


======================================================
                         AIC INTERACTIVE CONFERENCE
                                  jvif@spacelab.net
======================================================
 INTRUDERS FOUNDATION /ABDUCTION INFORMATION CENTER
                              http://www.if-aic.com
======================================================
             AIC -MEMBERS ONLY- /ACCESS CODES REQUIRED
======================================================








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 19

                         Re: Secrets & Conspiracies

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 13:29:24 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 19:19:44 -0400
Subject: Re: Secrets & Conspiracies

>Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 09:29:25 -0300
>From: Stanton T. Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Who is Jerome Clark?

<snip>

>The Corona spy satellite program, our first spy satllite, was
>revealed in 1992 .. more than 30 years after it began. It
>involved thousands of people and billions of dollars.

>The Director of Central Intelligence has admitted the annual
>black budget for work done under him is about 26$B. Billions
>were spent developing and building stealth aircraft etc etc. I
>don't consider Classified Development programs as
>conspiracies... nor to be evil.

But the Corona wasn't kept "secret" from the Soviets. They would
have been working on their own version of same.

It's also worth pointing out that secrets are revealed for all
sorts of reasons, too. The Manhattan Project was betrayed for
political reasons. There were only 15 copies of the so-called
Pentagon Papers in existence. One of them found its way to the NY
Times.

And the difference between flying saucers and your average black
budget project should be obvious. Someone directs and controls
the black budget projects -- no one has control over the UFO
phenomenon.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 19

               Re: A Reason For CSICOP Condemning The X-Files

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 14:31:24 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 19:37:11 -0400
Subject: Re: A Reason For CSICOP Condemning The X-Files

Dear List:

Here's something else for PK, CSICOP & Co. to get all apoplectic
about.

I see by my mailbox that The UFO Book: Encyclopedia of the
Extraterrestrial by Jerome Clark (Visible Ink Press) has just won
the 1998 Benjamin Franklin Award in the Science/Environment
category. The Award, sponsored by Publishers Marketing
Association, celebrates "excellence in editorial [content] and
design in book publishing."

Congratulations, Jerry!

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 19

                              Re: The Ten Cases

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 15:14:35 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 19:26:18 -0400
Subject: Re: The Ten Cases

>Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 22:36:10 +0100
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: John Rimmer <johnr@magonia.demon.co.uk>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: The Ten Cases

>Why is the cry "he had nothing to gain from a hoax" almost
>invariably proposed as evidence that a particular incident could
>not have been a hoax. Apart from a certain smug satisfaction that
>one of the great unwashed has got one over on smug would-be
>scientific-type investigators who can't belive that anybody who
>does not have their  level of academic achievement could *ever*
>fool their massive intellect, (what Peter Rogerson has dubbed the
>'Herr Professor' Syndrome) what does *anyone* gain from a UFO
>hoax? There must only be a tiny minority of hoaxes where the
>perpetrators *have* 'gained anything' from them, and quite a few
>where they have ended worse off as a result. So let's drop this
>silly argument.

>Most hoaxes are done for the hell of it.

Well, there's a scientific pronouncement. Actually, no, most
hoaxes are done for some form of psychological gain, which was
the gain to which I referred. This is true even when the hoax
leads to financial gain. I have never seen a study as to the
proportion of hoax acts, even in the UFO field, which led to
financial gain as opposed to those which were done to attain
psychological satisfaction. But I am certainly willing to accept
that no sign of a motive to attain psychological or financial
gain through one's UFO report is ONE of the hallmarks of the good
witness and the good report.

And let's not forget that even the AF couldn't ascribe more that
2% of their cases to hoaxes, a finding which I believe can be
reproduced by most UFO organizations as well.

------
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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 20

               Jerome Clark Wins 1998 Benjamin Franklin Award

From: dledger@ns.sympatico.ca (Donald  Ledger)
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 23:03:25 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 00:57:43 -0400
Subject: Jerome Clark Wins 1998 Benjamin Franklin Award


> Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 14:31:24 -0500 (CDT)
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: A Reason For CSICOP Condemning The X-Files
>              Movie?

> Dear List:

> Here's something else for PK, CSICOP & Co. to get all apoplectic
> about.

> I see by my mailbox that The UFO Book: Encyclopedia of the
> Extraterrestrial by Jerome Clark (Visible Ink Press) has just won
> the 1998 Benjamin Franklin Award in the Science/Environment
> category. The Award, sponsored by Publishers Marketing
> Association, celebrates "excellence in editorial [content] and
> design in book publishing."

> Congratulations, Jerry!

> Dennis

I'd like to echo that as well Jerry. Great stuff!! You do us all
proud.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 20

                Elaine Douglas on John Ford [was: Ford Fund?]

From: Elaine M Douglass <elaine26@juno.com>
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 00:28:48 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 01:14:44 -0400
Subject: Elaine Douglas on John Ford [was: Ford Fund?]


>Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 02:10:52 -0500
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Ford Fund?

>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: Ford Fund?
>>From: Elaine M Douglass elaine26@juno.com
>>Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 02:40:40 EDT

>>>From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>Date: Sun, 14 Jun 98 14:56:18 +500
>>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Ford Fund?

>>>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Ford Fund?
>>>>From: Elaine M Douglass <elaine26@juno.com>
>>>>Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 21:18:08 EDT

>>>>>From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>>>Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 10:09:37 -0400
>>>>>Fwd Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 10:09:37 -0400
>>>>>Subject: Ford Fund?

>>>>>In view of the interest in the John Ford case on UFO UpDates I'm
>>>>>re-posting the following. I don't know if the E-Mail addresses
>>>>>still work - I've Cc:'ed the interested parties.

>>>>>ebk

>>>><snip>

>>>>Saturday June 13, 1998

>>>>Dear UFO UpDates-Toronto:

>>>>You must have received this message in a time capsule. It is out
>>>>of date. As you can see, the date on Don Jernigan's message is
>>>>1996.

>>>I'm annoyed that that you seem to imply a shelf life for justice and
>>>fair play.

>>>Your light tone suggests that you have changed _your_ mind regarding
>>>John's guilt or innocence...why! I think you owe me an explanation.
>>>I think you owe us _all_ an explanation!

>>>>John Ford is no longer in jail. He is in a mental hospital in
>>>>New York state. Mr. Jernigan is no longer trying to raise money
>>>>for John's legal expenses, nor am I, nor any other members of
>>>>the now-defunct John Ford Defense Committee.

>>>>Best regards,

>>>>Elaine Douglass

>>>Ms. Douglass, you wrote a very impassioned paper that got _me_
>>>all stirred up. Subsequently, your tune has changed . . . you
>>>now _buy_ the radium in the toothpaste foolishness?

>>>With respect, madam, _you_ started this fire. Your casual
>>>efforts to put it out _now_ only increases my suspicion, anger,
>>>and sense of outrage.

>>>With friends like you, it would seem, John Ford needs NO
>>>enemies.

>>>Lehmberg@snowhill.com

>>>RESTORE JOHN FORD!

>>Dear Alfred et al.:

>>Your fuses are too short.

>>My message contained simply facts, no opinions.

>>You read into things, not a good policy.

>>I expended countless hours on the John Ford dilemma, you just
>>tuned in. Took a lot of guff for my trouble, seems that hasn't
>>ended.

>>I do not know what to do to gain freedom for John Ford.

>>Elaine Douglass


>Hello Elaine, hi All,

>You have had access to much more information on the case than we
>have. It's not important to air anymore of Johns' laundry in a
>public forum either. Don't feel as if you have to answer for
>him.

>The fact that he has been commited to a mental hospital
>(although questionable to some of us due to the 'nature' of
>Johns' interests) is not beyond the reach of reason. Some of us
>just wanted to make sure that this guy wasn't being "railroaded"
>because of his interest/belief in UFOs.

>Don't misread that concern for a peer as us giving you more
>guff. It's not. (Als' "passion" aside! <G>) Thank you for
>responding and updating us on the case. I published his (John
>Fords') address, so if anyone needs more information or wishes
>to follow up on the case they can write to -him- and ask him
>directly.

>Peace,

>John Velez, Webmaster IF-AIC


Dear John:

I never found myself so far out on a limb as when I tried to
help John Ford.

His lawyer deserted me, and Dennis Stacy was eager to print
incriminating information on John and did, and John himself did
not or could not defend himself.

The last move I made on John's behalf was to try to convince him
he had received inadequate legal defense and to get a new
lawyer. John and his brother refused to entertain that idea.
John wrote me from Mid-Hudson that he is doing just fine there.

I do not know what happened to John Ford.

I do not know if the govt tried to drive him over the edge and
succeeded.

I do not know if local authorities tried to get him. Or if there
was anything hidden behind it and it was all just as the
prosecutor said, i.e., that John was under surveillance because
one of his "buddies" tried to illegally sell a gun and they
recorded John saying stupid things just to brag and the police
took it seriously.

I don't know if John's inability to defend himself was a result
of being drugged in jail.

All I know is John Ford is not a threat to anyone and he should
not be in jail.

The whole episode was one of the most discouraging things I have





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 20

                               Re: Fast Walker

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 15:54:01 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 00:49:12 -0400
Subject: Re: Fast Walker

> From: Greg St. Pierre <StrmNut@aol.com>
> Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 23:43:05 EDT
> To: updates@globalserve.net
> Subject: Fast Walker

> PS....please visit the website of Dr. Bruce Cornet, PhD for
> scientific analysis of his many sightings and pictures of UFOs
> in Pine Bush NY.

Greg -

I'm afraid that Dr. Cornet's material is hardly convincing. It is
quite clear that those images which present a recognizable
lighting pattern are simply aircraft. Reflections and light
trails during camera oscillation explain the rest.

I have no wish to ignite a firestorm on this - Dr. Cornet and I
have already exchanged more that our share of e-mail on this
subject, and both he and his associates have expressed their
displeasure at my unwillingness to accept this "evidence". I have
since mostly resolved to avoid dealing with it, since it is
hardly productive. But it does not do us well to refer to this
material in the same breath as "the best quality sightings".

Rob, who thinks I am credulous, should pay attention to this, and
to my similar comments in a much earlier thread concerning
"Rods".

------
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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 20

               Re: A Reason For CSICOP Condemning The X-Files

From: Ron Decker <Ron_Decker@wavebbs.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 15:49:33 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 00:51:39 -0400
Subject: Re: A Reason For CSICOP Condemning The X-Files

> From: William Hand <ufotruth@ix.netcom.com>
> Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 22:27:44 -0500 (CDT)
> To: updates@globalserve.net
> Subject: A Possible Reason Why CSICOP Has Condemned The X-Files Movie!

> First of all lets all think about CSICOP for a moment. What is
> CSICOP? Well, it is an organization of people that for some
> reason try and bash, trash, irrationally debunk, and discredit
> anything that could possibly be even slightly "different" from
> what the mainstream and government accepts as "reality".

> They have tried to trash, bash, and discredit every single thing
> to do with UFOs, ETs, coverups, creatures like big foot,
> telepathy, phychokinesis, and other phenomenon that are very
> interesting and could show that there is more to this world, the
> mind, and the universe than what is commonly accepted by the
> government and "mainstream" science.

> Now, why would they be doing this? They claim that it is because
> there is no chance of any of the above phenomenon being real or
> actually existing! They claim that it is dangerous for people to
> believe in anything that is even possibly "not real". Well, this

William,

I think this last paragraph exposes the crux of the matter:
CSICOP doesn't want to allow any 'unauthorized' thinking.  In so
far as I'm concerned their last offering (condemnation of the
X-Files movie) provided a few moments of comedic relief on an
otherwise dreary day but their underlying message, to my way of
thinking, is dangerous.  If you are not thinking 'approved'
thoughts then you are dangerous.  And dangerous people are, after
all, dangerous and deserve to be squashed.  All for the common
good, of course.

> that any of these interesting phenomenons are real then why in
> the heck have some of them spent years of their life trying to
> irrationally and with any justification debunk them?

Because you and I (who perhaps DO think these things are real or
MAY be deserving of investigation) are dopes, jerks, clods,
bozos, etc. who need the gentle, guiding hand of those who really
do know everything.  We are NOT toeing the Party Line.

> I would simply spend my time doing something productive in
> something that I did believe in and not just waste years of my
> life trying to disprove something that I already did not believe
> existed......

But then you are probably NOT a True Believer which these CSICOP
guys most certainly are.  Fanatics are just that way for some
reason.  Go figure.

[....]

> Maybe some people who work for CSICOP are really government
> agents.

Personally, I kind of doubt it because these guys (CSICOP) really
don't need any government interference to ensure that they do a
proper job of maligning and so forth.  They are doing an
admirable job all on their own.

> Well, who really knows.... But the motives of CSICOP, and those
> who are members, really seem suspicious in my opinion....

Myself included.  I would go further and say that their motives
are the same as those who in the past might have muttered, "But,
Comrade, that sort of thinking is unacceptable,"  just before
they adjusted the voltage.

I have greatly enjoyed everyone's comments here regarding this
latest CSICOP "Warning."  Really, only the other True Believers
are going to take any heed.  The balance (i.e., reasonable folk)
are/are not going to see the movie according to their tastes.  I
fear that the only brainwashing going on is at CSICOP
headquarters.  And it appears that they haven't changed the water
in some time.

BTW, Jerome Clark mentioned the Fate article, "Starbaby."  If I
may ask, does anyone here know where I can get a copy?  My
collection of Fate Magazines disappeared (mysteriously, I might
add) and I would dearly love to reread that article; as I
remember it was excellent.  Please contact me directly if you
have any information.

Best regards,
Ron Decker







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 20

                              Re: The Ten Cases

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 15:46:17 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 00:46:18 -0400
Subject: Re: The Ten Cases

> From: RobIrving@aol.com
> Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 21:38:04 EDT
> To: updates@globalserve.net
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: The Ten Cases

> I can't find "suggestive" anywhere. "Indicative and evidential"
> was the crucial phrase. How's your memory? Or did you quietly
> move the goal posts while no-one was paying attention?

And here is my original post:


"I thought it would be interesting to find the cases which I
thought supported ETH."

"Obviously, each case tries to illustrate a different aspect of
the predictions I mentioned in my earlier e-mail. Any other
method of supporting ETH with cases frequently falls prey to
actually trying to prove OEH."


I should also have qualified by saying: These ten are a very
limited set of exemplars, and there are many other cases at least
equally well qualified, and probably some better, but here in the
middle of the night, off the top of my head, here are 10 cases I
think are suggestive, and whose veracity I would support.

These cases are, BTW indicative and evidential. What the heck
else does suggestive mean, anyway?

> >  Further, the
> >  fact that between 1 and 2 percent of cases have been found to be
> >  hoaxes tends to lower the probability of this case being a hoax.
> >  Finally, the presence of corroborating physical traces at the
> >  site, which were apparently not normal for the area, adds
> >  additional weight to the report.

> For reasons you may or may not be aware of, this segment was of
> particular interest to me. Can you explain the methodology by
> which you determine 'hoaxing'? How was this 1-2% arrived at?

The AF classified approximately that percentage as hoaxes. I
believe a similar result was obtained by the Condon Committee. To
the best of my knowledge there was either an admission or a
substantial detection of fraud by the investigating officer.

> >  To argue that a case is invalid because a hoax is easier to
> >  accept than the content of the report is ridiculous.

> I have never argued that. It's ridiculous to suggest that I have.
> I have no opinion on whether the Valensole case is 'genuine' or
> otherwise.

My apology. I'm not sure where this came from, but I certainly
was in error.

> >  To claim
> >  that the police simply shrugged concerning this case is a claim
> >  with no evidence.

> Similarly I have never claimed that. I asked you to tell me if
> there is any evidence that the police gave credence to the
> farmer's story.

Your comment:


"What was the police's interest in coming to a conclusion either
way?"

"If their response was any more than a Gallic shrug, please alert
me.

According to Vallee, who has followed this case for over a
decade, the witness, "a former Resistance fighter, a
conscientious and successful farmer, ... is regarded as
absolutely trustworthy by the police authorities who investigated
this case under the direction of Captain Valnet of Digne."


> >  You suggest that this case is not necessarily any different from
> >  "sea-serpent" stories. Yet, why choose this analogy, except to
> >  follow a standard debunker's line of guilt by association?

> That analogy was one of three.  Instead of illuminating us with
> your reactionary side, why not confront the issue. What is the
> difference between reported 'visions' of, say, the BVM, and
> reported sightings of extraterrestrials? Is it simply because you
> - that's you Mark - are more inclined to believe one than the
> other?

It's the one who promotes the explanation on whom the burden
falls. Thus, please explain to me the similarity between visions
of the BVM, sea-serpent reports, anything else, and the ten cases
I cited.

I did, by the way, list the differences in my response to the sea
serpent analogy. It applies equally well to the BVM or ghost
stories. Perhaps you'd care to respond to that rather than
putting the onus on me to disprove that your analogies apply?

------
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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 20

                   New Jet or UFO? [was: Re: Fast Walker]

From: Sue Strickland <strick@H2Net.net>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 20:07:47 -0600
Fwd Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 01:05:37 -0400
Subject: New Jet or UFO? [was: Re: Fast Walker]


>From: Greg St. Pierre <StrmNut@aol.com>
>Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 23:43:05 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Fast Walker

>Greg St. Pierre wrote (snipped):

>As long as broad statements are being made >about the UFO phenomenon,
skeptics are >happy. This saves them from the unpleasant >task of analyzing
each case for its individual
>merits. It's time to publicly force the skeptics >to deal with the best
quality sightings, not >"distant lights". Don't let them get away with >that
anymore, guys!

To all knowledgeable skeptics:

Thanks Greg for pointing out the obvious.

I think you brought up a good point. I'm one of those that may
have been abducted from age 5 to 15, but I'd much prefer
rational, logical explanations. Unfortunately, no one is
providing either.

The logic the FBI, CIA and other agencies use can play
match-point to the dumb logic the ET's use. Funny thing, both
groups expect us to swallow what they tell us, hook, line and
sinker!

Let's get wise.

Those whose minds are closed to case studies limit many
possibilities.

I've got an interesting sighting to discuss. If there's someone
able to respond to this, I would greatly appreciate it.

In April, 1992 I was driving home from an evening class on a
switch-back canyon road. An air-piloted vehicle paced (yes,
paced) me (at 45-50 mph), along the canyon road cut-out to the
left. The only light was from my headlights, which I purposely
used to see inside the vehicle by dropping back, allowing the
vehicle to get slightly ahead of me.

The vehicle was just a bit longer and about 2 or 3 times the
width of my truck. I concentrated on looking for wings. I could
not see them, but on a couple of occasions, I noticed a red
blinking light where a running light might be on an airplane. It
had a see-through canopy stretching from the very front
(windshield?) to 3/4 of the way back. I saw the shadow of 1
pilot and 1 other individual (who walked...yes walked...(gravity
inside?) ...balancing himself between whatever was at his lower
hip line).

When I rolled the driver's window down, there was no sound, no
hum, no whirling (I really thought it was a test jet from the
AFB!) I really expected to see it a ball of flame around the
last switch back. It was gone! I looked up, saw nothing but
stars.

When I got home and told my husband, he said, "Sue, are you sure
you saw a plane?" I said, well if it wasn't a plane, it was a
UFO, because it made no noise." He said, "But what jet do we
have that could manuver through that canyon-cut going 45-50 mph,
then shoot ahead just before the cut ended?"

That was what stumped me.

About 2 months later, I saw a small jet being transported down
the highway (from Los Alamos direction to Albuquerque AFB?)
Please, someone tell me I saw a little stealth jet manned by
humans.

See how easy it is to respond to something like that? It's so
simple. Only thing is, it doesn't fit the reality of the case
study, does it?

My husband does not believe in UFO's, but he doesn't know how to
explain this either, and he knows I don't lie.

Anybody know anything about this?

Please don't ignore this posting, as you ufologists seem to have
so many answers.

Thanks,

Sue







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 20

                         Re: Secrets & Conspiracies

From: Stanton T. Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 07:01:52 -0300
Fwd Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 09:28:59 -0400
Subject: Re: Secrets & Conspiracies


> Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 13:29:24 -0500 (CDT)
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Secrets & Conspiracies [was: Who is
>   Jermome  Clarke?]

> >Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 09:29:25 -0300
> >From: Stanton T. Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Who is Jerome Clark?

> <snip>

> >The Corona spy satellite program, our first spy satllite, was
> >revealed in 1992 .. more than 30 years after it began. It
> >involved thousands of people and billions of dollars.

> >The Director of Central Intelligence has admitted the annual
> >black budget for work done under him is about 26$B. Billions
> >were spent developing and building stealth aircraft etc etc. I
> >don't consider Classified Development programs as
> >conspiracies... nor to be evil.

> But the Corona wasn't kept "secret" from the Soviets. They would
> have been working on their own version of same.

> It's also worth pointing out that secrets are revealed for all
> sorts of reasons, too. The Manhattan Project was betrayed for
> political reasons. There were only 15 copies of the so-called
> Pentagon Papers in existence. One of them found its way to the NY
> Times.

> And the difference between flying saucers and your average black
> budget project should be obvious. Someone directs and controls
> the black budget projects -- no one has control over the UFO
> phenomenon.

> Dennis


Sorry, Dennis, but the best monitors of the sky (radar and
satellites) and of "foreign" radio transmissions all produce
data that is all born classified, with sophisticated means of
communicating it. NSA  and NRO aren't just sitting there
twiddling dials.

Certainly spies have learned a lot. Certainly the Soviets knew
we were overflying the USSR. How could they admit it PUBLICLY?

The Manahattan Project was publicized the data Hiroshima was
destroyed.. not by the Soviet Spies who already knew about it.
The Soviets knew we were active in Cambodia during the Vietnam
war. They knew we were sending airplanes, sometimes crossing
their borders to monitor their defenses. They shot down some of
those planes. The American people didn't know about Cambodia,
U-2s, border pentrations.Large scale expensive secrets can be
kept from the public.. Every old timer I talked to years ago who
had been involved in government programs agreed with this idea.

The modern equivalent of MJ-12 knows what is going on. The
secret of the best UFO data, recoveries, etc is still being
kept.

I am not saying no secrets have been leaked, though often false
big secret stories were leaked to Av. Week and Space Technology
to confuse the Soviets. I have no idea why you claim that nobody
is running the UFO show. The CIA still hasn't released any
foirmerly TOP SECRET or SCI UFO materials. I hate to say it, but
absence of evidence (which would certainly be highly classified)
is NOT evidence for absence, especially when there are such
amounts of money to play with.

Stan





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 20

                               Re: Fast Walker

From: Stanton T. Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 07:14:54 -0300
Fwd Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 09:24:11 -0400
Subject: Re: Fast Walker



> Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 11:23:35 -0400
> From: bruce maccabee >brumac@compuserve.com>
> Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Fast Walker
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto >updates@globalserve.net>

> >From: Greg St. Pierre >StrmNut@aol.com>
> >Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 23:43:05 EDT
> >To: updates@globalserve.net
> >Subject: Fast Walker


> >I must confess a certain level of surprise at the lack of cases
> >discussed here. "Fast Walker" is a good example. A military

> <snip>

> >It seems to me that the discussion about Occam's Razor is moot.
> >It has become subjective to each party, and therefore rendered
> >dull. What is the point of discussing it if you all have
> >different interpretations of it? As long as data is collected

> <snip>

> >The energy wasted on
> >them could, in my opinion, be better spent on research, and
> >public relations campaigns. Most popular poles in the US
> >indicate that at least half of the citizens believe UFOs exist.
> >That isn't bad. If it's more scientists you want, then take the
> >offensive. Don't let guys like Phil have the last word all the
> >time. Inform the public, make commercials telling folks about
> >sightings in their area, with phone numbers or other ways to get
> >in touch with researchers. Give the skeptics a real run for
> >their money! As long as broad statements are being made about
> >the UFO phenomenon, skeptics are happy. This saves them from the
> >unpleasant task of analyzing each case for its individual
> >merits. It's time to publicly force the skeptics to deal with
> >the best quality sightings, not "distant lights". Don't let them
> >get away with that anymore, guys!

> >Greg St. Pierre
> >Strmnut@aol.com

> HEAR, HEAR!  I posted a message over a week ago in which I
> pointed out that if we really wanted to advance ufology, rather
> than chopping ourselves to bits with both sides of Occam's
> Double Edged Sword, we would leave the ODES to others of a
> strictly philospphical bent, pick one or several sightings/cases
> and argue it until we arrive at a conclusion that (a) it/they
> can reasonably be explained, or (b) data are missing
> (insufficient information..... why missing?) and therefore a
> positive conclusion cannot be obtained (without more
> information) or (c) it appears that the sighting(s) simply
> cannot be explained in a reasonable manner in terms of
> known/understood phenomena (e.g,, ball lightning is known but
> not "understood") and therefore the possibility of TRuly
> Unxplainable Flying Objects (TRUFOs) cannot be rejected. (Of
> course, once there is copnscensus that at least one sighting
> cannot be explained, then there is good reason to speculate as
> to what this might be..... a "natural", which in this context
> means UNINTELLIGENT phenomenon, or a phenomenon which
> gives indications of NON-HUMAN INTELLIGENCE.

> (Note that this really is the big dividing line between
> "acceptable" and unexceptable explanations from the point of
> view of conventional science. If TRUFOs represent new but
> unintelligent phenomena conventional science/scientists will
> likely accept them without too much fuss. But, if at least some
> TRUFOs give indications of new and intelligent phenomena, but
> not related to known fauna of the world - especially not related
> to mankind - then scientists will reject them until the evidence
> becomes overwhelming. In ored to determine whether or not there
> is sufficiently overwhelming evidence it is necessary to study
> "the ten best cases" or the hundred, or thousand or.....

> even one...................)


Bruce is right on here. It is the good cases that matter, the
gold, not the dross. That is why I  start my lectures with 5
large scale scientific studies which, in my experience all over
the world, 98% of the people have not read. Dr. Jim McDonald's
outstanding investigations are there. His 71 page Congressional
testimony (shameless plug $10. postpaid from UFORI, POB 958,
Houlton, ME 04730- 0958) is an excellent collection. There is no
point in reinventing the wheel. BB Special Report 14 includes,
as Bruce has noted, some terrific cases. It isn't even mentioned
in a dozen anti-UFO books, and in a number of pro UFO ones.

Stan Friedman









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 20

                        Re: Ockham's Razor Reference

From: RobIrving@aol.com
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 06:44:20 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 10:00:12 -0400
Subject: Re: Ockham's Razor Reference

>  From: Max Burns <AlienHype1@aol.com>
>  Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 13:13:41 EDT
>  To: updates@globalserve.net
>  Subject: Re: Ockham's Razor Reference

Max,

>  Personally I disagree with Ockham's razor the statement is too
>  broad....

Yes, often without the necessary entities there would be no story.

By the way, any luck with your answers to David's questions?

Rob






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 20

                        'She Blinded Me with Science'

From: Sean Jones <Tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 11:09:03 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 10:36:06 -0400
Subject: 'She Blinded Me with Science'


>Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 10:16:01 +0100
>From: Donald  Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: CSICOP condemns X-Files Movie

Hi Don

>Hello Jared and List,

>Well now, after having just read the little piece "Skeptics
>verses Science" subtitled "Scientisits concerned by Portrayal of
>Science" I am just devastated that "science" is, for a change,
>behind the eightball taking the licks it so richly deserves for
>sticking its cowardly head up its own ass all these years on the
>UFO phenomenon.  It never ceases to amaze me at the two-headed
>approach that "science" takes on the pursuit of truth, which is
>[1] their truth and [2] the great unwasheds' truth. The latter of
>course is all of the other ignoramouses that are not those
>shining knights of the first truth, the "scientisits". Without
>them, we would not have been on the verge of the "big"
>breakthrough, for instance' on a cure for cancer for the last
>50-60 years-probably one of the biggest moneymakers of all time
>for scientists at several hundreds of billions of dollars. Or
>heart disease or,arthritis, or altzeimers, or the common cold or
>obesity or one of the newer moneymakers, AIDs.

>How about the science of astronomy for instance. There was the
>truth of 50 years ago and now the present day truth, mostly made
>clearer it seems not by science but by engineering, meaning
>electronics and optics.[We'll ignore the monumental screwup with
>Hubbles vision problem for the moment, which one astronomer told
>me could have been discovered using an amateur's instrument used
>for measuring the curve of a lens costing about $100.00]

>The monumental blunders made in the world of science over the
>last 50 years would fill several of Jerome Clark's encylopedias,
>with each blunder being satisfactorly being covered or explained
>away by their own invisible college of spin doctors. Can't have
>the great unwashed thinking that the scientists aren't the Gods
>that they and the geat unwashed think them to be.
>
>The doctors have been taking a well deserved hosing for the last
>few years so now maybe its time for the "scientists" to take
>their licks.

>From one who has been profoundly dissappointed over the last few
>years by the performance of the so called "people who seek the
>truth".

>Don Ledger

Its funny you should talk about monumental blunders of science. I am
currently debateing with a scientist about FTL and he says flat out it
aint possible etc etc.

Could you possibly put together a quick list for me where by
scientists have made these monumental blunders so I can with
conviction say that scientists are not always right, look here. I
would appreciate it very much, I have already quoted that
scientists said that the Earth was flat and that excededing eight
miles per hour in a motor car would asphyxiate the driver to
which he snorted (figureatively of course) so I really would
appreciate a list to poke under his arrogant nose.

---
      People can have it any colour, as long as its black!
                       Sean Jones
 Homepage--http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Zone/1745/index.htm
         Research 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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 20

                             Re: New Jet or UFO?

From: Donald Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 09:16:44 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 10:46:20 -0400
Subject: Re: New Jet or UFO?


> From: Sue Strickland <strick@H2Net.net>
> To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
> Subject: Re: Fast Walker New Jet or UFO?
> Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 20:07:47 -0600

<snip>

> I've got an interesting sighting to discuss. If there's someone
> able to respond to this, I would greatly appreciate it.

> In April, 1992 I was driving home from an evening class on a
> switch-back canyon road. An air-piloted vehicle paced (yes,
> paced) me (at 45-50 mph), along the canyon road cut-out to the
> left. The only light was from my headlights, which I purposely
> used to see inside the vehicle by dropping back, allowing the
> vehicle to get slightly ahead of me.

> The vehicle was just a bit longer and about 2 or 3 times the
> width of my truck. I concentrated on looking for wings. I could
> not see them, but on a couple of occasions, I noticed a red
> blinking light where a running light might be on an airplane. It
> had a see-through canopy stretching from the very front
> (windshield?) to 3/4 of the way back. I saw the shadow of 1
> pilot and 1 other individual (who walked...yes walked...(gravity
> inside?) ...balancing himself between whatever was at his lower
> hip line).

> When I rolled the driver's window down, there was no sound, no
> hum, no whirling (I really thought it was a test jet from the
> AFB!) I really expected to see it a ball of flame around the
> last switch back. It was gone! I looked up, saw nothing but
> stars.

> When I got home and told my husband, he said, "Sue, are you sure
> you saw a plane?" I said, well if it wasn't a plane, it was a
> UFO, because it made no noise." He said, "But what jet do we
> have that could manuver through that canyon-cut going 45-50 mph,
> then shoot ahead just before the cut ended?"

<snip>

> That was what stumped me.

> Anybody know anything about this?

> Please don't ignore this posting, as you ufologists seem to have
> so many answers.

> Sue

Hi Sue,

There are many out there that have a profound faith in the
ability of the aeronautical community to engineer aircraft that
could explain away UFO sightings. I am not one of them. When it
comes to being able to come close to the capabilities of most
UFOs the defence establishment is still having trouble getting
out of its own way using jets to motivate their vehicles. There
is nothing else.

Now you have to ask yourself, and this should be your prime
question, "...why is some government agency [if it does have
some type of new "drive"] out flying this aircraft around near a
public highway in such a manner as to make it visible to the
general public?" Beyond all else, this question has to be
answered first "if" you support the theory that what you saw was
a man made vehicle.

The "new" stealth as opposed to the "old"? The "old" F-117A is
really a turkey of an aircraft that is very noisy, slow and
clumsy. It has the ability to avoid radar detection the same as
a fiberglass yacht does. It just goes faster than the yacht. Ask
me if I have any respect for that machine. It works well against
any opposing force that has ancient radar technology, or none.

As for "new" stealths. By whom, the same people who gave you the
F-117A? Remember how the public got wind of the latter. It
crashed out in the desert somewhere during test flights in the
late 70s. It has continued to do that ever since. It doesn't
need an enemy to bring it down, it does that quite nicely on its
own.

You mentioned that the UFO was flying down the highway at about
50 mph. A Cessna-172 will stall out of the sky at 52-54 mph with
full flaps deployed, and is noisey enough, for instance, that
you would hear it quite well. Just to eliminate the ultralite
possibility, there is none built that would be roomy enough to
allow a passenger to get up and walk around. Prop driven
aircraft usually generate most of their noise from the prop, not
the muffled engine, though that is loud enough.

You usually get new technology following out of the old, but in
this case you have to ask yourself, in the last 20 years has the
aerospace industry had the time to extrapolate from a poorly
designed, unweildly, noisey, and slow aircraft to the one you
saw in the canyon? And if so, again why was it flying down a
public highway during testing?

Hope this helps eliminate some possibilities for you Sue.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 20

                         Re: Secrets & Conspiracies

From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 07:40:02 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 10:01:06 -0400
Subject: Re: Secrets & Conspiracies

>Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 13:29:24 -0500 (CDT)
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Secrets & Conspiracies [was: Who is
>  Jermome  Clarke?]

>And the difference between flying saucers and your average black
>budget project should be obvious. Someone directs and controls
>the black budget projects -- no one has control over the UFO
>phenomenon.

>Dennis

Dennis,

It would seem to me that this is another conclusion reached without
sufficient evidence.  How do you KNOW that no one has control over
the UFO phenomenon.

I am not arguing that someone does, just that we don't really
know since we don't know yet what the UFO phenomenon is.

We have far too much jumping to conclusions here.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 20

                        Re: Ockham's Razor Reference

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 05:15:19 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 11:03:56 -0400
Subject: Re: Ockham's Razor Reference

>From: Max Burns <AlienHype1@aol.com>
>Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 13:13:41 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: Ockham's Razor Reference


>>From: Sherry Cardinal <cardinal@bconnex.net>

>>Ockham's razor. States that after all possibilities have been

>>considered, in all likelihood, the correct answer to a problem

>>is probably the simpliest explanation

>Personally I disagree with Ockham's razor the statement is too
>broad....

>Max Burns

Dear Max and Sherry:

You and I probably agree that the 'razor' is a nice
rule-of-thumb, but highly fallible, as I had indicated some
weeks ago.

But, according to my New Illustrated Columbia Encyclopedia
($3.99 per volume at the Safeway supermarket chain here some
twenty years ago) William of Occam or Ockam actually said:

" What can be done with fewer (assumptions) is done in vain with
more. "Period. End of quote.

Willy just doesn't allow for the oddball things that defy simple
explanations, yet happen every day. I do, and I am sure almost
everyone does.

If this quotation is in error, I shall not ask for my $3.99 back.

I can't buy a paperback for 4 bucks anymore.

Best wishes

- Larry Hatch

PS: I also want to congratulate Jerry Clark for the well
deserved honors his monumental UFO cncyclopedia has won.

Dr. Richard Haines showed me his copy of one volume. We were
both deeply impressed. Haines opined that these volumes would (
and should ) remain on library shelves well into the next
century.  I agree.

Now, it I could only work out some kind of a trade..

-LH





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 20

                          UFOs are not BVM-acabras

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 06:15:54 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 11:10:09 -0400
Subject: UFOs are not BVM-acabras

to: Mark, Rob, et. al:

If I may interrupt with a difficult question, a bit off topic I
suppose..

Let's say I have a friend I enjoy discussing all sorts of things
with and the topic of UFOs come up. I think they are well worthy
of serious (and possibly costly ) study. My friend thinks they
are just bunk, all things considered .. the usual list of
misidentifications, hoaxes, wishful thinking .. you name it.

BUT! I interject. "Have you studied the literature? .. Have you
heard about (this) case or (that) sighting? How about Trans-en-
Proivence France for example!

It turns out that all my friend knows about is the crap on TV,
and what he reads in the papers i.e. nothing solid.

Naturally, I point out that one cannot begin to make value
judgements of this sort without studying the serious data!

My (hypothetical) friend will not study the data because the
whole topic is bunk, and it is bunk because he has not seen the
more solid studies!

A "vicious circle" you say? No! This is a relatively benign
circularity. (I forget the word .. tautology perhaps?)

The more vicious circle closes when my friend starts asking me
about astrology, scientology, shamanic ritualism, BVM sightings,
chupacabras or anything else I cannot (yet) take seriously.

He hits me with the same arguments I just used!

Has Larry Hatch read about BVM sightings and the miraculous
cures associated with them? .. "Well. er. no. " I am forced to
admit.

" Who the hell has time for that sort of crap! " (I clumsiliy
bluster, nearly spilling my beer)

"My point exactly!" Says my skeptical friend.. " Now you know
why I don't read the so-called 'serious UFO stuff'. "

.. And there I am, stuck for an answer.

Don't tell me it is useless to argue with this guy, I know that.

I want a more intelligent response than "UFOs are not as goofy
as Chupacabras, the BVM and so forth".

Evidence? The Mormons have all sorts of evidence.

Witnesses? Try the Jehovahs Witnesses.

Scientific measurements? The Scientologists have a $3000
ohm-meter they sell as a "stress analyzer" or some such.

What do I say to this not-so-hypothetical friend?

Its not such an easy question as it may seem.


- Larry Hatch







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 20

                         Re: Secrets & Conspiracies

From: Doc Barry <authority@webtv.net>
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 07:14:00 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 11:17:54 -0400
Subject: Re: Secrets & Conspiracies

SECRET KEPT FOR 38 YEARS BY U.S. NAVY.  ---- At the 75th
Anniversary of the US Naval Research Laboratory it was reported
(UPI 6/20/98) that Project Tattletale, the first U.S.
Reconnaissance Satellite (which obvserved Soviet sites) was
operational in 1960, and is now declassified.

What's Up Doc
http://www.angelfire.com/az/docbarry/






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 20

                           Re: Who Is Phil Klass?

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 04:51:25 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 10:58:41 -0400
Subject: Re: Who Is Phil Klass?

>From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
>Subject: Re: Who Is Phil Klass?

>Phil Klass was featured as one of the "experts" on an A&E program
>last evening, and in answer to one of the questions... [snip]
>Klass said that if a message was received from a visitor who gave
>the location of an unknown object in the solar system (such as a
>small undiscovered planetoid far beyond Pluto), that we could
>point our telescopes to and confirm, that would prove to him that
>the visitor was really from some other place and had ET knowledge
>that we (at this point) do not possess.

>I would suspect that Phil would likely come up with a "logical
>explanation" if actually faced with this scenario.

>Steve

I agree. It would be easy. All anyone has to do is posit that
thediscovery of some planetoid had leaked out, a hoaxer learned
of it, got a pal with a radio transmitter and hatched a neat
little plot.

The hoaxers take their little 'alien message' to some OTHER
observatory and let the astronomers fight over prior discovery!

If the discovery doesn't pan out for some reason, a flyspeck on
the telescope film for instance, they just wait for a different
opportunity.

Heck. I darn near convinced myself its a hoax, and it hasn't
even happened yet .. unless you count the astrophysics of the
Dogon tribe in North Aftrica. Their belief in an unseen
companion to (I forget what star .. Sirius?) based on the
teachings of gods or angels was written off by many as
cross-cultural contamination.

That's an odd bit of culture. Usually its some commercial
product, a sports or music celebrity .. something with flash,
dash and color .. (mass boob-appeal if you wish ).

But a minor footnote of astro-physics?. Odd indeed.

Best wishes

- Larry Hatch






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 20

             Re: Jerome Clark Wins 1998 Benjamin Franklin Award

From: bruce maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 10:36:02 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 11:19:43 -0400
Subject: Re: Jerome Clark Wins 1998 Benjamin Franklin Award


>Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 14:31:24 -0500 (CDT)
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: A Reason For CSICOP Condemning The X-Files
             Movie?

>Dear List:

>Here's something else for PK, CSICOP & Co. to get all apoplectic
>about.

>I see by my mailbox that The UFO Book: Encyclopedia of the
>Extraterrestrial by Jerome Clark (Visible Ink Press) has just won
t>he 1998 Benjamin Franklin Award in the Science/Environment
.category. The Award, sponsored by Publishers Marketing >
>Association, celebrates "excellence in editorial [content] and
>design in book publishing."

>Congratulations, Jerry!

I'll second.... or third....or whatever, that!!!
RIght On!






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 20

                   Re: Sheffield 'Incident' - New Evidence

From: Max Burns <AlienHype1@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 10:45:16 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 11:16:33 -0400
Subject: Re: Sheffield 'Incident' - New Evidence

>Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 15:00:23 -0400
>To ufoupdates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Sheffield 'Incident' - New Evidence
>From Dave Clarke,

David Clark wrote:

>To recap:  Max Burns claims a witness called Jonathon Dagenhart
>saw the co-pilot of a Tornado fighter jet which was destroyed by
>a UFO it was pursuing above the Peak District of Northern
>England on the evening of March 24, 1997.

>This is the Burns scenario: After bailing out of his aircraft,
>this co-pilot parachuted onto the A57 Snake Pass, one of the
>busiest trans-Pennine roads linking the cities of Sheffield and
>Manchester. Despite being soaked to the skin with highly
>inflammable aviation fuel, the "co-pilot" did not radio
>emergency services for help but decided to hitch a lift from a
>passing mini-bus in which Mr Dagenhart and friends were
>travelling to Sheffield...

<snip>

Mr. Clarke there are no telephone boxes or houses
on that area of Snake Pass. and as the jet�s were
flying at an altitude of 250ft, when it became time
to bail out I doubt that there would have been time
to enjoy the luxury of radio communication
How would you radio for help thought
projection?

<snip>

>Am I alone in smelling a rat here?

<snip>

Your smelling something, check your note book or your
shoes your piled up in it.

<snip>

>First of all I contacted Dagenhart directly on two occasions by
>phone on May 11 and 12 and the following statement is taken
>directly from shorthand notes transcribed immediately
>afterwards:

>"I was a passenger on a minibus which was travelling across the
>Snake Pass towards Sheffield late on the night of March 24 last
>year. When crossing the viaduct over the reservoir the bus was
>flagged down by a man who was acting suspiciously.

>"He spoke little English and was West Indian or Asian in
>appearance, with short black hair and a round face. He did not
>seem to know where he was and just said he wanted to get to
>Sheffield.

>"The guy was covered in fuel of some sort and from the smell I
>thought it was paraffin or diesel, but since then I have joined
>the RAF and I can say it was a smell like aviation fuel.

<snip>

Here is the full transcript of the conversation, which
I have on tape and if any one wishes to obtain a full
copy of this interview, then please email me.  I have
not twisted anything and Mr. Dagenhart was fully
aware of the situation after our conversation.

Mr. Jonathan Degenhart was contacted by Mr. Mike
Jarvis (reporter for the News of the World).  Mr. Jarvis
left a number and Mr. Dagenhart called The News of
the World back.  He corroborated all that he had
discussed with myself, almost word for word, and was
fully aware of how this story was going to be reported.

At that time he was not even bothered about being
quoted, I repeat he was not bothered about being
anonymous. Everything that you are about to read is
the full transcript of the conversation in which you will
see that I'm not the one trying to hide or twist anything.

In fact Mr. Clarke is desperate to have this real incident
disproved so badly he has now finally tripped himself up.
The evidence is quite clear

After writing a letter to this man regarding his comments
in the police log he telephoned me.  Here follows the
verbatim transcript of my telephone conversation.  Taped
interview between Max Burns and Jonathan Dagenhart on
2/5/98.  Time 11.10 am I had to call the witness back on
another phone so as to set up the recording equipment the
conversation went like this.  He consented to being recorded.

Burns           Hello there
Dagenhart       Hello
Burns           So what happened that night? You'd been the
                Wales...
Dagenhart       Well we'd been to Wales, Um on the way home,
                Um driving down Snake Pass and all of a sudden
                just coming up to the viaduct this man stepped
                out in front of us, flagged us down so we stopped,
                pulled over I was in the front of the minibus with
                the driver and another passenger so I wound my
                window down and he started speaking to us he
                said I've got to get to Sheffield, Sheffield and that's
                basically all he said.
Burns           Did he look in shock?
Dagenhart       Yes he didn't seem to really know which way
                Sheffield was or what he was doing or anything
                and the thing is I said at the time when I rang the
                police he smelled of diesel fuel, well since then
                I've joined the air force and I'm now working for
                the air force and it wasn't diesel fuel it was aviation
                fuel that he'd got on him.
Burns           Ah absolutely superb
Dagenhart       and I will put my money on that
Burns           You work for the air force
Dagenhart       I work for the royal air force
Burns           Where do you work? as a civilian for the air force
Dagenhart       No I actually work for the air force I am paid by the
                air force
Burns           Really can I ask you what job you do?
Dagenhart       I'm a jet engine specialist
Burns           A jet engine specialist
Dagenhart       Yes
Burns           And where do you work?
Dagenhart       At the moment I'm down in Wolverhampton but in
                July I'm moving up to Lock (unintelligible) in Scotland

<snip>

>"We didn't give the man a lift because the bus was full and we
>didn't like the look of him, but I thought it was odd because
>there were no parked cars anywhere near and it was a deserted
>spot.

>"The next day I heard about the search for the crashed plane and
>rang police to report the incident, thinking the man might have
>been an immigrant or criminal they were searching for."

<snip>

I have my interview on tape, this man is a member
of the RAF and rang the News of the World saying that he
was going to lose his job because of what he had said.

Question why would someone lose there job over some
thing that has not occurred?

As you can see from the actual taped interview what
Mr. Clark is saying is a fabrication and Dagenhart has
obviously been made to retract his statement and not
because of how I was going to use his testimony.  As
you can see from the conversation we had, at the time
he was quite happy about everything.  He said and also
was quite happy about calling the News of the World back
and confirming what he had said to myself.

Then enter the RAF. Enter Mr. David Clark, and all of
a sudden it might of been aviation fuel and the man
looked dodgy.

Tell me there are over a dozen people
on a mini bus why would they be intimidated by one man?

And from the police log.

Mr. Dagenhart said that they could not give the man a
lift because there was no room, he also says that they
could not give the man a lift because there was no room
in my interview. My interview about the reason for no lift
is the same as the reason given to the police.

Has Mr. Dagenhart lied to the police as well as myself?

Or is it back to enter Mr. Clark and the RAF
and statements change?

Burns           Or Do you know, I must send you a full
                copy of this report of what's happened.
                Do you remember they were looking for
                a crashed plane.
Dagenhart       Yep
Burns           Yes they've lost a military jet.
Dagenhart       Oh right
Burns           And I believe he was the co-pilot of the
                tornado jet that's crashed.
                Did it look like a flying suit he was wearing?
Dagenhart       Um I don't know he'd got clothes on but
                I mean it was dark and he'd got dark
                clothes on that's all.
Burns           And he didn't know where he was?
Dagenhart       No
Burns           Yer and there were no vehicles in the area
Dagenhart       There was nothing.  A police car past us
                about 2 minutes after we passed him Up
                'cause we'd got a full minibus there was no
                room at all to get him on sowe drove off.
                We told him the right way to go and a
                few seconds later a police car passed us.
                See when I spoke to the police later that
                evening (unintelligible) been on that road
                there had been nobody there and
                in a matter of seconds.

<snip>

>Questioned about the clothes this man was wearing, in the light
>of Max's claims, Dagenhart told me: "They were just ordinary
>dark clothes. He was definitely not wearing the sort of uniform
>associated with RAF pilots. I would have recognised that uniform
>immediately."

<snip>

In the Taped interview Mr Dagenhart said it was dark and
could nottell whether it was a flying suit. because it was dark.

Burns           I think I saw you because I was there in the area.
                I think I saw your minibus I saw a military landrover
                as well.
Dagenhart       Yes there probably was a couple of landrovers
                around but we'd got a white minibus with a trailer
                on the back.
Burns           Yer did you go through Castleton at all out that way
                or did you just go over Ladybower and into Sheffield
                that way.
Dagenhart       Over Ladybower and into Sheffield that way.
Burns           That night I've got 13 witnesses to an enormous
                ufo flying about everywhere
Dagenhart       right
Burns           A military interception and they're trying to cover
                it up but you know I'll send you a copy of this if you like
Dagenhart       yer brilliant
Burns           Do you remember anything else was his English good
Dagenhart       No it wasn't it was very poor very poor.
Burns           Yer I think he might have been a Nato pilot or co-pilot
Dagenhart       Yes he was of sort of African sort of origin very very
                dark skinned
Burns           And it was definitely aviation fuel
Dagenhart       yes
Burns           And you can substantiate that because you now
                work for the Royal Air Force on jet engines you now
                what aviation fuel smells like
Dagenhart       yes

<snip>

>After asking him to repeat his account of the events Max asked
>if he could use his testimony in a story he was working on for a
>national newspaper (as it turns out the downmarket News of the
>World). Permission was granted, but according to Dagenhart's
>statement on May 12 "at no stage in any of this conversation did
>Max tell me he was going to use what I told him in a story
>claiming I had seen the co-pilot of a Tornado which had been
>shot down by a UFO.

<snip>

I have never asserted that Mr Dagenhart said that it
was the co-pilot of the tornado jet, I said I believed that
it was the co- pilot... and I did not contact the News of
the World until after i had spoken with Mr Dagenhart.
I refer back to the transcript he was fully aware of
what I am asserting.

<snip>

>"I don't believe the man I saw was a pilot and if my name were
>to go in a national newspaper associated with such a claim I
>could get into serious trouble with my employers, the RAF.

<snip>

If that is the case and from the transcript of the taped
interview Mr. Dagenhart was fully aware of the implications
of what I am asserting.  Why did he willingly call The News
of The World back and corrobarate all that he had discussed
with me?

When Mr Dagenhart called me He said that he
had been spoken to and I had twisted what he said... You
can all read the transcript.  I have not twisted anything.

I also asked him was it his employer the RAF, who had spoken
with him he replied that he was not allowed to say.  I then
asked him if David Clark had spoken with him, and he
replied no he had not.

<snip>

>"I haven't been silenced by anyone, I just don't want my name
>connected with a story like this and that is why I intend to
>tell Max not to involve me any further.
>"I just told him what I saw that night and that is all I know."

<snip>
Why has Mr Dagenhart just blurted out, I have not been
silenced?

There is no mention of Mr Clark asking him if he has
been silenced by anyone, in Mr Clark�s interview.

Why did Mr Dagenhart feel the need to say that?

<snip>

>According to Dagenhart, in the letter Max identified himself,
>not as a UFOlogist, but as "a journalist working for a national
>organisation."

<snip>

Mr Dagenhart involved himself by responding to my letter.
I only stated that I was investigating the incident. I did not
tell Mr Dagenhart in my letter which I wrote to him that i was a
UFOlogist because obviously in the interest's of obtaining a
untainted statement it was important to say as little as possible
with regard to the incident and what i believed had occurred.

So as to obtain whatever comments with regard to the man he
encoutred freely and without prompting, and at the same time
not leaving myself open to be accussed of coersion.with regard
to Mr Dagenhart's statement.

I never said i was working for a national org. I did tell him that I am
a journalist and whatever any one thinks of Alien Encounters,
I have written several feature articles for them and was paid
as a journalist.

Burns           Do you know what if you was a woman I'd be
                bringing you flowers today oh this is absolutely
                brilliant can anyone else substantiate this?
Dagenhart       There was 15 other people in the minibus like 15
                other people in the minibus who were all there on
                the evening
Burns           Is there any chance Do you know the other people
                well?
Dagenhart       I know some of them well but I don't know them all
                there's about 8 that I don't know at all I know about
                four off the trip
Burns           Is there any chance you could speak to someone
                else that saw him and get them to call me
Dagenhart       Yer I can do
Burns           Could you
Dagenhart       I'll give it a go yer
Burns           I'll post you a copy of this report after the weekend
Dagenhart       right brilliant

Can you tell how keen Mr Dagenhart was at this point and he
was fully aware of how i was reporting this story..

<snip>

>Max had obtained this witnesses' home address from a copy of a
>log belonging to South Yorkshire Police which had been provided
>by another UFOlogist, Martin Jeffrey, of Sheffield.

<snip>

That�s right David I did, and then I kindly let you copy the log
and most of my other interview notes, that is correct is it not
Mr. Clarke.

What was your point?

Burns           Yer is there anything else you can tell me about
                that night where abouts on Ladybower was he?
Dagenhart       um
Burns           before you go over it or...
Dagenhart       Yer you know as you're coming from snake pass end
Burns           Yes
Dagenhart       You come up on to the Ladybower the smaller of the
                two viaducts going straight on to Sheffield
Burns           And he really didn't know where he was going
Dagenhart       He didn't know where he was going it looked like he
                just walked off a hill
Burns           Really did he have any mud or anything on him Could
                you tell was his clothing dirty
Dagenhart       I couldn't tell
Burns           But as you work for the Royal Air Force on jet engines
                your absolutely 100% certain that it was aviation fuel
                not diesel
Dagenhart       yes
Burns           Is there any chance you could write this down for me
Dagenhart       yes
Burns           Could you in handwriting not typed
Dagenhart       yer no problem
Burns           do you know what thanks very much for calling what's
                your first name
Dagenhart       Jonathan
Burns           Jonathan thanks very much for calling me you've been
                absolutely superb cos. I was giving up hope of getting
                in contact with you I was going to come and knock on
                your door and put a note through your door you know
                to Rotherham next time I was up there cos. I used to
                live in Rotherham
Dagenhart       Oh right
Burns           I used to live in Kimberworth
Dagenhart       Oh right cool
Burns           You know off Meadowbank Road
Dagenhart       Yep I've got friends who live up there
Burns           How old are you Jonathan
Dagenhart       I'm 25 and a half
Burns           25 and a half Do you mind me asking about
                your education?
Dagenhart       No go for it
Burns           What education have you got?
Dagenhart       I went to a little secondary school in the town
                where I  lived in Swinton the local secondary
                school didn't do any A levels didn't go to college
                didn't do anything left school with all GCSE passes
                there all Ds and Es very low passes got a job working
                in Milton Keynes, worked there for 4 and a half years
                came back home did other little jobs, trained as an
                outdoor educating instructor then joined the Royal Air
                Force that's basically it
Burns           Well you're obviously intelligent because the air force
                don't take idiots
Dagenhart       No  I was travelling abroad as well in about 18 months
                I mean in about three years I spent about 18 months
                abroad
Burns           Listen can I give you another number to ring me on
                instead of the one I gave you in the letter Yer if you
                pass it on to one of your friends if they could call me
                today it would be appreciated its **** ******* and
                I might contact you again if that's OK
Dagenhart       Yes well this is my parents number and I'm hardly ever
                here
Burns           Well I'll leave a message for you
Dagenhart       yes
Burns           Now in my report do you ant me to change your name
                 keep you anonymous
Dagenhart       To be honest I don't care
Burns           Thanks very much Jonathan
Dagenhart       You're welcome
Burns           You've been absolutely brilliant try to get someone else
                to ring with a statement
Dagenhart       yer I shall
Burns           About the bloke
Dagenhart       Yer I will
Burns           Thanks mate
Dagenhart       OK
Burns           Brilliant
Dagenhart       No problem
Burns           Bye
Dagenhart       Bye

As you can see Mr Dagenhart was fully aware of all aspects
of the incident as i saw it and he was very happy to go on
the record with his statements, once again enter Mr Clark
enter the RAF and all of a sudden he is trying to change his
statement's.

Am I the only one smelling a Rat here?

<snip>

>Now i come to my point: Who was this man "covered in aviation
>fuel" encountered by Jonathon Dagenhart on the Snake Pass?

>You would think any objective investigator worth his salt would
>not accept a story like this at face value but  would at least
>ask some obvious questions, including: why would a stricken
>pilot hitch a ride on a minibus rather than contact the military
>or emergency services by radio? Would an RAF pilot whose plane
>had been destroyed above his own country find it so difficult to
>speak English? How many Tornado pilots are of Asian or West
>Indian appearance anyway?

<snip>

It has already been confirmed that there were N.A.T.O tornado
jets there.. let�s see how many countries are there in N.A.T.O.?

For one the people of Turkey luck Asian...just as one example.
Not forgetting Mud / Oil / Aviation Fuel / Hillside/and darkness

<snip>

>Surprise, surprise, Brian Jones - who has 30 years' experience
>as a National Park ranger - remembered the incident straight
>away. Details about a man covered in petrol or paraffin
>wandering on the Snake Pass that night had in fact been reported
>to him by the police the next morning.

>"I do remember the incident as it was reported to the Peak Park
>Ranger service the next morning," he told me. "I understand it
>was a failed suicide attempt. It was someone who had driven out
>to the country and poured petrol or some other inflammable
>liquid over himself. But he had not gone through with the
>suicide. It had been reported to South Yorkshire Police who had
>passed it to Derbyshire to deal with. It's the sort of thing
>that happens occasionally in a remote area like this."

<snip>

Do people who are about to commit suicide forget where the
nearest large city is?

You cannot purchase aviation fuel in the peak district area,
and having checked all local filling stations, who informed
me that there is not much call for aviation fuel.
It is fair to assume that people do not take to wearing
aviation fuel as a fashion item while out walking.

And as Mr. Dagenhart stated there were no car�s in the area.
What did he do buy aviation fuel walk miles to the middle
of no where, poured aviation fuel over himself
then changed his mind about suicide and forgot where
Sheffield was?

<snip>

>I then contacted Insp Howard who confirmed the incident had
>occurred as described by the Ranger, but due to its sensitive
>nature no Press statement had been released at the time.

<snip>

The only thing sensitive about this situation is that Mr Dagenhart
has actually encountered the co-pilot

What�s the man�s name, i want to interview him?
Especially to ask him where ho left his car and where he obtained
aviation fuel from?

<snip>

>So there we have it folks, not a co-pilot after all, but a
>disturbed and possibly mentally ill individual who had made an
>attempt to take his own life that night.

<snip>

You actually expect people to believe that?

How can a non attempt at suicide be of a sensitive nature?

Where�s your evidence Mr Clark a bunch of neatly
packaged official statement�s from people involved in
the cover up and people who have been made to change
there minds.

Why would Mr Dagenhart lose his Job over Something
that the RAF and yourself say has not occurred?

Take a step back reader�s of update�s these are the fact's

You can read my research at:

http://www.skipnet.com/~visitations/sheffield/

http://www.pufori.org/articles/sheffield/index_nf.htm

You can also hear the edited Dagenhart interview at
these above 2 sites

Report only
http://www.sightings.com/ufo/sheffield.htm

Best regard�s

Max Burns








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 20

               CSICOP X-File Movie Review Lacks 'Rationalism'

From: 'Jack Hudson' <true.x-file.news@n2news.com>
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 06:46:54 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 11:53:39 -0400
Subject: CSICOP X-File Movie Review Lacks 'Rationalism'


"If The Truth Is Out There...We'll Find It!"

6/19/98 For Immediate Release:

CISCOP X-File Movie Review Lacks "Rationalism"

by Jason Sterling

On June 16th, the Committee for the Scientific Investigation of
Claims of the Paranormal issued a press release via the internet
entitled "Skeptics Versus the X-Files" in which they claim that
the motion picture debut of the globally popular TV program "has
the potential to catapult interest and belief in a range of
paranormal phenomena above already historic levels." Taken at
face value, this argument seems to have some basis in fact.
Topics like UFOs and angels, it seems, are more popular now than
ever. A recent poll, that CSICOP cites, showed that 71% of the
American people believe in a government cover-up of UFOs. But
like many arguments postulated by skeptics, and in particular
the man whose name is attached to the news release as a
contact(there is no author credit)this theory of a never before
seen level in paranormal interest falls apart under scrutiny and
for very obvious reasons. From the time that man existed on
Earth and up until the not so distant past, ALL of MANKIND
believed in paranormal phe omena ranging from water sprites and
shape shifting demi-gods to flying, firey chariots and blond
haired babes that would swoop down and carry the souls of fallen
warriors to an eternal beer bash in the heavens!

If that sounds like a startling revelation, consider this: these
days skepticism is more concerned than ever with maintaining a
status quo of knowledge and so-called rational thought, as
opposed to discovering truth. Though the CSICOP release shows a
version of the now famous poster from Fox Mulder's office that
features a flying saucer with the phrase "I Want To Believe",
now pasted over with the CSICOP inspired "I Want To Know!" (see
http://www.csicop.org/articles/x-files-movie ) skeptics today
"want to believe" even more than the paranormal true-believers.
They want to "believe" that nothing that could upset their
rationalized framework for the universe would, or could, ever be
real. Any doubt about that statement should be sufficiently
erased by observing the subtle placement of the now trademark
"X" for "X-Files" over the flying saucer in the poster. The
result is a clever way of "X-ing" out the the alien craft with
the symbol of the show itself, making the real statement of the
entire image "I Want To Know THERE ARE NO FLYING SAUCERS!"

Skeptics don't really want to "know" anything outside of their
fragile box. This is why the level of any true "investigations
of the claims of the paranormal" among skeptics has dropped to
abyssmal levels. If anyone makes a claim of something unusual,
more times than not, the skeptical response is "Prove It!" A
consistant and mantra-like repetition of Carl Sagan's comment
"extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" has
resulted in skeptics tending to rely entirely on the work of the
believers to produce evidence that the skeptics claim is never
enough proof, rather than skeptics actually investigating to
determine what the truth is. The main defect in the skeptical
ideology is the pursuit of a "rational" explanation when many
times the truth isn't what you might expect, let alone rational.

Another indication of how skeptics are becoming more and more
irrational in the attempts to preserve "rational thought" is
their acceptance of the use of inaccurate statements and
half-baked theories to prop up their position. Case in point: In
the CSICOP article, along with the grossly over inflated
speculation about the impact of the X-Files movie, this
statement appears - "In every episode of the X-Files, science
fails. FBI agent Dana Sculley, the series symbol of rational
skepticism, is incapable of positing satisfactory scientific
explanations for the extraordinary plot developments. It is
always Fox Mulder's mystical speculation that is on to
something." That statement is completely false. More importantly
it reflects a lack of a talent that many skilled skeptical
investigators were once proud of - keen observation.

In this instance, keen observation would have revealed that
there are times when the "rational" explanation wins out. For
example the episode which was the three-part season cliff hanger
last year that featured a deliberate hoax of creating an
artificial alien body of exotic hybrid cells called "chrimeras".
Then there was the black and white episoide that featured a
cameo appearance by talk show host Jerry Springer and was about
a "monster" that was going around making love to women in a
small town after they had been subjected to knock-out gas
normally used to sedate nervous cows for milking. The "monster"
turned out to be a greatly deformed teen-age boy whose heroin
was Cher because of her performance in the film, "Mask".

There are some episodes that seem to predict developments in
science that actually occur. In the first season the "Eve"
episode involved the issue of human cloning experiments done
through invetrofertilization. Only a few years later, Congress
would be debating the issue of human cloning due to the
breakthrough with Dolly the cloned sheep. There was nothing
"paranormal" about the "Eve" episode. It was meerly scientific
speculation, speculation that became a true potential reality
beyond what many could have ever expected.

There are X-Files programs that have no resolution. The episode
featuring cock roaches is but one example. When death after
death seems to be attributed to killer cock roaches, Sculley
comes up with explanation after explanation that seems to fit
perfectly. Eventually, however, the argument that some of the
cock roaches might be tiny robots sent here from outer space is
made due to the discovery that some seem to be made of metal. In
the end there is no real solution, just more speculation after
all the evidence is inadvertantly destoryed in the explosion of
a fertilizer factory. But what true keen observation would
reveal is that the X-Files is a fictional show. Many times the
viewers know that there is only a so-called paranormal
explanation because they see the events contributing to the case
at hand when the characters don't. When a man's shadow (one of
the series' more nonsensical attempts)acts like a black hole and
destroys anyone who comes in contact with it, what kind of
rational explanation is ther ? Even as a paranormal phenomena it
doesn't make sense since *everything* that the shadow would
touch(walls, floors, the ground) should be sucked in as well.

The pathetic position that skepticism finds itself in today can
be seen in a saddening panaorama of examples. From the whinning
of the 1996 "World Congress" of skeptics at X-File creator Chris
Carter when he appeared before them, to the extremes like the
recent investigation that revealed that scientists Jacques
Vallee and Bernhard Haisch conspired to promote an article that
Vallee wrote and Haisch published contaning fraudulent
information attempting to debunk the Philadelphia Experiment.
Oxford University professor Richard Dawkins weighed into the
CSICOP article with his observation that if the X-Files was a
crime show where every week there were two suspects, one black
and one white, and every week the black suspect was found to be
the guilty one, could "Hollywood defend that kind of myth-making
as "only fiction". The obvious answer is "yes" if the show in
question was all about how bad black people are supposed to be.
Of course that would be incredibly racist and completely
intolerable except maybe in t e South Africa of past decades.
What Dawkins is failing to realize, due to his lack of
observation, is that the show that he uses as an example would
be making a statement about the nature of people of differing
races where the X-Files is about the nature of reality and how
it is perceived. The show is not about whether skeptics are
right or true-believers are right, and there are times when
Mulder and Scully have seemingly exchanged roles. Dawkins'
observation is a reflection of the paranoia that has so embraced
skeptics that it makes their arguments sound more and more
*religious*. Religious in that they are worshiping rationalism
instead of looking for "truth" and in their own words and
phrases, they espouse these religious beliefs. After all, you
seldom hear of a skeptic mention the idea of finding the
"truth". Their concern instead is for the discovery of a
rational "explanation". *Explanation* is a sophisticated way of
saying "excuse". It used to be "rational" to view the Earth as
the center of the un verse or the world as being flat, or that
man would never fly. None of these views proved to be the truth,
and the first two were held by both scientists and by the
Church.

What is the point of posing excuses for events when actual
scientific work should be done to discover a true answer, be it
mundane or extraordinary? For that  only skeptics like Matt
Nisbet would have the answer. You see Nisbet not only is the
name of the contact on the CSICOP press release, but he had
written a letter to the editors of USA Today supporting the Air
Force's contention that when Roswell witnesses claimed to have
seen alien bodies, they were actually seeing crash test dummies,
a *rational* explanation that not only had true-believers
balking, but many non-believers as well. The reason? The crash
test dummies hadn't been used until the '50s and the Roswell
crash was in 1947. To make matters worse, investigator Marshall
Barnes had pointed out that he was surprised at how detailed the
dummies were in the original photos released by the Air Force to
the media. "These things (the photos in the USA Today story)were
tall and looked nearly exactly like models that I have seen of
Nazi propaganda for th head shape and features of the perfect
Aryan. So how anyone could come up on a crash site and see these
things as short, big eyed aliens with small noses is completely
beyond explanation." And the Air Force didn't try to explain it,
but Nesbit still endorsed the idea despite its lack of proper
science and common sense. That doesn't mean that there is
evidence that *proves* that Roswell did happen, but the lack of
conclusive proof doesn't jusitify the blind acceptance of just
any explanation to the contrary, especially when it is plainly
no answer at all.

The X-Files always begins with the motto in the sky - "The Truth
Is Out There". For skeptics with Prof. Dawkins and Matt Nisbet's
style of *irrational* rationalism, we can be most assured of one
thing - they'll never find it.
_______________________________________________________

Distribution in any form granted as long as proper credit is
given to True.X-File.News







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 20

                            CE: Trace Case Center

From: Francis Ridge <slk@EVANSVILLE.NET>
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 10:12:30 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 11:44:56 -0400
Subject: CE: Trace Case Center


Hello List Members,

I ask that you post this temporary link everywhere you can:
http://www.evansville.net/~slk/icptr.htm Text of link as
follows:

Ted Phillips is THE foremost authority on trace cases and has
established the International Center for Physical Trace
Research. He will soon have his own web page linked to and from
the NICAP site.

Thanks,

Fran

______________________________


International Center for Physical Trace Research
 An International Center for Physical Trace Research is being
established by veteran researcher Ted Phillips to provide a
central repository for the receipt, study, and distribution of
UFO landing events involving physical residue. Phillips,
generally recognized as the top ground traces researcher in the
world, has worked on hundreds of such cases with the late Dr. J.
Allen Hynek and the Center for UFO Studies. as well as with
MUFON. Phillips had "retired" from active work with ground trace
cases, but had promised Dr. Hynek that he would revisit the
famous Delphos, KS, case. Recently he began work on updating
that case, and quickly became aware that little is being done by
UFO researchers in this important area of ground traces.

"There is a real need here," says Phillips. "There is a need for
responding quickly to the better cases, for utilizing the best
equipment and methods, for bringing data together, and for
analyzing the reports." He decided to come out of "retirement."

MUFON is cooperating with this new project, and MUFON field
investigators are asked to cooperate fully in getting
appropriate reports to Phillips quickly. All data will be
entered into a computer database and made available at a web
site linked to CUFOS, MUFON, and NICAP. The data will be updated
as material is converted to web site format. Data will be
displayed as a basic case listing consisting of one to two line
summaries. Links will be provided for each case which can then
be displayed in full report form with sketches and photographs.
Statistical studies will be posted as data is compiled.

"Analysis of landing residue will be aggressively pursued on a
priority basis when gathered or received. All data will be made
available including case reports, follow-up, and analysis
results."

The Center expects to take advantage of today's technology.

"Unlike the 1960's and 70's we now have the ability to
communicate at incredible speed. Using email as a link the
Center would be in a position to receive new cases almost as
they happen. In the high strangeness events, full on site
investigation will be done. We are attempting to acquire
resources for on site work at this time. In turn, we would be in
a position to communicate with people at a new site immediately
to preserve any traces existing there and suggest the proper
documentation of the site early on. This is extremely important
as some types of traces seem to be of short duration."

Phillips adds, "This is a project that we can all participate in
and learn from. It is a project that can yield results as
physical traces remain after the observation, they can be
documented, studied and subjected to scientific analysis. After
30 years of trace research I can assure you that this will take
time and a lot of work. With the help of many we can move ahead
and at the very least preserve the data for that point in the
future when it will be seriously 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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 20

                          Recommendations Please!?

From: Peter Gersten <UFOLAWYER1@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 20:41:43 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 11:57:02 -0400
Subject: Recommendations Please!?


[Without Prejudice --ebk]

CAUS is now planning the first of its annual mock trial events:
'Contact--Proof Beyond a Reasonable Doubt.' Our premier event
will be in the early part of 1999 in the Phoenix area and will
include as many as 8 expert witnesses 'testifying' to different
evidence of 'contact;' the scientific view of a 3D reality; and
the possibility of 'higher dimensional intelligence.' Suggested
areas of testimony include: crop circles; artificial structures
outside of our planet; personal contact experiences; UFOs;
paranormal phenomena; video and photographic anaylsis; and
quantum physics.

CAUS is interested in your opinion as to who these experts
should be. Qualifications should include: particular expertise
in area; years of experience; academic credentials; published
works and the ability to articulate opinions. Each witness will
be subject to ' cross-examination' about both their personal
lives and professional qualifications and opinions.

Thank you,

Peter A. Gersten
Executive 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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 20

                         Re: Secrets & Conspiracies

From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 11:55:41 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 19:28:47 -0400
Subject: Re: Secrets & Conspiracies

>Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 07:40:02 -0400
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Secrets & Conspiracies

>>And the difference between flying saucers and your average black
>>budget project should be obvious. Someone directs and controls
>>the black budget projects -- no one has control over the UFO
>>phenomenon.

>>Dennis

>Dennis,

>It would seem to me that this is another conclusion reached without
>sufficient evidence.  How do you KNOW that no one has control over
>the UFO phenomenon.

>I am not arguing that someone does, just that we don't really
>know since we don't know yet what the UFO phenomenon is.

>We have far too much jumping to conclusions here.

>Bob


You have to start *somewhere*, Bob. Or, as Charles Fort said,
"One measures a circle beginning anywhere."

What I meant was that no one is in charge of keeping the UFO
phenomenon a secret from anyone or we wouldn't have any case
reports. Put another way, Vallee once said the AF could no more
cover up UFOs than they could the Andromeda galaxy, because there
was nothing to prevent your hauling a telescope into your
backyard and having a look for yourself.

If I didn't want you to get at the gold in Fort Knox, however,
that would be pretty readily manageable.

No conclusions were jummped here, nor were any adjectives
stretched or otherwise harmed in the formulation of this
argument.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 21

               Re: A Reason For CSICOP Condemning The X-Files

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 05:06:44 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 05:06:44 -0400
Subject: Re: A Reason For CSICOP Condemning The X-Files





I saw the first public showing on Friday afternoon
along with 2500 kids and a friend.

Jonn and I have both watched the 'Files on tv with
a deal of enjoyment from the entertainment POV.

During our walk to 'The Good Byte' - a Greeky Spoon, for
a late lunch we discussed Carter's Summer-Blockbuster.
Without going into too much detail our observations
follow in point form.

- "I really missed the commercials."

- "Was it as long as it seemed?"

- "I _really_ missed Mark Snow's synth
   music"

- "I guess they make more money with
   a Summer Blockbuster than with a
   seasons worth of episiodes."

- "Damn good job I knew who Skinner was
   in the series. The cameos he and the
   three computer-geeks didn't help their
   careers."

- "Too bad they didn't shoot it in
   Vancouver with the original Director
   of Photography. It wasn't dark enough
   for The X - Files."

- "With the way they tidied up in the movie
   I dunno what they're going to do next
   season."

- "Cancer man looked morose and pissed."





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 21

                              Re: The Ten Cases

From: John Rimmer <johnr@magonia.demon.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 21:14:32 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 05:25:27 -0400
Subject: Re: The Ten Cases

>From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
>Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 15:14:35 -0400
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: The Ten Cases

>>Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 22:36:10 +0100
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: John Rimmer <johnr@magonia.demon.co.uk>
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: The Ten Cases

<snip>

>>Most hoaxes are done for the hell of it.

>Well, there's a scientific pronouncement.

Really? I thought it was just blindingly obvious.

> Actually, no, most
>hoaxes are done for some form of psychological gain, which was
>the gain to which I referred.

If so, you could have been a little more precise. When most other
people talk about hoaxes "for gain" the context suggests they're
talking about financial gain. My point *was* that most hoaxes are
done for some sort of psychological gain ('getting one over on
Herr Professor', for instance, but...

> This is true even when the hoax
>leads to financial gain. I have never seen a study as to the
>proportion of hoax acts, even in the UFO field, which led to
>financial gain as opposed to those which were done to attain
>psychological satisfaction. But I am certainly willing to accept
>that no sign of a motive to attain psychological or financial
>gain through one's UFO report is ONE of the hallmarks of the good
>witness and the good report.

...how on earth are we supposed to find out any sign of a motive
for psychological gain, short of the hoaxer sitting there rubbing
his hands and muttering "fooled you"! Sorry, but I just don't
believe any ufologists are good enough psychologists to work this
one out. (I doubt if many psychologists are good enough either...
I just mention Munchhausen's Syndrome here in the hope that it
might start another hare off across the green fields of UFO
UpDates.)

>And let's not forget that even the AF couldn't ascribe more that
>2% of their cases to hoaxes,

Don't forget the Air Force is a public body which is aware that
if it went around accusing too many taxpayers and voters of being
hoaxers it would be liable to get it's ass sued off and have some
angry elected representatives causing problems. If any AF
investigator *did* suspect a hoax it would in most cases be very
carefully tip-toed over by the public relations guys.

>a finding which I believe can be
>reproduced by most UFO organizations as well.

For some reason I'm not surprised by this.


-- --  --  --  --
John Rimmer
Magonia Online: http//www.magonia.demon.co.uk
"Dublin design group Dynamo has created the identity for TV3,
Ireland's fourth TV station."  Design Week Magazine, 19th June






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 21

                        Re: UFOs are not BVM-acabras

From: Donald  Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 14:38:17 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 05:18:52 -0400
Subject: Re: UFOs are not BVM-acabras


> Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 06:15:54 -0700
> From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> Subject: UFOs are not BVM-acabras!

> to: Mark, Rob, et. al:

> If I may interrupt with a difficult question, a bit off topic I
> suppose..

> Let's say I have a friend I enjoy discussing all sorts of things
> with and the topic of UFOs come up. I think they are well worthy
> of serious (and possibly costly ) study. My friend thinks they
> are just bunk, all things considered .. the usual list of
> misidentifications, hoaxes, wishful thinking .. you name it.

> BUT! I interject. "Have you studied the literature? .. Have you
> heard about (this) case or (that) sighting? How about Trans-en-
> Proivence France for example!

> It turns out that all my friend knows about is the crap on TV,
> and what he reads in the papers i.e. nothing solid.

> Naturally, I point out that one cannot begin to make value
> judgements of this sort without studying the serious data!

> My (hypothetical) friend will not study the data because the
> whole topic is bunk, and it is bunk because he has not seen the
> more solid studies!

> A "vicious circle" you say? No! This is a relatively benign
> circularity. (I forget the word .. tautology perhaps?)

> The more vicious circle closes when my friend starts asking me
> about astrology, scientology, shamanic ritualism, BVM sightings,
> chupacabras or anything else I cannot (yet) take seriously.

> He hits me with the same arguments I just used!

> Has Larry Hatch read about BVM sightings and the miraculous
> cures associated with them? .. "Well. er. no. " I am forced to
> admit.

> " Who the hell has time for that sort of crap! " (I clumsiliy
> bluster, nearly spilling my beer)

> "My point exactly!" Says my skeptical friend.. " Now you know
> why I don't read the so-called 'serious UFO stuff'. "

> .. And there I am, stuck for an answer.

> Don't tell me it is useless to argue with this guy, I know that.

> I want a more intelligent response than "UFOs are not as goofy
> as Chupacabras, the BVM and so forth".

> Evidence? The Mormons have all sorts of evidence.

> Witnesses? Try the Jehovahs Witnesses.

> Scientific measurements? The Scientologists have a $3000
> ohm-meter they sell as a "stress analyzer" or some such.

> What do I say to this not-so-hypothetical friend?

> Its not such an easy question as it may seem.

> - Larry Hatch

You bring up an interesting point Larry, one I have pondered
myself. There seems to be no slick, snappy comeback for many of
the questions we are asked or arguments we are presented with. It
pisses me off no end that some reporter or inteviewer can present
you with some question about "little green men from Mars' and you
have to spend the precious time available trying to do a quick
"history of UFOs catchup" just to put the audience in the proper
frame of reference because the reporter or interviewer has
immediately put you on the defensive.

We need someone with a great deal of money to hire a marketing
agency, it seems, that can come up with responses to the usual BS
questions:-)

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 21

                      Re: 'She Blinded Me with Science'

From: Donald  Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 14:37:45 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 05:18:46 -0400
Subject: Re: 'She Blinded Me with Science'


> Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 11:09:03 +0100
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> From: Sean Jones <Tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: CSICOP condemns X-Files Movie

> >Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 10:16:01 +0100
> >From: Donald  Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
> >To: updates@globalserve.net
> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: CSICOP condemns X-Files Movie

> Hi Don

> >Hello Jared and List,

> >Well now, after having just read the little piece "Skeptics
> >verses Science" subtitled "Scientisits concerned by Portrayal of
> >Science" I am just devastated that "science" is, for a change,
> >behind the eightball taking the licks it so richly deserves for
> >sticking its cowardly head up its own ass all these years on the
> >UFO phenomenon.  It never ceases to amaze me at the two-headed
> >approach that "science" takes on the pursuit of truth, which is
> >[1] their truth and [2] the great unwasheds' truth. The latter of
> >course is all of the other ignoramouses that are not those
> >shining knights of the first truth, the "scientisits". Without
> >them, we would not have been on the verge of the "big"
> >breakthrough, for instance' on a cure for cancer for the last
> >50-60 years-probably one of the biggest moneymakers of all time
> >for scientists at several hundreds of billions of dollars. Or
> >heart disease or,arthritis, or altzeimers, or the common cold or
> >obesity or one of the newer moneymakers, AIDs.

> >How about the science of astronomy for instance. There was the
> >truth of 50 years ago and now the present day truth, mostly made
> >clearer it seems not by science but by engineering, meaning
> >electronics and optics.[We'll ignore the monumental screwup with
> >Hubbles vision problem for the moment, which one astronomer told
> >me could have been discovered using an amateur's instrument used
> >for measuring the curve of a lens costing about $100.00]

> >The monumental blunders made in the world of science over the
> >last 50 years would fill several of Jerome Clark's encylopedias,
> >with each blunder being satisfactorly being covered or explained
> >away by their own invisible college of spin doctors. Can't have
> >the great unwashed thinking that the scientists aren't the Gods
> >that they and the geat unwashed think them to be.

> >The doctors have been taking a well deserved hosing for the last
> >few years so now maybe its time for the "scientists" to take
> >their licks.

> >From one who has been profoundly dissappointed over the last few
> >years by the performance of the so called "people who seek the
> >truth".

> >Don Ledger

> Its funny you should talk about monumental blunders of science. I am
> currently debateing with a scientist about FTL and he says flat out it
> aint possible etc etc.

> Could you possibly put together a quick list for me where by
> scientists have made these monumental blunders so I can with
> conviction say that scientists are not always right, look here. I
> would appreciate it very much, I have already quoted that
> scientists said that the Earth was flat and that excededing eight
> miles per hour in a motor car would asphyxiate the driver to
> which he snorted (figureatively of course) so I really would
> appreciate a list to poke under his arrogant nose.

Well Sean, I wish I did have some specific names to give you but
most of my experiences have been of a general nature and a
growing concern over the years that the "scientists" as we once
knew them have gotten to political. I don't mean necessarily in
the government sense. Perhaps they always were and I just didn't
notice, but they fail to be really objective as to what is or
isn't fair game for study. Certainly there is the ever present
pecking order in scientific circles as there are in any
profession, trade or organization for that matter, but I can't
understand why such an interesting subject can be so hard for
them to at least peek at. It doesn't take very long to discover
that there is something here to be lokked at in a major way.

I don't think anyone will argue that science is and has been up
for sale for the last 30 years or even more. By that I mean the
cigarette manufacturers scientists as opposed to the health and
welfare scientists, the ecological scientists verses the heavy
industry scientists as examples.

I think any scientist can have their bell rung though if
confronted by the stark evidence as were Clyde Tombaugh or Paul
R. Hill. I'm always impressed with Clyde Tombaugh's statement to
the effect that after having seen his first UFO his whole belief
system had been changed in a matter of seconds.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 21

                        Re: UFOs are not BVM-acabras

From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 12:55:58 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 05:22:56 -0400
Subject: Re: UFOs are not BVM-acabras

>Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 06:15:54 -0700
>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: UFOs are not BVM-acabras!


Excuse my density, but BVM?  Whazzat??  I know what a
BEM is, but not a BVM.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 21

                          Re: CE: Trace Case Center

From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 16:21:57 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 05:34:31 -0400
Subject: Re: CE: Trace Case Center

>Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 10:12:30 -0500
>From: Francis Ridge <slk@EVANSVILLE.NET>
>Subject: Trace Case Center
>To: CURRENT-ENCOUNTERS@LISTSERV.AOL.COM


>Hello List Members,

>I ask that you post this temporary link everywhere you can:
>http://www.evansville.net/~slk/icptr.htm Text of link as
>follows:

>Ted Phillips is THE foremost authority on trace cases and has
>established the International Center for Physical Trace
>Research. He will soon have his own web page linked to and from
>the NICAP site.

>Thanks,

>Fran


Good news, Fran!

I have gotten to know Ted recently, and must say that of all
the UFO researchers I have met he is the one with his feet most
solidly planted on terra firma.

He is also one of the few who knows his butt from a cave entrance
when it comes to photographic evaluation.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 21

             Re: Jerome Clark Wins 1998 Benjamin Franklin Award

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 98 13:45:02 PDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 05:38:55 -0400
Subject: Re: Jerome Clark Wins 1998 Benjamin Franklin Award


> Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 14:31:24 -0500 (CDT)
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: A Reason For CSICOP Condemning The X-Files
>              Movie?

> Dear List:

> Here's something else for PK, CSICOP & Co. to get all apoplectic
> about.

> I see by my mailbox that The UFO Book: Encyclopedia of the
> Extraterrestrial by Jerome Clark (Visible Ink Press) has just won
> the 1998 Benjamin Franklin Award in the Science/Environment
> category. The Award, sponsored by Publishers Marketing
> Association, celebrates "excellence in editorial [content] and
> design in book publishing."

> Congratulations, Jerry!

> Dennis


Dennis,

Thank you very much for the kind words.  And thanks
to everybody else who had something nice to say on
the subject.  I am really touched.

Best wishes to all,

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 21

                          Re: CE: Trace Case Center

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 14:27:52 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 05:50:02 -0400
Subject: Re: CE: Trace Case Center

>Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 10:12:30 -0500
>From: Francis Ridge <slk@EVANSVILLE.NET>
>Subject: Trace Case Center
>To: CURRENT-ENCOUNTERS@LISTSERV.AOL.COM


Dear Fran Ridge:

I only want to add a few unwanted notes,  but only if nobody
minds.

Ted Phillips is and has been THE catalguere-premiere,  of the
messiest and dumbest aliens ever to have visited this planet.

I nearly threw other catalogs away (take a guess...don't ask
which) just to get a copy of Ted's fine job.

I remain a very poor astronomer, Fran, and trust your expertise
when it comes to anomalies!

There is something solid and good about the grain country.....
Something I consider honest.

Best wishes

Larry Hatch






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 21

                        Re: Recommendations Please!?

From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 18:00:58 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 05:48:05 -0400
Subject: Re: Recommendations Please!?


>From: Peter Gersten <UFOLAWYER1@aol.com>
>Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 20:41:43 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Recommendations please!

>[Without Prejudice --ebk]

>CAUS is now planning the first of its annual mock trial events:

This wouldn't be a 'Kangaroo Court' type of event would it?

>'Contact--Proof Beyond a Reasonable Doubt.' Our premier event
>will be in the early part of 1999 in the Phoenix area and will
>include as many as 8 expert witnesses 'testifying' to different
>evidence of 'contact;' the scientific view of a 3D reality; and
>the possibility of 'higher dimensional intelligence.' Suggested
>areas of testimony include: crop circles; artificial structures
>outside of our planet; personal contact experiences; UFOs;
>paranormal phenomena; video and photographic anaylsis; and
>quantum physics.

>CAUS is interested in your opinion as to who these experts
>should be. Qualifications should include: particular expertise
>in area; years of experience; academic credentials; published
>works and the ability to articulate opinions. Each witness will
>be subject to ' cross-examination' about both their personal
>lives and professional qualifications and opinions.

>Peter A. Gersten
>Executive Director

How about Freeman Dyson, Arthur C. Clarke, Jill Tarter,
Colin Andrews, Story Musgrave, John Velez, Betty Hill,
and last but not least Errol Bruce-Knapp?

Most of the above's qualifications speak for themselves.

Intuition is also a factor in my choices. Will we be afforded the
opportunity to examine the transcripts or be advised of the
outcome of the event? How will it be communicated to the rest of
us?

Sue Kovios







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 21

             Re: CSICOP X-File Movie Review Lacks 'Rationalism'

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 00:44:33 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 06:00:15 -0400
Subject: Re: CSICOP X-File Movie Review Lacks 'Rationalism'


>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 06:46:54 -0700
>From: 'Jack Hudson' <true.x-file.news@n2news.com>
>Subject: CSICOP X-File Movie Review Lacks "Rationalism"

>"If The Truth Is Out There...We'll Find It!"

>6/19/98 For Immediate Release:

>CISCOP X-File Movie Review Lacks "Rationalism"

>by Jason Sterling

Hi All,

Me and my Margie went to see it last night. X-Philes are
going to love it. I'm not sure if folks who don't follow the
series will be able to enjoy it to the same degree though.
You really have to know 'a little' about the characters and
the shows' running alien theme to really appreciate it.

Production values were excellent (thank you BIG Hollywood
budget! <G>) and the quality that X-Philes are used to
was also there in generous helpings. I would recommend it
to all as a fun summer flick to go and see.

Screw CSICOP and especially that tight cheeked fellow
who wrote the review. I bet you couldn't drive a pin up
-his- butt if you used a jackhammer! <EG>

Go see the movie, it's fun and you'll enjoy it.

Peace,

John Velez


======================================================
                         AIC INTERACTIVE CONFERENCE
                                  jvif@spacelab.net
======================================================
 INTRUDERS FOUNDATION /ABDUCTION INFORMATION CENTER
                              http://www.if-aic.com
======================================================
             AIC -MEMBERS ONLY- /ACCESS CODES REQUIRED
======================================================








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 21

                        Re: UFOs are not BVM-acabras

From: RobIrving@aol.com
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 21:15:49 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 05:57:49 -0400
Subject: Re: UFOs are not BVM-acabras

>  Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 06:15:54 -0700
>  From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
>  To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>  Subject: UFOs are not BVM-acabras!
>
>  to: Mark, Rob, et. al:
>
>  If I may interrupt with a difficult question, a bit off topic I
>  suppose..

Hi Larry,

An amusing post, and not off topic at all.

>  What do I say to this not-so-hypothetical friend?

You begin by reminiscing about your trips to Venus, and then you
go for the ol' fake heart attack routine. That always pisses 'em
off.

Rob






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 21

                        Re: Recommendations Please!?

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 01:02:45 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 06:02:19 -0400
Subject: Re: Recommendations Please!?


>From: Peter Gersten <UFOLAWYER1@aol.com>
>Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 20:41:43 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Recommendations please!

>[Without Prejudice --ebk]

>CAUS is now planning the first of its annual mock trial events:

Geez, how odd. I thought CAUS was a 'politically oriented' group.
Representing the grass roots and all of that. I must have been
laboring under a delusion. I didn't know CAUS was an off-off-off
Broadway production company! Please be sure and let me know when
the "show" hits New York.

I'm sure Mr. Gersten will want to work out all of the kinks in
the dialog and the musical numbers before opening on The Great
White Way. Wow, what a great way to get the attention of the
people and those in the gubamint. A "show!" Yeah, we'll put on a
show!

Hearing/reading shit like this, and some of the other crappola
that CAUS clutters my e-mail box with makes me want to chew on a
45 caliber bullet and wash it down with rat poison!

What is that diet lady that looks like Annie Lennox on acid
always yelling, . . ."STOP THE INSANITY!"

Peace,

John Velez, and so many miles to go before I see Home.


======================================================
                         AIC INTERACTIVE CONFERENCE
                                  jvif@spacelab.net
======================================================
 INTRUDERS FOUNDATION /ABDUCTION INFORMATION CENTER
                              http://www.if-aic.com
======================================================
             AIC -MEMBERS ONLY- /ACCESS CODES REQUIRED
======================================================








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 21

                        Re: BWW Media Alert 19980620

From: <BufoCalvin@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 22:27:14 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 05:58:28 -0400
Subject: Re: BWW Media Alert 19980620


Bufo Calvin
P O Box 5231, Walnut Creek, CA  94596
Internet: BufoCalvin@aol.com
Website: <A HREF="http://members.aol.com/bufocalvin">http://members.aol.com/bufo
calvin<;/a>
<A HREF="surprise link to Amazon.com">http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=048
6230945/bufosweirdworldA/<;/a>
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED (permission is granted to reproduce or redistribute this
edition of Bufo's WEIRD WORLD 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).

June 20, 1998

Father's Day weekend, quite busy, will be brief.

TELEVISION

A&E
Sunday, June 28, 2:00 PM, THE UNEXPLAINED: PSYCHIC DETECTIVES

DISCOVERY CHANNEL
Sunday, June 21, 1:00 PM, ARTHUR C. CLARKE'S MYSTERIOUS WORLD: THE GREAT
SIBERIAN EXPLOSION (about the Tunguska Event of 1908...UFO crash, comet, black
hole, antimatter?)
Sunday, June 21, 1:30 PM, ARTHUR C. CLARKE'S MYSTERIOUS UNIVERSE: CRACKING
CODES: WRITINGS AND RIDDLES (Do ancient maps, etc., have encoded information
which disproves current theory?)
Sunday, June 21, 2:00 PM, STRANGE BUT TRUE: GHOSTS AND MIRACLES
Friday, June 26, 10:00 PM, MYSTERIES OF THE UNEXPLAINED: THE POWER OF THE
PARANORMAL
Saturday, June 27, 1:00 AM, MYSTERIES OF THE UNEXPLAINED: THE POWER OF THE
PARANORMAL
Saturday, June 27, 9:00 PM, SCI-TREK: UFOS: DOWN TO EARTH (UNCOVERING THE
EVIDENCE)
Sunday, June 28, 1:00 AM, SCI-TREK: UFOS: DOWN TO EARTH (UNCOVERING THE
EVIDENCE)
Sunday, June 28, 1:00 PM, ARTHUR C. CLARKE'S MYSTERIOUS WORLD: THE RIDDLE OF
THE STONES (ancient stone structures)
Sunday, June 28, 1:30 PM, ARTHUR C. CLARKE'S MYSTERIOUS UNIVERSE: THE PUZZLE
OF THE PYRAMIDS
Tuesday, June 30, 5:00 PM, TRAVELERS: LAS VEGAS (includes UFO enthusiasts)
___________________________

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 Media Alert the same way. Also, please let me know if
there is something in the media you think I should cover. Deadline is Tuesday, t
he 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.  For more information on OPUS, see its we
bsite at http://members.aol.com/josephxx3






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 21

                              Re: The Ten Cases

From: RobIrving@aol.com
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 21:15:46 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 05:57:03 -0400
Subject: Re: The Ten Cases

> Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: The Ten Cases
>  From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
>  Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 15:46:17 -0400
>  To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

Mark,

>  These cases are, BTW indicative and evidential. What the heck
>  else does suggestive mean, anyway?

I guess it all comes down to standards of evidence again. A part
of this discussion was about whether and why ETH proponents have
difficulties in getting their evidence accepted on a scientific
level - as if, at worst, a kind of suppression of evidence
occurs, or at best, what we might call 'orthodoxy-influenced'
scotomia.

What generally concerns me is that you consider witness reports
as evidence - hard data. Of course in one sense they are;
they're the accumulated data of what people say they
experienced. This would no doubt be useful to an anthropologist,
and perhaps even eventually as supportive evidence. But you seem
to present it as if there is no question of its veracity; as
solid and undisputable.

An anthropologist would tell you that as evidence witness
reports are by their nature unreliable, and present up-to-date
studies that support this - Loftus, for example. A physical
scientist will tell you that unverifiable evidence is no
evidence.

Therein lies the problem. Dennis meant 'evidential' in the sense
of it being defensible at a certain level - he said 'in a court
of law'. In general terms, witness evidence isn't. Nor are
confessions, btw.

You might ask, who would want to confess to a crime they didn't
commit? Whatever the answer, the fact is that some people do.

That's not to say that most testimony is untrue, just that you
can't say with any level of certainty, as you seem to be, that
they are.

As I said originally, the ETH is rooted in belief; one is either
inclined to believe these reports to be literally true or one
isn't. Greg argued in his original message that Occam's razor
should cut in favour of the former, being the simplest
explanation, even in the absence of physical evidence. However,
an abundance of evidence exists to counter this.

Despite your earlier arguments you are no more qualified to
decide the truth of these reports as I, or anyone. As has been
repeatedly demonstrated, it is possible that the witnesses
themselves cannot be entirely objective about what they saw.

You are arguing that it's more reasonable to accept these
stories as objectively true. I am arguing that it's more
reasonable to place them in the "who knows?" tray. In other
words, who knows until we see and can properly evaluate better
evidence?

On this point, what makes me suspicious is that such 'evidence'
is rarely forthcoming, which could either be because ET is much
too smart to leave any, investigators are too stupid to collect
it or leave it uncontaminated, or because there is a reluctance
on the part of ufologists to supply evidence for independent
scrutiny.

Anyway, that's basically what "suggestive" means.

>>How was this 1-2% arrived at?
>
>The AF classified approximately that percentage as hoaxes.

Tell me, have you ever rejected anything the AF has told you on
the basis that you thought it ridiculous? Forgive me Mark, but
you appear to have a typically naive idea of 'hoaxing', and what
might motivate 'hoaxers', just as I suspect the AF had...
however many years ago they came up with that figure. For you to
blandly quote this figure without taking into consideration the
effect an increase in public awareness in UFOs (whatever that
means) may have re people's motives for 'hoaxing' doesn't do
your argument credit.

No doubt you've read Jerome's interesting piece on this subject
in Stein's Encyclopedia of Hoaxes, or Marcello Truzzi's
analysis. As Jerome states, 'hoaxes that focus on unusual aerial
phenomena predate the modern UFO age by decades'.

Just as, in my opinion, ufologists tend to immunize themselves
from criticism by falsely characterising it - i.e. your comment,
"standard debunker's line" - so a similarly dismissive and
unrealistic argument is usually offered against 'hoaxing'; that
'hoaxers' are motivated by money, or attention, or even malice.
The 'genuine' v 'hoax' mentality that prevails in ufology may be
convenient, but from my experience the reality is much more
subtle.

Re. Valensole: I asked...

>"What was the police's interest in coming to a conclusion either
>way?"

I still think this is a relevant question, by the way. It stands
alone, but I'll tell you what makes me ask. In Wiltshire,
England, there is a farmer who tacitly allowed people to put
crop circles on her land. In one year she received 21 formations
of various sizes. Coupled with this were her own accounts of
ET-oriented phenomena. The local police, which I interviewed,
were more willing to take her version of things than face what
was actually happening (crime). This was probably simply because
she was local, and known to them - as she refused to accept that
these circles were 'hoaxes' she made no complaint (except
against people who argued they were hoaxes, whom she promptly
banned from her land), and so it was not really the police's
business. Bearing in mind, I believe it is quite relevant to ask
what would be the police's motivation in questioning the
Valensole farmer's story. Not least for you to look at the
scenario from a different perspective.

>I did, by the way, list the differences in my response to the
>sea serpent analogy. It applies equally well to the BVM or
>ghost stories. Perhaps you'd care to respond to that rather
>than putting the onus on me to disprove that your analogies
>apply?

Sorry, like Jerome I have deadlines, so I have not been paying
the attention your response deserved.

>Over time, other investigators have an opportunity to examine
>the witness and the evidence. For instance, if the witness
>develops a case of psychosis, this might suggest a hallucination
>was in fact responsible. Or a hoaxer may reveal the hoax. Such
>events have not apparently occurred in this case.

Not to be argumentative, but I can't see why hallucination
necessarily equates to "a case of psychosis". If you have ever
seriously studied cognitive science you wouldn't make such a
comment. Equally, why think that hoaxers automatically reveal
hoaxes? And there are many examples where 'hoaxers' have
revealed their involvement in UFO 'events' only for ufologists
to choose not to believe them. This makes sense, right?.. "Why
believe an admitted hoaxer?" I hear this all the time, and it
rather negates your simplistic view of 'hoax' revelations.

>You suggest that this case is not necessarily any different from
>"sea-serpent" stories.

Actually I think I said "lake monsters" - it's different... but
whatever.

There's an excellent "sea-goat" report I thought I might run by
you, maybe next time.

>Yet, why choose this analogy, except to follow a standard
>debunker's line of guilt by association?

I don't know why you assume that I think such stories are untrue
- so no, I chose these analogies because I think they are
comparitive.

>Is there any other salient point of comparison other than your
>personal sense of a common strangeness in the resulting reports?

Uh, yes. Arguably they may be inherent to environment, but I'll
let the PSHers argue that. The most salient point I would make
off the top of my head is that it seems that whatever people
report seeing, in many cases they come away believing they've
seen it.

>It is that sort of fallacious reasoning which has led to the
>baroque theories of the debunkers on the one hand and the
>bizarre associations in PNH on the other.

Easy to say (see above). Have you ever considered that this kind
of arbitrary characterization of opposing views to yours
provides reinforcement by discouraging consideration of
evidence? These are certainly not new debating techniques, Mark.

>As I pointed out in another message, UFO reports are
>qualitatively different from many types of "tales" - in their
>lack of a conventional narrative structure, their lack of a
>resolving explanation, and in the attempt of the witness to
>generate several levels of conventional explanation prior to
>admitting the presence of a novel stimulus.

Have you ever noticed how it is often the 'investigator' that
puts these values on reports? Respect for list decency precludes
me from mentioning names. "Tales", btw, is your word. To me,
'story' and 'report' are not as different as you suggest -- in
this context, they are both accounts of what people say they
saw. I am not implying, as you appear to think, that by 'story'
the teller is making things up. For what it's worth, I suspect
that you favour 'report' because it has a more scientific ring
to it, and is therefore more believable. It's a funny thing,
syntax. I use 'story' to remind you what they basically are.

Incidentally, attempts to rationalise what we don't understand
is common to all sorts of situations. It's entirely natural.

>Furthermore, the presence of multiple independent witnesses
>in many cases, the ability to detect the UFO with instruments
>that indicate the same location for a luminous phenomenon
>observed by a witness and an instrumental detection, take them
>far from any ghost or sea-serpent story I am familiar with.

That is probably because you're unfamiliar with the literature
-- I am sure there are many common examples (if my books weren't
boxed up - sorry, out of reach of this armchair - I'd look some
up for you).

What exactly do you mean by instruments, btw? Cameras? Radar?

I could offer various examples where say, the Loch Ness monster
has been 'located' on radar. As for the Blessed Virgin, you are
right - there couldn't have been many (if any) sightings of Her
on radar, due mainly to the ground-level nature of Her
appearances, I suspect. But all manner of 'popular' phenomena
have been captured on camera. I hope you're not about to suggest
that there's more likelihood of them being faked or
misinterpretations because you don't belief they exist.

In another post you stated...

>Perhaps you didn't realize that in the 1940s, ETH was not even in
>the running as a theory for UFOs, as far as the public was
>concerned.

Really?

>It was only cases like those I listed, which became
>famous in the press, that caused the change in opinion.

I hadn't realized this. So where in your opinion does Wells,
Welles, Fort's theory of ET (circa 1923), late-19th century
airship 'reports', etc., etc., fit in to this view?

Rob








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 21

                Re: A Divided Community Can Never Get Anwsers

From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 09:50:30 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 05:22:17 -0400
Subject: Re: A Divided Community Can Never Get Anwsers


You could call me a person who was never really attracted to the
inter-net, but after some persistent pressure from my colleagues
over the last year or so, telling me what a revelation the
W.W.W. has made on us in the UFO community. I am not quite sure
it has been a good thing. It seems that all the inter-net has
done, is to enable ufologists to rip the s..t out of each other,
rather than talking about cases on the phone, or face to face.

When I became interested in the research of the UFO Phenomena,
due to a multiple of incidents throughout my life, I didn,t
realise just how petty things would become over the years. I
have read on updates for some time now, ufologists condemning
each other as frauds - fakes etc. I personally am not bothered
in these accusations that have been doing the rounds, they dont
push us any further into my goal [Proving to the public of the
existence of E.T.]. I think some researchers need to step back
and take a deep breath, and look at where they are going in
terms of their arguments.

How are their rows helping the UFO community in any way?. The
establishments w-wide probably encourage some of these fall
outs, no doubt. As for myself and my fellow researchers we shall
keep doing the ground-work, talking to joe public, finding out
the facts, keep doing the sky-watches, keep printing our facts
on our investigations without turning the knifes on anyone.

It does look to me that those who now come forward in any
way,with a revalation on this subject are in fact putting their
neck on the line. This has the effect on those people who
probably do hold footage etc, from abstaining on coming forward,
they have taken a peak inside and they dont like what they see.

There maybe sometime in our future when E.T. decides to land in
Hyde Park or on the White House Lawn, I just wish they would
hurry up about it, and hopefully settle the row once and for
all!.


To you & yours

Roy.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 21

                      Red Shining Object Over Charlotte

From: "Stefan Duncan" <duncan@tarheel.net>
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 19:09:33 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 05:50:40 -0400
Subject: Red Shining Object Over Charlotte

Has anyone heard reports of a bright red shining object over
Charlotte, N.C. last Friday night?

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXHXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Stefan Duncan
Director of XPI
Editor of AUFON
4055 Hwy. 152E #8
Rockwell, NC 28138
http://www.aufon.com
ICQ 11878618








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 21

              P1947: The X-Files Movie - CISCOP Has Nothing To

From: Steven Kaeser <steve@KONSULTING.COM>
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 20:01:46 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 09:42:25 -0400
Subject: P1947: The X-Files Movie - CISCOP Has Nothing To

Just a couple of thoughts regarding the new X-Files Movie and
CISCOPs concerns.

Having watched the greatly hyped X-Files movie "Fight the
Future", I would have to question whether CISCOP's reviewers
actually saw it before they expressed their views on its
world-wide impact.

I won't go into the plot line, since there are those who may want
to see it, but since it appears to be little more than a big
screen version of the television program, it shouldn't have any
greater impact that the TV show itself.  Other might want to
argue, but I found the special effects to be no more
sophisticated than one would find on the weekly program, and the
overall plot line was no more involved than a standard two or
three part TV show.

When the program first aired, there were a few voices from
believers who questioned whether or not the program was part of
an education program to prepare us for the "truth".   I have
assumed by their absence that they have realized that "The
X-Files" is just a fictional TV show.  I would predict that the
new movie won't change that opinion.

IMO. during the first two seasons of the program, Carter used
most of the accepted "myths" in UFOlogy and he had to expand on
those "myths" to continue his plot lines.   When that expansion
took him out onto tangents that clearly were fictional, comments
about the program on various "lists" seemed to dry up completely.
 This Movie expands greatly on one of those tangents and sets it
into stone, and I'm now curious as to how Carter will proceed
with the plot lines next year.  Of course, Mulder could wake up
at the beginning of next season and find the experiences he had
in the Movie were all a dream.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 21

                            Re: More on Sheffield

From: Max Burn <AlienHype1@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 09:21:00 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 09:52:41 -0400
Subject: Re: More on Sheffield


>From: David Clarke <dclarke14@compuserve.com>
>Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 15:00:23 -0400
>FwdDate: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 16:41:10 -0400
>Subject: Sheffield 'Incident' - New Evidence

<snip>

In response to Mr Clark's previous postings

I find it quite amusing to hear you quote M.O.D reply's I do not
need to hear another official stamp of approval on the
perpetuation of a coverup as being forwarded by yourself..

If you ask questions like this to the M.O.D what sort of
responce do you expect to get, for me its like asking a
murderer, did you do it and expecting him to reply yes.

This is a question Mr Clark asked recently to some high ranking
officials

<snip>

>Dear Mr Ministry of defence could you tell me if you
>were intercepting a Flying Triangle over the Peak
>district on the 24th March 1997 and did one of your
>tornado jets crash or attacked by such
>triangle was there the loss of a jet with the death of
>a pilot during this incident.

<snip>

These are the statements that the M.O.D have made during the
last 15 months, please note how many times they have changed
there minds.

<snip>

>Reply1: We had no planes in the air that night.

>Reply2: We had some planes in the air but, they were
>on maneuvers over the North sea.

>Reply3: Well we did have some aircraft over the North
>of England on a covert low flying training mission

>Reply4: It wasn't the Tornado Intercepters based at RAF
>Conisby, but the Strike Tornado's based at RAF Markham
>and there were Jaguars present, and some N.A.T.O
>Tornado's but we they do not specify which type.

>Reply5: There were NO Flying Triangle's, and there were
>no ufo reports to the police on the 24th or 25th of March,
>as stated by questions raised in the houses of Parliament
>by Helen Jackson MP

<snip>

Which is a lie There are lot's of UFO reports to the police on
the 24th and 25th March 1997

Well let's have a look From the police log, there are plenty of
ufo sightings reported to the police on the 24th March 1997

26  03/25  10.09  14NC3005  OPE
                Call From Mrs Dronfield 1 Moorlands
                Place at Stannington TN ***** ******
                about 22.00  last night looked out of
                her bedroom window towards Bradfield
                could see a cigar shaped object which
                was very low going towards High
                Bradfield states it was lit up more than
                a normal plane could be it went from
                view behind a house so it was very low

Mr David Clark has ignored this witness, Mrs Dronfield has told
both of us that the cigar shaped object she saw was glowing
orange as it went behind the houses.. Why have you ignored this
credible witness? I believe because of the object cigar shape
and very low altitude that she has seen the triangle from the
side view.

32  03/25  11.39  14NC3341  OPE
                Call from Bryan Haslam 5 Coronation
                Mount West Lane Keighly T/N ***** ******
                Yesterday approx 19.40  traveling on a
                train  back home .States around the
                Barnsley area saw a triangle shaped
                object with lights all around it hovering.
                Does not think it was a plane thinks we
                are wasting our time.

He is very certain about what he saw that night

2  03/24  22.19  14NCRODG OPE
                Callers mother and brother live on More
                Hall lane they saw a plane flying low
                about 10 minutes ago, then saw a red
                flash then smoke and think a plane
                may have come down on the moors in
                the distance from Bolderstone Village

The peak District is a very wet part of the world, what would
cause a red flash and smoke. I think that it is reasonable to
assume based on all the other evidence that its not much of a
leap to summise that a plane has crashed

186  03/25  07.16  14NCGOOD  OPE
                Call received from Mrs Miller 88 Wheel
                Lane t/n ***** ****** she states that
                approx 22.30 last night she was looking
                out of her window over Whitley lane
                towards Burncross and saw a red light
                in the sky what she believed to be a plane
                to she then states she then states that
                she saw white flashing lights as though
                someone was taking a photograph she
                states she has heard on the radio this
                morning about this incident and wonders
                if this has anything to do with it she has
                been informed that we will recontact her
                if need be

Is this the spotter plane that was seen all over the area in
close proximity of the triangle sightings, taking photograph�s?

190  03/25  07.33  14NC2975  OPE
                From Ps 20 Grayson  at 00.45 on 25/3/97
                i was visited Mr Morton and Mother at
                edge end farm Moorhall lane Bolderstone
                Tel ***** ****** Mr Morton describes seeing
                a low flying plane traveling in a west south
                west direction  and apparently having
                come from the direction of Deepcar Both
                he and his mother commented on the low
                level of the aircraft and its low speed.he
                was able to see the fixed wing navigation
                lights and the silhouette of a small fixed
                wing aircraft from his home grid ref
                278965 he pointed out the high ground
                due west of his home where he last had
                sight of the planes navigation lights a
                short while later he saw an orange glow
                followed by several plumes of smoke using
                a map i had with me he indicated the ridge
                formed by outer edge Grid ref 177970
                and Featherbed Moss Grid ref 193940
                which he believes to be  the highest
                ground visible to the west and to be the
                ridge the plane passed over he then
                pointed to Margerry Hill Grid ref 189957
                and suggested that it was roughly at this
                location that he last had sight of the plane
                he felt that they are on the west side of
                Derwent valley and would be the most
                likely place to start .

No report�s of ufo�s reported to the police on the 24th March
1997.

Glowing orange object's Cigar shaped objects, on interviewing
this witness she told me that the object was also glowing
orange, MR David Clark has also interviewed this witness and she
has told him the same thing but he chooses to ignore it WHY?
One witness even saw the triangle in daylight (see Bryan Haslam)
as you can see lies being told in the houses of Parliament.with
regard to ufo sightings on the night in question.

I feel sure that glowing orange object�s, and cigar shaped
object�s, and triangles fits the bill of. Unidentified flying
object�s.

As well as that reports of red flashes then smoke plumes or we
saw an orange glow followed by several plumes of smoke. Then a
man encountered in the area an hour after these reports stinking
of aviation fuel, and the militiary say nothing has crashed
who�s kidding who here.

More from the police log:

207  03/25  09.24  14SYFENN  OPE
                Call from Mick Logan AIB at Maltby
                if required they have the equipment
                for measuring up at scenes of accident
                which span over a large area AIB are
                aware that it a Civil Aviation Matter but
                they are prepared to assist with
                measurements plans etc

More evidence nothing has crashed.

Let's stay focused on the evidence.  I reiterate Mr Clark you
are believing or party to lies being told by our Military (see
evidence above)

Mr Clarke  myself and the reader�s of update�s would be pleased
to hear your explanation as to why your original 26 page report
on the Sheffield incident stated that it was nothing more than a
bolide meteor,which you presented to the Bufora group.as there
area investgator?.

As it turns out you were completely wrong or acting on another
agenda, and an explanation as to why you research was so far
from the mark?

And you have the audacity to accuse myself of poor research

Could you also please explain why you chose to ignore the fact
that the RAF were in the area?.

Could you also explain why you were so insistant that there were
no military jets, even as late as Febuary this year?.

Could you please tell us all how you feel after  you consulted
the BBC on the making of the Carol Vorderman program,with
statements and advice on the making of there documentary that it
was nothing other than a Bolide?.

Will you please acknowledge that you made a grave error of
judgment, and advised a national TV show with wrong or
dis-information regarding event�s over the peak district on the
24th March 1997 ?.

Was this dis-information or poor research ?.

All this just because one of the RAF jets might have gone
supersonic by accident, which the RAF still deny.  I hope the
reader�s of update�s agree that it is a lot of changing stories
just to cover up two Sonic Boom's.

Mr Clark, there is no excuse for either your previous poor
shoddy research or disinformation. Why should any of the user�s
of the update�s service believe that you are right now based on
your previous attempt at reporting this incident, the previous
report was either poor research or dis-information personally I
believe you are an intelligent man and therfore i must conclude
that some one of your intelect, could not have made so many
error�s in there original investigation. So I believe that your
error�s were deliberate and you are Party to the cover up.

In fact I ask Bufora or yourself Mr Clarke to post your report
or make it available to all interested in this case. Comments
Steve Gamble & Mr Clarke please.

Those are the facts and you know it.

Mr Clarke will you make your original report available for list
member's.?(Bolide) 26 pages of Bolide, no jet's, no ufo's just
Bolide, Sonic boom

List member�s Don't just take my word for it. Do you expect all
list members to believe the military just because themselves and
the authorities say nothing has occurred?

Ok.  How much evidence is there out there that the military have
lied are involved in a global cover
up of the UFO phenomena........

With regard to your challenge that i supply you with,

1. The name of the pilot
2. The air base where the tornado jet was launched from.
3. The registration number of the jet
4. Proof that this jet existed.
5. Evidence that this jet no longer exist�s

Obviously I am striving toward�s this goal, and have opened some
new avenue�s with regard to obtaining this information. And as
patience is a virtue, I feel that I will eventually succeed in
obtaining this proof.

However I do not think that I will be supplying you with any
such information, after all dont you think that I have shared
enough of my research with you?

Hold that thought.

You can read my research at:

http://www.skipnet.com/~visitations/sheffield/

Thanks,

Max Burns







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 21

                          P1947: Project Tattletale

From: Joel Carpenter <ufx@MINDSPRING.COM>
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 00:27:42 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 09:41:50 -0400
Subject: P1947: Project Tattletale

NRL Built and Deployed First Reconnaissance Satellite System

WASHINGTON, June 17 -- While attending the Naval Research
Laboratory's (NRL) week-long Diamond Jubilee Celebration,
Washington, DC, Mr. Keith Hall, Director, National
Reconnaissance Office, and Rear Admiral Lowell E. Jacoby, USN,
Director of Naval Intelligence, announced the declassification
of the United States' first reconnaissance satellite system,
the Galactic Radiation and Background (GRAB) satellite system.
GRAB was proposed, developed, built, and operated by the Naval
Research Laboratory.

The following announcement is an approved declassification
action directed by the Director of Central Intelligence in
keeping with Executive Order 12958.

"A U.S. Navy electronic intelligence (ELINT) satellite system
became operational in July 1960 and was operated until August
1962. The heretofore classified mission was to obtain
information on Soviet air defense radars that could not be
observed by Air Force and Navy ferret aircraft flying ELINT
missions along accessible borders in Europe and the western
Pacific.

The ELINT satellite system was proposed by the Naval Research
Laboratory in the spring of 1958. In parallel with exploratory
development by NRL, the Office of Naval Intelligence obtained
endorsements for Project Tattletale from elements of the
executive and legislative branches. With positive
recommendations from State, Defense, and CIA, President
Eisenhower approved full development on 24 August 1959. By then,
the project had been placed under a tight security control
system with access limited to fewer than 200 officials in the
Washington DC area. Development and interagency coordination
proceeded as the GRAB (Galactic Radiation and Background)
experiment.

After NRL completed development of the GRAB satellite and a
network of overseas ground collection sites, a first launch was
approved by Eisenhower on 5 May 1960, just four days after a CIA
U-2 aircraft was lost on a reconnaissance mission over Soviet
territory. The GRAB satellite got a free ride into space on 22
June 1960 with Navy's third Transit navigation satellite. GRAB
carried two electronic payloads, the classified ELINT package
and instrumentation to measure solar radiation. The SolRad
experiment was publicly disclosed in Department of Defense press
releases on this and subsequent launches. Four more launches
were attempted, and one was successful on 29 June 1961.

The Director of Naval Intelligence exercised overall control.
Data recorded on magnetic tape was couriered back to the NRL,
then evaluated, duplicated, and forwarded to the NSA at the
Army's Fort Meade, Maryland, and the Strategic Air Command (SAC)
at Offutt Air Force Base, Omaha, Nebraska, for analysis and
processing. SAC's processing was aimed at defining the
characteristics and location of air defense equipment to support
building the SIOP (single integrated operations plan), a
responsibility of the Joint Strategic Targeting Staff at Offutt
AFB. In searching the tapes for new and unusual signals, NSA
found that the Soviets were already operating a radar that
supported a capability to destroy ballistic missiles.

Secretary of Defense Robert S. McNamara formally established the
NRO on 14 June 1962 by a top secret directive, and the GRAB
technology was then transferred to the NRO."

NRL has a 75-year history in science and technology development.
NRL pioneered naval research into space, from atmospheric probes
with captured V-2 rockets, through the direction of the Vanguard
project -- America's first satellite program, to such  projects
as the Global Positioning System and more recently the
Clementine mission. NRL produced the first satellite
communication system by using the moon as a reflector and
receiving the returned signal on the Earth's largest parabolic
antenna; this was a first step toward artificial satellite
communications. Since the late 1950's, Laboratory scientists
have designed, built and launched more than 80 satellites. The
GRAB space program announcement is indicative of the many
contributions of NRL's scientists and engineers in support of
the Navy's and National interests. The Naval Research Laboratory
is the Navy's corporate laboratory. NRL conducts a broad program
of scientific research, technology and advanced development. The
Laboratory, with a total complement of nearly 3,400 personnel,
is located in southwest Washington, DC, with other major sites
at the Stennis Space Center, Miss.; and Monterey, Calif.

Source: Naval Research Laboratory
Contact: Dick Thompson of the Naval Research
Laboratory, 202-767-2541 or
rthompso@ccf.nrl.navy.mil






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 21

                        Re: UFOs are not BVM-acabras

From: JJ Mercieca <mufor@maltanet.net>
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 15:35:02 +0200
Fwd Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 10:06:22 -0400
Subject: Re: UFOs are not BVM-acabras

Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 12:55:58 -0400
To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: UFOs are not BVM-acabras

>Excuse my density, but BVM?  Whazzat??  I know what a
>BEM is, but not a BVM.
>Bob

I think that stands for Blessed Virgin Mary sightings like
Fatima, Medjugorje, etc.

We've had a few of those here in Malta in the past 200 years
and a Church has gone up in each place.  At least 3 if I
recall correctly.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 21

                         Re: Secrets & Conspiracies

From: Stanton T. Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 10:38:07 -0300
Fwd Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 10:10:42 -0400
Subject: Re: Secrets & Conspiracies


> Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 11:55:41 -0500 (CDT)
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Secrets & Conspiracies

> >Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 07:40:02 -0400
> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> >From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Secrets & Conspiracies

> >>And the difference between flying saucers and your average black
> >>budget project should be obvious. Someone directs and controls
> >>the black budget projects -- no one has control over the UFO
> >>phenomenon.

> >>Dennis

> >Dennis,

> >It would seem to me that this is another conclusion reached without
> >sufficient evidence.  How do you KNOW that no one has control over
> >the UFO phenomenon.

> >I am not arguing that someone does, just that we don't really
> >know since we don't know yet what the UFO phenomenon is.

> >We have far too much jumping to conclusions here.

> >Bob

> You have to start *somewhere*, Bob. Or, as Charles Fort said,
> "One measures a circle beginning anywhere."

> What I meant was that no one is in charge of keeping the UFO
> phenomenon a secret from anyone or we wouldn't have any case
> reports. Put another way, Vallee once said the AF could no more
> cover up UFOs than they could the Andromeda galaxy, because there
> was nothing to prevent your hauling a telescope into your
> backyard and having a look for yourself.

> If I didn't want you to get at the gold in Fort Knox, however,
> that would be pretty readily manageable.

> No conclusions were jummped here, nor were any adjectives
> stretched or otherwise harmed in the formulation of this
> argument.

> Dennis


The analogy with Andromda is a false one. Andromeda is there,
many telescopes are available and we all know where to look.

We don't have access to the classified data obtained by
satellites, by sophisticated radar, by aircraft with EM
monitoring equipment, nor to the data obtained by NRO, NSA,
laboratories testing wreckage evaluating bodies, etc.

There is an enormous difference between somebody standing gawking
at the sky watching a UFO and the kind of information that I as a
scientist want. There is instrumentation available, but nothing
without a need to know.

The analogy is false.

Stan Friedman






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 21

             Re: Michigan's "Thumb Area" Currently Under A Flap?

From: Jeff Westover <jeff.westover@mailexcite.com>
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 08:01:42 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 18:22:59 -0400
Subject: Re: Michigan's "Thumb Area" Currently Under A Flap?


Hello subscribers.

UFO sightings are on the increase in Michigan's
'thumb-area', seemingly centered around Marlette and Brown City.
Last night's odd amber lights (common UFOs to this area) made
another appearance and on June 17, high altitude, starlike
objects zig-zagged across the sky and local residents heard
"high pitched whirring" sounds as neighborhood animals became
agitated.

These are just the latest events in rural Sanilac, Tuscola,
Lapeer, St. Clair and Huron counties (the 'thumb area').

This latest flap seems to have begun in late November, 1997 when
a Genesee County Deputy Sheriff drove under an unmoving and
massive lit object on US-23 five miles south of Flint.  He
reported his sighting to Michigan MUFON.  A few days later,
December 1, 1997, a Marlette man watches a massive lit object
hovering motionless above Peck, Michigan in southern Sanilac
County.  It vanished into thin air when two airplanes approached
it (military?)

On December 13th, a southern Sanilac County Police Officer,
along with his partner and an entire family, witnessed a UFO
hovering over Brown City for upwards of an hour before it
drifted off.  Official police documents show this event as
actually occurring and further show Selfridge Air National Guard
in Mount Clemens, Michigan advising the police dispatcher "that
it was probably a helicopter that was sighted and there was
nothing much that could be done from that end."  I've spoken to
one of the two police officers and I can tell you that the sound
of his voice alone told me that he was witness to something
other than a helicopter.

Two nights later, on December 15, 1997, a Marlette, Michigan
woman watched a huge silent saucer, with round lights on the
bottom of the craft that were each much larger than the full
moon, drift slowly above her home.

A flap occurred in this area in 1993 as documented by Michigan
MUFON.  The Kingston, Caro and Cass City areas had multiple
sightings of hovering triangles, one possibly 500 feet wide.
Apparently, a past Michigan MUFON State Director had possession
of a videotape of one of these objects.

Michigan's thumb area has played host to other unusual
phenomenon.  Crop formations, Bigfoot and mysterious underground
explosions.

Dr. W.C. Levengood has studied the October 1995 Bad Axe (Huron
County) crop formation and found it to be a legitimate
formation, although far from geometrical or circular in design.
It contained the earmark molecular changes and high heat
application to the vegetation spurred a growth of a black sooty
fungus.

In February 1996 several bizarre underground explosions shook
Ellington, Michigan (between Cass City and Caro).  Michigan
State University scientists, in 1997, verified that there were
no earthquakes in Michigan since 1994 when one occurred west of
Lansing.

If anyone has any information on any of these events or has had
any other experiences taking place in Michigan's thumb, please
contact me at jeff.westover@mailexcite.com.  I'm also looking
for people with videocams and other equiptment for skywatching
to assist me.

Please visit the following URLs for further information
concerning Michigan's UFO events.

UFO Mind's Michigan Page
http://www.ufomind.com/place/us/mi/

"Phenomenon-The Michigan UFO Experience"
http://www.geocities.com/CollegePark/Quad/1365/

Thank you, Jeff Westover Marlette, Michigan --- "Prejudice will
take you farther from the truth than ignorance"  Bang Weng Gwang

Enter into the "Night Of Light" art gallery at
http://www.crystaltower.com/jeffw



Free web-based email, Forever, From anywhere!
http://www.mailexcite.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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 21

                        Re: Recommendations Please!?

From: Rod Eastman <darkstar@carrollsweb.com>
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 09:10:15 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 18:22:47 -0400
Subject: Re: Recommendations Please!?


> Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 01:02:45 -0500
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Recommendations Please!?

> >From: Peter Gersten <UFOLAWYER1@aol.com>
> >Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 20:41:43 EDT
> >To: updates@globalserve.net
> >Subject: Recommendations please!

<snip>

> >CAUS is now planning the first of its annual mock trial events:

<snip>

> What is that diet lady that looks like Annie Lennox on acid
> always yelling, . . ."STOP THE INSANITY!"

> Peace,

> John Velez, and so many miles to go before I see Home.

Susan Powter, yup, yup.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 21

                       Trumbull County 911/UFO Website

From: Kenny Young <task@FUSE.NET>
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 10:31:29 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 18:23:11 -0400
Subject:  Trumbull County 911/UFO Website

A new web-site has been dedicated exclusively to presenting reports,
investigative summations and current information regarding the
incredible 9-1-1/UFO incident in Trumbull County, Ohio from 1994.

This site is located at:
        http://home.fuse.net/task/Trumbull_Index.htm

It will be updated when additional information becomes available.

Kenny Young
June 21, 1998
--
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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 21

                        Re: UFOs are not BVM-acabras

From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 11:30:51 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 18:23:58 -0400
Subject: Re: UFOs are not BVM-acabras


>Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 15:35:02 +0200
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: JJ Mercieca <mufor@maltanet.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: UFOs are not BVM-acabras

>I think that stands for Blessed Virgin Mary sightings like
>Fatima, Medjugorje, etc.
>
>We've had a few of those here in Malta in the past 200 years
>and a Church has gone up in each place.  At least 3 if I
>recall correctly.
>
>Regards,
>
>JJ Mercieca
>Malta UFO Research
>http://www.mufor.org/


Thanks, JJ.  I never would have guessed that one.  I think we
should have a rule that anyone using an abbreviation here for
the first time should tell us what it means.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 21

                             Re: New Jet or UFO?

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 11:37:41 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 18:24:53 -0400
Subject: Re: New Jet or UFO?


>From: Sue Strickland <strick@H2Net.net>
>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: Fast Walker New Jet or UFO?
>Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 20:07:47 -0600

> I've got an interesting sighting to discuss. If there's someone
> able to respond to this, I would greatly appreciate it.

Hi, Sue -

You don't mention the geometry of the object. Was it
cylindrical, disc shaped, triangular?

Did it have any other projections or structure besides the
"cockpit"?

How did you first see the object if it was night and the object
was not illuminated?

Did this sighting occur before or after you were made
aware of your possible abduction experiences?

Was this case investigated by an independent investigator? Have
any sketches, maps, etc. been developed as part of such an
investigation?

Did you observe the object in front of anything which was at
a known distance? Did you have a sense of its proximity based
on depth vision?

Thanks in advance.

------
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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 21

                Re: CSICOP's Religious War Against The Unholy

From: "John Ratcliff" <jratclif@inlink.com>
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 12:15:13 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 18:29:59 -0400
Subject: Re: CSICOP's Religious War Against The Unholy

I feel compelled to make a comment regarding CSICOP's recent
press release.  For those who don't already know, CSICOP is a
fundamentalist religious organization, not at all unlike other
popular religions such as Mormonism, Catholicism, Judaism,
Jehovah's Witnesses, and so forth.  While the hypocrisy of
Christians is always amusing to watch, the unmitigated gall of
the cult followers of the CSICOP movement can be somewhat
irritating.

The distinction is simply that most religions at least have the
good sense to wrap their dogma in terms of "faith", while the
CSICOP brethren present their litany of material reductionism
under the guise of reason and rationality.  Nothing could be
further from the truth, of course, since it appears that no
CSICOP member seems to have ever truly managed to grasp the
concept of relativism.

Reality assimilation is a highly personal thing, between the
consciousness of an observer/experiencer of Universe and his,
her, or it's central nervous system.  That CSICOP as a group
seems committed to dictate consensus reality in some sort of
totalitarian way, waging an ideological battle against anyone who
dares experience a touch of reality outside of their strict rule,
is no more or less disconcerting than any other inquisition in
human history.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 21

             Second Annual Long Island UFO Conference - 11-08-98

From: Joanne Steele <Wolflady@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 15:30:59 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 18:45:36 -0400
Subject: Second Annual Long Island UFO Conference - 11-08-98

EYES OF LEARNING, INC
STARPEOPLE

Second Annual Long Island UFO Conference
Sunday, November 8, 1998 8:30 am till 7:00 pm
Levittown Hall, Levittown Parkway,
Hicksville, New York

GUEST SPEAKERS

Colin Andrews
As one of the earth's premier Crop Circle Researchers, Colin
documented and collected thousands of reports, photographs and
charts demonstrating the instantaneous appearance of these
enormous pictorial symbols.

Antonio Huneeus
Investigated alien and extraterrestrial activities since 1973.
Antonio lecture will be on UFO CHRONICLE AND GLOBAL PERCEPTION.

Stewart Swerdlow
Personally experiences the extraordinary events during The
Montauk Experiments. He authored 'Montauk - The Alien
Connection' and 'The Healing Handbook: A Journey Into
Hyperspace.'

Chuck Walker
Offers a multimedia presentation titled UFOs and World
Mysteries, Chuck's camera recorded Peru's Machu Pichu, Southern
England's Crop Circle, Roswell New Mexico, Area 51 and much
more. This audio-visual presentation brings the mysteries of the
world to you.


REGISTRATION:

$25 per ticket (Members) before Oct 15, 1998,
$35 per ticket (non-members) before Oct 15, 1998.
$45 at the door if space allows.

For more information Please Contact Joanne Steele at
(516) 420-8767

or write to:

P.O. Box 8007 Hicksville
N.Y. 11802-8007
USA

Check out web site too for directions and Registration Form
http://members.aol.com/wolflady/web






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 21

                         Re: Secrets & Conspiracies

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 11:52:12 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 18:34:56 -0400
Subject: Re: Secrets & Conspiracies


>Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 10:38:07 -0300
>From: Stanton T. Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Secrets & Conspiracies


>The analogy with Andromda is a false one. Andromeda is there,
>many telescopes are available and we all know where to look.

It's not an analogy, Stan, so much as an example. If you don't
like the example of Andromeda, then simply substitute something
like the "night skies." Vallee's point was that the AF couldn't
prevent people investigating something that was beyond their
control. That's not the same as saying the AF can't control
whatever data they've collected on their own; Vallee was saying
that didn't stop us from gathering our own best data.

By way of another example -- also not an analogy -- quite a good
civilian investigation, with instrumentation and photographs,
was mounted at the Hessdalen Valley. Similarly, you are free to
make what you will of the many, many pictures emanating out of
Gulf Breeze over the years. Point is, the AF isn't down there
telling everyone to stay off the beaches and inside their
houses.

>We don't have access to the classified data obtained by
>satellites, by sophisticated radar, by aircraft with EM
>monitoring equipment, nor to the data obtained by NRO, NSA,
>laboratories testing wreckage evaluating bodies, etc.

I seriously doubt if NSA has any laboratory facilities in which
bodies and wreckage could be tested. Ditto, the NRO. Chemical and
biological analysis isn't in their job description --
intelligence gathering and interpretation is.

I also doubt that the AF -- or anyone else -- can control where
UFOs crash.
Thus, if one were to slam into the Emprie State building tomorrow
-- having taken the long way from Linda's apartment back to the
Hudson River -- it seems pretty safe to say that the cat would be
out of the bag and that there would be little the AF or anyone
else could do about it, including covering up the fact, or the
origin and nature of the fact.

As for certain satellite data, you are aware that a few
scientists from the University of Arizona, I believe, were
allowed to look at some of that classified data recently and
disovered that asteroids explode in the upper atmosphere much
more frequently than previously supposed.

In the main, though, these guys are designed not to detect and
track everything in sight, in fact, they are programmed to ignore
most of what they see the better to concentrate on ICBM launch
signatures, which fall within fairly characteristic parameters.
Thus, it's possible that even if you had the entire print-out of
a "fast walker," you wouldn't necessarily be able to tell what a
fast walker was. I admit we have no way of knowing at the moment,
but it's at least arguable that the spy satellites themselves
don't really "care."

You must also be aware that the world has changed drastically in
the wake of the collpase of the Cold War. If you've got the
money, you can already buy Soviet satellite pictures on the WWW.
And a new generation of civilian "spy" satellites will soon be in
orbit, as well. Yes, they won't be quite as good as the
military's best, at the same time, they should be quite
sufficient for capturing many UFOs, especially the big guys like
the flying triangles and wings, but your "average" 30-foot
daylight disk as well.

If you followed up the links, recently posted here, to the
lightning strike detection network, you know that all sorts of
air and ground-based monitoring of geophysical and atmospheric
phenomena is presently taking place, without an iota of AF
knowledge or oversight control.

Similarly, more and more governments and commercial entities are
acquiring significant radar and air traffic control systems, over
which our AF "cover-up" office has no control whatsoever. I
believe the Chilean AF recently announced its own UFO agency, to
name but the most drastic example.

In short, UFOs are increasingly running out of places to hide,
Stan, just as the AF is rapidly running out of effective ways to
hide them, if they haven't already.

>There is an enormous difference between somebody standing gawking
>at the sky watching a UFO and the kind of information that I as a
>scientist want. There is instrumentation available, but nothing
>without a need to know.

>The analogy is false.

>Stan Friedman


No, Stan, it's not false, for the reasons stated above. If you
don't like the Andromeda example, simply substitute the sky
itself instead.

The sky has never been more monitored and less controlled than it
is now. There is no way that the AF has a monopoly on the UFO
data now, electronic or otherwise. Too many eyes in the sky.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 21

                Re: A Divided Community Can Never Get Anwsers

From: Diane Lovett <RAMBLD@worldnet.att.net>
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 12:09:30 +0000
Fwd Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 18:28:19 -0400
Subject: Re: A Divided Community Can Never Get Anwsers


> Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 09:50:30 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
> Subject: A Divided Community Can Never Get Anwsers
> To: updates@globalserve.net

> You could call me a person who was never really attracted to the
> inter-net, but after some persistent pressure from my colleagues
> over the last year or so, telling me what a revelation the
> W.W.W. has made on us in the UFO community. I am not quite sure
> it has been a good thing. It seems that all the inter-net has
> done, is to enable ufologists to rip the s..t out of each other,
> rather than talking about cases on the phone, or face to face.

> When I became interested in the research of the UFO Phenomena,
> due to a multiple of incidents throughout my life, I didn,t
> realise just how petty things would become over the years. I
> have read on updates for some time now, ufologists condemning
> each other as frauds - fakes etc. I personally am not bothered
> in these accusations that have been doing the rounds, they dont
> push us any further into my goal [Proving to the public of the
> existence of E.T.]. I think some researchers need to step back
> and take a deep breath, and look at where they are going in
> terms of their arguments.


Amen to that. It has only been since reading stuff on the
internet that I personally realized how negative,
confrontational, and competitive so many in ufology truly are. I
don't go to conferences, and I never got that picture from
reading books or even the odd TV show. The name calling and
nastiness leaves a really bad taste in a lot of mouths. Disagree
all you want, but what in the world is accomplished by name
calling and personal attacks?!

<snip>

> It does look to me that those who now come forward in any
> way,with a revalation on this subject are in fact putting their
> neck on the line. This has the effect on those people who
> probably do hold footage etc, from abstaining on coming forward,
> they have taken a peak inside and they dont like what they see.

Again, amen! I have now met so many witness' or abductees who
have been burned badly by going public even in the slightest way,
that I have to say that if I personally managed to take a
detailed photo or video, or grab some sort or physical evidence,
I would be scared to death to offer that info. I would feel 100%
certain that no matter how geniune what I had to offer was, I
would be torn to bits, most of all by those who are in ufology.
Are we all really after answers? I have said it before and will
again, anyone, witness, abductee, or "researcher" who basically
says "I am right and pretty much everyone else is wrong-and to
prove it I will engage in deeply personal attacks on all and
sundry"-will find no quarter with me. What a waste of precious
time and resource.

Diane





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 21

                          Strieber's 'Confirmation'

From: Diane Lovett <RAMBLD@worldnet.att.net>
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 12:31:35 +0000
Fwd Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 18:33:10 -0400
Subject: Strieber's 'Confirmation'

Dear List,

I have just finished reading Whitley Strieber's newest book,
"Confirmation", and wanted to just share some of my thoughts on
it.

My own reactions to Strieber over the years has fluctuated a
lot, but with this book I have gained a greater respect for him.
I can really relate better to the human being here as he talks
about the persecution and misunderstandings he has endured
because of his efforts to understand the contact experience. He
even talks about going back and reading his earlier works and
actually seeing that what he meant to convey did not come out as
planned, and led to a lot of the impressions that he was almost
acting as a mouthpiece for the visitors.

In this book he comes across as much more "down to earth" and
understandable, and his own ideas and self doubts are explained
in a much more coherent way, at least to me. This book offers
some really good ideas and plans for what needs to be done in
the way of gathering hard evidence and then finding out what it
means, and is full of some really interesting technical and
historical info. He is still personally open minded to more than
one simple answer to the situation, and presents some thoughts
and possibilities that certainly had never occurred to me and
seem to be very worthwhile food for thought. He seems much more
prepared to look at the possibilities that are very negative,
which I never got the impression he was really ready to do
before.

I highly recommend this book to all, and hope that his Communion
Foundation is successful in it's goals.

Diane





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 21

                        Re: Recommendations Please!?

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 12:45:07 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 19:48:38 -0400
Subject: Re: Recommendations Please!?


>Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 01:02:45 -0500
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Recommendations Please!?

<snip>

>Hearing/reading shit like this, and some of the other crappola
>that CAUS clutters my e-mail box with makes me want to chew on a
>45 caliber bullet and wash it down with rat poison!

>John,

Hi All,

Thought I'd forward a copy of this to the list. Apparently Mr
Gersten is the 'sensitive' type! <EG> Wish he'd get his head out
of his keester and do something useful with CAUS. What a waste
of an organisation that _could be_ a tremendous and effective
public tool. Gersten has castrated it and turned it into a joke
and an impotent vehicle. CAUS could use a little Viagra or at
least someone at the helm with some vision and leadership
qualities. Not this frustrated Broadway director.

John Velez

===============

Mr Gerstens response to me:


>No problem....I have removed you from the mailing list.
>What brand of rat poison do you use? I will bring you some
>when I am in NY next month. Wouldn't want you to continue
>to suffer any longer. Seems you have already started to
>take it in small doses.

>Peter

My response to Peter:

Gee All of a sudden the quality of the 'content' of what CAUS
has been putting out there makes sense! I guess it's true that
some diseases start in the "head" and eventually filter down to
infect/rot the body.

CAUS has turned to shit. Now I know why! Thanx for
the enlightening e-mail Peter!

Peace, and break a leg with the 'show'.


John Velez


======================================================
                         AIC INTERACTIVE CONFERENCE
                                  jvif@spacelab.net
======================================================
 INTRUDERS FOUNDATION /ABDUCTION INFORMATION CENTER
                              http://www.if-aic.com
======================================================
             AIC -MEMBERS ONLY- /ACCESS CODES REQUIRED
======================================================







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 21

                Re: A Divided Community Can Never Get Anwsers

From: Ori Jackson <Kaosquasar@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 16:33:38 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 23:04:08 -0400
Subject: Re: A Divided Community Can Never Get Anwsers


> Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 09:50:30 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
> Subject: A Divided Community Can Never Get Anwsers
> To: updates@globalserve.net

As a recent initiate, conscientious observer say, of the field
of ufology I have been taking notice of many of the postings on
Updates but I have begun to question the role of the ufologist
who seems to spend more time engaged in verbal battles of
sarcasm and inuendo than in actually completing any research. I
am in complete agreement with Roy Hale's recent posting

>A divided community can never get answers

To become drawn into purial paroxysms serves only to discredit
the work of the ufologist who is then seen to care more for his
reputation and standing amoungst others than for the validity of
his/her research. Is this a conspiricy to draw public attention
away from the offerings of theoretical answers?

Obviously the nature of the field dictates differing opinions as
shown currently through the Burns v Clarke controversy but I
feel it is important to focus only on the research and not on
the personal lives of those involved.

Proof undeniable may well be the researchers ultimate goal, for
fame and fortune and being the first has always in any genre
been the ambition and intention but the ufologist's
responsibility should be not only the search for and the
uncovering of the secrets of the UFO prodigy it should also be
to provide the general public with information beyond proof.
This rather than self gratification should be the goal.

As the general consensus seems to be that E.B.E's (if they do in
fact exist) have hostile intentions where are the ufologists who
are offering the public concrete strategies for dealing with the
prevention of alien intervention?

In World War 2 the British public dug their gardens to assist
the war efforts.

What has it been decided, in the higher echelons of ufology that
the public should be doing to contribute to this war effort?

Replies most welcome.

Candidly

Ori





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 21

                              Re: The Ten Cases

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 16:27:16 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 22:23:39 -0400
Subject: Re: The Ten Cases

> From: RobIrving@aol.com
> Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 21:15:46 EDT
> To: updates@globalserve.net
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: The Ten Cases


Rob -

I do not believe that witness testimony is

1) Infallible.

2) Perfectly represents the observed events.

3) or is in all cases credible.

What I do believe is that

1) Witness testimony is not useless. Witness information
represents qualitative rather than quantitative data. Such
information is not unheard of in science, where it forms an
important part of the history of physics, astronomy, and natural
studies.

2) Witness reliability and credibility is based on their normal
life. The witness reputation has at least some bearing
on their reliability, especially when no perceptual or
psychological defects are observable. Official investigation
of a sighting often involves significant skepticism on the part
of officials - I know this from personal experience with police
officials in the course of field investigation. This was also
evident in the Exeter case, where we have a clear example
of strong initial skepticism by the officials involved. The
consequences of police observation and reporting of UFOs
is quite clear from the Portage County report, which caused
Dale Spaur to lose his job. Not all offical reporters are
considered equally reliable, however, as can be seen from
some notes by Hynek on a police report made to Blue Book
and later revisited by Hynek and NBC, and by statistics
derived which indicate the percentage of unknowns from
witnesses of various percentages.

3) Hoaxers follow a recognizable psychological profile, which
may not always be recognized by field investigators, and thus
logitudinal study of a witness and a case is valuable. One may
also note that hoaxes such as Mt Clemens were discovered and
publicized by the AF long before the hoaxers admitted their
role. Attempts by hoaxers to exploit their situation for
additional attention are often clear.

4) A UFO report has a probability of representing an objectively
existent UFO event. That probability is never 100, and only
initial reports determined not to be UFOs have a probaility of
0. The reports of interest are those where the probability is
high. Some single witness reports receieve probability of 3,
which is the highest they can attain, and are still worthy of
consideration.

5) High probability UFO reports do exist and should be studied.
Some of those cases have already been cited. Many others
exist.

6) No one has, so far as I am concerned, demonstrated a
substantial similarity between UFO reports, reporters, and the
reports and witnesses claiming other anomalous phenomena.

7) UFO misperceptions are extremely unlikely when the reported
event involves an object of large angular extent or determinate
close distance. However, a UFO witness will not necessarily
perceive all aspects of a novel phenomenon correctly or the same
as another witness to the same phenomenon.

8) UFO sightings are stressful events, and close encounter
witnesses sometimes exhibit symptoms similar to PTSD.

9) Debates about whether UFOlogy in general can justify its
existence are debates I have already spent enough time with. I
am more interested in trying to get better information and
deriving more patterns from the existing information. I admit
that I have a fair amount of confidence that OEH is justified,
and I do not consider ETH as a working hypothesis to be
unjustified.

Yes, we may all be wasting our time. But it's worth looking.

'Nuff said.

------
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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 21

                              Re: The Ten Cases

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 15:56:52 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 22:21:06 -0400
Subject: Re: The Ten Cases

>Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 21:14:32 +0100
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: John Rimmer <johnr@magonia.demon.co.uk>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: The Ten Cases


>>And let's not forget that even the AF couldn't ascribe more that
>>2% of their cases to hoaxes,

>Don't forget the Air Force is a public body which is aware that
>if it went around accusing too many taxpayers and voters of being
>hoaxers it would be liable to get it's ass sued off and have some
>angry elected representatives causing problems. If any AF
>investigator *did* suspect a hoax it would in most cases be very
>carefully tip-toed over by the public relations guys.

>>a finding which I believe can be
>>reproduced by most UFO organizations as well.

>For some reason I'm not surprised by this.

The question remains whether you can substantiate an assertion
that the cited figures are wrong, and on what basis, or whether
we are just supposed to accept you testimony.

------
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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 21

                    Working Together For An Ultimate Goal

From: Max Burns <AlienHype1@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 16:42:12 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 23:12:55 -0400
Subject: Working Together For An Ultimate Goal


Working together for an ultimate goal As you may or may not be
aware I have come under quite an amount of criticism from David
Clark formerly BUFORA area investigator and now Press officer and
other's in his company regarding my ongoing investigation, into
incidents over the Peak District National Park just outside the
city of Sheffield England on the 24th March 1997.

These posts I hope will clear up quite a few points regarding
the incident and exposes Mr Clark and his group for what they
really are. ( A group of trouble causing, debunkers, hardened
sceptics, whose only agenda is to cause friction between
researchers) so as to slow down and cast doubt on the
credibility of people who are involved in a genuine search for
the facts and truth about the phenomena.

They should be asked one question. Why would a person spend 15
years investigating the subject of UFOs and state that out of
all the sightings in the World, and in light of the many
thousands of claims of abduction by extra terrestrials, will not
acknowledge that there is more to this than is been admitted by
those who seek to conceal the truth.

For me personally it's like an atheist reading the bible. These
people should be asked some serious questions about their
motivations and reasons for being so heavily involved in
something that they claim is not occurring.

Whether or not these triangle sightings are ET in nature, or
part of some ultra secret terrestrial project, or both we must
continue to assist each other no matter what our own personal
notions about the phenomena. By sharing all information with who
ever is interested in a positive manner so as we can all jointly
build a fuller picture of the current situation.

For example Mr Tim Mathew's is of the opinion that aliens do not
visit planet Earth, and that all UFO sightings are either
misidentified 'whatevers', or top secret experimental
terrestrial flying triangles. And that is his right as an
individual and  I am of the opinion that these triangles are
both ET and terrestrial and that is my right.

However just because as an example the two of us are of
different opinions does not matter at least people like Tim and
myself as well as others are trying to get to the bottom of the
UFO phenomena, if it turns out that for example Tim is correct
then I would be the first to congratulate him.

We must unite after all we are all in search of the truth.

However these people who carry out no positive research and seek
to disprove and discredit work carried out by others should be
removed from the arena as they are nothing more than a
distraction, whose main purpose is to cast doubt and create
rifts between individuals, it is a known rule of war divide and
conquer,

Its time to draw a line in the sand, and start working together,
it is not important to squabble about who is right and who is
wrong that only serves the agenda of those who seek to slow down
our quest for answers.

Either as part of an agenda of unknown probably military groups
or for some form of perverse entertainment, it is still
important to question findings but we must not act in a negative
manner, positive and fruitful work and the friendly interaction
between us all is of utmost importance which will break the hold
these detractors seem to have on the UFO community.

It is time face the facts we need each other if we are going to
get to the bottom of this large enigma wrapped up in a riddle in
our quest to uncover the truth.

Best regards
Max Burns







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 21

                        Re: UFOs are not BVM-acabras

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 15:52:34 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 22:20:18 -0400
Subject: Re: UFOs are not BVM-acabras

> Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 06:15:54 -0700
> From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> Subject: UFOs are not BVM-acabras!
> What do I say to this not-so-hypothetical friend?

> Its not such an easy question as it may seem.

The argument from personal incredulity doesn't work on either
side of the UFO issue. Those who claim that BVM, sea serpents,
etc are the same kind of reports as UFOs have their work cut out
for themselves to prove that.

Just because certain things are equally strange doesn't make them
comparable.

My answer to that question was mentioned earlier, when I pointed
out that BVMs etc. don't leave validated trace evidence, don't
generate photos which remain unexplained, don't cause
instrumental traces corresponding to visual sightings, etc.

However, my answer really is that I don't study those fields so I
am not qualified to discuss how well grounded they are. In fields
where I have read reasonably well-grounded skeptical studies
(such as ESP), I tend toward skepticism, but I remain open to new
evidence or experiments.

Ask if your friend is willing to take on that level of
objectivity.

------
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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 21

                     Chat with UFO Lawyer, Peter Gersten

From: Yvonne Hedenland <vonni_h@email.msn.com>
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 19:25:24 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 23:17:33 -0400
Subject: Chat with UFO Lawyer, Peter Gersten

UFO LAW: CAUS vs. US Army

Join well known UFO Lawyer Peter Gersten along with the UFO and
Law Forums Tuesday, June 23rd at 6pm, PT, for an exclusive update
on the lawsuit of the decade. Will the US Army relinquish
documents pertaining to Colonel Corso and Roswell?

According to Gersten's recent audio interview with the UFO Forum,
Colonel Phillip Corso's signed affidavit states that this retired
Army Officer actually witnessed alien bodies and viewed an
autopsy report.  In court, this affidavit could encourage the
Judge not to throw the case out.

But, with Corso now recovering from a heart attack, the
possibilities for a deposition and further testimony may have
been diminshed.  Gersten, and the remainder of the UFO Community,
await further word regarding Corso's recovery.

This chat is available at  http://forums.msn.com/UFO The Briefing
Room chat can 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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 22

                       Re: Elaine Douglas on John Ford

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 20:44:29 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 03:57:28 -0400
Subject: Re: Elaine Douglas on John Ford


>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: Ford Fund?
>From: Elaine M Douglass <elaine26@juno.com>
>Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 00:28:48 EDT

<giant snip>

>His lawyer deserted me, and Dennis Stacy was eager to print
>incriminating information on John and did, and John himself did
>not or could not defend himself.

<snip>

Elaine:

Wipe your eyes, blow your nose, and grow up big time!

I not only put Operation Right to Know on the cover of the May
1992 issue of the MUFON Journal (with a lead article by you about
same), but I also published your "The Ordeal of John Ford" in the
November 1996 issue of the Journal, an article which called for
contributions to his defense fund. Or have you conveniently
forgotten?

Being (or just playing at becoming) a martyr becomes no one. If
any information about John Ford was indeed incriminating, as you
yourself say above, then I was no more "eager" to publish that
than anything else that goes into a monthly news journal.

I will not accept any blame in any degree whatsoever -- from you
or anyone else, including the remarkably incoherent, confused and
paranoid Ed Komarek, also of ORTK -- for any inconveniences or
misfortunes in life that may have befallen John Ford, you, or
others.

Sorry, but look elsewhere for your scapegoats. My conscience is
completely clear in this matter. And while I sympathize with Mr.
Ford's present situation, I had absolutely nothing whatsoever to
do with it. (A sentence I refrain from putting in capital
letters.)

For you to even remotely suggest or intimate otherwise on your
part is to elevate chicken-shitness to a new high.

I would appreciate an apology, although, frankly, I don't expect
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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 22

                Re: A Divided Community Can Never Get Answers

From: Peter Brookesmith <101653.2205@compuserve.com>
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 21:56:04 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 04:09:21 -0400
Subject: Re: A Divided Community Can Never Get Answers


With the compliments of the Duke of Mendoza:

>Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 12:09:30 +0000
>From: Diane Lovett <RAMBLD@worldnet.att.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: A Divided Community Can Never Get Anwsers

>It has only been since reading stuff on the
>internet that I personally realized how negative,
>confrontational, and competitive so many in ufology
>truly are. I don't go to conferences, and I never
>got that picture from reading books or even the odd
>TV show. The name calling and nastiness leaves a
>really bad taste in a lot of mouths. Disagree
>all you want, but what in the world is accomplished
>by name calling and personal attacks?!

What upsets you is inherent in the nature of the subject
and, as long as people feel strongly, an element of savagery
will always be present along with the disputations. Some
people, too, will always be more tender than others when
their cherished ideas are threatened, and correspondingly
more vitriolic in defending them. Like Dr Chasuble, even I
am somewhat susceptible to drafts.

A cogent portrait of the field is drawn by one who
deservedly attracts great respect from both wings of the
eternal debate: as follows below the dotty line.

This has some pointy relevance to the discussion going on
between Mark Cashman & Rob Irving, too, btw.

best wishes
Periphrasis D. Maunderon
Barbed Wit


--------------------

The meaning of a narrative or custom lies only partially in
the item itself. It reveals its full meaning only when
viewed amid the web of relationships associating the item
with the rest of culture. In this spirit the study of
folklore has become the study of whole cultural systems as
they intersect with folklore iems or activities (Ben-Amos
1972; Dorson 1972: 45-47; Bennett 1987: 8-9). A folklorist
using this revised concept is not only able to accommodate
UFOs, but has good reason to welcome them. UFO reports count
among the most common and widespread narratives of
extraordinary experience active in the modern world. They
update the legend of supernatural encounter by replacing
ghosts and fairies with visiting aliens, and usurps its
functions by continuing an age-old relationship between
humans and superhuman beings. Substitution of a
superscientific technology for magic restores the
credibility of the fantastic in a secular age with little
faith in things magical. The broader ties between UFO
reports and beliefs about alien visitation, especially
aliens as saviors and agents of change in human culture,
expand UFOs to mythical proportions and challenge the
fullest capabilities of folklore scholarship. These
folkloric dimensions remain valid whatever the actual nature
of UFOs may be. Fact or fantasy, they have provoked an
extensive cultural response....

The Folk of UFO Folklore

Perhaps the most succinct and all-encompassing definition of
folklore designates it as "unofficial culture (Dorson 1976:
46). Experts have the final say in the modern world. They
set the standards of truth and the public bows to their
authority in most matters. UFOs stand out as an exception.
The official verdict rules them to be misinterpetations of
conventional phenomena, but many people defy governmental
and scientific conclusions to maintain a stubborn insistence
that something truly mysterious is flying in the air. The
persistence of UFO beliefs in opposition to official opinion
places them within the sphere of unofficial culture and
identifies them in one basic sense as folklore.

The grassroots level of the UFO phenomenon belongs to
individuals. Gallup polls reveal that up to 95% of the
American public has heard of UFOs and as many as 11% has
seen one, while about half of the sample accepted UFOs as
real (Gallup 1973: 213-6 1987: 52-54). This phenomenon rests
on a genuinely broad base of popular awareness and interest.
The testimony of personal experience provides the first and
most vivid evidence that UFOs exist; the credibility of that
evidence depends closely on individual observation and
integrity. The personal element remains central, while
instrumental or expert evidence stays on the periphery. This
situation itself reverses the usual standards of knowledge
in the modern world and further sets UFOs apart from
official truths. UFOs stake another basic claim as a folk
phenomenon simply because ordinary people continue to see
and report them year after year.

Most unofficial culture and its official counterpart go
their ways side by side in peaceful coexistence. UFOs are
different. UFO reports make a claim about reality that
challenges the official position in no uncertain terms.
Compromise is impossible - one side must be right and the
other wrong. Previous views of the folk as uniformly
credulous have resolved into the image of a plurality of
beliefs surrounding controversial subjects (Degh & Vazsonyi
1978). The "true believer" takes for granted that UFOs are
alien spaceships and spreads his convictions with religious
zeal. His diametrical opposite is the true disbeliever, or
"debunker", an individual convinced that all UFO sightings
reduce to conventional terms and UFO beliefs are not only
wrong but irrational. Between these extremes are critical
believers and disbelievers. They are selective about the
evidence they accept and cautious about interpretation even
though they reach the same basic conclusion as their more
radical allies.

[...]

Individuals may remain passive bearers of tradition,
familiar with UFO experiences and beliefs but silent about
them. Other individuals may speak out and become active
tradition bearers. Communication draws UFOs into the social
realm, and there the variety of UFO beliefs acquires its
folkloric significance. When an individual reports a
sighting or states a belief, he takes a stand on the reality
of his observation or the correctness of the belief. He also
exposes himself to the conflict inherent in a subject where
no consensus exists and various listeners hold strong
opinions of their own. Members of the audience speak up to
support, deny, or reinterpret the assertion according to
personal preference. This disputation is the typical folk
interaction over controversial claims (Degh & Vazsonyi 1978:
254-257). These disputes are less efforts to reach a
consensus than to promote personal beliefs, so the structure
of conflict persists as a constant for as long as the
controversy fires human interest.

[...]

The strangeness of UFOs is important in making them
folklore, but they do not become folklore simply because
they are strange. They assume that status when official
authority rejects them while believers reject the judgements
of authority and deal with the subject through informal
channels. Folklore is more a way of doing things, a way to
handle knowledge, than the knowledge itself. Believers and
disbelievers alike comprise the folk. Anyone who interacts
with others concerning UFOs, whether to express a belief or
pass along some information, joins the UFO folk and is
necessary to its structure. Without controversy and the
taking of sides, no distinction would exist between official
and unofficial beliefs, and subsequently no folklore.


--Excerpts from pages 4-8 of
Thomas E. Bullard
"Folkloric Dimensions of the UFO Phenomenon"
Journal of UFO Studies ns 3 (1991), pp 1-57

--------------------------





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 22

                        Re: UFOs are not BVM-acabras

From: Greg St. Pierre trmNut@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 23:29:11 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 04:15:15 -0400
Subject: Re: UFOs are not BVM-acabras


>Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 06:15:54 -0700
>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: UFOs are not BVM-acabras!

<snip>

>What do I say to this not-so-hypothetical friend?

>Its not such an easy question as it may seem.

>-Larry Hatch

Larry,

Sure it is. You stop trying to convince him, and keep your
friendship intact. You made an excellent point though.
Sometimes I think we must ask ourselves, "Is it worth trying
to convince everyone around us?", to be followed by "Is
it even possible?". I think the answer is "no" on both counts.

I know, that was basically the answer you didn't want. Sometimes
we get those anyway, don't we.

Greg

Strmnut@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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 22

                           Re: Who Is Phil Klass?

From: Greg St. Pierre <StrmNut@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 23:12:04 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 04:14:57 -0400
Subject: Re: Who Is Phil Klass?


> Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 11:13:11 -0400
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
> Subject: Re: Who Is Phil Klass?

> Phil Klass was featured as one of the "experts" on an A&E program
> last evening, and in answer to one of the questions expressed the
> evidence that would prove ET visitation to his satisfaction
> (gasp!) [ . . er, sorry, personal comment].

>Klass said that if a message was received from a visitor who gave
>the location of an unknown object in the solar system (such as a
>small undiscovered planetoid far beyond Pluto), that we could
>point our telescopes to and confirm, that would prove to him that
>the visitor was really from some other place and had ET knowledge
>that we (at this point) do not possess.

>I would suspect that Phil would likely come up with a "logical
> explanation" if actually faced with this scenario.

>Steve


Steve,

Saw that show. I thought they dealt with the subject using
a reasonable degree of fairness, although their were no UFO
researchers to be seen. Phil had way too much to say without
being countered, which no doubt was a source of extreme
smugness for him. At least they showed some decent
Mexico City video footage.

They made a good case for overreacting to distant lights,
however, when their breathless cameraman whispered "My God,
there it is!", and it turned out to be a regularly scheduled
flight to/from a distant airport. Of course this particular
light behaved precisely like a plane, and the film crew should
have known better. I can't help but wonder if it was staged to
show "how easily people can be fooled". After all, they must
have flown in to that airport to do the segment....right? So,
they must have known where it was.

Phil was behind it, I just know it!!
(Just kidding)

Greg
Strmnut@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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 22

                  Re: Working Together For An Ultimate Goal

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 98 00:39:52 +500
Fwd Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 10:03:41 -0400
Subject: Re: Working Together For An Ultimate Goal


>From: Max Burns <AlienHype1@aol.com>
>Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 16:42:12 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Working Together For An Ultimate Goal

<snipped that of which was argued against>

>It is time face the facts we need each other if we are going to
>get to the bottom of this large enigma wrapped up in a riddle
>in our quest to uncover the truth.

>Best regards
>Max Burns


Pursuant to "[uncovering]the truth" we must first be prepared to
_accept_ *all* the truth, and so are then reluctant to accept
_any_ of the truth, so help me god <g>.

The flow in the truth stream sometimes, not all times, descends
to tepid cesspools of favored racial preference in bloody Third
World struggles. It steams and stinks past religious bigotries
spewed on Christian AM stations. It festers and sours in a fetid
run-off around our shamelessly inadequate public schools.
It trickles through the broken ground of our convenient and
consoling governmental institutions. Made more rancid by the
cunning and deceitful guiles of a currupt news media, it gushes,
finally, into our squalid lives with its disrespectful attempt to
sustain us at as low a level of subsistance as is possible.
Still, thirty thousand children starve to death every day, and
the world becomes increasingly more toxic.

This is what we do to _each other_, and _this_ is a truth.
Treating each other with disdain and disrespect, and with
abundant evidence of what we do to strange outsiders, we are
fortunate to not have been wiped out, out of hand by them --
those that Dr. Drake makes exceptionally clear may watch from
weird, vast, unknown, and timeless skies.

Clean up our ubiquitous, shameful, and unadmitted social
problems; stop this foolish, and wastefully tragic posturing,
posing, and pernicious bickering; give, get, and expect an
honored respect, -- and the UFO's will fly right down,
fearlessly, to let us know what their thinking is.

That's when this enigma, wrapped in it's secrets and mysteries,
and smothered in convenient lies of position and priviledge will
open like a strange new flower -- likely giving us all a more
real and satisfying world to live in. To the chagrin of some, to
be sure, but to the gratification of more than you'd think.
More than you CAN think, are willing to think, or probably ever
WILL think. Too bad too, 'cause the kingdom's right at hand.

Lehmberg@snowhill.com

Restore John Ford






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 22

                  Re: Working Together For An Ultimate Goal

From: Erica Furgison <believer17@hotmail.com>
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 22:20:35 PDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 10:18:39 -0400
Subject: Re: Working Together For An Ultimate Goal


>From: Max Burns <AlienHype1@aol.com>
>Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 16:42:12 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Working Together For An Ultimate Goal

><snip>

>We must unite after all we are all in search of the truth.
><snip>

>Its time to draw a line in the sand, and start working together,
>it is not important to squabble about who is right and who is
>wrong that only serves the agenda of those who seek to slow down
>our quest for answers.

><snip>

>It is time face the facts we need each other if we are going to
>get to the bottom of this large enigma wrapped up in a riddle in
>our quest to uncover the truth.

>Best regards
>Max Burns


Max,
Even though you are right poeple with different beliefs will investigate
different solutions.Someone who believes that ufo's are of terrestrial
origin will not be able to accept the proof that ufo's are of
extraterrestrial origin, and visa versa. Each person will only see the
proof that they want to see. This will create more argument and debate
and leave us no better off than we were before.
Erica Furgison






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 22

                              Re: The Ten Cases

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 98 09:04:04 PDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 14:42:27 -0400
Subject: Re: The Ten Cases


> Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: The Ten Cases
> From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
> Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 15:56:52 -0400
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

> >Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 21:14:32 +0100
> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> >From: John Rimmer <johnr@magonia.demon.co.uk>
> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: The Ten Cases
>
>
> >>And let's not forget that even the AF couldn't ascribe more that
> >>2% of their cases to hoaxes,
>
> >Don't forget the Air Force is a public body which is aware that
> >if it went around accusing too many taxpayers and voters of being
> >hoaxers it would be liable to get it's ass sued off and have some
> >angry elected representatives causing problems. If any AF
> >investigator *did* suspect a hoax it would in most cases be very
> >carefully tip-toed over by the public relations guys.

> >>a finding which I believe can be
> >>reproduced by most UFO organizations as well.

> >For some reason I'm not surprised by this.

> The question remains whether you can substantiate an assertion
> that the cited figures are wrong, and on what basis, or whether
> we are just supposed to accept you testimony.

A splendid point, Mark.  Sounds to me as if our friend John is
just making it up as he goes along.  In fact, as anybody who's
studied Blue Book's largely inept handling of UFO investigation
knows, there is no evidence whatever that it was holding its
fire; to the contrary, its problem, not only a scientific but a
p.r. one, was its habit of shooting wildly.  Probably no one but
John has ever before accused Blue Book of acting cautiously.

Its fecklessness in calling witnesses dishonest or devoid of the
most elementary perceptual abilities brought the AF study into
disrepute and even from time to time attracted the attention of
members of Congress, responding to complaints from constituents.
If anything, one might argue, a more objective assessment of Blue
Book data may well have reduced the already low hoax percentage.

While we're on the subject of Blue Book's failings, let me
recommend an excellent book on that very subject -- a book that I
fear has been overlooked in the flood of less worthy volumes that
have washed over all of us in the past year: Kevin Randle's
Project Blue Book Exposed (Marlowe and Company, 1997). This
searching, intelligent analysis of PBB data ought to be on the
bookshelf of everyone who considers himself or herself a serious
ufologist.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 22

                      Re: 'She Blinded Me with Science'

From: Sean Jones <Tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 20:35:00 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 14:45:28 -0400
Subject: Re: 'She Blinded Me with Science'


>Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 14:37:45 +0100
>From: Donald  Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: 'She Blinded Me with Science'

>>>Don Ledger

>>Its funny you should talk about monumental blunders of science. I am
>>currently debateing with a scientist about FTL and he says flat out it
>>aint possible etc etc.

>>Could you possibly put together a quick list for me where by
>>scientists have made these monumental blunders so I can with
>>conviction say that scientists are not always right, look here. I
>>would appreciate it very much, I have already quoted that
>>scientists said that the Earth was flat and that excededing eight
>>miles per hour in a motor car would asphyxiate the driver to
>>which he snorted (figureatively of course) so I really would
>>appreciate a list to poke under his arrogant nose.

>Well Sean, I wish I did have some specific names to give you but
>most of my experiences have been of a general nature and a
>growing concern over the years that the "scientists" as we once
>knew them have gotten to political. I don't mean necessarily in
>the government sense. Perhaps they always were and I just didn't
>notice, but they fail to be really objective as to what is or
>isn't fair game for study. Certainly there is the ever present
>pecking order in scientific circles as there are in any
>profession, trade or organization for that matter, but I can't
>understand why such an interesting subject can be so hard for
>them to at least peek at. It doesn't take very long to discover
>that there is something here to be lokked at in a major way.

>I don't think anyone will argue that science is and has been up
>for sale for the last 30 years or even more. By that I mean the
>cigarette manufacturers scientists as opposed to the health and
>welfare scientists, the ecological scientists verses the heavy
>industry scientists as examples.

>I think any scientist can have their bell rung though if
>confronted by the stark evidence as were Clyde Tombaugh or Paul
>R. Hill. I'm always impressed with Clyde Tombaugh's statement to
>the effect that after having seen his first UFO his whole belief
>system had been changed in a matter of seconds.

>Don Ledger

Thanks Don

This particular chap is of the opinion that we are alone in the
universe and if was not then the distences are too great to
excede and visit neighbouring civilizations. Which is how FTL
came up. I know Stan and I had a similer debate a while ago but
I still think it must be possible.

---
      People can have it any colour, as long as its black!
                       Sean Jones
 Homepage--http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Zone/1745/index.htm
         Research 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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 23

                  Re: Working Together For An Ultimate Goal

From: Scott R. Caput <scaput@shadow.net>
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 19:36:44 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 06:00:17 -0400
Subject: Re: Working Together For An Ultimate Goal


> From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> Date: Mon, 22 Jun 98 00:39:52 +500
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Working Together For An Ultimate Goal

> >From: Max Burns <AlienHype1@aol.com>
> >Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 16:42:12 EDT
> >To: updates@globalserve.net
> >Subject: Working Together For An Ultimate Goal

> <snipped that of which was argued against>

> >It is time face the facts we need each other if we are going to
> >get to the bottom of this large enigma wrapped up in a riddle
> >in our quest to uncover the truth.

> >Best regards
> >Max Burns

> Pursuant to "[uncovering]the truth" we must first be prepared to
> _accept_ *all* the truth, and so are then reluctant to accept
> _any_ of the truth, so help me god <g>.

> The flow in the truth stream sometimes, not all times, descends
> to tepid cesspools of favored racial preference in bloody Third
> World struggles. It steams and stinks past religious bigotries
> spewed on Christian AM stations. It festers and sours in a fetid
> run-off around our shamelessly inadequate public schools.
> It trickles through the broken ground of our convenient and
> consoling governmental institutions. Made more rancid by the
> cunning and deceitful guiles of a currupt news media, it gushes,
> finally, into our squalid lives with its disrespectful attempt to
> sustain us at as low a level of subsistance as is possible.
> Still, thirty thousand children starve to death every day, and
> the world becomes increasingly more toxic.

> This is what we do to _each other_, and _this_ is a truth.
> Treating each other with disdain and disrespect, and with
> abundant evidence of what we do to strange outsiders, we are
> fortunate to not have been wiped out, out of hand by them --
> those that Dr. Drake makes exceptionally clear may watch from
> weird, vast, unknown, and timeless skies.

> Clean up our ubiquitous, shameful, and unadmitted social
> problems; stop this foolish, and wastefully tragic posturing,
> posing, and pernicious bickering; give, get, and expect an
> honored respect, -- and the UFO's will fly right down,
> fearlessly, to let us know what their thinking is.

> That's when this enigma, wrapped in it's secrets and mysteries,
> and smothered in convenient lies of position and priviledge will
> open like a strange new flower -- likely giving us all a more
> real and satisfying world to live in. To the chagrin of some, to
> be sure, but to the gratification of more than you'd think.
> More than you CAN think, are willing to think, or probably ever
> WILL think. Too bad too, 'cause the kingdom's right at hand.

> Lehmberg@snowhill.com

> Restore John Ford

Well Alfred, once again you have found the perfect words.I
couldn't agree with you more. Somebody needs to start the move
toward the more perfect planet that is so desperately needed. We
need to stop fighting each other, and start helping each other if
we are to become an older, and wiser race. I pray that this will
come about without a dark catalyst/common enemy, but we don't
seem to be making any progress.

Scott R. Caput

The brain is by far the most complexly organized piece of matter
we know. It is enormously more complicated in structure than a
star is, for instance, which is why astronomers know so much
about stars, and psychologists know so little about brains.

                       Isaac Asimov









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 23

                        Re: UFOs are not BVM-acabras

From: Sue Strickland <strick@H2Net.net>
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 19:46:25 -0600
Fwd Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 05:51:27 -0400
Subject: Re: UFOs are not BVM-acabras


>Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 06:15:54 -0700
>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: UFOs are not BVM-acabras!

Dear Larry:

I'm responding to your point about the difficulty in accepting
ideas which perhaps a majority of trustworthy, reliable
individuals find themselves also unable to accept.

To keep this short and simple, I really do think you have made a
most important argument in pointing out that it is the ignorance
that keeps us skeptics, regardless of the issues.

I don't believe in that other stuff you mentioned any more than
your hypothetical friend. I've not had reason to spend countless
days (and years) trying to determine if any of those "other"
ideas have sicentific basis. But, then I haven't experienced any
of that other stuff first-hand, either. I haven't felt the need
to find answers for those kinds of phenomena because I haven't
had the need to maintain my sanity where those issues are
concerned. I have experienced the UFO phenomenon, many times.
They haven't been wonderful, "spiritual" experiences either. I'd
much prefer to be your skeptic friend. I just can't.
I've not had a choice. I've been compelled to try to find
answers, just so I could maintain my sanity. If you've got some
logical, reasonable, explanations for the things that I've
experienced, hey...I'm listening. I'm game. Sock it to me baby!

So far, the answers I've been receiving have served to
substantiate my fearful UFO experiences...that what I saw was
real, and what happened, really happened. So, now all I know is
how little I know. I guess that's a start. It just seems rather
meager pickings at this point. I'd like them to land on the White
House Lawn too, in broad daylight. But, it probably won't happen
in my lifetime. In the meantime, I'm just listening to other
skeptics sing the "Twilight Zone" theme song.

--Sue





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 23

                              Re: The Ten Cases

From: RobIrving@aol.com
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 20:19:49 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 05:52:57 -0400
Subject: Re: The Ten Cases

>  Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: The Ten Cases
>  From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
>  Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 16:27:16 -0400
>  To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

Mark,

>  Yes, we may all be wasting our time. But it's worth looking.

Agreed... except that I think the best insight into 'hoaxing' of the
paranormal hasn't been written yet. Otherwise, interesting post.

Rob






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 23

                Veteran Ufologist Becomes Successful Amateur

From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose)
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 03:24:32 +0200
Fwd Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 06:02:51 -0400
Subject: Veteran Ufologist Becomes Successful Amateur

As many of you will know, Ray and Rex Stanford became famous in the
50's for their alleged telepathic contact with aliens and the
subsequent UFO sightings. Some of these were confirmed by photographic
evidence, but one, which took place on November 6, 1954, is worth
special notice, as it was confirmed by sworn statements by policemen.

Later on Ray Stanford headed Project Starlight International, a
Phoenix-based UFO group, for many years.

The item below is from The Detroit News.

http://detnews.com:80/1998/nation/9806/19/06190116.htm


Stig


*****


Friday, June 19, 1998


Amateur paleontologist tracks dinosaur prints


Self-taught researcher stuns experts with his vast collection of 150
fossils of Cretaceous footprints

(Photo: Linda Coan / The Baltimore Sun)

"Priceless ... a time machine," said Robert Bakker, fossil hunter and
curator about Ray Stanford's print collection.


By Frank D. Roylance / Baltimore Sun


BALTIMORE -- Ray Stanford's hobby is taking over his house.

Hundreds, maybe thousands of rocks are heaped in knee-high windrows
around his living room. Rock piles snake across the floor, under and
over his furniture. Stacks of rocks have permanently usurped his
kitchen stove.

"We don't even eat here, there are so many darn rocks in the house,"
Stanford said. His insurance company urged him to reinforce his floor
beams. He did. But he won't get rid of the rocks.

These rocks are pocked with footprints, traces of a lost world that
flourished 105 million to 115 million years ago, during a time
geologists call the Cretaceous period.

In four years of what he agrees is obsessive rock-gathering in local
stream beds, the writer, researcher and admitted "total amateur"
paleontologist has amassed an astonishing collection of early
Cretaceous footprints of dinosaurs and flying reptiles.

"It is priceless ... a time machine," said Robert Bakker, fossil hunter
and curator of the Tate Museum in Casper, Wyo.

"If you want to understand Maryland dinosaurs, you want lots of
skeletons and you want lots of footprints. But we didn't have the
footprints at all. Now, thanks to Ray, we have lots."

Stanford, his wife, Sheila, and the rocks occupy what is otherwise an
unremarkable Washington-area house. The piles seem chaotic. In fact,
it's a filing system. The track-bearing rocks are segregated by
dinosaur type, and each pile is "labeled" by representative toy
dinosaurs.

But this collection is no joke. Stanford, 59, and self-taught, has
confounded the experts.

David Weishampel, a Johns Hopkins biologist and anatomist and author of
a recent book on East Coast dinosaurs, was skeptical, but he took a
look last fall.

"My jaw dropped," he said. "After picking it up, I started looking at
things with a more critical eye. I was astounded." Weishampel admits
his book now needs a rewrite.

Track expert Robert Weems of the U.S. Geological Survey said: "There is
nothing remotely comparable to it for the Cretaceous anywhere in
eastern North America."

It's not just that the wiry, "hyper" Texan has found prints where
scientists said they didn't exist. Stanford has found more than 150
prints of up to a dozen species -- several new -- in a region where
teeth and bones had hinted at barely four.

"We've got a couple of different kinds of herbivores we didn't know
about before. And we may have a baby ankylosaur," a squat, tanklike
armored beast. "All these are brand new and based on Ray's collection,"
Weems said.

Stanford never earned a scientific degree. He built rockets as a kid,
was intrigued by space propulsion, and for many years headed the
Phoenix-based Project Starlight International, which studied UFO
incidents.

One day he'd like to display his collection, perhaps at the Academy of
Natural Sciences in Philadelphia, if nothing more suitable can be
found.

"Ray's one of those guys who just has the eye to find tracks," Bakker
said. Stanford calls it a knack for spotting patterns in seemingly
chaotic forms. Sometimes he found eight or 10 tracks in an outing. But
"it is very slow now," he said.


Copyright 1998, The Detroit News







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 23

                          UFO News International 37

From: Henny van der Pluijm <hvdp@worldonline.nl>
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 23:48:52 +0200 (MET DST)
Fwd Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 05:39:05 -0400
Subject: UFO News International 37


  __    _    _____    ______         ___________________________
  ||    |   ||       //     \               ___           ____
  ||    |   ||       ||     |        |\  | |    \      / /
  ||    |   ||___    ||     |        | \ | |___  \ /\ /  |___
  ||    |   ||       ||     |        |  \| |___   \__/       |
   \____/   ||       ||_____/       ___________   __________/
             _______________________________________
            /_\                                   /_\
               \   |I|n|t|e|r|n|a|t|i|o|n|a|l|   /
                \  ___________________________  /
                 \____________/\______________ /


=FF                          - 37 -

*    Russian cosmonaut shadowed by UFO

*    Colonel Corso confirms seeing alien bodies under oath

*    Argentine pilot flew with UFO

*    The people's rally at Area 51

*    More Than 100 ET Radio Signals Collected?

     __________________________________________________

                - UFO News International 37 -


//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

For direct subscriptions, send your e-mail address to:
                        hvdp@worldonline.nl

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////


************************************************************
Russian cosmonaut shadowed by UFO
************************************************************

From: The CSETI Website
http://www.cseti.org/position/addition/russian.htm

Cosmonaut Shadowed By Structured UFO

In April of 1979, Cosmonaut Victor Afanasyev lifted
off from Star City to dock with the Soviet Solyut
6 space station. But while en route, something strange
happened. Cosmonaut Afanasyev saw an unidentified
object turn toward his craft and begin tailing it
through space.

"It followed us during half of our orbit. We observed
it on the light side, and when we entered the shadow
side, it disappeared completely. It was an engineering
structure, made from some type of metal, approximately
40 meters long with inner hulls. The object was
narrow here and wider here, and inside there were
openings. Some places had projections like small
wings. The object stayed very close to us. We photographed
it, and our photos showed it to be 23 to 28 meters
away."

In addition to photographing the UFO, Afanasyev
continually reported back to Mission Control about
the craft's size, its shape and position. When the
cosmonaut returned to earth he was debriefed and
told never to reveal what he knew, and had his
cameras and film confiscated.

Those photos and his voice transmissions from space
have never been released. It is only now, with the
collapse of the Soviet Union that Afanasyev feels that
he can safely tell his story.

"It is still classified as a UFO because we have
yet to identify the object."


************************************************************
Colonel Corso confirms seeing alien bodies under oath
************************************************************

>From Peter Gersten <UFOLAWYER1@aol.com
CONTACT INFORMATION Peter A. Gersten 520-284-5248
e-mail: Ufolawyer@caus.org


Attorney Peter A. Gersten, executive director of
Citizens Against UFO Secrecy, Inc (CAUS), a non-profit
Arizona activist organization dedicated to ending
all secrecy surrounding this planet's contact with
an extraterrestrial intelligence, announced today
that retired Army Colonel Philip J. Corso has sworn
under oath to statements previously made in his
best selling book 'Day After Roswell.'
Gersten stated that Colonel Corso has provided CAUS,
for use in its lawsuit against the Department of
Army, with a sworn affidavit re-affirming previous
statements that he saw alien bodies in July, 1947
and had the opportunity to read their autopsy reports
in 1961.

The CAUS lawsuit, which was filed March 25, 1998
in the U.S. District Court in Phoenix, is asking
the federal court to direct the Army to provide
Gersten and CAUS with any and all documents relevant
to what the Colonel, now swears under oath, he saw
and read. "The CAUS lawsuit is, in and of itself,
ground breaking" Gersten declared. "Now with the
Colonel's affidavit, we should be able to defeat
the government's attempt to have the lawsuit dismissed
and go forward with the judicial disclosure process."

Perjury, or lying under oath, is punishable as a
criminal offense usually incurring a jail sentence
for the person convicted. Colonel Corso is believed
to be the highest ranking military officer, if not
the only officer, to come forward and state under
oath to seeing 'extraterrestrial biological entities
(EBEs.)

CAUS v. Department of Army; Civil 98-0538PHXROS
can be found at the CAUS website located at http://www.caus.org.

END OF PRESS RELEASE

Be sure to visit the CAUS web site at http://caus.org


__________

In a brief statement made to the Roswell International
UFO Museum, the Philip Corso, Jr. family stated
that on Tuesday, June 9, Philip Corso, Sr. suffered
a severe heart attack. At last report, his condition
was greatly improved.

_________


************************************************************
Argentine pilot flew with UFO
************************************************************

>From John Stepkowski <legion@MIRA.NET>

>From AFP: - Argentine pilot claims he flew with
UFO 20 years ago

 BUENOS AIRES, June 1 (AFP) - An Argentine pilot
has claimed he flew near an unidentified flying
object (UFO) 20 years ago but did not tell anyone
until now for fear of being considered mad, the
DyN news agency said Monday.

Aldo Mastice, who flies for a regional airline said
he was flying back from Buenos Aires to Neuquen
at midnight two decades ago when an object as long
as a bus flew over his plane.

The object, which "crossed our route on a south
to north course," was "illuminated, but it was as
if the light was part of the object," the pilot
explained. "It was not the shape of a plate."

But authorities at Ezeiza international airport
here said that no other traffic was in the area
at that time except a plane whose position had already
been identified.

Mastice said that at the time he contacted the pilot
of the other plane and that both agreed to "keep
their mouths shut."

Mastice said that he had kept quiet about the incident
for fear he would be considered crazy. "Luckily
the crew of the other plane saw it too."


************************************************************
The people's rally at Area 51
************************************************************


Via Glenn Campbell

[Note from Moderator: No endorsement is implied.
I do not plan to attend. -- GC ]

GroomWatch wrote:

SPECIAL ANNOUNCEMENT: THE PEOPLE'S RALLY AT AREA
51 ON JUNE 6, 1998 The People's Rally at AREA 51
will take place as scheduled on Saturday, June 6,
1998, right at the restricted boundary line on Groom
Lake Road, as previously announced in the newsgroups.

This will be a legal, public assembly and will take
place on legal, public land. The event will be a
spontaneous, peaceful gathering of concerned citizens.

One of the purposes of the gathering will be to
bring to the attention of the news media once again
the plight of former Groom Lake workers who are
still suffering from illnesses caused by long-term
exposure to highly toxic chemicals without their
knowledge while working at AREA 51, the base that
officially "doesn't exist". The former workers and
their families' plea is not so much to seek for
monetary compensation as to seek for cures to the
diseases. There are no specific organizations behind

this event. Inquiries regarding the event are still
coming in from many states in the U.S., as well
as from England, New Zealand, Canada and Australia
and other countries.

Quite a number of people may already be camping
out overnight on Friday, June 5 at the site. The
news media will show up to cover the event, depending
on how much publicity will be generated prior to
the event. (There will be a press conference on
Friday, June 5 in Rachel, Nevada) The event will
start at 6 a.m. on Saturday, June 6, at the restricted
boundary, and will last till about 11 a.m. That
Saturday evening, there will be a music festival
in Rachel. For the June 6 rally, each participant
is suggested to bring a mirror (of any kind .......
the larger the better) to the event. All vehicles
are to be parked off Groom Lake Road. Lincoln County
Sheriff Dept. will not allow any vehicle to be parked
on the dirt road for the event.

Also, early on Sunday morning, June 7, there will
be a hike up to the ridges of Tickaboo Mountain
to observe the Groom Lake facility. This particular
hike may be a littlestrenuous since this time it
will not originate from the Alamo side, but will
be from the west foothills, a direct "frontal assault"
on the mountains from the Tickaboo Valley side.

Sincerely, Norio Hayakawa GroomWatch@aol.com P.S.
The People's Rally at AREA 51 will also be held
on June 6, 1999 as well as June 6, 2000.

Norio Hayakawa
http://www.eagle-net.org/groomwatch
--------------------------------------------------------------
Both a mirror and flashlight (with extra batteries)
seem useful. As to exactly how close anyone wants
to get to area 51 or area s-4, that will be up to
the individual.


************************************************************
More Than 100 ET Radio Signals Collected?
************************************************************

Via Dave Pigott and Stig Agermose

Sunday Times of London,
by Steve Farrar & Alex McGregor,
7 June 1998

Some of the world's leading astronomers revealed
last week that they have collected more than 100
unexplained radio signals during routine surveillance
of space.

These faint, pure tones have no natural origin and
could have been created artificially, the scientists
said. They do not rule out the astonishing possibility
that this strange radio traffic could have extraterrestrial
origins.

Most of the signals have been picked up by American
radio telescopes managed by the Search for Extra Terrestrial
Intelligence Institute (SETI) in Mountain View,
California, set up in 1988 to study radio static
in space and scan it for material that could be
evidence of alien contact. A few have also been
logged by British astronomers studying stars and
galaxies with the Lovell telescope at Jodrell Bank,
near Macclesfield in Cheshire.

"It's tempting to hypothesise that at least some
of these seductive signals were truly from ET and
that they vanished from the ether when the extraterrestrials
turned off their transmitters or otherwise went
off air before we could verify the message," said
Dr Seth Shostak, SETI's public programmes scientist.

Alternatively, he said, it was possible they were
simply the product of some kind of local interference
that did not repeat when the astronomers tried to
relocate the rogue signals.

SETI, which was formed by scientists including Carl
Sagan and received funding from Nasa until 1993,
has yet to discover any clear, repeated radio pattern
that might hint at the existence of alien intelligence
in the universe.

The short, indistinct signals that have been detected
are a far cry from the resounding pulses featured
in the movie Contact, in which Jodie Foster played
a SETI astronomer who deciphered radiocontact with
aliens. Foster's signed photograph is pinned to
a wall in SETI's Silicon Valley office. None of
the signals has been heard by human ears -- they were
all picked up by computers monitoring radio telescopes.

"If you could hear the signal at the frequency it
is received, it would sound like a faint whistle,
a pure tone which could only be made by a transmitter.
As far as we know, nature can't make a pure sound,"
said Shostak. Each time one of these signals is
detected by a radio telescope, an alarm alerts SETI
astronomers, who work around the clock. None has
yet been pinpointed or recorded a second time, so
that scientists have been denied the chance of making
a study of their source or composition.

SETI is stepping up efforts to increase its chances
of relocating one of these signals and has secured
agreement to use the world's largest radio telescope
-- which was featured in the James Bond film GoldenEye
-- at Arecibo in Puerto Rico.

The Americans are also negotiating with British
astronomers to launch a five--year project to allow
speedy verification and tracking of these elusive
noises.

Whenever SETI identifies a suspect signal, radio
telescopes at Jodrell Bank will scan the same section
of the sky to locate it. In this way the scientists
can rule out possible terrestrial interference from
radar, traffic and even electric fences as a cause.

"I'm sure there are signals that have come and gone
that we couldn't get to the bottom of. That's not
to say it's little green men trying to communicate
with us, but we just don't know," said Dr Tom Muxlow,
an astronomer at the British radio astronomy observatory.
He disclosed that Jodrell Bank had picked up about
six rogue signals.

The possibility that the signals have extra--terrestrial
origins cannot be ignored, according to Nobel laureate
Tony Hewish, emeritus professor of radio astronomy
at Cambridge University. In 1967 Hewish and Jocelyn
Bell, a student, believed they had found evidence
of an alien first contact when they detected a regular
pulse of radio signals coming from a distant star.

"It all had an air of unreality about it, but for
a month we thought it was possible that the signals
were coming from intelligent life on another planet.
When radio astronomers pick up signals that are
very peculiar they take it with a big pinch of salt,
but you cannot remove the possibility," said Hewish.

Instead, they had found a pulsar, a rapidly spinning
neutron star, a discovery for which Hewish won a
Nobel prize in 1974.

Shostak is not put off by the prospect that any
signal from an alien world would probably be indecipherable.
"If we heard from an ET, it would be from a civilisation
that is a long way ahead of us, maybe even a million
years more advanced than we are," he said.

=FF
**************************************************************
June 22, 1998
**************************************************************
You can use UFO News International articles


. Make a selection from this issue for your web site.

. Redistribute articles in your owns newsletter or Bulletin Board
System.

Conditions:

. Please give credit to UFO News International and, if relevant,
to the original source.


**************************************************************
Editor's notes:

UFO News International welcomes:
. reports, experiences, analyses and commentaries
Anonimity will be provided if needed.

All contributions to this newsletter must be in English. Grammar
and spelling need not be perfect.

In case of a change in your e-mail address, please notify me in
advance, so that you can continue to receive UFO News Internatio-
nal. Readers are encouraged to invite their friends, acquaintan-
ces and colleagues to subscribe to this newsletter.


  ______
 /\    /\
 \_\  /_/
 \  "  /
  \ _ /
   \ /

**************************************************************

Editor:             Henny van der Pluijm
Correspondents:     Barry Chamish (Israel)
                    Mike Stahl (Australia)


UFOIC, http://www.ufoic.com, hosts:

Henny van der Pluijm's UFO FAQ: http://www.ufoic.com/faq
and the UNI archive:            http://www.ufoic.com/faq/ufopals

Personal website:   http://www.worldonline.nl/~hvdp
E-mail:             hvdp@worldonline.nl

Direct subscribers:                  418
=99Redistributors:

Alien Research (120), Project Watchfire BBS, NUN BBS Network
(150), UFO Online BBS PDX Portland Oregon USA (75), UFOR (Over
10,000), UFO UpDates Toronto (1,000).

Estimated readership: 11,000
______________________________________________________________

(C) Henny van der Pluijm, 1998.
______________________________________________________________
=FF
            __________________________________________
           /    Met vriendelijke groet/Best wishes    \
                      Henny van der Pluijm
                      hvdp@worldonline.nl

                       Technology Pages
                http://home.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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 23

                           Re: Sheffield Incident

From: David Clarke <dclarke14@compuserve.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 16:23:04 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 05:35:35 -0400
Subject: Re: Sheffield Incident

>From Dave Clarke, Sheffield.

Max Burns becomes ever more desperate in his pitiful attempts to
pursuade UFO Updates readers to buy his yarn about a UFO, a
triangle and a pilot covered in aviation fuel.

But it will just not wash.

Judging by the amount of messages I have received from readers
who have offered me congratulations and support for the stand I
have taken over this nonsense, I believe my thorough and
unompromising investigation of this case has been vindicated.

One of them, Paul Power, has already been accused of
participating in the same laughable "cover-up" that I stand
accused of, simply because Paul dared to ask Max a few
reasonable questions in a private email.

If you were to believe Max Burns he is the one and only pillar
of truth in this case - I am lying, a Member of Parliament is
lying, the RAF are lying and the Ministry of Defence are lying
when asked a clear and direct question by a member of the Press
and by a Member of Parliament.

These are serious slurs and allegations in themselves, but at
the end of the day I don't have to prove anything. I am not
making any claims about crashed Tornados and UFO.

Max is making the claims, I am simply asking for evidence. And
as one perceptive UFO Updates reader from Holland noted, all he
can do is launch a vicious attack in response.

But most importantly, when challenged to come up with the
evidence to support his wild claims, all Max can say is:

"Obviously I am striving towards this goal, and have opened some
new avenues with regard to obtaining this information. And as
patience is a virtue, I feel that I will eventually succeed in
obtaining this proof.. However I do not think that I will be
supplying you with any such information, after all dont you
think that have shared enough of my research with you?"

What a cop out - it is so easy to make crazy unprovable claims
about UFOs shooting down jets, but its more difficult to come up
with the goods, isn't it Max?  I predict you will never find the
"evidence" you are looking for because it does not, and never
has existed, except of course in your imagination.

In a disgraceful display of arrogance, Max even goes so far as
to ask "what is sensitive" about a failed suicide attempt, and
says he even wants to go and interview the poor man who tried to
kill himself and has since been labelled a victim of a UFO
dogfight.

The facts are these: the transcript of Max's conversation with
Dagenhart proves absolutely zilch. What Dagenhart did or did not
say doesn't matter, because we know who he saw, and it wasn't a
pilot of any description. Dagenhart is a red-herring, a mere
pawn in Max's game. This man's delusions know no bounds, and he
is so full of himself he can't see how his Internet postings are
sounding more and more ridiculous as time goes by.

I challenge Max for a third time:

1. Who SAW a UFO shoot down a Tornado jet? At the moment, we
don't have one single witness who claims they saw this occur, so
what basis is there to leap to this wild conclusion?

2. Which base did this jet fly from?

3. What was the name of the pilot?

Just last week a REAL Tornado jet crashed in the North Sea off
Flamborough Head, killing the pilot and the co-pilot. The news
media were informed immediately, and we were given the names,
ages, home addresses etc of both men within 24 hours, probably
just minutes after their families were told.

Does Max seriously believe the RAF could have succeeded in a
complete cover-up of the loss of a jet over Sheffield more 15
months ago, and the death of its pilot, without one snippet of
information leaking out to the news media?  What about the
family of the pilot, would they have not been asking questions
now after their husband or son had not returned for 15 months?

This claim does not stand up to any kind of rigorous
examination. It is quite plainly and simply nonsense, and what's
more Max knows it is nonsense.

To deal with some of his other points:

1. Max's claim I have used his information without
acknowledgement. That's rich coming from someone who is using
information about Parliamentary Questions, information on RAF
jet timetables from RAF Coningsby etc in his Sheffield Report,
all without acknowledgent to myself. Who told Max there had been
two sonic booms reported that night, not the one? Yes, it was
me, but of course he choses to ignore this fact too.

Yes, I did obtain a copy of the police log from Max, but so
what? Max got it from Martin Jeffrey, who got it from the
police, so it is hardly Max's property, is it? Martin is happy
for me to have a copy and would have provided me with one if I
had asked, so what's the big deal?  What does the police log
prove anyway, it's just a list of aeroplane sightings, and the
conclusion reached at the end of is precisely the one any sane
normal person would reach, viz: "Enquiries reveal a combination
of circumstances that would lead people to believe a plane might
have crashed".

2. My report to BUFORA on the case. Max has not seen this
report, yet he chooses to make wild claims about it and make
slurs against my ability as an investigator on that basis. Well
I have news for you Max, I have been around for years before you
saw your first X-Files episode and then suddenly went on to
become an "expert", and I will be around an equal number of
years after you have disappeared like all the other ET believers
I have seen come and go.

In fact, My report does not in fact conclude a Bolide meteor was
responsible, it says the Royal Astronomical Society say a bolide
could have caused the sonic booms reported that night. I
actually conclude the events were caused by a military aircraft
and possibly a Bolide meteor. My report states quite clearly
there was RAF activity that night, well before it was officially
admitted, and this is a fact I have always believed played a
major role in the initial stages of the incident. That fact is
clearly stated in my report which went to Gloria Dixon, BUFORA
NIC, just two months after the incident. Like it or not, that is
a fact.

3. The Carol Vorderman BBC show. Once again (or at least when I
spoke to him earlier this year) Max has not seen this programme,
yet he makes slurs against my character and professionalism
based upon something he has not even watched!  In fact, I played
no role in the making of the programme, other than providing the
TV researchers with a list of phone numbers of people who were
involved in the March 24 event - including Max, a fact he
chooses to ignore. If I was trying to debunk this incident, why
would I have urged the TV people to contact him? I did so
because unlike Max I'm open minded and can accept that other
people can have an opinion. In the event, Max as usual behaved
like a petulent child, took his bat and ball home and turned
down an invitation to appear on the programme because it would
not pander to his absurd claims about a Tornado crash.

Ironically, if Max had watched the programme, he would know that
Glenn Ford, the senior Seismologist from Edinburgh University,
who actually recorded the sonic booms, goes on record and says
he believes both the booms and the sightings were caused by a
Bolide meteor burning up in the atmosphere!

Is Mr Ford now to be labelled a liar, and an agent of the
cover-up too? And how is it shoddy investigation on my part to
conclude a Bolide meteor could possibly have played a part in
the event, when this explanation is supported by both a senior
Seismologist and the spokesman for the Royal Astronomical
Society?

Lets face it the only "expert" who Max will believe is himself,
or one of his loony friends.

Objective investigators should always apply Occam's Razor and
look for the most likely explanation first, before jumping to
fantastic conclusions. In this case, we know both military
aircraft and Bolide meteors exist, we don't know that ET-piloted
triangular UFOs exist. Therefore its logical to conclude a
military jet/Bolide played a part in the incident until we have
good solid evidence that ET-piloted triangles actually exist.
I'm sorry Max but it's not good enough to say they exist because
you believe they do, or because people claim to have seen them.
People can and do misidentify aircraft and a whole host of
mundane objects as UFOs every night - that is a FACT, and if you
can't accept it you should get out of UFOlogy and take up
science fiction.

3. UFOs and the police log. Max claims there is "plenty" of
evidence in the police log of people who rang to report UFOs.
This is simply untrue, as Max's edited excerps from the log
prove. The log is simply a list of people who saw low-flying
aircraft. There are no more than a couple of instances in the
entire log where people describe UFOs, and then they are just
talking about "lights in the sky" which could be anything, and
probably were the low-flying aircraft we know were around at
that time.. With regards to Mrs Dronfield's sighting, I have not
deliberately ignored it - her sighting appears in the first few
paragraphs of my article in UFO Magazine, out this week, and in
my report to BUFORA. I believe she saw an aircraft at an odd
angle, simple as that. If you look at the time she saw the
object, it simply must have been the same low-flying aircraft
seen by the police special constable and the farmers a couple of
minutes later.

A question for Max arises at this point: Why has Max ignored the
testimony of Marie-France Tattersfield? It was her sighting
which triggered the initial police concern. She describes what
can only be interpreted as a low-flying aircraft, NOT a UFO.
Yet, Max has completely ignored her story in his Sheffield
report. Why? Because she is a police special constable a.k.a yet
another agent of the cover-up. Therefore, why believe an
employee of the RAF? Surely they are involved in the cover-up
too?

Ooops we're in the hall of mirrors again!

With regards to Brian Haslam, his sighting of a "triangle" UFO
is the only one recorded in the police log, and it took place at
7.40, more than two and a half hours BEFORE the report of the
"crashed aircraft". You cannot use this as evidence of anything,
and what's more Max has not spoken to Haslam, therefore his
evidence is useless - just more hearsay.

As for the other witnesses to the "triangle", there are just two
of these, one saw it half an hour before the reports which
triggered the search, and the second saw something almost two
hours later.

Is this the best evidence we have of a triangular UFO?  If it
is, then it dosen't amount to much, especially when you bear in
mind one of these witnesses is a personal friend of Max's
anyway.

The more you look at the details of this case, the more it falls
apart, and the claims of there being any kind of UFO incident or
"cover-up" of a UFO incident are just ludicrous.

Max has now painted himself into a corner to such an extent that
anyone who questions his claims is immediately labelled a liar
or an agent of the cover-up. I'm sorry but it just won't wash,
it's just an easy way for Max to avoid having to answer direct
questions and provide proof for his claims.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 23

                       Foo-Fighters and Cloud Cutters

From: Jan Aldrich <jan@cyberzone.net>
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 20:37:56 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 06:29:41 -0400
Subject: Foo-Fighters and Cloud Cutters

Greetings,

PROJECT 1947 continues to move, although it might seem at a
glacially pace to some, towards its next two reports. Both
reports require one more visit to the National Archives to
obtain photographs. The "Cloud Cutter" report has been held up
because the Archives has lost an order put in over a year ago.
It will probably take face to face coordination to straighten
this one out.

The FOO-FIGHTER report will feature essays by various
investigators in this research area, plenty of new official
World War II material, and reports from sources all over the
world.

Most purported foo-fighter photographs are spurious. However,
recently we came across an interesting photo in Bill Yanne's
"U.F.O., Evaluating the Evidence," page 20-21. Yanne gives
little data except that the UFO was photographed near the
Shreveport, Louisiana area during 1943. It does seem to resemble
a "sub-sun," a reflect of the sun off of ice crystals beneath
the aircraft. However, that is just impression from cursory
inspection. Does anyone have a contact address for Bill Yanne?

Contributions of foo-fighter accounts and leads continue to come
in and are also most welcome! Any assistance in documenting this
extremely interesting era is most welcome.

CLOUD CUTTERS are an interesting variety of the UFO phenomenon.
We have several accounts of this effect and are always looking
for more. It seems that aircraft and missiles sometimes have a
similar effects. We continue to look for information and
photographs of conventional "Cloud
Cutters."

--
Jan Aldrich
Project 1947
http://www.iufog.org/project1947/
P. O. Box 391, Canterbury, CT 06331, USA
Telephone: (860) 546-9135







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 23

                     Re: Elaine M Douglass on John Ford

From: Elaine M Douglass <elaine26@juno.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 02:10:27 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 06:53:24 -0400
Subject: Re: Elaine M Douglass on John Ford


>Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 20:44:29 -0500 (CDT)
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Elaine Douglas on John Ford [was: Ford Fund?]

>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: Ford Fund?
>>From: Elaine M Douglass <elaine26@juno.com>
>>Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 00:28:48 EDT

><giant snip>

>>His lawyer deserted me, and Dennis Stacy was eager to print
>>incriminating information on John and did, and John himself did
>>not or could not defend himself.

><snip>

>Elaine:

>Wipe your eyes, blow your nose, and grow up big time!

>I not only put Operation Right to Know on the cover of the May
>1992 issue of the MUFON Journal (with a lead article by you about
>same), but I also published your "The Ordeal of John Ford" in the
>November 1996 issue of the Journal, an article which called for
>contributions to his defense fund. Or have you conveniently
>forgotten?

My Dear Dennis:

Excuse me, but after the appearance of my piece on John Ford in
the MUFON Journal, you printed a piece of writing by someone with
a _fake_ name ("Harry Hepcat"), in which the writer said he hoped
John Ford was gang raped in prison.

Far from offering me, the head of John Ford's Defense Committee,
the opportunity to respond in the same issue, you _refused_ to
allow me _any_ opportunity to respond at all!  I had to go over
your head to Walt Andrus and some 4 months later I was allowed a
modest 3 paragraphs of space in which, if I do say so, I rather
effectively and with dignity rebutted Mr. "Hepcat's" full page of
spleen.

I can see, though, why you liked Mr. "Hepcat's" article, Dennis.
Both you and he could vie for "intemperate of the year" honors in
anybody's book.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 23

                             Re: New Jet or UFO?

From: Sue Strickland <strick@H2Net.net>
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 01:46:15 -0600
Fwd Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 07:00:35 -0400
Subject: Re: New Jet or UFO?


>Subject: UFO UpDate: New Jet or UFO? [was: Re: Fast Walker]
>From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
>Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 11:37:41 -0400
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>From: Sue Strickland <strick@H2Net.net>
>>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: Fast Walker New Jet or UFO?
>>Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 20:07:47 -0600

Dear Mark,

Thanks for responding! Your questions are thought provoking. I'll
try to answer them. I don't know anything about airplanes, so
you'll have to draw your own conclusions. I don't know what I
saw. If it was a UFO, they were just "checking up" on me. I'm
very hesitant to talk to you or anyone else about the behind the
scenes stuff. After being on this "list" for 3 weeks, and
listening to the garbage people throw at each other, I'll stick
to the facts. Quenching your curiosity is not why I brought up
the subject in the first place. I'm looking for answers for
myself.

>You don't mention the geometry of the object. Was it
>cylindrical, disc shaped, triangular?

I didn't mention it because hard as I tried to concentrate on
"seeing" the wings or the shape, I couldn't. It was frustrating
because I could see the pilot and the other individual, but
couldn't make out the shape of the vehicle. It was so close too.
All I could see was the cockpit and canopy and that red blinking
light. I kept trying to determine if that red light was on one
side or the other of the craft. It appeared to stay pretty
stationary on the left side, but I do remember looking for a
green or blue light (like a running light on a boat) and couldn't
see another one. One thing is certain. The dashboard in front of
the pilot was curved in a wide arch (about 10'-12'), wide enough
to seat at least one other individual beside the pilot (sitting
just left of center), with 3' or more between them. I watched the
pilot. That pilot never turned around to look at me...face
forward always. I was worried that the light from my head lights
was making it difficult for him to pilot the vehicle. Whatever he
was doing with his hands, he never raised them up off the
dashboard. I saw no "joy stick" or specific controls, and I
looked for them.  I've driven that road literally hundreds of
times, sometimes 60 mph in the straight-aways...that's fast on
that road. There are right-angle turns that are posted at 35 mph.
If you take them much faster, you can skid out on the gravel/sand
berm (or ice) and land up in the arroyo dead. It's very
dangerous, especially if you're not familiar with it. I purposely
looked at my speedometer to make sure I was under control. Most
of the time I was going 47 mph. I know exactly where we were, and
where he was, and I knew if he didn't pull up before the end of
the next curve, he would hit the wall, because the road cut ended
on that side of the highway and switched over to the other side
(my side).  I was thinking and talking out loud, "Pull up, Pull
up, you're going to hit the wall." I really expected to see a
ball of flame around the next curve. They were gone, just that
fast. I felt like they must have been "cowboy" airmen from the
base, playing "chicken" with me in some new experimental 2-man
jet. If we do have such a jet, I want one!

>Did it have any other projections or structure besides the
>"cockpit"?

None that I could make out. I really tried to see something,
anything like that. It must have had "bat radar" or something. I
looked for one of those pointed nosed needles on the front, but
couldn't see anything for sure beyond the windshield. I tried to
see a contrasting value (dark gray vs. pitch black) to see where
there might have been a pattern or line to determine the shape
or see where the wings were. I couldn't make out any value
change.

>How did you first see the object if it was night and the object
>was not illuminated?

It was 10:30 pm. There are no "street" lights on Tijeras Canyon
road, only reflectors attached to the metal guard rails (where
there are guard rails). I don't know if it was illuminated from
inside, or if my headlights were what was lighting it up. I
thought it was my headlights shining on them from behind. What I
saw first was headlights behind me approaching very fast. At
least, I think they were headlights. When I looked in the
rear-view mirror, I recall seeing 2 very bright lights, set
close together, coming very fast. I thought it was a truck
wanting to pass me, so I slowed down (didn't stop) and moved
over to the berm to let him pass. Well, if it was a truck that
passed me, it was really "flying." It passed me going very fast.
(I had the impression that it was a white truck, but I really
didn't "see" a white truck, because I was already focusing on
this other vehicle coming up on my left. That's when it started
to pace me in the canyon cut. It surprised me. And I looked
ahead for the other truck. It was gone. I don't know where it
went. I remember wondering about that, but not overly concerned.
I don't know why. I figured whoever was driving that "white
truck" had the caca scared out of him by this other vehicle
chasing him. It certainly wasn't logical for a truck to
"disappear" unless it went over the edge of the cliff, and I
would have seen that happen. So, I don't know if what passed me
was a truck or another flying aircraft.

>Did this sighting occur before or after you were made
>aware of your possible abduction experiences?

After. Long after. My last visit from them was 1958 or 59. This
particular incident happened in April, 1992. I wasn't "made
aware" by someone else. I'm a pretty down-to-earth, concrete
individual. My "prove it," "show me" attitude is what started
this whole thing, at age 5. So, it's been self-discovery. Not a
la-la land, sugar-coated, new age, spiritual experience for me.
Most of it has been pretty unpleasant and very unsettling.

>Was this case investigated by an independent investigator? Have
>any sketches, maps, etc. been developed as part of such an
>investigation?

There has never been an investigation of this siting as far as I
know. I'm just now trying to piece the whole bizarre thing
together. I'm the only one really interested, because it effects
me. Sure, curiosity keeps people wondering, and I suppose it
could sell a few Sci-Fi stories, but beyond that no one really
wants to, nor could many people accept the reality of the
situation. It's taken me over 40 years to try to accept what has
happened to me. Who in the blankety-blank would believe it if
they had not (somewhere in the depths of their brains) had some
haunting questions? Why else are we posting on this list? We're
looking for answers, if nothing else to maintain our sanity.

>Did you observe the object in front of anything which was at >a
known distance? Did you have a sense of its proximity based >on
depth vision?

Yes to both. The road is a 2-lane highway. If you wanted to, you
could go there, measure the distance from the narrowest cut on
the inside canyon wall to the edge of the on-coming lane of
traffic at the guard rail. That would give you a pretty close
measurement of the width of the vehicle. The vehicle fit in that
space, between the wall of the canyon and the on-coming traffic
lane. It never came over to the on-coming traffic lane. So, I
was no more than 50' from it (and probably a lot closer than
that on a couple of occasions).

--Sue






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 23

                        Re: Recommendations Please!?

From: Peter Gersten <UFOLAWYER1@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 22:38:07 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 06:35:48 -0400
Subject: Re: Recommendations Please!?

>Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 18:00:58 -0400
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Recommendations Please!?

>>From: Peter Gersten <UFOLAWYER1@aol.com>
>>Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 20:41:43 EDT
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Recommendations please!

>>CAUS is now planning the first of its annual mock trial events:

>..... Will we be afforded
>the opportunity to examine the transcripts or be advised
>of the outcome of the event? How will it be communicated
>to the rest of us?


Sue,

The proceedings will be taped. Aren't you planning on attending?
Why does the mere thought of a mock trial make some people very
fearful and in return resort to personal attacks?


Peter






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 23

                  Re: Working Together For An Ultimate Goal

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 16:37:20 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 07:53:44 -0400
Subject: Re: Working Together For An Ultimate Goal


>From: Erica Furgison <believer17@hotmail.com>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Working Together For An Ultimate Goal
>Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 22:20:35 PDT

>>From: Max Burns <AlienHype1@aol.com>
>>Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 16:42:12 EDT
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Working Together For An Ultimate Goal

>><snip>

>>We must unite after all we are all in search of the truth.
>><snip>

>>Its time to draw a line in the sand, and start working together,
>>it is not important to squabble about who is right and who is
>>wrong that only serves the agenda of those who seek to slow down
>>our quest for answers.

>><snip>

>>It is time face the facts we need each other if we are going to
>>get to the bottom of this large enigma wrapped up in a riddle in
>>our quest to uncover the truth.

>>Best regards
>>Max Burns

>Max,

>Even though you are right poeple with different beliefs will investigate
>different solutions.Someone who believes that ufo's are of terrestrial
>origin will not be able to accept the proof that ufo's are of
>extraterrestrial origin, and visa versa. Each person will only see the
>proof that they want to see. This will create more argument and debate
>and leave us no better off than we were before.

>Erica Furgison

Hi Erica & Max,

I think you are both taking a rather 'innocent' view of the
nature of change, growth, and the 'how' of the way things tend
to evolve.

Look at your own life as an example. When we first begin to
socialize as children a part of what shapes us are the
criticisms of attitude and behavior (feedback) that we receive
from our friends and parents and families. The uncomfortable
feelings that we may get from time to time about ourselves only
serve to point out our weaknesses and areas that need
strengthening, change, improvement or modification. The same
thing is going on here - most of the time.

There is a fine line between critique and put down but most
folks are able to recognize it and respect it. Individual style
and expression also has to be gauged and taken into account.

There is a difference between a constructive criticism (pointing
out a weakness and personal attack. That's granted. Very little
of that ever goes on here because Errol ferrets/edits all of
that stuff out before it ever reaches your hard drive. It's ok
for people to argue and debate, it can make both participants
better/stronger if it is done right. Sometimes that kind of
thing speeds the evolutionary process along in much the same way
that conflict or war stimulates production and technical
advancement.

What we have to watch for is the personal stuff not the
critiques themselves. The 'critiques' of one anothers work or
organizations _can_ be_ a healthy and positive thing, personal
attacks never are. Let people knock the rough edges off of each
other (improve and strengthen each other) without it causing you
concern. You can raise a red flag when it becomes personal.
Other than that, the criticism/debating is only a part of a
larger evolutionary process.

We are never going to be truly united until we've hashed out all
of our major differences and arrived at some kind of consensus.
We can't begin to work out those differences until we know what
they are. It's going to take a _long_time_ to accomplish, that's
for sure. But if you can raise your sights above the din/roar
for a moment you'll see that way down the road, consensus is
what we are all working toward. Ignore the skirmishes and
battles and concentrate on winning the war! Regardless of which
side of the fence we fall on, we're all in this boat together.
In a very real sense we are already 'united'. We are all here
with our differences and points of view trying to find the
common ground. On the surface it can look pretty sloppy but if
you dig underneath you'll see how we're all working together to
understand/improve one another.

One of the things that I love about UpDates so much is the
diversity of views represented here. Always going to be some
head butting and pissing-contests under these close conditions.
Nothing wrong with it though, just nature taking its course.

Focus on the future and where we want to be.

Peace,

John Velez

[Merci John - succinctly put --ebk]

======================================================
                         AIC INTERACTIVE CONFERENCE
                                  jvif@spacelab.net
======================================================
 INTRUDERS FOUNDATION /ABDUCTION INFORMATION CENTER
                              http://www.if-aic.com
======================================================
             AIC -MEMBERS ONLY- /ACCESS CODES REQUIRED
======================================================







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 23

                      UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 3, Number 25

From: Joseph Trainor <Masinaigan@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 07:32:15 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 08:12:41 -0400
Subject: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 3, Number 25


     UFO ROUNDUP
Volume 3, Number 25
June 21, 1998
Editor: Joseph Trainor

RAF TORNADO VANISHES FROM
RADAR OVER THE NORTH SEA

     On Monday, June 15, 1998, at 12:45 p.m., a
Tornado F3 jet fighter from 29 Squadron, Royal Air
Force (RAF) vanished from radar while flying at
10,000 feet (9,090) meters over the North Sea.
     The Tornado took off from RAF Coningsby in
Lincolnshire with two other F3s from 29 squadron
for a "routine training mission" over the North Sea.
     The Tornado's crew included Squadron Leader
William Michael Vivian, 33, of Cheshire and Flight
Lieutenant Derek Stuart Lacey, 33, of Altringham,
Cheshire, UK.  Both airmen had wives and young
children, according to reports aired on BBC-1's
Look North TV program.
     When it disappeared from the radar screens,
the Tornado was at 10,000 feet about 100 miles
(160 kilometers) east of Flamborough Head, near
Bridlington, East Yorkshire, which is 160 miles
(256 kilometers) north of London.
     According to the BBC, "After a seven-hour
air and sea search, the wreckage of the F3 Tornado
fighter was found 20 miles (32 kilometers) off the
east Yorkshire coast."
     The search was carried out by two RAF Sez
King helicopters and lifeboats of the Humber
coastguards.
     During the 6:30 p.m. news broadcast on Look
North, commentator Vicky Johnston reportedly
"stated that the RAF had told personnel not to speak
to the media, and that the mood at RAF Coningsby
was somber and subdued."
     Another BBC-1 reporter "interviewed Scottish
aircraft expert Jim Ferguson, who said that the fact
that the Tornado plunged two miles to the sea without
having time to radio for help, only serves to 'deepen
the mystery.'"
     The weather over the North Sea that morning
was described as "atrocious," according to the BBC.
At last report, one airman's body had been recovered
from the ocean, but the other remained missing.  (See
the BBC website for June 15, 1998, "Crew Killed in
RAF Crash."  Many thanks to Paul Hunter for sending
us this news story.)

STAFFORDSHIRE POLICE
RECEIVE MANY UFO REPORTS

     The blue UFO that flew over the UK the night of
Thursday, June 11, 1998, was seen by many in
Staffordshire, including policemen.
     According to the BBC, "Many people rang the police
to report a flying saucer, while others feared that they
had seen a burning aeroplane.  Sergeant John Drake of
Staffordshire police said, 'We had more than a dozen
calls from people who had seen a single blue light...
Many officers from police cars also radioed in, saying
they had seen the same thing.  We had calls from
Keele in the north of the county to Tamworth in the
south."
     The blue UFO, attributed by officialdom to "three
meteors," was also seen along motorway M4 near
Reading in Berkshire.  (See the BBC website for
June 12, 1998.)

UFO FOLLOWS CURTIS HOME
TO QUARTZITE, ARIZONA

     After last week's UFO sighting in Indio, California,
Jack L. Curtis had another strange encounter--this time
in his hometown of Quartzite, Arizona.
     "I was walking east on Main Street in Quartzite
(population 1,876) and watched a very intense white
light," Curtis reported, who described it as "about the
size of a round star but incredibly bright.  There was
no aircraft visibly or audibly" present "before or
immediately after the sighting.  It (the UFO) was about
50 degrees elevation and descended to about 25 to 30
degrees before it disappeared.  The object was in the
east-southeastern sky, estimated azimuth was 110
degrees.  During the seconds of its jagged descent
path, it changed destination four times.  It was first
descending vertical, then jigged to the north, then
the south, back to the north, then the south before
disappearing.  No sound was heard at all."
     "Later, at about 8:50 p.m., as I was returning to
my residence, I saw an orange-colored star that looked
unusual and out of place.  It was just to the north of
where the intense white light had descended.  It
appeared to stay in the same location for about ten
minutes.  It was close to 90 degrees azimuth.  For
about two minutes it disappeared,  Then, as I was
near my residence, I noticed it again but it was
moving rapidly.  It was flying west about 280 degrees
(heading--J.T.), and I quickly grabbed my binoculars.
There was a steady red light on one end, a steady
orange on the other, and a blinking red in the middle.
It continued on the same flight pattern until out of
sight at 9:15 p.m."  (Email Interview)

WOMAN SEES GREEN UFO
OVER DENVER SUBURB

     On Thursday, June 11, 1998, at 9:45 p.m.,
Karen L. of Broomfield, Colorado saw "a strange
green light in the sky.  It was stationary for quite some
time and then zipped back and forth in a zigzagging
path.  It was so unbelievably fast that the green light
would leave a trailing path."
     "There was a slight storm that night.  After the
light was done moving, it went to a stationary position
and just being in the sky," she added.  "Under the
clouds of the storm came a great white light, then
two other green-and-pink lights emerged and started
moving towards the original green light.  All three
lights started going into this zigzagging dance.  One
even went from a stationary position and shot straight
up and out of sight, leaving a (luminous) trail behind."
     "The strangest of all was that it shot straight back
down and also stopped in a stationary point again.
This went on for approximately 15 minutes.  Suddenly,
all three shot straight up into the sky and disappeared
in less than a second."
     Karen reported her sighting to the Jefferson County
Sheriff's Department.  Broomfield (population 24,638)
is on Colorado Highway 11 approximately 11 miles
(18 kilometers) north of Denver.  (Many thanks to Tim
Hagemeister of NACOMM for this report.)

BLINKING UFO SPOTTED OVER
DES PLAINES, ILLINOIS

     On Sunday, June 14, 1998, at 10 p.m., Susan G.
was working at the computer at her home in Des
Plaines, Illinois (population 53,223) when she
noticed a strange object beyond her window.
     "The UFO was moving from south to north,"
Susan reported, "I was facing east when I saw it.
Between 30 to 50 degrees above the horizon."
     She described the UFO as a discoidal object
with "multi-colored flashing/blinking lights around
its edges," flying "near Des Plaines River Road and
Route 294, about four seconds before it passed
behind a building.  It seemed to be round and flat,
like a pancake with a dome in the middle.  I was
alone (at the time), shutting down my computer."
     Des Plaines is a suburb of Chicago, located
21 miles (34 kilometers) northwest of the Loop.
(Email Interview)

NEW UFO SIGHTING IN
LAGRANGE, GEORGIA

     On Sunday, June 17, 1998, two 12-year-old
boys spotted a UFO in their hometown of LaGrange,
Georgia (population 25,597), a city approximately
64 miles (102 kilometers) southwest of Atlanta.
     The boys said the UFO "resembled a white light
that had a red circle around it, moving to the north"
at around 10 p.m.  "The non-blinking light 'dropped,'
according to one boy, after 15 seconds.  The sky
was clear.  Its apparent size was smaller than Venus
but as big as 'the brightest star'...The light did not
blink and was flying in their estimation much higher
than a commercial airliner."
     The UFO "was moving in a generally straight
path from the south, with the moon to the east and
a bright star west of it."  After it moved out of sight,
the boys ran indoors and told their families. (Many
thanks to John C. Thompson for this report.)

CIGAR-SHAPED UFO SEEN BY
THREE IN NORTHERN OHIO

     On Monday, June 14, 1998, at about 8:15 p.m.,
Steven J. Neely, director of Ohio Skywatch
International, his son Doug and a friend, Kyle,
were at the Marion Fish and Game Club in
Marion, Ohio when they spotted "an object in
the sky, very shiny...as it came over low on
the horizon."
     Neely estimated that the UFO was flying
at an altitude of 3,000 to 5,000 feet.
     "By then, Kyle, using his rifle scope (3 by 9),
looked at the object...The object was cigar-shaped,
very shiny (metallic), almost a mirror finish, and we
estimated the size at 65 feet to 80 feet (20 to 25
meters) in length.  We watched it traveling north
for about five minutes.  It then made a 90-degree
turn to the east and moved away at a high rate
of speed."
     Marion (population 34,075) is located on Ohio
Routes 4 and 309 about 40 miles (64 kilometers)
north of Columbus, the state capital.  (Many
thanks to Steven J. Neely for this report.)

WEIRD SCREAMS HEARD
NEAR TEXAS UFO SITE

     On Sunday, June 14, 1998, at 8:34 p.m.,
ufologist D.M. of Leander, Texas, also known as
"Pappie" and his son were on a skywatch out
in the nearby Hill Country when they had an
unusual encounter.
     "We parked on a country road about two miles
(4 kilometers) west of Leander, Texas," D.M. reported,
"We were on a hill and could see other hills and
valleys around us.  The sky was clear."
     They "saw two lights in the sky.  Both traveled at
a steady speed.  One went southwest and was seen
to traverse the entire sky.  The other was traveling in
a southern direction and was viewed for a good
distance."
     Then they "witnessed a third light," and "the first
two seemed to cross each other.  All (were) too low
to be satellites."
     In a valley to the west of their position, he added,
"the area was suddenly lit up from the ground for about
five seconds with a blue-colored light.  The lit area
(illuminated area) covered about a football field."
     Then they heard a strange sound coming from
one of the wooded valleys below their hilltop position.
"Then a scream was heard from the woods to the
southwest.  In about four seconds, it was heard from
the southeast.  No human could have traveled that
distance in that amount of time."
     Neither witness could recognize the sound as
the scream of a known animal.  Their investigation
continues.
     Leander (population 3,398) is on Highway 1431
about 25 miles (40 kilometers) northwest of Austin,
the state capital.  (See Filer's Files #24 for 1998.
Many thanks to George A. Filer, Eastern Director
of MUFON, for this report.)
(Editor's Comment:  A similar blue flash was seen
at a UFO site near Grays Harbor, Washington
in 1997.)

CAVALLARI SNAPS ANOTHER
UFO PHOTO IN BROOKLYN

     On Thursday, May 28, 1998, ufologist and ham
radio enthusiast Alex Cavallari snapped another
color photograph of a UFO flying over the New York
City borough of Brooklyn.
     Cavallari, who lives near Neptune Avenue in
Brooklyn's Sheepshead Bay section, shot the photo
using a Minolta Freedom Zoom 90C camera with
Kodak ASA400 color film.
     "The jet aircraft in the picture had just taken
off from (John F.) Kennedy (International) Airport
and was climbing and turning to the southeast,"
Cavallari reported.  "I noticed the UFO enter (the
field of view) through my camera's view finder,
and I took this picture.  I tried to take more pictures
as fast as the camera would take them, but the UFO
was traveling at a great rate of speed and was out
of my field of vision within two seconds."
     "The UFO appeared to be a gray/silver-colored
spherical/orb-shaped craft.  There was no trail or
smear seen during the filming, but the picture shows
a tail or smear behind the UFO.  The UFO traveled
north towards New York City  I believe the craft was
about 50 to 75 feet in diameter."
     Cavallari said he thinks the "tail or smear" in the
photograph is probably a "motion blur" which resulted
because his camera or the film "was too slow in
response time to capture the craft's image in a still
or motionless position."  (Copyright 1998 by Alex
Cavallari.  Many thanks, Alex, for letting UFO Roundup
quote from your report.)

BOYLE RESIDENTS REPORT
NEW FLURRY OF SIGHTINGS

     A new UFO flap has excited residents of Boyle,
a town in County Roscommon, Eire, the site of
an alleged saucer crash two years ago.
     In May 1996, several residents reported seeing
a large silver saucer plunge from the sky, clip some
treetops on a hillside and crash in a lake just north
of Boyle.
     According to some accounts, several occupants
of the craft survived the crash and were taken into
custody by the Gardai (Irish police--J.T.)  A NATO
task force then reportedly moved into the crash
zone and remained there for several months.
     Now Boyle is the site of a new UFO flap,
according to the Roscommon Herald.  "The
Herald has heard several reports of bright blue lights
moving back and forward slowly in the heavens in
the early last Saturday night/early Sunday morning,"
i.e. June 6/June 7, 1998.  Boyle is about
168 kilometers (105 miles) northwest of
Dublin, the national capital.
     "According to one observer, the mysterious
lights were hovering over the Ballymote Road of
Boyle and could apparently be seen for many
miles around."  (See the Roscommon Herald for
June 10, 1998, "'Flying Saucer' in Boyle."  Many
thanks to Daev Walsh of Blather for forwarding
the article.)

SOMBRERO-SHAPED UFO
SIGHTED IN QUEENSLAND

     Two Australian men, both in their mid-fifties,
sighted a UFO "shaped like a Mexican hat" at
Paradise Point, Queensland, about 200 kilometers
(120 miles) south of Brisbane last week.
     Gerhard S. and Waltraud S. saw the UFO from
their home in Paradise Point.  "They describe the
object as very bright, white and some orange light
underneath."  The object, they said, "was a flat disc
with a dome in the center and a bright light underneath."
     "The object was moving very slowly over the sky,
coming from the northwest.  It disappeared and
reappeared several times and, after several minutes,
disappeared behind trees and houses in a southerly
direction.  The size was a bit smaller than the moon,
about a third of a degree arc, but was brighter than
the moon.  Seemed to be several kilometers away.
It looked similar to a Mexican hat, no similarity to
aircraft or helicopters, etc."  (Email Interview)

UFOs SIGHTED ALL OVER
NORTH CENTRAL ITALY

     North central Italy was rocked by a UFO flap the
night of Monday, June 8, 1998.
     "At 9:40 p.m., some red lights were observed
turning around a tall TV tower in the city of
Firenze (Florence)," about 200 kilometers
(120 miles) north of Rome.
     "At 10:10 p.m., two white lights were seen moving
in tandem through the skies above Caselle Torinese
from the northeast to the south, and, a few seconds
later, the same witnesses saw a white light like a
lighthouse beacon in the west, which several seconds
later moved to a higher altitude."
     At 10:50 p.m., "two mysterious lights were moving
parallel to each other from north to south in the
vicinity of Piacenza," a city 320 kilometers (200 miles)
northwest of Rome.
     At 11:10 p.m., the same phenomenon was seen
at Viconza, a small city in Veneto province about
96 kilometers (58 miles) west of Venezia (Venice).
     Also that night, at 10 p.m., a "mysterious light
was photographed at Mizza" in northern Italy.
     At 2:55 a.m. on Tuesday, June 9, 1998, "a single
reddish sphere" was photographed over Rome.  This
case is being investigated by the Centro Italiano di
Studi Ufologici (CISU).  (Grazie a Renzo Cabassi,
Daniele Maffetone, Paolo Tosselli, Alfredo Lissoni
e Edoardo Russo di CISU per questo rapporto.)

MYSTERIOUS FIREBALL SEEN
IN NORTHERN ARGENTINA

     A mysterious fireball crossed the sky over
Misiones province in northern Argentina the afternoon
of Monday, June 8, 1998, leaving a luminous trail
that remained visible for minutes afterward--even
during a tropical downpour.
     "Several witnesses observed the afternoon of
Monday, June 8, a ball of fire, which, say the
witnesses, crossed over Colonia Julio Martin,
seven kilometers (5 miles) from the city of Campo
Viera."
     "So bright was the spectacle" that the
witnesses "entertained the possibility that they
had seen an OVNI (Spanish acronym for UFO)
but reports from a local observatory and specialists
indicated that they had seen a meteorite."
     "A great explosion was heard by the villagers
and attributed to the (Argentinian) Air Force, and
the astronomers said it was related to the heavenly
body."
     The trail remained visible "despite the intense
rains that were reported in the area."
     Campo Viera is 560 kilometers (350 miles)
north of Buenos Aires, the capital.  (See the
Argentinian newspaper El Dia of La Plata for
June 12, 1998.  Muchas gracias a Carlos Iurchuk
para esa historia.)

from the UFO Files...

1875: THE STRANGEST DAY

     Here's a record in the field of Forteana--five weird
events, all taking place at different points around
the world on the same day.  The day was June 25,
1875, and here are the incidents, fully documented.
     USA - Tatanka Iotanka (Sitting Bull) is participating
in the annual Sun Dance powwow at Standing Rock,
Dakota Territory (now Mobridge, South Dakota.)  All
at once, he collapses into a trance.  In his vision, he
finds himself 400 miles to the west, in the hilly coulee
country of eastern Montana.  He meets White Buffalo
Calf Woman, guardian spirit of the Lakota people.
She tells him that in one year's time a big battle will
be fought here.  The Lakotas will be victorious, she
says, but victory will bring much hardship, and she
predicts a Lakota renaissance in a few generations.
(See THE LANCE AND THE SHIELD: THE LIFE
AND TIMES OF SITTING BULL by Robert M. Utley,
Henry Holt, Inc. New York, N.Y. 1993.  Chalk one
up for White Buffalo Calf Woman.  The Battle of the
Little Bighorn, a.k.a. Little Ragnarok on the Prairie,
was fought one year later, on June 25, 1876.)
     USA - The same morning, on the east coast of
Tunkashila (Lakota name for the USA), on West
47th Street in New York City, to be exact, a Russian
noblewoman and mystic named Elena Petrovna von
Hahn Blavatsky made her way slowly to her study.
Elena had had a little date with Jack Daniels the
previous night and now had a head as big as Siberia.
Reaching her desk, she let out a scream. There, on
the desktop, was "a pile of perhaps thirty pages,
written--or perhaps one should say precipitated--by
invisible hands while she slept."  It was the start
of Madame Blavatsky's first book, ISIS UNVEILED.
(See MADAME BLAVATSKY'S BABOON by
Peter Washington, Schoken Books, New York, N.Y.
1995, page 51.)
     AUSTRIA - Guido Karl Anton List, journalist,
folklorist and mountain climber, invites four fellow
members of the Donauhort, a rowing club in Vienna,
to take the day off from work and row down the
Danube to the Roman ruins at Carnantum.  "For
List, lost in reverie, it was the 1,500th anniversary
of the tribal German victory over the Romans, which
he celebrated with a fire and the burial of eight wine
bottles in the shape of a swastika beneath the arch
of the Pagan Gate."  This event marked the birth of
the Armanenschaft, a forerunner of the Nazi Party.
(See THE OCCULT ROOTS OF NAZISM by Nicholas
Goodrick-Clarke, New York University Press, 1992,
page 35)
     UK - "Flashes that were seen in the sky upon
the 25th of June, 1875 by Charles Gape, of Scole,
Norfolk." (See THE COMPLETE BOOKS OF CHARLES
FORT, Dover Publications Inc., New York, N.Y., 1974,
page 434. I knew I could count on you, Chuck.)
     AUSTRALIA - "A miner, a Mr. J.H. Campbell, was
exploring scrubland on the southern slope of the Castle,"
a landform in the Jamison Valley near Katoomba Falls,
New South Wales, "when he sighted what he later
described as a hairy, two-metre-(6.6 feet)-tall, manlike
ape-like animal moving through the scrub about 100
metres in front of him and seeminglt oblivious to his
presence.  Mr. Campbell picked up a strong piece of
tree limb for protection and stalked the hairy creature
(usually called aYowie in Australia--J.T.) for half a
kilometre before it eluded him."  (See MYSTERIOUS
AUSTRALIA by Rex Gilroy, Nexus Publishing,
Mapleton, Qld., 1995, page 197)
    Your editor does not pretend to know the meaning
of it all.  But the concentration of strange incidents
on this single day is certainly unusual.

FUN UFO WEBSITES:
     For more on situation in Boyle, Eire, drop in at
Daev Walsh's great site, Nua Blather, a weekly
compendium of Forteana, dogma destruction and
high wierdness.  Check it out at http://www.nua.ie/
blather.
     Don't miss our parent site, UFO INFO, with its
new links to Australia.  Log in at this URL:
http://ufoinfo.com.
     Back issues of UFO Roundup are available for
reading and downloading at our site.  Drop in at
http://ufoinfo.com/roundup

     And that's it for now.  Join us next weekend for
more saucer news from "the paper that goes home--
UFO ROUNDUP."  See you then.

UFO ROUNDUP: Copyright 1998 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 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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 23

                Re: A Divided Community Can Never Get Anwsers

From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 10:27:40 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 15:04:48 -0400
Subject: Re: A Divided Community Can Never Get Anwsers

>From: Ori Jackson <Kaosquasar@aol.com>
>Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 16:33:38 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: The Role Of The Researcher In Modern Ufology

>As the general consensus seems to be that E.B.E's (if they do in
>fact exist) have hostile intentions where are the ufologists who
>are offering the public concrete strategies for dealing with the
>prevention of alien intervention?

>In World War 2 the British public dug their gardens to assist
>the war efforts.

>What has it been decided, in the higher echelons of ufology that
>the public should be doing to contribute to this war effort?

>Replies most welcome.

Ori,

Without waiting for the "higher echelons of ufology" to decide
anything, the main thing we can be doing is to try to spread the
word to friends, neighbors and our community that UFOs and their
piloting entities are for real.  So then it's good to have a list
of UFO books you can recommend they read, and/or web sites to
visit. Besides occasional word-of-mouth communication, you could
try writing, or at least submitting, an occasional letter to the
editor of your newspaper about it. There are some smaller-town
newspapers whose editors don't automatically reject such
letters.

In so doing, I feel it's best to try to present a balanced
picture of it all, and not just harp on the negative side of
traumatic UFO experiences.
The more scared the public is made, the more reluctant will be
those who control the news media to allow discussions of it to be
aired. We have all these cases of UFO-induced healings and of
abductees who later came to value their experiences as
enlightening on record, as well as all the cases of UFO-induced
temporary sickness and trauma.

And the more scared the public is made, the more likely
governments will be to call for an all-out war against the UFO
entities when our legislators eventually do learn about the
reality of their presence. And that would be senseless, unless we
had no other alternative.

With a balanced approach, it is easier to understand that UFO
aliens who mean us no good must have been held in check by other,
less malevoent aliens, for many millennia, in order to explain
the continued existence of our societies unexploited, as a whole,
by alien intervention.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 23

                        Re: Recommendations Please!?

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 14:59:30 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 15:40:26 -0400
Subject: Re: Recommendations Please!?

>From: Peter Gersten <UFOLAWYER1@aol.com>
>Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 22:38:07 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Recommendations Please!?

>>Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 18:00:58 -0400
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Recommendations Please!?

>>>From: Peter Gersten <UFOLAWYER1@aol.com>
>>>Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 20:41:43 EDT
>>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>>Subject: Recommendations please!

>>>CAUS is now planning the first of its annual mock trial events:

>>..... Will we be afforded
>>the opportunity to examine the transcripts or be advised
>>of the outcome of the event? How will it be communicated
>>to the rest of us?

>Sue,

>The proceedings will be taped. Aren't you planning on attending?
>Why does the mere thought of a mock trial make some people very
>fearful and in return resort to personal attacks?

>Peter

Hello,

Only a lawyer trying to make a case for himself and trying to
clean up a "mess" he made on himself could characterize
disappointment and disbelief as "fear."

And, I do believe it was _you_ who made things "personal."
I criticized the direction that you are taking CUAS into.
You offered me rat poison to eat. Who's jerking who Peter?

Get real, . . . more importantly, get serious! CAUS _can_ be
a mighty force for change and enlightenment. But not if
you're going to concentrate on publishing all of that painful
New Age rubbish and wasting all your energy on "Mock Trials"
that only a few will ever see, or marketing/pimping videotapes
for Hoagland et. al. There have just _got_ to be more productive
avenues that CAUS (under your leadership) can pursue.

Just my opinion and requires no response from you Mr Attorney.

John Velez


======================================================
                         AIC INTERACTIVE CONFERENCE
                                  jvif@spacelab.net
======================================================
 INTRUDERS FOUNDATION /ABDUCTION INFORMATION CENTER
                              http://www.if-aic.com
======================================================
             AIC -MEMBERS ONLY- /ACCESS CODES REQUIRED
======================================================







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 23

                        Re: UFOs are not BVM-acabras

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 14:15:44 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 15:15:22 -0400
Subject: Re: UFOs are not BVM-acabras


>From: Sue Strickland <strick@H2Net.net>
>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: To Larry Hatch: UFOs are not BVM-acabras
>Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 19:46:25 -0600


>>Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 06:15:54 -0700
>>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: UFOs are not BVM-acabras!

>Dear Larry:

>I'm responding to your point about the difficulty in accepting
>ideas which perhaps a majority of trustworthy, reliable
>individuals find themselves also unable to accept.

>To keep this short and simple, I really do think you have made a
>most important argument in pointing out that it is the ignorance
>that keeps us skeptics, regardless of the issues.

>I don't believe in that other stuff you mentioned any more than
>your hypothetical friend. I've not had reason to spend countless
>days (and years) trying to determine if any of those "other"
>ideas have sicentific basis. But, then I haven't experienced any
>of that other stuff first-hand, either. I haven't felt the need
>to find answers for those kinds of phenomena because I haven't
>had the need to maintain my sanity where those issues are
>concerned. I have experienced the UFO phenomenon, many times.
>They haven't been wonderful, "spiritual" experiences either. I'd
>much prefer to be your skeptic friend. I just can't.
>I've not had a choice. I've been compelled to try to find
>answers, just so I could maintain my sanity. If you've got some
>logical, reasonable, explanations for the things that I've
>experienced, hey...I'm listening. I'm game. Sock it to me baby!

>So far, the answers I've been receiving have served to
>substantiate my fearful UFO experiences...that what I saw was
>real, and what happened, really happened. So, now all I know is
>how little I know. I guess that's a start. It just seems rather
>meager pickings at this point. I'd like them to land on the White
>House Lawn too, in broad daylight. But, it probably won't happen
>in my lifetime. In the meantime, I'm just listening to other
>skeptics sing the "Twilight Zone" theme song.

>--Sue
================

Hi Sue,

Errol usually doesn't like to publish responses that consist
solely of, "Right on" or "I agree" but, . . .

Damn, sister that was one of the most gut level, honest, sane
and well written statements as has ever come from an abductee!

I bow deeply at the waist and tip my hat to you. It is people
_like_you_ that I have dedicated my life to. _You_ are a shining
example of 'why' I have chosen to do so.

Thanx. Great/excellent post! And thanks for _proving_ a point
that I've been trying to make for years!

Peace,

John Velez, Webmaster, IF-AIC
Intruders Foundation/Abduction Information Center


======================================================
                         AIC INTERACTIVE CONFERENCE
                                  jvif@spacelab.net
======================================================
 INTRUDERS FOUNDATION /ABDUCTION INFORMATION CENTER
                              http://www.if-aic.com
======================================================
             AIC -MEMBERS ONLY- /ACCESS CODES REQUIRED
======================================================







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 23

               CE: 'Light Phenomenon' In June '98 N. Carolina

From: Kenny Young <task@FUSE.NET>
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 12:27:19 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 15:52:47 -0400
Subject: CE: 'Light Phenomenon' In June '98 N. Carolina

June, 1998
Reported Earthquake in North Carolina accompanies "flash of light"

The reports of a recent earthquake in an unlikely locality such as
North Carolina contain additional, unreported information which may
be of interest. A powerful 'flash of light' was described by area
residents, drawing initial speculation of a meteor strike in the
region.

The U.S. Geological Survey concluded that a minor earthquake with
the preliminary magnitude of 3.2 on The Richter Scale occurred at
10:31 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time on Thursday evening, June 4. The
epicenter was determined to have been about 10 miles west-northwest
of Kannapolis and about 20 miles north of Charlotte.

In a news report dated June 5, 1998, UPI reported that the local 9-1-1
emergency line fielded 93 calls after the first trembler at 10:31 p.m.
EDT, which was reportedly followed by two smaller aftershocks. UPI
quoted witnesses as describing tremors which felt like a series of
'underground explosions.'

Missing from the reportage was the initial concern expressed among
citizenry regarding a brilliant flash of light which was visually
observed and thought by many to be connected with the incident.

Jeff Whisenant of The Lucile Miller Observatory in Maiden, North
Carolina, dispatched an advisory on an internet 'newsgroup' relevant
to the event, first expressing concern that a meteor had impacted
the region.

During my contact with Whisenant on June 16, he confirmed that there
were seven calls and e-mails within about 15 minutes of the incident
placed to the observatory in Mooresville, North Carolina, which is
just north of Charlotte. He said that the description of the incident
was consistent with that of a "meteor hit."

Whisenant added that weather officials confirmed that there was no
thunder or lightning storms at that time within 50-miles of the
area (Note - I also conducted a check of weather advisories and found
some thunderstorm alerts for this region but issued earlier in the week).

Mr. Whisenant initially sought to follow up on the reports and correlate
any possible sightings, but suspended his efforts when geologists stated
that the unusual event was due to a minor earthquake, a very rare
occurrence in North Carolina.

Whisenant added that 4 of the 7 calls he received reported a 'light
event' associated with the shaking. He theorized that any light
associated with the event probably originated with 'heat lightning'
from storms in the Raleigh area.

"We have also considered that the light event may have been "imagined",
or just coincidence," Whisenant added. "Confusion such as this happens
often, and is similar to people who report hearing a hiss at the instant
they see a meteor. These calls were from ordinary people who were not
familiar with meteors, or earthquakes either, for that matter."

A kind 9-1-1 dispatcher for Mooresville Police Department who was
contacted by telephone said that their initial fears centered on a
natural gas pipeline in the area that was thought to have exploded.
Additional concerns were that an airplane had crashed, as the
flight line for the Charlotte Airport is in the region. They were
also concerned that a calamity had struck The McGuire Nuclear Power
Station.

The dispatcher added that her daughter was standing on her porch when
the event transpired, and heard a tremendous 'BOOM' sound.

Mr. Larry Dickerson, Director of Iredell County Emergency Management,
was also contacted on Wednesday morning, June 17. He said that there
were numerous 9-1-1 reports from citizens advising of a tremendous
flash in the sky, and added that so many calls came in at once that
the office did not take time to get names from callers.

"At that particular time [the flash] was part of the confusion," he
said, recalling how the 'flash' reports confounded their understanding
of the event which they were dealing with.

"The National Earthquake Center said that we wouldn't have flashes of
light in a 3.2 earthquake, and the sky was clear, there were stars.
People were reporting something," said the emergency management
director.

"Initially, we thought it was anything from a gas pipeline explosion
to a large plane crash. People were describing a tremendous flash of
light. In the first 30-minutes of the earthquake we took in over 700
phone calls. The first few of which were relevant to the flash."

Dickerson said that there were more than 'a dozen' callers reporting
the brilliant flash, but in a later phone call on June 23, added
that there had been so many calls to the 9-1-1 office relevant to the
incident that the majority of reports dealt with the explosive noise
which was heard and the calls regarding the 'flash' report could not
be easily located by the 9-1-1 telecommunicators.

Mr. Dickerson also added that the majority of people were probably
indoors and did not see the flash, and that the bright flash was also
reported on a Charlotte, North Carolina NBC news affiliate.

"From my understanding," Dickerson added, "people did describe the
event using the word 'explosion.' Rolling thunder is not unusual
around here, the folks in this area are very familiar with that. We
recently had a plane crash, and people used the word crash, not
explosion."

Dickerson added that although the residents in the area thought there
was a huge explosion which took place, he acknowledged that they are
also unfamiliar with earthquakes.

"I've heard of earthquake lights recently, and in the past month I have
heard of these earthquake lights far more than I'll ever want to know...
but the National Earthquake Information center said it was highly unlikely
that the flash everyone saw was associated with the earthquake. We didn't
have a clue what it was, and at the time an 'earthqake' was way down
on the list."

Dickerson remarked how police officers and dispatchers laughed when
they were first told the event was due to an earthquake. "The earthquake
explanation was initially dismissed," he said.

The references to any 'flash of light' seen in conjunction with the
reported earthquake event was omitted from news media reportage of
the happening. It was not until this writer noticed an internet
posting from Jeff Whisenant of The Lucile Miller Observatory requesting
information on a 'meteor hit' that a 'light-flash' phenomenon reported
at the time of the North Carolina earthquake incident was known. My
subsequent email contact with Whisenant and phone call to Dickerson
verified this strange report.

Dickerson said that he will send me a 9-1-1 tape of the citizen
advisements of the earthquake incident for my research purposes. I
expressed to him that I sought to triangulate the locality where the
flash and boom was reported.

A phenomenon known as 'earthquake lights' has been documented and
measured by researchers. Dickerson stressed, however, that the National
Earthquake Center denied that the North Carolina flash would have
been attributable to the 3.2 quake on June 4.

NOTES:

The Iredell County Fire Department documented the following log entry:

 Friday, June 05, 1998
 MOORESVILLE, NC: (Iredell Co.) *Earthquake*  A 3.2 Earthquake shook
 structures in a 20 mile radius just north of Charlotte.  (4)
 aftershocks. No major damage.  No injuries.  County Agencies very busy.
 [CFP353*702]. 12:50a.m.

Filed;
June 23, 1998
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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 23

                             Re: New Jet or UFO?

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 14:42:45 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 15:27:53 -0400
Subject: Re: New Jet or UFO?


>From: Sue Strickland <strick@H2Net.net>
>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: New Jet or UFO?
>Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 01:46:15 -0600

Sue -

Thanks for responding to my questions. The reason I asked them
was not only to satisfy my curiosity, but also to ensure that I
could give you as good an answer as possible.

The only apparent mundane cause would be a helicopter, such
as a Hughes, or perhaps one of the smaller Bells. However, it
seems you were in sufficiently close proximity that you would
have had notable effects from the rotor wash, no matter how
"stealthified" the helicopter was.

From a UFO perspective, there is a class of reports which fit
your description. Richard Hall has dubbed this class of reports
as "Dyad". I independently discovered this classification, and
have been maintaining those cases I find in my correlated catalog
at

http://www.geocities.com/~mcashman/ufocorr.htm

You may wish to have a look at this.

The only case which seems to describe a large "hooded" control
panel with the sort of space next to the pilot which you describe
would be the Cowichan case, at

http://www.geocities.com/~mcashman/ufo/report/700101.htm

I have not yet uploaded a drawing of that object, though I
have one, courtesy of Hilary Evans.

Most Dyad objects show strong rim lighting. Your observation
of a single light would not fit that part of the pattern.

Dyad's have been involved in reports classified under my
behavioral system as Spy, Drop-In, and Roadblock.

I hope this helps.

------
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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 23

                           Mini UFO flap in Quebec

From: Gilles Milot <milotg@Magnola.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 15:49:32 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 23:55:58 -0400
Subject: Mini UFO flap in Quebec


Here is a brief summary of the sightings that occured from
mid-may to mid-june 1998 along the St-Laurent river between
the cities of Three-Rivers 150 km/90 miles east of Montreal
and Chateauguay 10 km/6 miles S.W. of Montl. We are
presently investigating other sightings that occured also
during the same period of time.


Berthierville May 18, 1998 (60 km/36 miles east of Montreal)

Georges H.P. has observed at 11:15pm three lights over the cities
of Sorel and Tra=E7y located on the south shore of the
St-Laurent(opposite to Berthierville) consisting of one bright
white light with repetitive incoherent movement (Up and down,
left to right) and two motionless colored light( top:green,
bottom: red ) located at each side of the white one at a distance
of approx.1000 feets (each) from it. The duration of the sighting
was 30 minutes. The witness took one picture of the white light
(last shot in the film roll) and when he came back with a new
roll, the lights were gone.


Montreal, May 18, 1998

Sylvain O.has observed over downtown Montreal, at 11:40pm
during 20 minutes three white lights surrounding a bigger one
also of white color. A triangular form of dark orange color was
standing close to the white lights. No movements were apparent.
Two others persons located in the south part of the city have also
sighted these ufos.


Lachine, May 30,1998 (SW sudburd of Mtl)

On Saturday May 30, many witness have observed a black chopper
unidentified stationery 20 feets over the Lake St-Louis (Part of the
St-Laurent river). Following these witnesses, this is not the first time
that this happened; it's frequent to see these choppers over the lake
between 1:00 and 4:00am. An explanation could be that these
choppers belong to federal police fighting the tobacco and alchool
traffic between indian reservations (Frequent problems in this
area). But unidentified and black ??


Sorel, June 01, 1998 (60 km/36miles east of Mtl)

Around 21:45pm, Robert B. heard a loud "Boum" and jumped out
of his home to look on the origin of that noise. Outside, at his left
at a distance of 1000 feets and approx. 50 to 75 feets from the
ground,a large bright white light was hovering for a few minutes
and then turn to the right direction showing following the witness,
a triangular form. The ufo then departed at a tremendous
speed in the south direction, his color changing with the speed
from white to dark orange. The total sighting lasted  5 minutes.


Chateauguay, June 06, 1998 (S.W. of Mtl)

At 23:00pm Francois G. has observed with two winesses three
white lights having a triangular form flying thru the clouds. The
lights were moving in the interior of the triangle leaving from what
seem to be the edge of the FT to join the center all at the same
time illuminating therefore the center of the ufo and then returning
at their original position.The sighting lasted for 1 hour 15 minutes.


Montreal, June 09,1998

At 9:45pm, on the south shore of Montreal, Marie G. has  sighted
two disks or spheres having a dimension of four times the brighest
star, flying from east to west at different speeds. (Thank to UFO
Round-up and M. Broussard for the information).


These reports are still under investigation with other sightings by
The Association Qu=E9becoise d'Ufologie/Quebec Association of
Ufology, UFO Qu=E9bec and S.P.I.


G.Milot
A.Q.U./Q.A.U.

   Gilles Milot







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 24

                Re: A Divided Community Can Never Get Anwsers

From: bruce maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 16:05:18 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 00:02:26 -0400
Subject: Re: A Divided Community Can Never Get Anwsers


>From: Ori Jackson <Kaosquasar@aol.com>
>Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 16:33:38 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: The Role Of The Researcher In Modern Ufology


>> Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 09:50:30 -0700 (PDT)
>> From: Roy Hale <roy_hale@yahoo.com>
>> Subject: A Divided Community Can Never Get Anwsers
>> To: updates@globalserve.net

>As a recent initiate, conscientious observer say, of the field
>of ufology I have been taking notice of many of the postings on
>Updates but I have begun to question the role of the ufologist
>who seems to spend more time engaged in verbal battles of
>sarcasm and inuendo than in actually completing any research. I
>am in complete agreement with Roy Hale's recent posting>

>A divided community can never get answers

>To become drawn into purial paroxysms serves only to discredit
>the work of the ufologist who is then seen to care more for his
>reputation and standing amoungst others than for the validity of
>his/her research. Is this a conspiricy to draw public attention
>away from the offerings of theoretical answers?

>Obviously the nature of the field dictates differing opinions as
>shown currently through the Burns v Clarke controversy but I
f>eel it is important to focus only on the research and not on
t>he personal lives of those involved.

This would certainly be desirable. Unfortunately, one person's
gold is another's pyrite ("fool's gold") and one ends up not
believeing in th results of someone else's investigation. Unlike
conventional science, it is impossible to recreate a UFO event
such that investigator B can independently check on the results
reported by investigator A. If B does not believe A did a good
job investigating, then B may reject A's results and A will get
angry and call B an SOB and then B will get in a huff and say A
is a jerk, doesn' t know his rear oriface from a hole in the
ground.... and then things get really nasty. Ad homninem attacks
take over (friends of A attack friends of B) and pretty soon NO
ONE KNOWS what is the real status of the UFO report that started
it all off.

In ufology the best one can do for replication is (1) carry out
your own interviews of the witnesses, while realizing that if
the witnesses have alreay been interviewed their statements to
you might be modified by the fact that they have already told
their stories (that is, mere investigation can, in principle
although not always in actuality, modify the "data" - - the
"experimenter effect" analogous to the problem in quantum
mechanics of "uncertainty") or (2) gather all the pertinent
information from the people who have already done the
investigation and (3) do your own analysis and arrive at your
own conclusion. NOTE: the analysis of most UFO sightings
requires a rather broad spectrum of knowledge in order to
understand the interplay or relationship between the sighting
details (or characteristics of the reported phenomenon)and the
Candidate Explanatory Phenomena. An investigator may have to
know about astronomy, satellites, aircraft (what do you know
about various types of heavier and lighter than air craft?),
physiology of the eye (how people see things), radar, optics,
photography, soil analysis, interviewing techniques,
trigonometry,map reading, history, atmospheric phenomena
including the way the atmosphere modifies the appearance of
things (especially distant lights at night). Anyone who wishes
to carry out an independent investigation of a previously
investigated case had better be certain s/he can do at least as
well as the original investigator. (I have had problems in the
past with people who have questionsed my results of
investigation and have tried to carry out their own, but they
just don't understand the various technical issues involved, so
they arrive at what I consider to be the "wrong answer.")

Another problem is that an "outside" person who is not totally
familiar with the sighting information or who cannot
independently evaluate it is left with a decision of which
"expert," A or B, to believe. Often the choice will be made on
which investigator seems more credible in the face of attacks
from the other side.


>Proof undeniable may well be the researchers ultimate goal, for
f>ame and fortune and being the first has always in any genre
>been the ambition and intention but the ufologist's
>responsibility should be not only the search for and the
>uncovering of the secrets of the UFO prodigy it should also be
t>o provide the general public with information beyond proof.
>This rather than self gratification should be the goal.

Yes

>As the general consensus seems to be that E.B.E's (if they do in
>fact exist) have hostile intentions where are the ufologists who
>are offering the public concrete strategies for dealing with the
>prevention of alien intervention?

Will send you FRIGHT NIGHT by private email since it
doesn't fit the publication format here.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 24

                              Re: The Ten Cases

From: bruce maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 16:04:44 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 00:00:20 -0400
Subject: Re: The Ten Cases


>Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: The Ten Cases
>From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
>Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 16:27:16 -0400
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto >updates@globalserve.net>

>> From: RobIrving@aol.com
>> Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 21:15:46 EDT
>> To: updates@globalserve.net
>> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: The Ten Cases


>Rob -

>I do not believe that witness testimony is

>1) Infallible.

>2) Perfectly represents the observed events.

>3) or is in all cases credible.

>What I do believe is that

>1) Witness testimony is not useless. Witness information
>represents qualitative rather than quantitative data. Such
i>nformation is not unheard of in science, where it forms an
i>mportant part of the history of physics, astronomy, and natural
>studies.
SNIP

>4) A UFO report has a probability of representing an objectively
>existent UFO event. That probability is never 100, and only
>initial reports determined not to be UFOs have a probaility of
>0. The reports of interest are those where the probability is
>high.

Let "U" be "Unexplainable and representent the status as a
function of the investigation. U as "unexplained" suggests the
end of the investigation.B ut could there be more investigation
that would provide an explanation? What really counts is if the
report is - or appears to be - unexplainable or not able to be
explained AFTER investigation. And any explanation should be in
terms o conventional UNINTELLIGENT phenomena. Note the
importance of UNINTELLIGENT because if a TRuly Unexplainable
Flying Object - TRUFO- were to be discovered and if it gave no
indications of humanlike intelligence, it would be subsumed by
conventional science without too much fuss. Where the rubber
meets the road in ufology is in the claim that SOME TRUFOS
REPRESENT OTHER INTELLIGENCES where "other" means ET, time
travelers, dimension jumpers, whatever...but definitely not
human intelligence.)

Now, using U as "unexplainable to this point in the
investigation" we may find for any given sighting that the
probability "probably" starts somewhere between 10 and 50% at
the beginning of the investigation and then changes as the
invesigation continues. Obviously if the initial probability
were 0 there would be no need for an investigation since 0
probabiliy is just as certain as 100%. (Note: this is comparable
to Dr. Peter Sturrock's discussion of a-priori and a-posteriori
probabilities of explanation.) As investigation proceeds the
probability could go uniformly upwards as one Candidate
Explanatory Phenomenon (CEP) after another is ruled out, or it
could level out the stay constant if there is Insufficient
Information to arrive at a definite explanation or to reject all
possible explanations, or it could drop as one or more
explanations seems to reasonably fit the
circumstances/description of the sighting.

Mark has said that the probability never reaches 100%, but this
has to be tempered with the observation that FOR PRACTICAL
PURPOSES the probability can be assigned 100% if after
investigation there just are no CEP remaining. This requires, of
course, a complete analysis of the accuracy of the report (must
be, or at least seem to be, very accurate, and perhaps supported
with multiple witness testimony and /or physical evidence) and a
complete comparison of the characteristics of the phenomenon
reported with all possible CEP.

On the other hand, it is really bogus to assign probability to
something like this. each sighting is a "singleton," an event
unique in some or many ways. There may be similarities to other
sightings, but that's all. Probability can really only be
assigned AFTER numerous events which fall into a limited set or
group of particular types, are recorded and the "answer" for
each one is POSITIVELY KNOWN, which presumably includes a
fraction of sightings which are POSITIVELY UNKNOWN
(Unexplainable). This approach was taken during the Battelle
study in 1952-53 which became Project Blue Book Special Report
#14. The two basic classes of sightings were KNOWN and UNKNOWN,
and under KNOWN was a list of possible explanations
(astronomical, aircraft, birds, balloons, etc.) They studied
3201 sighting reports. The major problem with their
investigation was that in most cases they could not be
absolutely certain about identifications. Hence they broke the
KNOWN classification into two parts, CERTAIN and DOUBTFUL. This
was very "scientific" of them, but when they proceeded to their
final statistical analysis they combined CERTAIN and DOUBTFUL
identifications and treated them all as CERTAIN. Many years ago
I reviewed the Battelle study and recalculated their statistics
leaving out the DOUBTFUL to get closer to the ideal statistics
for the KNOWNS. The result was that the statistical difference
between KNOWNS and UNKNOWNS increased.

>5) High probability UFO reports do exist and should be studied.
>Some of those cases have already been cited. Many others
>exist.

Yes.

>7) UFO misperceptions are extremely unlikely when the reported
>event involves an object of large angular extent or determinate
>close distance. However, a UFO witness will not necessarily
>perceive all aspects of a novel phenomenon correctly or the same
>as another witness to the same phenomenon.

Also when the reported object/phenomenon is witnessed by several
observers under lighting conditions such that overall shape and
other descriptive characteristics can be clearly seen. Also,
when unusual dynamics can be accurately recalled by the
observer(s). (See, e.g., case 10 of Special report #14)

>9) Debates about whether UFOlogy in general can justify its
>existence are debates I have already spent enough time with. I
>am more interested in trying to get better information and
>deriving more patterns from the existing information. I admit
>that I have a fair amount of confidence that OEH is justified,
>and I do not consider ETH as a working hypothesis to be
>unjustified.>

>Yes, we may all be wasting our time. But it's worth looking.

>'Nuff said.

Now, let's get down to 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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 24

                       Re: Elaine Douglas on John Ford

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 16:10:27 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 00:31:18 -0400
Subject: Re: Elaine Douglas on John Ford

>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Elaine Douglas on John Ford [was: Ford Fund?]
>From: Elaine M Douglass <elaine26@juno.com>
>Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 02:10:27 EDT

>My Dear Dennis:

<snip>

>I can see, though, why you liked Mr. "Hepcat's" article, Dennis.
>Both you and he could vie for "intemperate of the year" honors in
>anybody's book.

>Elaine Douglass


My Dear Elaine:

And you are the "ingrate of the year." I'll repeat some of your
original remarks which began this exchange:

>>>His lawyer deserted me, and Dennis Stacy was eager to print
>>>incriminating information on John and did, and John himself did
>>>not or could not defend himself.

Why am I the one named here, and not the lawyer who deserted you
and presumably his client? Why are you trying to make me a major
villain in the John Ford saga? And since when were you granted
the ability to read minds, so that you know when I'm "eager" to
print something or not? If I was so eager to publish
incriminating information, then why would I have published your
article first (or, for that matter, at all)?

After I did, though, it quickly became apparent to me, if not
you, that there were no relevant, related UFO issues as far as
John Ford's own unfortunate personal circumstances were
concerned. There was no concerted effort on the part of local
authorities or anyone else to cover up the ridiculous Long Island
crash or otherwise squelch John Ford's continuing
"investigations."

In short, it was clear that John Ford had gone off the deep end,
and you wanted us all to follow him. If you'd had your way, the
Journal would have been turned into the John Ford Update.

You're right that I should have edited out Hepcat's most
egregious remark. A belated apology on my part. You're wrong if
you think, in the wake of your own article, that I didn't get
several articles complaining about why we were giving space to
this non-case in the first place.

So I repeat: I am not the villain here. Nothing I did had
anything to do with Ford's own actions or contributed in any way
whatsoever to his present situation. I regret the latter, but I
had nothing to do with it. You might as well insinuate that I had
something to do with Richard Boylan and Edith Fiore losing their
licenses to practice.

Two final thoughts to consider: some already discombobulated
people inevitably drift into this field. Other borderline cases
drift into the field and then become discombobulated. This stuff
is not for the faint of heart.

But take heart, nonetheless. As you well know, I no longer edit
the MUFON Journal, which means you won't now have to go over my
head to promote your own personal vision of the UFO phenomenon. I
didn't buy the latter, and I make no apology for it. Just as I
didn't buy the Ford, Boylan, Fiore or Corso version, either.

So be happy! Pop the champagne corks! According to Jim
Deardorff's letter published in the June issue of the Journal, a
"dark cloud" has finally been lifted off same.

The moral? Work long and hard enough and you'll surely get the
journal you deserve.

Black Cloud






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 24

                Re: A Divided Community Can Never Get Answers

From: bruce maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 16:05:42 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 00:05:10 -0400
Subject: Re: A Divided Community Can Never Get Answers


>Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 21:56:04 -0400
>From: Peter Brookesmith <101653.2205@compuserve.com>
>Subject: A Divided Community Can Never Get Answers
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>With the compliments of the Duke of Mendoza:

>>Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 12:09:30 +0000
>>From: Diane Lovett <RAMBLD@worldnet.att.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: A Divided Community Can Never Get Anwsers

>. The name calling and nastiness leaves a
>>really bad taste in a lot of mouths. Disagree
>>all you want, but what in the world is accomplished
>>by name calling and personal attacks?!

>What upsets you is inherent in the nature of the subject
>and, as long as people feel strongly, an element of savagery
>will always be present along with the disputations. Some
>people, too, will always be more tender than others when
t>heir cherished ideas are threatened, and correspondingly
>more vitriolic in defending them. Like Dr Chasuble, even I
>am somewhat susceptible to drafts.

Periphrasis D. Maunderon
Barbed Wit

 Dear Barbed,

Susceptible to drafts? And to draughts?

I would like to point out that "ufology" is LIKE science....
except there is "more of it." People don't generally learn about
the personal antagonisms between "straight" scientists because
(a) the information is not published and (b) in general the
belief of the scientific community in the correctness of the
result of an experiment or the result of a theoretical analysis
is not based on the trust in the accuracy of the scientist or
whether said scientist is a "good person" because the
experiment/theoretical analysis can be replicated by others. In
ufology each sighting is a unique event and generally each
investigation is also a unique event (more comments on this in
another post to this list). Hence the trust in the investigator
becomes important in anyone's decision whether or not to believe
that a particular sighting has been explained or has not been
explained.

As one can see, once trust in the investigator(s) becomes an
important part of belief in the results of an investigation, the
way is opened for (dare I say i?) ad hominem attacks (see
Burns-Clark, elsewhere).

And then, of course, there are the just plain bullshit artists
who flock to the UFO field with all sorts of stories about how
they saw this or that or went here or there or worked for the
government and saw UFOs and bodies, etc.... all said stories
being acked up by exactly no proof. No wonder the poor neophyte
wonders who, if any, has his/her had screwed on straight. No
wonder the beginner is confused.

Maybe if we could just get back to discussing the details of
sightings the new recruits would discover that there really is
some gold in that field of dross and dreams.

Ponds J. Fishbite
Barbed Hook





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 24

                         Re: Secrets & Conspiracies

From: Stanton T. Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 15:45:33 -0300
Fwd Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 00:39:14 -0400
Subject: Re: Secrets & Conspiracies


> Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 11:52:12 -0500 (CDT)
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Secrets & Conspiracies

> >Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 10:38:07 -0300
> >From: Stanton T. Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Secrets & Conspiracies


> >There is an enormous difference between somebody standing gawking
> >at the sky watching a UFO and the kind of information that I as a
> >scientist want. There is instrumentation available, but nothing
> >without a need to know.

> >The analogy is false.

> >Stan Friedman

> No, Stan, it's not false, for the reasons stated above. If you
> don't like the Andromeda example, simply substitute the sky
> itself instead.

> The sky has never been more monitored and less controlled than it
> is now. There is no way that the AF has a monopoly on the UFO
> data now, electronic or otherwise. Too many eyes in the sky.

> Dennis

Dennis, I simply cannot believe that you honestly think that we
common people have access to the same tools, equipment,
monitoring devices and communications system as the NSA, NRO,
USAF, NASA, etc. We can indeed all look at the sky.

We don't have access to the monitors or the data.. The DCI black
budget of $26Billion per year buys some pretty good stuff. Have
you seen any of the look down data showing uncorrelated targets
observed by the NRO or any of the look up radar monitoring of
uncorrelated targets by the ADC.?

The data is born classified; the capabilities are classified. Of
course they can hide what data they obtain.

I am truly incredulous at your naivete!!






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 24

                              Research Request

From: Tim Matthews <matthews@zetnet.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 10:47:34 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 00:44:26 -0400
Subject: Research Request

We are looking to make contact with former employees of the AV.
Roe Company, Bell, (Chance) Vought, Lockheed and Republic who may
have worked upon jet-powered circular wing aircraft in the 1950s
and 1960s. Although we have some fascinating evidence relating to
these we always need more.

We specifically require confirmation on certain important details
relating to project designations...

Our small group is particularly interested in Projects Y/Y2, P724
and WS606 - all variants upon circular wings developed by a joint
USAF/AVRO team in the 1950s.

All information is held in the strictest confidence. Anonymity
guaranteed.

Tim Matthews
(Classified Aircraft Research)





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 24

                Re: A Divided Community Can Never Get Anwsers

From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 19:40:51 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 00:47:43 -0400
Subject: Re: A Divided Community Can Never Get Anwsers


>From: Ori Jackson <Kaosquasar@aol.com>
>Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 16:33:38 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: The Role Of The Researcher In Modern Ufology

>As the general consensus seems to be that E.B.E's (if they do in
>fact exist) have hostile intentions where are the ufologists who
>are offering the public concrete strategies for dealing with the
>prevention of alien intervention?

>In World War 2 the British public dug their gardens to assist
>the war efforts.

>What has it been decided, in the higher echelons of ufology that
>the public should be doing to contribute to this war effort?

>Replies most welcome.


Ori-

It would be interesting to see an actual study, as I'm not
entirely convinced that a general consensus would support the
"hostile intentions" hypothesis. There are a significant number
of abductees (which is probably the sub-group most severely
impacted by alleged E.B.E.s) who view the entire scenario as
positive.

In Great Britain there was nearly a decade of warning before
they actually went to war, and when the general populace began
it's supportive efforts there was a general consensus among the
population that Germany was a clear threat. Such a consensus
doesn't yet exist with regard to the perceived threat of
E.B.E.s, so I'm not sure how one would energize the general
population to take action.

As far as the "higher echelons of Ufology" is concerned, I have
found this genre to be so diverse that simply trying to define
it often leads to vocal disagreements. I think that most would
agree that the general public needs to be made more aware of
research being performed in this genre, but I would doubt that a
general consensus can be reached as to how any possible "threat"
should be dealt with.

On the other hand, IMO, growing a garden helps to get us back to
nature, and that's always a good thing.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 24

                           Re: Sheffield Incident

From: Max Burns <AlienHype1@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 16:47:28 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 00:26:07 -0400
Subject: Re: Sheffield Incident


>Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 16:23:04 -0400
>From: David Clarke <dclarke14@compuserve.com
>.Subject: Sheffield Incident
>To: UFO Updates <updates@globalserve.net>

>From Dave Clarke, Sheffield.

>Max Burns becomes ever more desperate in his pitiful attempts to
>pursuade UFO Updates readers to buy his yarn about a UFO, a
>triangle and a pilot covered in aviation fuel.

<snip>

Please note  (The head of a pack of Brownies)

I do not need pity, what I do need is for you to stop looking at
the universe through your little box like view. Readers of
UpDates the evidence of coverup are quite clear due to Mr
Clark's refussal to acknowledge any of the direct witneses to
the triangle. there are five individual witneses to the
triangle,and not three as Mr Clark states who are not my friends
however I do know the first witness to the triangle Emma
Maidenhead.

And with another six witnesses to the glowing orange object, one
of which Mr Clark I know has interviewed Mrs Dronfield, and
during that interview she told Mr Clark that She saw a cigar
shaped object that was glowing orange at about 10.00pm which was
very low and went behind the houses and out of sight. heading in
the direction of High Bradfield which is approx three miles from
snake pass.

Mr Clark is this what constitutes a sighting of an unidentified
flying object, and was it was reported to the police?

Answer: YES

Mr Rhodes saw a glowing orange object and had been looking for a
ufo hotline to report it to, and was it reported to the police

Answer: YES

Mr Morton & Mother Saw an orange glow followed by several
plumes, and was it reported to the police

Answer: Yes

Mr Bryan Haslam, witnessed the triangle Yesterday approx 19.40
traveling on a train back home . States around the Barnsley area
saw a triangle shaped object with lights all around it hovering.
Does not think it was a plane thinks we are wasting our time.
Was this sighting reported to the police

Answer: Yes

Now in paticular to this sighting this man saw the triangle
while it was still light and what does it matter that this
sighting occurred at 19.40 two hours before the bulk of the
sighting's after all it happened approx 10 miles away from the
incident. More importantly every reader of updates must
acknowledge that there was infact a triangular shaped UFO in the
area on the night in question, that was reported to the police.

If all these sighting's were in the police log of the incident.
And in the reply to the question was there any UFO sighting's
reported to the police on either the 24th or 25th of March 1997

As asked by Helen Jackson MP in the Houses of Parliament the
reply was given. There were no UFO report's to the police on
either of these dates reported.

That statement is staring you in the face,  Lies have
been told during questions in Parliament. The evidence is quite
clear

<snip>

>But it will just not wash.

<snip>

What will not wash the official document's we have in our
possession, that confirm that lies have told?

<snip>

>Judging by the amount of messages I have received from readers
>who have offered me congratulations.

<snip>

Whoop E Doooo I got a mail box full of similar email's in my
support, so what?

<snip>

>Paul dared to ask Max a few
>reasonable questions in a private email.

<snip>

Yes Paul and I had some very interesting email exchanges and I
endeavored to answer all the points that he raised with me I
even offered to allow him to interview Emma Maidenhead. Although
before you ask David I showed her your post when it was alleged
that she was dillussional, and she replied you were not there,
and you did not observe the triangle.

Ummm objective ehh, Making comments about witneses you have not
even spoken to, and then when you do speak to a witness to the
UFO you simply ignore it, ( Mrs Dronfield )

<snip>

>If you were to believe Max Burns he is the one and only pillar
>of truth in this case - I am lying, a Member of Parliament is
>lying, the RAF are lying and the Ministry of Defence are lying
>when asked a clear and direct question by a member of the Press
>and by a Member of Parliament.

<snip>

There you go again David misquoting me. I said you are party to
or believing lies being told to our goverment Helen Jackson MP
has been lied to. And I intend to supply Helen Jackson MP with
the full facts including copies of the police log which will
confirm that she has been lied to in the houses of Parliament
and as you were in possesion of the log as supplied most kindly
by myself, you were also aware that there were UFO report's to
the police on the 24th March 1997. You have not been totally
honest have with your local Member of Parliament, Brown
Owl..looks like your camp fire is about to go out, run out of
wood have you, for me it looks like you have already burnt your
bridges.

David could you email me Helen Jackson's office postal address
to me?

<snip>

>But at the end of the day I don't have to prove anything.

<snip>

How very conveinent, you are , so as you see it I or no
one else can question your very neatly packaged report full of
interviews with people who have also lied to Helen Jackson MP

<snip>

>All he can do is launch a vicious attack in response.

<snip>

If the readers of updates would care to do a search of the
updates archive for, item''s posted by, David Clark. Andy
Robert's, Tim Mathews, Mike Wooton, Bufora Watch It will become
quite clear who has been attacking who here. Wooton, Clark and
Robert's are all in the same Brownie pack <snip> >But most
importantly, when challenged to come up with the >evidence to
support his wild claims, all Max can say is:

>"Obviously I am striving towards this goal, and have opened
some >new avenues with regard to obtaining this information. And
as >patience is a virtue, I feel that I will eventually succeed
in >obtaining this proof.. However I do not think that I will be
>supplying you with any such information, after all dont you
>.think that have shared enough of my research with you?"

>What a cop out -

<snip>

You asked a question and I have answered it I do not have that
information at the present but David as you will not even accept
that there were many ufo report's on the night of the 24th
March.

<snip>

>In a disgraceful display of arrogance, Max even goes so far as
>to ask "what is sensitive" about a failed suicide attempt, and
>says he even wants to go and interview the poor man who tried to
>kill himself and has since been labelled a victim of a UFO
>dogfight.

<snip>

In my report I use word's such as shot down, exploded,crashed,
and malfunction, As possibilty's please do not add words to my
report to embelish the circumstances so as to suit you agenda if
you wish to talk about dogfight's then talk about the Tehran
incident. David you dont expect people to believe the suicide
story, if this man had driven out to the Peaks, where was his
car parked? Where did he purchase aviation fuel from? This camp
fire story you are peddling about about suicide attempt's is not
even believable with all the other fact's about this incident
which you continue to ignore, including that Mr Dagenhart was
100% certain that the man he encountered with no doubt in his
mind what he smelled was aviation fuel. "Dagenhart, And I will
put money on that"

<snip>

>The facts are these: the transcript of Max's conversation with
>Dagenhart proves absolutely zilch. What Dagenhart did or did not
>say doesn't matter,

<snip>

But David you were so quick to post to updates, re your
handwriiten notes of your interview which were written off your
short notes as you jumped up from your camp fire to exclaim, Max
Burns has twisted what Dagenhart said, I simply posted the true
and full taped interview which can be verified that I have
infact twisted nothing. and that Dagenhrt had asserted four
times in my interview that the man he encountered was indeed
covered in aviation fuel.

I have my interview on tape, this man is a member of the RAF and
rang the News of the World saying that he was going to lose his
job because of what he had said.

Question why would someone lose there job over some thing that
has not occurred?

How is it that when you post your interview taken after
obviously this RAF employee has been silenced.

From handwritten notes that it is big news and posted to updates
and because in responce to your posting of your RAF Dagenhart
new interview I posted the transcript of my taped interview all
of a sudden you claim.

<snip>

>The facts are these: the transcript of Max's conversation with
>Dagenhart proves absolutely zilch

<snip>

Well lets play the common sense game, I have my interview on
tape and was recorded with permission of Dagenhart, therfore my
interview recorded on the 3rd of May was before he realised that
he was in trouble with the RAF for making comments about a man
he encountered on snake pass was covered in aviation fuel, which
he has asserted that he is 100% certain that it was aviation
fuel. with quotes such as "I will put money on that"

There have been over a dozen ufo sightings ten of the sightings
occurred between 21.45 and 22.05 three of the witneses saw the
jets in pursuit of the triangle between the time frame of 21.50
and 21.55 they said the jets were flying at the same height and
the same direction as the triangle. within a few seconds of the
triangle sighting. the sonic boom's or air explosions occurred
at 21.52 and 22.06 at this time we have got people reporting,
Red flashes then smoke plumes, and an orange glow followed by
several plumes of smoke. within a couple of miles of these
explosions about one hour after the explosions a man is
encountered on snake pass

Quote

Dagenhart       Yes he didn't seem to really know which way
                Sheffield was or what he was doing or anything
                and the thing is I said at the time when I rang the
                police he smelled of diesel fuel, well since then
                I've joined the air force and I'm now working for
                the air force and it wasn't diesel fuel it was aviation
                fuel that he'd got on him.

Burns           Ah absolutely superb

Dagenhart       and I will put my money on that

You cannot purchase aviation fuel, and with the reports of smoke
plumes Red flashes and in close proximity of this UFO all this
happening in a 3-4 sqaure mile area. at exactly the same 15
minute period 21.50-22.06. sonic booms that the RAF will not
admit to causing. A breach of regulations, all sonic occurences
have to be reported within 30 minutes of planes landing.

It has been confirmed in no uncertain terms that the man was
stinking of aviation fuel Lets be clear here Mr Dagenhart told
me he had been spoken to he told me so on the phone....

Lets get it straight here Does this sound like a covert low
flying training mission to you?

<snip>

>This claim does not stand up to any kind of rigorous
>examination. It is quite plainly and simply nonsense, and what's
>more Max knows it is nonsense.

<snip>

More camp fire stories from , but what about all the
evidence?

<snip>

>To deal with some of his other points:

>1. Max's claim I have used his information without
>acknowledgement. That's rich coming from someone who is using
>information about Parliamentary Questions, information on RAF
>jet timetables from RAF Coningsby etc in his Sheffield Report,
>all without acknowledgent to myself.

<snip>

Actually , I got my copy Helen Jackson's questions
and the replies from the House of commons web site search.

<snip>

>Yes, I did obtain a copy of the police log from Max, but so
>what? Max got it from Martin Jeffrey, who got it from the
>police, so it is hardly Max's property, is it?

<snip>

I never said it was my property and as I made a special trip to
Rotherham so you could copy it, and you were the one who decided
to post that i got the log off Marin Jeffrey. Big deal. I still
shared it. what was your point?

<snip>

>What does the police log
>prove anyway, it's just a list of aeroplane sightings.

<snip>

In the police log does it say that the triangle shaped aeroplane
was hovering ?

Quote from the log

Yesterday approx 19.40 traveling on a train back home . States
around the Barnsley area saw a triangle shaped object with
lights all around it hovering. Does not think it was a plane
thinks we are wasting our time.

Or how about the glowing orange plane flew past? Or I saw a
cigar shaped object are these planes?

What the police log does confirm is that there were indeed ufo
reports to the police on the 24th of March 1997 and infact lies
have been told to Helen Jackson MP

<snip>

>2. My report to BUFORA on the case. Max has not seen this
>report, yet he chooses to make wild claims about it and make
>slurs against my ability as an investigator on that basis. Well
>I have news for you Max, I have been around for years before you
>saw your first X-Files episode and then suddenly went on to
>become an "expert", and I will be around an equal number of
>years after you have disappeared like all the other ET believers
>I have seen come and go.

<snip>

you told me yorself what the conclusions of your
investigation.were initially. And with regard to your comment
about me disapearing as Mcaulay Caulkin says.."I dont think so"

I once knew somone who did the same thing for twenty years and
they said they were still crap at it. You see just because you
may have been around for years does not qualify your statements
as more correct, infact perhaps its time for the old guy to
retire and put the camp fire out, return home draw the curtains,
mix yourself a hot cocoa and not need to worry about what is
really going on.

<snip>

>In fact, My report does not in fact conclude a Bolide meteor was
>responsible, it says the Royal Astronomical Society say a bolide
>could have caused the sonic booms reported that night. I
>actually conclude the events were caused by a military aircraft
>and possibly a Bolide meteor.

<snip>

There was no debris in the atmosphere that was there. which has
now been confirmed. I said the Bolide story was a cover right
from the beginning. whether you said it or your dog said it it
was still wrong.

<snip>

>My report states quite clearly
>there was RAF activity that night, well before it was officially
>admitted, and this is a fact I have always believed played a
>major role in the initial stages of the incident. That fact is
>clearly stated in my report which went to Gloria Dixon, BUFORA
>NIC, just two months after the incident. Like it or not, that is
>a fact.

<snip>

Let's see it, or is gone forever into the bowl of the bufora
archive?

<snip>

>3. The Carol Vorderman BBC show. Once again (or at least when I
>spoke to him earlier this year) Max has not seen this programme,
>yet he makes slurs against my character and professionalism
>based upon something he has not even watched! In fact, I played
>no role in the making of the programme.

<snip>

David you were the one, when you were busy quantifying your
expertise to me that claimed you were the consultant on the
programme The same day I shared the police log and my interview
notes with you.

<snip>

>Max as usual behaved
>like a petulent child, took his bat and ball home and turned
>down an invitation to appear on the programme because it would
>not pander to his absurd claims about a Tornado crash.

<snip>

I turned down the offer of assisting the researchers on the
making of the programme, because they had already decided to
report this incident as a ghost plane! I asked Angela Holden
from the BBC, this question if you have allready made your minds
up what has occurred in this incident what do you need my
research for. To which i did not get a responce, I then
considered whether I wanted to have my work used in this ghost
plane scenario and concluded that as it was never a ghost plane
or a bolide or a drug drop that I did not want to have my work
used for the purpose of disinformation.

<snip>

>Ironically, if Max had watched the programme, he would know that
>Glenn Ford, the senior Seismologist from Edinburgh University,
>who actually recorded the sonic booms, goes on record and says
>he believes both the booms and the sightings were caused by a
>Bolide meteor burning up in the atmosphere!


<snip>

Ironically he was wrong

<snip>

>Is Mr Ford now to be labelled a liar, and an agent of the
>cover-up too? And how is it shoddy investigation on my part to
>conclude a Bolide meteor could possibly have played a part in
>the event, when this explanation is supported by both a senior
>Seismologist and the spokesman for the Royal Astronomical
>Society?

<snip>

Ironically you must confirm David that you are also aware that
it has now been confirmed that there was no space debris in the
atmosphere over Northern England on the night of the 24th March
1997 between 21.45 and 22.15./ So they were mistaken and you
believed them thats Irony.

<snip>

>Lets face it the only "expert" who Max will believe is himself,
>or one of his loony friends.

<snip>

The facts above are quite clear, as to the remarks of about my
loony friends, many have degree,s are scientists, physicist's.
and do not need to hear your comments when you do not even know
them more objective comments about people you do not know.

<snip>

>Objective investigators should always apply Occam's Razor and
>look for the most likely explanation first, before jumping to
>fantastic conclusions. In this case, we know both military
>aircraft and Bolide meteors exist, we don't know that ET-piloted
>triangular UFOs exist. Therefore its logical to conclude a
>military jet/Bolide played a part in the incident until we have
>good solid evidence that ET-piloted triangles actually exist.
>I'm sorry Max but it's not good enough to say they exist because
>you believe they do, or because people claim to have seen them.
>People can and do misidentify aircraft and a whole host of
>mundane objects as UFOs every night - that is a FACT, and if you
>can't accept it you should get out of UFOlogy and take up
>science fiction.

<snip>

You are a hardened sceptic and obviously have been listening to
Phillip Klass You have also told me to get out of ufology twice
during your post you really do think you are dont you giving
your order's around, let me tell you somthing Mr Clarke I am
here to stay and In yer face.... Like it or lump it..

<snip>

>3. UFOs and the police log. Max claims there is "plenty" of
>evidence in the police log of people who rang to report UFOs.
>This is simply untrue, as Max's edited excerps from the log
>prove. The log is simply a list of people who saw low-flying
>aircraft. There are no more than a couple of instances in the
>entire log where people describe UFOs, and then they are just
>talking about "lights in the sky" which could be anything, and
>probably were the low-flying aircraft we know were around at
>that time.. With regards to Mrs Dronfield's sighting, I have not
>deliberately ignored it - her sighting appears in the first few
>paragraphs of my article in UFO Magazine, out this week, and in
>my report to BUFORA. I believe she saw an aircraft at an odd
>angle, simple as that. If you look at the time she saw the
>object, it simply must have been the same low-flying aircraft
>seen by the police special constable and the farmers a couple of
>minutes later.

<snip>

David Mrs Dronfield told you that it was cigar shaped and
glowing orange. Can you name a plane that is cigar shaped glows
orange and flies across the back of some houses at an altitude
of less that 200ft and at less than 60mph?

<snip>

>A question for Max arises at this point: Why has Max ignored the
>testimony of Marie-France Tattersfield?

<snip>

I have infact spoken with Taterfield, and she assured me that
there were no militiary jets and was adamant that nothing had
occurred and that there were no ufo's. the funny thing is that
she just turned up one afternoon while I was mooching around the
peaks Taterfield got out of her car on a dam and asked myself
and Miles Johnston what we were doing. Miles replied that we
were investigating a ufo incident. This was in April without
even taking the time to ask the date Of the reported ufo
incident, Taterfield replied sharply with there was no Ufo's, I
asked her how did she know that when she did not know the date
of the ufo incident we were investigating. On that she had no
response and got back in her car with her Former military what I
assume was her husband and another Person, The strange thing
about this chance meeting was that after she had asked her what
are you doing question. I asked her who she was and she replied
Marie France Tatershall, the normal response would have been to
ask who I was but she did not, it was as if she already knew who
I was. It's a funny old World, dismissing an incident which we
were Investigating without knowing the date

<snip>

>With regards to Brian Haslam, his sighting of a "triangle" UFO
>is the only one recorded in the police log, and it took place at
>7.40, more than two and a half hours BEFORE the report of the
>"crashed aircraft". You cannot use this as evidence of anything,
>and what's more Max has not spoken to Haslam, therefore his
>evidence is useless - just more hearsay.

<snip>

Just a coincidence was that on the night of multiple triangle
Sighting,s this man calls the police and tells them.

Quote

saw a triangle shaped object with lights all around it hovering.
Does not think it was a plane thinks we are wasting our time.

Well there's no smoke without fire David I am going to stay in
ufology for long time So get used to it .

Max Burns





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 24

                   Research Question - Warragamba, NSW, Oz

From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 22:28:13 PDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 04:51:23 -0400
Subject: Research Question - Warragamba, NSW, Oz

Dear List,

I am wondering whether anyone may know anything further about
this report from the Australian UFO files on Mark Cashman's web
site?


"075 1953 WARRAGAMBA NSW

Following several UFO sightings a hiker came across several man
sized figures in "space-suits." They appeared to be searching the
ground with strange metal devices.
Later three soldiers were reported to have disappeared in the
area.
(Rex Gilroy.)"


Regards,

Leanne Martin






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 24

             DISPATCH # 96 -- the weekly newsletter of ParaScope

From: ParaScope@AOL.COM
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 22:04:02 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 01:12:31 -0400
Subject: DISPATCH # 96 -- the weekly newsletter of ParaScope

DISPATCH # 96 -- 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

6/23/98

Quote of the Week

"A cult is a religion with no political power."

-- Tom Wolfe


-----------------------

Rant of the Week: �Just Like Vietnam�

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, �Red� shares with us a rant from
a local newspaper�s editorial pages. What does it all mean? Your guess is as
good as ours. Enjoy.


�It sent shivers down my spine when I made the realization that how similar
the school where my children attend is so much like what was going on in
Vietnam in the 60s.  Here are some comparisons I have made.

�We have flower children.  They range in ages from 4-8.  Sadly, they are the
innocent ones who are caught in the crossfire.  The soldiers are the ones who
are there every day, trying to do their jobs while being bombed with new plans
of attack without clear definitions of the objective...plans that are not
consistent from one day to the next.

�I have the sense that people are crawling through the tunnels to avoid being
seen when wanting to visit a comrade, always watching over one shoulder,
waiting to be the next target.  Are they the enemies?  Depends on what you are
fighting for or what side of the battle lines you walk.

�There are, I feel, lots of spies who are more than willing to report to
whomever they think their General is.

�I have sensed covert activity but thankfully some parents are in the trenches
too.

�Are the parents the enemy?  I guess some might think so. Just like Vietnam,
the battle rages on and on and just as then, there are a lot of politics going
on and no real end in sight.�

------

All rants are printed �as is,� with spelling and grammar goofs left
uncorrected. Some rants may be edited for brevity or clarity, to the extent
such a thing is possible. If you�ve got a rant you�d like to share, send it to
pscplady@aol.com with �possible rant� in the subject line of your letter.

-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Coming Up This Week!

Catch a number of great stories this week on the ParaScope web and AOL sites,
including daily updates to our Conspiracy Newsline and Daily Dose features.
Among the articles you'll want to check out:



Charles Hayes: A Prison Interview

Were the strange deaths of Ron Brown, Admiral Boorda, and William Colby in
1996 part of a "spook war" between rival US intelligence groups? Did more than
60 members of Congress resign after receiving documentation of their own
criminal activity in the mail, courtesy of a Fifth Columnist named Charles
Hayes? In this prison interview, Professor Wesley Phelan questions the
enigmatic Hayes on the various Clinton scandals, drug running in Arkansas, Jim
McDougal's suspicious death, PROMIS, and the Fifth Column's resistance
efforts.

-------------

Martin Luther King Assassination Update
Coretta Scott King: "We want justice."

Will President Clinton give the go-ahead to a new investigation of the King
assassination? The slain civil rights leader's widow is pressing for a
national commission which would extend immunity to key witnesses in exchange
for the truth. Clinton says he is waiting for a Justice Department review of
the case, but with possible FBI ties to King's killing, can we really trust a
DOJ review? Get the latest facts in the case in this special update.

-------------

The X-Files Movie X-Travaganza

The X-Files has hit the big screen at last, but is the truth out at a theater
near you? A special roundup of articles on Chris Carter's blockbuster film,
including a review by Enigma editor D. Trull and a transcript of Chris
Carter's "secret message" from the movie soundtrack.

-------------

The Area 51 People's Rally

On June 6, 1998, citizens from across North America came together at Area 51
to issue a symbolic challenge to the wall of secrecy surrounding the
mysterious desert base. Norio Hayakawa brings us the details in this special
event report from the scene.

-------------

Conspiracy Newsline

Paranoia is just a higher level of awareness. Judge's ruling silences Free
Radio Berkeley, but underground radio vows to stay on the air; brutal hate
crime in Texas spurs copycats in Illinois and Louisiana; U.S. forces allegedly
used nerve gas against American defectors in Vietnam; lots more news.



...All this, and much, much more!

-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

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 subscribe:

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





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 24

                           Gersten For The Defence

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 01:21:39 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 04:47:48 -0400
Subject: Gersten For The Defence


Hi All,

Hate to clutter the bandwidth with this but I just
want to expose Mr Gersten for what he is.

Mr Gersten. Any and all messages that I recieve from
you will simply be made a part of the public record.

Let's recap. So far you have offered me "rat poison".
Hang yourself with your own words!

I offered the following valid criticizm of your
'ideas' :

===============================================

CAUS _can_ be a mighty force for change and enlightenment. But
not if you're going to concentrate on publishing all of that
painful New Age rubbish and wasting all your energy on "Mock
Trials" that only a few will ever see, or marketing/pimping
videotapes for Hoagland et. al. There have just _got_ to be more
productive avenues that CAUS (under your leadership) can pursue.

Just my opinion and requires no response from you Mr Attorney.

John Velez

===============================================

But noooooo! A couple of hours later I get this
response:

===============================================

John,

Just one of the many e-mails I received in response to your
negative behavior:

"...but I just wanted to comment on the recent attack made on you
and your organization on UFO UpDates by John Velez. This may be
something you are already aware of, but this individual seems to
thrive on nasty attacks on just about everybody, researchers and
abductees alike. I have witnessed many such attacks..."

And my response:

'Actually it appears John needs continuous attention. When I sent
him a personal response he found it necessary to post it in order
to obtain that attention. I have been told he has very little
self-esteem and thus the constant need to show how 'smart' he is.
It appears that, since he has little ability at being
constructiive, he must resort to being contrary...probably a
continuation of childhood conduct and sibling rivalry. He is
considered a nuisance to almost everyone in the UFO
community....that is everyone except the owner of the UpDates
list who allows his nonsense. But even that will soon be
changing.'

================================================

Peter, either answer, or ignore my critique. Did you miss
'Addressing Points Raised - Directly - 101' in law school?

>When I sent him a personal response he found it necessary to post
>it in order to obtain that attention.

Nah Peter, not for "attention" - to 'expose'! My wife and my
family give me all the "attention" that I need. What I do here is
"work!" <G>

>that is everyone except the owner of the Updates
>list who allows his nonsense. But even that will soon be changing.'

Threats? Mr "Law-yer?" You've got me rolling on the floor man!

Keep 'em coming Peter, you're looking better and better baby!

John Velez ;-)


======================================================
                         AIC INTERACTIVE CONFERENCE
                                  jvif@spacelab.net
======================================================
 INTRUDERS FOUNDATION /ABDUCTION INFORMATION CENTER
                              http://www.if-aic.com
======================================================
             AIC -MEMBERS ONLY- /ACCESS CODES REQUIRED
======================================================







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 24

                       Radar Tapes Of Mass Sightings?

From: Steve Burrows <S.Burrows@uq.net.au>
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 22:48:26 +1000
Fwd Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 09:43:15 -0400
Subject: Radar Tapes Of Mass Sightings?

There are many excellent accounts of mass sightings of triangle
shaped UFOs across the North American continent.  But why do we
not see radar tapes of such sightings especially when it is
reported that some of the sighters were setup to wait and
photograph the UFOs?  Or is there no such equipment on the market
such as small, portable low range radar units?

If not, lets look at building them! (I used to be a radar
engineer before computers came along).

Just my 2 cents worth..






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 24

                        Re: Recommendations Please!?

From: John White <mjawhite@digitaldune.net>
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 06:31:43 -0700
Fwd Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 09:50:05 -0400
Subject: Re: Recommendations Please!?

List:

>From: Peter Gersten <UFOLAWYER1@aol.com>
>Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 22:38:07 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Recommendations Please!?

>>Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 18:00:58 -0400
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Recommendations Please!?

>>>From: Peter Gersten <UFOLAWYER1@aol.com>
>>>Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 20:41:43 EDT
>>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>>Subject: Recommendations please!

>>>CAUS is now planning the first of its annual mock trial events:

>>..... Will we be afforded
>>the opportunity to examine the transcripts or be advised
>>of the outcome of the event? How will it be communicated
>>to the rest of us?

>Sue,

>The proceedings will be taped. Aren't you planning on attending?
>Why does the mere thought of a mock trial make some people very
>fearful and in return resort to personal attacks?

>Peter


Sue's questions and concerns mirrored to a large extent, I
believe, those of others on this list.

Anyone familiar with the concept of a "mock" trial, understands
full well that the facts are "canned" and that evidentiary
niceties which ensure the competency of the witnesses, relevancy,
materiality of the testimony, and the indicia of reliability of
any hearsay, are often informalized to the point where a
conclusion is foregone.

Your response to Sue indicates that her concerns were
well-founded. Snide ad hominem is a poor substitute for
responsive facts and substance.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 24

                   Seeking Info on Wurtsmith 1975 Sighting

From: Diana Botsford <diana@oznet.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 10:51:47 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 16:10:30 -0400
Subject: Seeking Info on Wurtsmith 1975 Sighting


I'm looking for a reported UFO incident relating to Wurtsmith,
Michigan in 1975.  I need to know the exact date or dates and
what was believed to have happened.

Much thanks in advance to anyone who can help.

Diana Botsford
Publisher/Forum Manager
UFO Forum
http://forums.msn.com/ufo
- - - - - -
"To follow knowledge like a sinking star,
Beyond the utmost bound of human thought . .
To strive, to seek, to find and not to yield."
Tennyson's Ulysses








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 24

                 Sheffield Incident - Exclusive New Evidence

From: David Clarke <dclarke14@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 14:32:59 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 16:08:41 -0400
Subject: Sheffield Incident - Exclusive New Evidence


Readers who have been following the progress of the "Sheffield
Incident" on UFO UpDates may be aware I have been investigating
the March 24, 1997 incident both in my role as a UFOlogist and
via my paid employment as a news reporter with the Sheffield
Star.

In this latter capacity I have now received an Editor's Award
for my investigative work on the "aircrash mystery", the
culmination of more than 15 months fieldwork including more than
two weeks full time off-diary interviews which resulted in a
series of exclusive articles and resulting questions in the
British House of Commons.

For those unfamiliar with British newspapers, the Star is one of
the top five leading provincial evening newspapers in England,
with five daily editions and an independent audited circulation
of more than 100,000 copies every night in Yorkshire.

Now readers can see the truth behind Max Burn's claims that I
have employed "shoddy" investigative techniques. Obviously my
employers (United Provincial Newspapers, owners of the London
Daily Express, Daily Star and London Standard) don't share Max's
views.

The phrase "sour grapes" springs immediately to mind!

Secondly, as a result of my continuing "shoddy investigation"
into this case I have now been allowed access at Bakewell Police
Station to the Derbyshire Police log of the incident on March
24, 1997, a breakthrough which Max Burns has singularly failed
to achieve during his work on this case.

Unfortunately for Max, the information provided by the
Derbyshire log reveals a completely new perspective on the case
which throws into doubt the seriousness of the whole incident.

The log reveals that Derbyshire Police received calls from three
members of the public reporting an aircraft in trouble over the
Strines area at roughly the same time as similar incidents were
reported to South Yorkshire Police - and detailed in the log
posted on Burn's website.

However, because the Derbyshire force were more used to dealing
with reports of this kind (working in an area on a direct
flightpath to Manchester Airport and an RAF training ground) the
duty inspector that night refused to take the reports seriously.
He looked at the vague information provided by the callers,
checked with air traffic control, and took the decision NOT to
alert the emergency services to a suspected aircrash.

The police inspector on duty that night told me earlier this
week: "The Derbyshire force did not believe this incident was
genuine and I refused to give the order to scramble emergency
response.

"We are continually receiving reports of this kind, only a
couple of weeks ago during the meteor shower we had people
ringing in saying they had seen an aeroplane crashing and on
fire.

"People see something odd in the sky and their imagination does
the rest. "I could not believe it when I heard South Yorkshire
Police had brought in poth a police helicopter and an RAF Sea
King to search the moors - I don't know what they expected to
find.

"The locations given by the people who rang in were so vague and
covered literally tens of square miles of moor.  The volunteers
who searched the moors found nothing either.

"There was no military involvement on that night other than the
Sea King sent from Leconfield.

"Afterwards I was carpeted by a senior officer for not taking
the reports seriously, but I believe subsequent events prove I
was one hundred percent correct in my assesment of the
situation, and this officer had to admit I had taken the right
decision in the end.

"The search of the moors was a complete waste of time and public
money because nothing crashed."

And what's more he added:

"I have seen the claims in one of those UFO magazines [Alien
Encounters] which one of my PCs brought into the office,
claiming there was a cover-up over this case.

"The theories these people are putting forward are so
far-fetched they are hilarious.

"The guy who wrote the article was saying 'why would they have
sent two helicopters to search for something which did not
crash'.  But if I had had my way, we wouldn't have sent any
helicopters out because it was a waste of time and public
money."

This important new information is backed up by testimony from
the Peak District's volunteer mountain rescue service who turned
out 141 of its members for the 15 hour search through the night.

Senior Peak Park Warden Brian Jones, based at Fairholmes in the
"crash zone" said all 141 men are professionals with decades of
experience on the moors which they know intimately.

Mr Jones said allegations that his men were party to a cover-up
or were misled to search the wrong part of the moor were
"absolute nonsense" and a slur on the professionalism of his men
who are unpaid and dedicate their lives to saving climbers and
people in distress in their own time.
 "All 141 of the men are volunteers, they are not subject to the
Official Secrets Act and they were in radio communication with
the RAF helicopter throughout the search," he said.

"The search was extremely thorough and covered almost 50 square
miles of the wildest terrain in the Peak District. They found
absolutely nothing to indicate any object or aeroplane had
crashed.

"These men are highly professional people and I have known Mike
France and Ted Burton who were in charge during the night for
many years.

"There was no cover-up and anyone who claims there was does not
know what they are talking about."

Mr Jones said if any object had crashed the residue would have
been immediately detected by the heat-seeking thermal imaging
cameras on board the West Yorkshire Police Helicoper which
reached the scene shortly before 11pm that night.

When a Hawker Hunter jet crashed into the same area of Broomhead
Moor in 1991, killing the pilot, the impact from 2,000 feet left
"one hell of a hole" and smoking debris scattered around a large
area.

"On the night of the search I was out watching the Hale-Bopp
comet through binoculars and I heard nothing crash or explode.
When the Hawker jet went down I head a loud boom and raised the
alarm straight away.

"I'm convinced, as are most of the Mountain Rescue service, that
the March 24 event was the result of an illegal drugs run. The
police know that this valley is regularly used by drug smugglers
and the moors would be an ideal drop zone."

Mr Jones also revealed that the search of the moors on March 24
last year was not an unusual event at all, as Max Burns has
claimed. He has provided evidence from Peak Park records that
search and rescue teams, including sniffer dogs are called out
to search the same moors on average two or three times every
year - always as a result of people ringing to report aircraft
on fire or crashing.

"The people who report these things are invariably visitors to
the National Park who don't realise the area is used for
low-level RAF training and is used for "stacking" airliners
descending into Manchester," he said. "They see what they think
is an aircraft about to crash and they call us. We have to
respond with dogs and mountain rescue teams in case it is a
genuine incident, but that fact alone does not make it
significant in itself that something must have crashed simply
because we have turned out. It's our duty to check it out,
that's all."

The above information provides yet more conclusive evidence, if
such were needed, to back my argument that there simply is no
evidence whatsoever to support a claim of a cover-up over this
case.

If we believe there was a cover-up we have to accept that almost
200 rescue personnel were either deliberately misled or are
party to a massive conspiracy which not one of them has broken
so far.

Of the 200 personnel involved, more than 140 are volunteers with
ordinary jobs and lives who are not party to the Official
Secrets Act.

Are they all liars or deluded in their conclusion, like me, that
nothing crashed and nothing was covered-up?

*Once more, I rest my case, but as a final aside I must make a
very serious point.

Max Burns in his last posting claims he qualifies to describe
himself as "a journalist" on the strength of having penned
several articles for a pulp-fiction magazine called Alien
Encounters.

In the same breath he goes on to ask why a report of someone
driving out to the Peak District, pouring petrol over
themselves, and making an attempted suicide bid should be
regarded as "sensitive".

This statement, despite being disgraceful and disrespectful of
the individual concerned, amply illustrates why Burns has not
the slightest idea of what the title of being a responsible
journalist entails, and why he will never earn it,.

Every year in the course of my job I report on upwards of 50-100
suicides often by often the most gruesome of methods - hanging,
carbon monoxide poisoning and overdose being the three most
common in this area. Every one of these cases deserves careful
and considerate reporting bearing in mind the trauma of the
victim's families and friends.

Suicide by pouring petrol or flammable liquid over clothes and
then lighting the mixture is quite common unfortunately with 2
or 3 deaths per year on average in this area. And it is a well
known fact that potential suicides often chose to drive to
isolated spots - like the Peak District - so as to avoid rescue
attempts.

When a suicide is successful, police reveal details to the
Press, a public inquest is held and is reported by journalists.
Where a suicide is attempted but not successful police as a
matter of policy withold details from the Press so as not to add
to the trauma and suffering of the victim who is often disturbed
or mentally ill. Publicity for their self-inflicted injuries
cannot be said to be in the interests of anyone.

I hate to labour the details of basic journalistic procedure,
but it is obvious Max Burns - who claims to be a journalist -
knows nothing about the day to day duties of the  job or the
great responsibilities it entails. Any unqualified
self-proclaimed expert can write about aliens and UFOs in
science fiction magazines, but that does not give them the write
to call themselves a journalist.

No real journalist would use a person who tried to commit
suicide as testimony to back  a claim about UFOs which has no
supporting evidence. It is a claim which is nothing short of
shameful and I feel very strongly that the truth should be made
known to everyone reading information on this newsgroup..

Finally, a big thankyou to everyone who has sent emails in
support of my stance on this case. There is hope for ufology
after all!

I





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 24

                           Re: Sheffield Incident

From: Max Burns <AlienHype1@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 15:43:38 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 16:13:48 -0400
Subject: Re: Sheffield Incident


>Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 16:23:04 -0400
>From: David Clarke <dclarke14@compuserve.com
>.Subject: Sheffield Incident
>To: UFO Updates <updates@globalserve.net>

In his recent posting, Mr David Clark asserted that I am
incorrect in my claims that Helen Jackson MP has been lied to
during questions tabled in the UK Houses of Parliament.

When Helen Jackson MP asked Were there any UFO's reported to the
police on either the 24th or 25th March 1997.

The reply was given There were no UFO reports to the police on
either the 24th or the 25th March.

Now At last Mr Clark has indeed admitted that there were infact
UFO reports to the police on the 24th and 25th March 1997. And
as Mr Clark and his crew over the last few months subjected me
to various insults in an attempt to discredit myself and my
research.claiming that I have made it up or I am nuts etc, which
as it turns out even Mr Clark has now admitted that.

<snip>

>There are no more than a couple of instances in the
>entire log where people describe UFOs, and then they are just
>talking about "lights in the sky"

<snip>

I think this sighting is a little more than lights in the sky

Yesterday approx 19.40 traveling on a train back home . States
around the Barnsley area saw a triangle shaped object with
lights all around it hovering. Does not think it was a plane
thinks we are wasting our time.

But it does not matter whether it was two sightings or over half
a dozen, the fact is that Mr Clark has admitted that there are
ufo sightings reported to the police that night and therefore
Helen Jackson MP has been lied to in the Houses of Parliament.

Mr Clark knew that there were UFO sightings reported to the
police that night, these questions I feel need an answer.

1. Why has it taken you so long to come clean and proove that I
am not a liar by admitting that there were ufo reports that
night?

2.why were so so adamant that I am a liar when the facts are
clear?

3.Why have you felt the need to disproove this incident?

4.Why are you involved in the coverup?

These are your words Mr Clark.

<snip>

>There are no more than a couple of instances in the
>entire log where people describe UFOs, and then they are just
>talking about "lights in the sky"

5.Why did you feel the need to telephone the News of the World
news paper to try and discredit me and stop the story going to
press?

Which you managed to do, surely as an objective investigator it
would only have been fair to let me get my version of events out
to the public and to simply allow the members of the public to
make there own minds up.

Let me just bring the readers of updates up to speed, I have
been unemployed for over six months and have had little or no
money my investigation into this incident has cost me over
=A34,000 pounds sterling $7,000 dollars US

Mr Clark knew that I am unemployed and knew that the =A31,500 UK
pounds I was recieving for the story I needed, although I am not
in ufology for the money, this payment did not even cover my
investigation costs of this incident.

Somthing im sure that a lot of ufologist's can relate about.

But never the less, it would have eased my current money
shortage situation, but you chose to ring a national news paper
and it would appear that you succeded in this dispicable act.

Why did you do this?

But now that you have admitted in your own words,s and confirmed
that lies have been told, by confirming ufo reports were infact
reported to the police.

I will sleep well tonight.
Will you?

You can read my honest research at:

http://www.skipnet.com/~visitations/sheffield/

http://www.pufori.org/articles/sheffield/index_nf.htm

You can also hear the edited Dagenhart interview at
these above 2 sites

Report only
http://www.sightings.com/ufo/sheffield.htm

Best regards

Max Burns







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 24

                         Re: Secrets & Conspiracies

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 12:37:18 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 16:02:27 -0400
Subject: Re: Secrets & Conspiracies

>Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 15:45:33 -0300
>From: Stanton T. Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Secrets & Conspiracies

<snip>

>Dennis, I simply cannot believe that you honestly think that we
>common people have access to the same tools, equipment,
>monitoring devices and communications system as the NSA, NRO,
>USAF, NASA, etc. We can indeed all look at the sky.

>We don't have access to the monitors or the data.. The DCI black
>budget of $26Billion per year buys some pretty good stuff. Have
>you seen any of the look down data showing uncorrelated targets
>observed by the NRO or any of the look up radar monitoring of
>uncorrelated targets by the ADC.?

>The data is born classified; the capabilities are classified. Of
>course they can hide what data they obtain.

>I am truly incredulous at your naivete!!

>Stan

Stan:

I'm amazed at yours as well. After all, your're the one with the
physics degree. Don't you keep up with current developments in
technology?

I never implied that the military didn't have the better toys and
couldn't keep their own data secret. The issue is whether the
civilian toys -- which aren't controlled by the military -- are
good enough for our purposes.

For example, this afternoon I'll be picking up some shares of
CYMI, a civilian Star Wars spin-off that went public last
September. Another Star Wars spin-off that anyone can now pick up
for a hundred bucks or so is a handheld satellite positioning
device. If you want, you can buy Soviet military night goggles on
the open market. Five to ten years from now, all these
technologies will no doubt have improved by an order of another
magnitude or so. This will include high resolution civilian
satellite photography and of course all the tracking and
telemmetry equipment needed to launch and monitor same.

Yes, it's true, the civilian "spy" satellites presently in orbit
aren't as good as the military's, but the point is, they don't
have to be. If all you want is a picture of a flying disc with a
50-foot diameter, you don't need to be able to tell what brand of
cigarettes someone is smoking from space.

Here's a best case scenario of how UFOs *could* be investigated
today -- if one had the resources and money -- and how they
undoubtedly *will* be investigated in the not too distant
future:

Joe Blow sees a flying saucer 50 feet in diameter at 12:15 in the
afternoon six miles south of Tucson. He uses his satellite
connection to mark his position, picks up his cell phone and
reports the sighting. He gets home, logs onto the Web, goes to
the civilian satellite photography service that was over Tucson
that day, keys in the time and his geographical coordinates, and
downloads the picture. (Not for free, of course.) He then blows
it up, and, presto, there it is -- a picture of his very own UFO,
which he promptly posts on his own web site.

Moreover, he's got a chain of unbroken evidence that even the
most devout skeptic would have a hard time debunking.

He could probably do even more, were he so inclined. For example,
he could search the Web for any university that might have
electronic or gravity monitoring stations in the area. He might
even be able to contact various radars in the area to see if they
detected anything. He might not get cooperation from everyone at
this time, but the point is the military would be completely out
of the loop. They wouldn't have been able to cover up the
sighting and evidence, in other words.

If it turned out that Tucson happened to be in the middle of a
flap at the time, he could set up a live videocamera and stick it
on his web site. Any of us could go there at any time and
skywatch without leaving our computer.

(It goes without saying that some of the above could be applied
to any willing repeat abductees, too.)

Welcome to the 21st century, Stan, and how long have you had
e-mail, anyway?

I'm constantly appalled at how behind the times most "modern"
ufology is. The head of one major "scientific" group still
doesn't have e-mail and has no intention of ever having e-mail.
He couldn't even get on the web if you threatened to break his
arm. And that's about how advanced half the field is. Most of the
"investigation" these days is done with a copy of Photoshop, when
it is done at all.

Time to get with the times, people!

If the NSA and NRO aren't going to share their data, if any, as
seems likely by now, then it's time to go out there and get our
own. The tools are in place now, and will only get better in the
months and years to come. Or we can bitch and moan about the
cover-up and sit around and swap saucer stories.

Dark Cloud






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 24

                            Re: Research Request

From: Bruno Mancusi <Bruno.Mancusi@com.mcnet.ch>
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 20:51:13 +0200
Fwd Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 16:10:10 -0400
Subject: Re: Research Request

> From: Tim Matthews <matthews@zetnet.co.uk>
> To: <Updates@globalserve.net>
> Subject: Research Request
> Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 10:47:34 +0100

> We are looking to make contact with former employees of the AV.
> Roe Company, Bell, (Chance) Vought, Lockheed and Republic who may
> have worked upon jet-powered circular wing aircraft in the 1950s
> and 1960s. Although we have some fascinating evidence relating to
> these we always need more.

I have only a little story to tell on this subject. I have
interviewed a Canadian woman, L. P., on 27 February 1988. At that
time, she lived at Montheron, near Lausanne, Switzerland.

>From 1952 to 1958, she has worked at A.V. Roe-De Havilland's
cafeteria at Malton, near Toronto, Canada. One evening at about
10-10:30 p.m., between 1953-1955, she saw an open door at a
hangar which was always closed and guarded. She looked in and saw
a saucer in wood, about 10 meters in diameter. An American guard
asked her what she was doing here and closed the door. After, she
asked to the workers union leader what it was and he answered it
was "something secret". The hangar was a small one, for small
aircrafts like Pipers, with usually no connection with A.V. Roe
factory. I showed her a photo of the AVROCAR but she said it was
something different.

That's all, but I still have her drawings if you are interested.

Bruno Mancusi





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 24

                             Re: Holiday Reading

From: Sean Jones <Tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 21:13:55 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 16:48:47 -0400
Subject: Re: Holiday Reading

'Lo All

I am off to Tunisia this sunday and I am taking a few books to
read with me. My other half being a tad dissed with me for my UFO
interests has limted me to one UFO book. I was going to take
Jerome Clark's UFO Encyclopedia but she said that was taking the
proverbial.

So people suggestions please.

---
    In an infinite universe inifinitely anything is posible.
                       Sean Jones
 Homepage--http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Zone/1745/index.htm
         Research 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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 25

                 Re: Seeking Info on Wurtsmith 1975 Sighting

From: Jeff Westover <jeff.westover@mailexcite.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 15:47:12 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 11:15:05 -0400
Subject: Re: Seeking Info on Wurtsmith 1975 Sighting


>From: Diana Botsford <diana@oznet.com>
>To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Seeking Info on Wurtsmith 1975 Sighting
>Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 10:51:47 -0500

>I'm looking for a reported UFO incident relating to Wurtsmith,
>Michigan in 1975.  I need to know the exact date or dates and
>what was believed to have happened.

Diana,

There is some information on the Michigan MUFON website
concerning 'classic Michigan sightings', one of them being the
10/30/75 Wurtsmith event.

A few links to check out:

Michigan MUFON's Classic Michigan Sightings:
http://pilot.msu.edu/user/trumbull/mufon/sightings/classic.htm

UFO Mind:
http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/1997/jan/m31-034.shtml

UFOBBS:
www.ufobbs.com/ufo/txt1/466.ufo

Greenwood and Fawcett's book "Clear Intent" documents the 1975
Norad Base intrusions by UFOs over the period of a few weeks late
in 1975.


Best,
Jeff Westover
---
"Prejudice will take you farther from the truth than ignorance"  Bang Weng Gwang

 Enter into the "Night Of Light" art gallery at http://www.crystaltower.com/jeff
w

Visit "Phenomenon-The Michigan UFO Experience" at http://www.Geocities.com/Colle
gePark/Quad/1365/







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 25

              Meteor impacts/UFO crashes and earthquake lights

From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 16:59:49 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time)
Fwd Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 11:06:54 -0400
Subject: Meteor impacts/UFO crashes and earthquake lights

Greetings everyone,

Below is a briefly edited reply <my comments in brackets>
to questions I asked Bob Wetmiller, a seismologist with the
Geological Survey of Canada in Ottawa, regarding meteor
impacts and earthquake lights.  Bob even tells how we can
produce and observe earthquake lights in our own kitchen.

Nick


Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 09:41:08 -0400
From: Bob Wetmiller <bobw@seismo.nrcan.gc.ca>
To: nikolaos@YorkU.CA
Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: CE: 'Light Phenomenon' In June '98 N. Carolina
Quake

Hi Nick

<snip>

* The seismic signal produced by a meteorite impact would look
similar to that produced by an explosion or an earthquake.
In principle the signals should be different because of the
differences in the source, but in practice the simiarities
are more obvious than the differences. I am aware of one
example of a seismic record for a meteorite impact in Canada
and would not suspect the record as being anything other than
an earthquake at first glance.  <Unlike natural earthquakes,
explosions usually have a much larger initial signal compared
to the rest of the seismic signal that follows.>

You should also be aware that there are more examples of seismic
stations recording the sonic booms of meteorites <and aircraft,
UFOs, etc.> than impacts. In those cases the seismic records are
bizarre. <Seismic records have been used in one case to determine
that a Canadian military plane was flying too fast creating a
sonic boom which were picked up by seismometers along its flight
path all the way back to its base.  In another unusual case, the
trajectory of the 1965 Keckburg UFO crash was determined using
the seismic signals from different seismometers in Canada and
the U.S.>

* Magnitude 3 represents a big explosion. There is no single
relationship between magnitude and charge size because much
depends on what happens at the source, but the largest explosions
set off in the mining industry anywhere in Canada, and they do
some big ones, seldom exceed Magnitude 3.5.  <I got an e-mail
message from Steve Roecker, a U.S. seismologist who has worked
in Kyrgyzstan for many years, and he has not heard anything or
detected any seismic signals which could be connected to the huge
Russian UFO crash which was reported earlier on UFO UpDates.>

* Surface explosions seldom generate aftershocks, but it is
common in underground mining for explosions to be followed by
induced seismic activity. It all depends on the stress conditions
at the site of the explosion.

* We have never seen any credible reports of lights accompanying
earthquakes in Canada, but there have been some. Generally they
are very hard to qualify, but there could be something going on.
Next time you take a tray of ice cubes out of the fridge, turn
off all the lights before you crack the tray. You will see lights
produced when the ice cracks. <Try this and lets compare notes.>

* The light flash associated with the North Carolina earthquake
could just be coincidental. Its hard to tell from the report
you've given and I have not heard about other reports on the
event. I will let you know if something comes along to explain
it further. I doubt there was any meteor involved. <Especially
since the source of the earthquake was located not far from
Charlotte, NC, a fair sized city.  One would expect a crater to
have been reported if it was a large meteor impact.>

Good to hear from you again, Nick. Take care.

Bob Wetmiller








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 25

                            Posting Instructions

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 11:11:24 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 11:11:24 -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)  _should_ include 'http://' and be
       on one line.

                     ------------------------------------





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 25

                        Re: Recommendations Please!?

From: SKvs <bradford@globalserve.net>
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 19:13:25 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 11:20:16 -0400
Subject: Re: Recommendations Please!?


>From: John White <mjawhite@digitaldune.net>
>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Recommendations Please!?
>Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 06:31:43 -0700

>>From: Peter Gersten <UFOLAWYER1@aol.com>
>>Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 22:38:07 EDT
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Recommendations Please!?

>>>Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 18:00:58 -0400
>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
>>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Recommendations Please!?

>>>..... Will we be afforded
>>>the opportunity to examine the transcripts or be advised
>>>of the outcome of the event? How will it be communicated
>>>to the rest of us?

>>Sue,

>>The proceedings will be taped. Aren't you planning on attending?
>>Why does the mere thought of a mock trial make some people very
>>fearful and in return resort to personal attacks?

>>Peter

>Sue's questions and concerns mirrored to a large extent, I
>believe, those of others on this list.

<snip>

>John

John,

Thank you for a civilized response to this. I seem to have
stirred the pot of defense on this one. What was the basis for
these defensive attacks between Peter and John? From experience,
people only seem to get defensive when they have something to
hide. Does anyone else have anything to say about these two and
their criticisms of one another? Can we move on to Grade 1?

Let's keep it civilized folks. We're all in this ufological
circle whether you agree with one another or not, and I'm
getting bored with the badgering between 'space brothers' (that
should hit a nerve with 'somebody' I know ;( ). Behave kids.

Have a nice.

Sue






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 25

                 Re: Seeking Info on Wurtsmith 1975 Sightin

From: UFOLAWYER1@aol.com
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 20:27:07 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 11:28:39 -0400
Subject: Re: Seeking Info on Wurtsmith 1975 Sightin


>From: Diana Botsford <diana@oznet.com>
>To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Seeking Info on Wurtsmith 1975 Sighting
>Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 10:51:47 -0500

>I'm looking for a reported UFO incident relating to Wurtsmith,
>Michigan in 1975.  I need to know the exact date or dates and
>what was believed to have happened.


Diana,

I have the documents on Wurtsmith and will send them to you.

Peter





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 25

                   David Jacobs Warns: Truth Is Out There

From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 02:47:19 +0200
Fwd Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 11:58:18 -0400
Subject: David Jacobs Warns: Truth Is Out There


>From the Philadelphia Inquirer. URL:

http://www.phillynews.com:80/inquirer/98/Jun/24/lifestyle/THRET24.htm


******


June 24, 1998


Temple professor warns: Truth Is Out There

In his latest book, respected, tenured David M. Jacobs, the "foremost
expert" on aliens, says they do not come with benign intent.

By Leonard W. Boasberg
INQUIRER STAFF WRITER

So you're walking down Walnut Street and you see this guy coming
toward you, and he looks like an attorney or maybe an
accountant.

Well, maybe he is, or maybe he's one of those hybrid
alien/humans that Temple University professor David M. Jacobs
writes about in The Threat, just published by Simon & Schuster.

There are thousands of these beings, he contends. They could be
anyone. "Some hybrids look really quite human," Jacobs said in a
recent interview in his Victorian-style home near Chestnut Hill.

But many look like the kind of extraterrestrials you've seen in
movies and trash tabloids. That's the way people have described
them to Jacobs: large heads; big black eyes; no hair, ears or
nose; slits for mouths; thin arms and legs; grayish bodies.

What about that young woman taking her baby out for a stroll in
Rittenhouse Square? Could she be one? "I do not think they are
walking among us," Jacobs says, "or that they have a job at the
7-Eleven, or something like that."

What the young woman might be, though, is one of the thousands
of people who, according to Jacobs, have been abducted by
extraterrestrial beings and taken onto spaceships, stripped, and
used for experimental procedures, including the removal of ova
or sperm.

And the baby? Don't ask. Embarrassing. Frightening. Jacobs
himself is frightened.

The aliens from outer space, he contends, do not come to earth
with benign motives. On the contrary. They have an agenda. As he
describes in The Threat, with the subtitle The Secret Agenda:
What the Aliens Really Want . . . and How They Plan to Get It,
the motive is nothing less than "the systematic and clandestine
physiological exploitation, and perhaps alteration, of human
beings for the purposes of passing on their genetic capabilities
to progeny who will integrate into the human society and,
without doubt, control it."

Whew!

And it may be too late to stop them. "My own complacency is long
gone, replaced," he writes, "by a sense of profound apprehension
and even dread."

Jacobs, 55, a tenured associate professor of history at Temple,
special izing in 20th-century America, is also, according to his
publisher, "the world's foremost expert on the UFO and abduction
phenomenon."

A man of medium height, with a halo of white hair and a white
moustache, he speaks with the confidence of a man who knows his
subject. He's been studying UFOs since 1965. He's written two
previous books on the subject. He appears regularly on the TV
talk show circuit -- Larry King Live, Howard Stern, Geraldo,
A&E, the Learning Channel, the Discovery Channel. He recently
returned from the sixth annual international UFO conference
sponsored by the Republic of San Marino.

Jacobs started studying UFOs as a student at the University of
California at Los Angeles, where he majored in history. In 1973,
he obtained a master's degree in history at the University of
Wisconsin and, later, his doctorate, with a dissertation on the
UFO controversy.

In The Threat, Jacobs recounts the abduction experiences that
people he's interviewed have described. He writes that he has
used hypnosis in more than 700 abduction investigations. He
learned it on his own: "Doing hypnosis is the easiest thing in
the world."

There is something, for example, that he calls "mindscam," in
which the abductors stare into the abductees' eyes at a distance
of a few inches or less, sometimes provoking intense sexual
arousal in both men and women.

A woman Jacobs calls "Laura" said that one night she was lying
in bed with her husband when five of these creatures entered the
bedroom, and one of them got on top of her. There was nothing
she could do to stop him.

"Donna," when she was 20, met a hybrid on a beach in Maine. He
was wearing a T-shirt and jeans, and his hair was down past his
ears. He began kissing her, she recalled, and "you feel your
brain exploding and your toes tingling and everything in between
absolutely -- firecrackers!"

Unfortunately, all we have to go on is Laura's and Donna's word.
All we have to go on in all the cases that Jacobs describes is
what the people involved told him.

"Anecdotal evidence is not evidence at all," says James Randi, a
professional magician, also known as the Amazing Randi, who has
gone around the world debunking claims of the paranormal,
supernatural and occult.

Randi, who received a MacArthur Foundation award for his work in
investigating such claims, says he has offered a million dollars
"for the performance of any paranormal, supernatural or occult
phenomenon under proper observing conditions, and that includes
contact with alien beings from nonterrestrial sources." The
money, he says, is in negotiable bonds at Goldman Sachs in New
York. So far, no claimants.

What about it, professor? There's a million dollars waiting for
you.

Randi, Jacobs says, is like a lot of other critics who "have
done absolutely no research whatsoever."

Even if we had an ashtray stamped "made in Mars," Jacobs
contends, the skeptics would claim it had been made on earth.
"Ultimately, what you need is an alien. You need one of these
little guys wiggling on the end of a pole, and then you would
have something. That would be convincing."

What about photographs? Didn't it occur to any of these people
who claim multiple abductions to have a camera handy the next
time?

The problem, he explains, is that there's a consciousness
alteration at the beginning of every abduction that renders the
abductee passive.

Sure, people hijacked aboard those spacecraft have picked up
things. But see, they're naked, so there's no place to hide
them.

How is it, a Wall Street Journal reviewer of The Threat
wondered, that the aliens always seem to abduct people no one's
ever heard of? Why don't they abduct somebody important, like
Alan Greenspan or Kathie Lee Gifford?

"The answer," says Jacobs, "is that they do." Like who? "Can't
tell you. If the people want to come forward, they will. . . . I
cannot give you names right now."

Jacobs, like many UFO researchers, contends that the government,
along with the media and the scientific community, determined
long ago that the phenomenon had no objective reality. So
"because the normal avenues of academic discourse have been
closed to UFO researchers," he said, "they have been forced to
take to the popular culture airways to bring their message."

"There are no alien spaceships. There never have been," said
Robert Baker, emeritus professor of psychology at the University
of Kentucky. "There's absolutely no respectable scientific
evidence of any alien invasion or that aliens have abducted any
human being."

How then does he explain how people who come from all walks of
life have told Jacobs such similar stories? of being abducted by
aliens from outer space?

It's a phenomenon, well-known to psychiatrists and
psychologists, called "sleep paralysis" -- people wake up in the
middle of the night, find themselves paralyzed, and have
psychological experiences in which they think their dreams are
real, Baker said.

"It's a universal human experience that has been reported from
the beginning of time," he said.

At Temple, Jacobs, in addition to his main job of teaching
20th-century American history, also conducts a course called
"UFOs in American Society," in the American studies program. He
believes it's the only course on UFOs taught at any American
university, and he's pretty sure there's nothing of the kind
anywhere else in the real world.

He teaches both sides of the issue, he says, including required
reading of a debunking book by Philip Klass, UFO Abductions: A
Dangerous Game, "that contends I'm a total jerk."

Jacobs' colleagues in the Temple history department speak highly
of his teaching. There is, said Morris Vogel, former department
chair, "a fundamental disconnect between the David Jacobs of The
Threat and who is on Howard Stern and the David Jacobs we see
every day as a colleague and a teacher. In the classroom, he's a
gifted instructor who covers the same 19th and 20th century
United States in the way most of his colleagues do . . . and
differs from us only in doing that teaching with more success."

Jacobs admits he's never seen one of these extraterrestrials
himself, but he knows they exist. How can he be sure they
haven't installed thoughts in his mind? Laughing, Jacobs
dismisses the question. He knows that many people, including
some of his colleagues, think he's a nutcase.

"I've learned to accept that," he says. It's a sacrifice he
makes to "have the opportunity to make a contribution in a field
of potentially surpassing importance."

"You have to remember," he says seriously, "that I've come to
these conclusions after an adult lifetime of studying this
subject, and I've come to them with full realization of how
fringy they are, of how off-to-the-side they are. I've come to
them with the full realization of the damage it does to my
career and to my credibility. And yet, as an academic and as a
person who is intellectually honest, I feel I must go where the
evidence leads me."


=A91998 Philadelphia Newspapers Inc.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 25

                     Re: Radar Tapes Of Mass Sightings?

From: StrmNut@aol.com
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 22:05:37 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 12:09:04 -0400
Subject: Re: Radar Tapes Of Mass Sightings?


>From: Steve Burrows <S.Burrows@uq.net.au>
>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Are there radar tapes of mass sightings
>Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 22:48:26 +1000

>There are many excellent accounts of mass sightings of triangle
>shaped UFOs across the North American continent.  But why do we
>not see radar tapes of such sightings especially when it is
>reported that some of the sighters were setup to wait and
>photograph the UFOs?  Or is there no such equipment on the market
>such as small, portable low range radar units?

>If not, lets look at building them! (I used to be a radar
>engineer before computers came along).

>Just my 2 cents worth..

Steve,

I don't know of too many radar facilities readily willing to
dole out radar tapes with..well..."unusual returns" to just
anyone. Are any of them (as far as you know) obligated to hand
out such tapes?

You mentioned "sighters" being "set up to wait and photograph
UFOs". To whom are you referring, and was this a specific
occasion, or a series of them?

The notion of UFO researchers toting portable radar for
skywatches is intruiging...I had not considered it. Reminds me
of the stormchasers in the midwest with their portable
Dopplers.....which, by the way, I think our hypothetical radar
would have to be. The downside of this is, of course, the odds
of actually being in the right place at the right time, with the
radar pointed in the right direction. One would have to
routinely travel to "hotspots" to improve the odds. Also, I am
not familiar with Doppler components, but I imagine they aren't
cheap. Anyone know of a good used Doppler radar unit for sale?

Incidentally, kudos to you for trying to look for new ways to
improve the research in this field. That's forward motion I'm
detecting, and I like it.

Greg

Strmnut@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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 25

                         NASA's Astrobiology Program

From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose)
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 04:39:40 +0200
Fwd Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 12:10:17 -0400
Subject: NASA's Astrobiology Program


URL:

http://www.mercurycenter.com:80/premium/scitech/docs/astrobio23.htm


Stig


*******


Published Tuesday, June 23, 1998, in the San Jose Mercury News


Ames charts far-out goals for institute of researchers


BY GLENNDA CHUI
Mercury News Science Writer


WHEN people say the new Astrobiology Institute at NASA's Ames Research
Center in Mountain View will cover life in the universe from soup to
nuts, they're not kidding.

They're talking everything from the primordial soup to concepts that, a
few years ago, seemed downright nutty. To name a few:


=B7 Maybe living microbes can spread from one planet to another,
surviving journeys of millions of miles on rocks hurtling through space.

=B7=BFMaybe with the right system of telescopes, astronomers over the next
decade or so can snap photos of planets around other stars -- and tell
whether they harbor life.

=B7=BFMaybe comets, those dirty snowballs that loop around the sun, are
factories for cooking up a host of complicated chemicals. They may have
been the Johnny Appleseeds that scattered the prerequisites of life
across the cosmos.


And perhaps the wildest idea of all: The researchers who are pursuing
these matters, and many more, will work in offices that in some cases
are thousands of miles apart, linked by a new, high-speed computer
network. This should allow them to write on virtual blackboards and
argue in virtual hallways as if they were in the same building. At
least that's the plan.

"I don't know of an example that comes close to this, to the kind of
ambitious goals we have for this institute," said Lawrence Caroff, who
is helping to coordinate the effort at Ames.

"This is an experiment," said Donald L. DeVincenzi, division chief for
space science at Ames. "This is the first time any of us is doing
anything like this."

The virtual institute formally came to life last month with the
announcement that the National Aeronautics and Space Administration had
selected 11 institutions as the initial members, out of 53 groups that
had applied.

It has a budget of $3.5 million this year to pull itself together and
get rolling. NASA has budgeted $9 million for next year, proposed $20
million for the following year and projected that the institute could
eventually pull in $100 million annually.

Ames, which is NASA's official center for the study of astrobiology, is
also one of the institute's first members and serves as its
headquarters. To carry out its own proposal, it has fielded a team of
more than 70 scientists from 25 institutions across the country,
representing disciplines from earth science to biology and computer
modeling.

Among the other members, Scripps Research Institute and the University
of California-Irvine plan to study the emergence of chemical systems
that can reproduce themselves -- one of the criteria for life. Harvard
University will take a look at three major transitions in the evolution
of life: the buildup of oxygen in the atmosphere about 2 billion years
ago; the Cambrian Explosion, in which nearly all of today's classes of
plants and animals sprang into being 540,000 years ago; and the
Permian-Triassic boundary 251 million years ago, in which 95 percent of
ocean species and a good number of species on land suddenly and
mysteriously vanished.

And NASA's Johnson Space Center will work on identifying biological
markers that serve as signatures for life, both here and in space. The
leader of the Johnson team, David McKay, is one of the scientists who
announced two years ago that they had found what looked like fossilized
microbes in a meteorite from Mars; that claim is still in dispute.

Each of these teams is a far-flung enterprise, combining scientists
from many institutions and from a number of fields. If it were plotted
on a map, with strings linking its various parts, the institute would
look like a spider web.

That's exactly what its creators intended. The idea was to unite people
who had never worked together before, and who could combine their
expertise in unanticipated ways to discover something new.

"It's a way of trying to use NASA technology and communications
technology to enable a new level of complexity in research," said David
Des Marais, one of the leaders of the Ames team. "We're trying to
create a new research organism."

The institute is part of a renaissance at NASA/Ames, which only three
years ago was struggling for survival and searching for a new mission
that would save it from closing.

The center had a longstanding program in exobiology -- the study of the
origin and evolution of life on Earth, and the possibility of life
elsewhere. But the field was a backwater.

Although it produced a steady stream of productive science, it rarely
made headlines and never attracted much money. One of NASA's most
visible efforts, a search for radio signals from extraterrestrial
beings, was killed in 1993 by Congress, which derided it as fruitless
and a waste of money.

Then came a string of dramatic discoveries suggesting that life is both
hardy and widespread.

On Earth, researchers found signs of life dating back 3.8 billion
years, to a time when comets pelted the infant planet.

Biologists discovered microbes thriving in unbelievably harsh
conditions: in boiling springs like those at Yellowstone National Park,
inside salt crystals, inside rocks. Some bacteria live deep
underground, apparently subsisting on rock and water; others survive
millions of years in Siberian permafrost and are revived by thawing.
The amazing microbe Deinococcus radiodurans endures tremendous doses of
radiation; although its genetic material initially falls apart, it
reassembles itself in a matter of hours.

In space, astronomers detected planets around other stars. A few of
those planets were at the right distance from their parent stars to
allow the existence of liquid water -- considered the main requirement
for the development of life.

The Galileo mission found evidence of liquid oceans under the icy crust
of Jupiter's moon Europa -- a place where life could conceivably gain a
foothold.

And the discovery of possible fossils in the Mars meteorite renewed
interest in the search for life on that planet.

As Ames astrophysicist Louis Allamandola puts it, "Life may be a cosmic
imperative. The conditions are everywhere. You don't need a magic thing
to happen right here."

As the sense of excitement grew, Ames persuaded NASA headquarters to
make Ames the agency's lead center for astrobiology research. It was
also designated the NASA Center for Excellence in Information
Technology.

The two dovetail nicely in the Astrobiology Institute, officials said.
It'll need a lot of computing power to hook up all its far-flung parts
and to do the kinds of science it envisions.

"There are some familiar themes, but we're asking new questions or
applying new methods of analysis," DeVincenzi said. "We didn't have the
computer technology five years ago to create an artificial cell on a
computer. Now we do."

The institute is already having some growing pains. The man who
reportedly was the first choice to become director -- Wesley T.
Huntress Jr., NASA's associate administrator for space science --
instead accepted a job as director of the Carnegie Institution's
Geophysical Laboratory. The agency's second choice didn't work out
either, and it has not yet appointed an interim director. Caroff said
the delays have held up other important decisions, such as the
selection of an interconnection guru to set up the computer network.

Another problem: NASA originally said it would fund seven or eight
proposals. It funded 11 instead. So the institute's budget is being
stretched thinner, with each team getting 40 percent to 80 percent of
the money it had requested.

The Ames team, which has been told it will get less than half of its
request, is waiting to see which parts of its many-pronged proposal
will go forward.

Among the possibilities:


=B7 Tracing carbon -- the backbone of terrestrial life -- from its origin
in the death throes of aging stars to its role in space dust, comets,
meteorites, the primitive Earth and living things.

=B7Investigating the formation of planets that can support life: Are
there rules that determine where and how they form? How many are out
there? How can we tell, from afar, which ones are habitable?

=B7=BFHow did the young Earth and early life forms evolve together?

=B7=BFWhat did the first living cell look like? Researchers hope to
re-create it on a computer.

=B7=BFIf planets have life cycles, is the Earth young, middle-aged or old?
As DeVincenzi puts it, "Can we recognize when a planet is going
downhill?" Are people doing anything to speed its demise?

=B7=BFWhat is the potential for living things to survive beyond their
planets of origin? Christopher McKay, a physicist at Ames who has been
involved in the search for extraterrestrial life for two decades, will
be holding a small workshop on this question Thursday and Friday at
Ames. It will explore not only the possibility of microbes hitching
rides on meteorites but also the feasibility of people living on Mars.


"These are questions that not too long ago would produce a high snicker
factor -- and they still can, if we don't approach them properly," he
said.

Human settlement of another planet is "no longer a crazy idea," he
said. "We're asking, 'Can we do it? Is life that adaptable?'=BF"


=A91997 - 1998 Mercury Center.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 25

              Strange Lights In The Red Rock Canyons Of Sedona

From: Rob Meyer <robmeyer@sedona.net>
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 18:09:37 -0700 (MST)
Fwd Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 12:02:29 -0400
Subject: Strange Lights In The Red Rock Canyons Of Sedona

From: PLANETNEWS@aol.com
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 20:21:21 EDT
Mime-Version: 1.0
Subject: More UFO sightings...
Status:  O

Earth Lights with Intelligence in the Red Rock Canyons of Sedona

On June 19,1998 Rob Meyer was on a sky watch out in the Red Rock
Canyons of Sedona when all of a sudden from far out in the Red
Rock Canyons a huge multi- colored lights appeared. The group
that was observying this did not know what to make of this
pheoneomoen. Rob passed out the night vision equipment and asked
everyone to observe the pheonomoen while Rob started pulsing his
flash light in the direction that these lights were coming from
.

As Rob keep flashing at the lights another light appeared and
flashed back in responce to him flashing. The sequence of these
flashes was not consistant yet the same pulses were observed
over several hours that evening. As all this was taking place
two in the group observed several Orbs pass by them which they
could see through the night vision equipment. As these lights
keep up and increased hugh amounts of Orbs started appearing.
While viewing all this activity Rob's video equipment was
running to capture the nights events.

As the evening came to a close the group all faced the area were
these pulses were coming from and observed another sequence of
pulsed flases from the location. Rob flashed back at the
location of were the lights were coming from and asked the group
to send Love telepathically to were the lights were and all of a
sudden the most spectular flashes of multi-colored lights
appeared in the same sequences that Rob had flashed with his
flash light. All in the group were completly taken by this event
and later on our way out of the canyons were sharing how
greatful they were to God and the Earth mother be a witness to
these most unusal events that had taken place that evening.

Rob will be updating and soon will be putting these pictures and
video footage of these on the web site those interested in
sharing there UFO & Paranormal Photos and video footage please
contact Rob at his E-mail http://wwwrobmeyersedona.net or visit
the web site at http://www.sedonavortexconnection.com/robmeyer







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 25

                      New Books On Space Eavesdropping

From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 03:34:11 +0200
Fwd Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 12:05:45 -0400
Subject: New Books On Space Eavesdropping

From the San Jose Mercury News.

http://www.mercurycenter.com:80/books/docs/seti21.htm


Stig


*******


Published Sunday, June 21, 1998, in the San Jose Mercury News


Caller ID for E.T.


Two authors delve into the science of eavesdropping in outer space


OTHER WORLDS: The Search for Life in the Universe

By Michael D. Lemonick
Simon & Schuster, 272 pp., $25


SHARING THE UNIVERSE: Perspectives on Extraterrestrial Life

By Seth Shostak
Berkeley Hills Books, 206 pp.,
$14.95 paperback


BY CHARLEY LINDSEY


"NOW, WE see through a glass dimly," wrote the apostle Paul. "But then,
we shall see face to face."

Early Christians hoped their wishes would come true in a mere handful
of years, but 20 centuries later, their heirs still pray to see God
"face to face." Apostles of extraterrestrial life, though they believe
in science and not necessarily in God, speak with much the same
yearning.

The mission for both groups is how to occupy themselves until "the
Lord's returning," or, in the case of the researchers who scan the
skies, for a call from E.T. You could wait forever -- or the cosmic
Teletype could start chattering tomorrow.

A pair of new books -- one by a seasoned science journalist, the other
by one of the brains of Silicon Valley's own SETI (Search for
Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence) Institute -- gives a taste of what the
acolytes are up to in the real-world vigil for aliens.

It's cutting-edge science, a realm of fierce arguments and surprise.
Only a few weeks ago, a California team not even mentioned in these
books unveiled the first likely photo of a planet outside our solar
system.

The task is a million light-years from "The X-Files" and the Halloween
monsters carved up on slabs for tabloid TV shows. The true alien-seeker
is a software-wrangler, a competitive academic, a roving grant-hound
who occasionally admits to a bit of chagrin at the job's snicker factor
.=BF.=BF. and then cheerfully, as Seth Shostak does, drags in references to
"Star Trek," "Independence Day" and star dreck like "Night of the
Lepus," a horror film about giant, mutant bunnies.

Shostak's "Sharing the Universe" reads like a lecture series by your
physics department's liveliest professor. The public-programs scientist
at the private, non-profit SETI Institute in Mountain View, Shostak
knows the ropes of popular science: Make it fun, make it engaging, use
your professional prowess to slip in some serious theory. His line of
work is straining to hear signs of intelligent life through the
background noise of the universe, and it also leads him plunging
headlong into the squawk of popular culture.

"Hollywood aliens are like winter vegetables," he remarks. "There isn't
much variety." Why is it, Shostak wonders, that the movies spawn
star-faring monsters with "convincing tentacles, steely teeth and four
quarts of mucus; yet they often still look a little like the guy next
door"?

Or, at the other extreme, they look wrinkled, big-eyed and infantile --
"cute, harmless and here to help"?

No mere scoffer, Shostak enjoys discussing why the pop-culture
extraterrestrials are such a predictable bunch: They reflect humanity's
worst fears and brightest hopes. They remind us of snakes, insects and
carnivores -- animals that make Earthlings shiver. They illuminate our
mixed feelings about our feelings themselves: Wouldn't Mr. Spock be a
nice improvement on sloppy humanity? Or is a truly cold-hearted alien,
say, one of those supermarket "grays" with the empty eyes, a way of
pointing to the hole we dread finding in our own hearts?

Of course, Shostak notes dryly, sometimes it's just easier to put an
actor in a rubber suit than to fantasize from whole cloth.

Some of Shostak's best work is the way he brainstorms about real
extraterrestrials, wherever they may be. You'd be hard-pressed to toss
him a question about this highly speculative field he hasn't gnawed on.

Carbon-based life? Very likely, if life there is. Silicon had plenty of
chances on Earth to be the star ingredient in the primordial soup, and
it blew it. Tentacles and blobby bodies? Don't bet on it -- musculature
without bones is inefficient, and single-celled beings can only get so
big .=BF.=BF. besides, we're looking for aliens who can "hold up their end
of the conversation," as Shostak says, and an overgrown amoeba would be
prone to awkward silences.

Smart aliens will be not too small, not too big, both conclusions he
bases on bio-engineering. Eyes and ears seem universally useful, plus a
head to put them in (held high, the better to find food or diversion).
They won't be coming here to eat us -- we'd be indigestible -- or to
mate with us -- a little thing called DNA is standing in the way.
Anyway, they could be self-reproducing machines. And the energy costs
for coming to our part of the universe would be ludicrous.

Maybe the aliens can fly, Shostak muses, but they probably won't swim,
at least full time -- an aquatic environment is thought to be too cushy
to favor evolution of intelligence. Also, sea creatures wouldn't have
telescopes or radio, and when it comes down to it, how would we ever
find a being who wasn't beaming electromagnetic signals at us?

Which brings the reader to SETI and similar tantalizingly oblique
efforts to bag otherworldly folk. The poignancy of Shostak's genial
"infomercial" for cosmic eavesdropping is that we're highly unlikely
ever to shake hands with any intelligent aliens, nor will our
children's children. About all we can do is listen. The fun is in the
brilliance of the chase: where to scan for a juicy world, how to decode
the bleeps we might someday overhear. Most of the book is about
creating those strategies (though curiously, he never wastes a word on
whether the search is worth doing).

Shostak may razz "Contact," whose heroine was based on a SETI colleague
of Shostak's, radio astrophysicist Jill Tarter, but Hollywood does meet
reality at one point. The search for E.T.'s radio traffic will be a
flop -- until the instant it succeeds.

MICHAEL D. Lemonick's "Other Worlds" describes itself a bit defensively
as "a work of journalism rather than a work of scholarship." That's a
touch over-modest, because Lemonick's explanation of the exotic science
is fluent and clear, proof that he has wrestled tough theories to the
ground. His technical and historical chapters are cooler and more
focused than Shostak's, bearing much of the tone of Time magazine,
where Lemonick is a senior science writer.

His disclaimer, though, points out the perishability of his material.
Astronomy is a fecund field; part of its thrill is that today's
cutting-edge work can be tomorrow's washout.

Both Lemonick and Shostak write well about the famous Martian meteorite
from Antarctica that might contain traces of microscopic life, but for
the latest arguments you really need to have kept up your newspaper and
magazine reading. The authors couldn't have known the Lunar Prospector
was about to sniff out millions of tons of water on the moon, though
they're well aware of the tantalizing slush beneath the icy wrapper of
Jupiter's moon Europa.

Even as Lemonick asserts that the Hubble Space Telescope could never
peer through the glare of a distant star to see orbiting planets, a
team from the Extrasolar Research Institute in Pasadena announced May
28 that it had done exactly that: The Hubble, a modest older sister
barely mentioned in Lemonick's discussion of future super-telescopes,
had snapped a picture of a likely "proto-planet" in the constellation
Taurus.

Hubble's coup will stir up planet-formation theories as well, an area
that Lemonick explains thoroughly. He also leads fascinating field
trips to the mountaintop telescopes, high-tech's high places, where the
seekers perform their mysteries in the thin, cold air.

A minor blemish on Lemonick's work is its boys' club tone. It's
possible it really is a man's world behind the radio dishes, but he
emphasizes too heavily the scruffy fellows who carry his story, and
describes them -- shirttails out, beards, wild-haired or balding -- too
predictably. Female scientists (Tarter earns a few paragraphs) are
almost as invisible as the purported aliens.

One featured male astronomer is described as bringing his girlfriend to
a conference at Capri -- she has no last name and she spends the whole
time shopping in boutiques. The detail has nothing to do with science
and seems to be jerking a thumb at the "Few Girls Allowed" sign.

Both books utterly avoid mathematics, with the exception of a benchmark
formula Shostak calls "more sorcery than science": the Drake equation.
Concocted in 1961 by pioneer radio-astronomer Frank Drake, now SETI's
president and a professor at UC-Santa Cruz, the equation is a set of
talking points that tries to estimate the number of intelligent
civilizations in our galaxy. The variables are all profoundly uncertain
-- most pertinent, in our case, the variable for the amount of time
between when a civilization invents radio and when it goes silent --
presumably by annihilating itself.

The equation says that ultimately the chances for shaking E.T.'s hand,
or overhearing his talk radio, come down to how Earthlings treat each
other. If we can do it well and kindly, it increases the likelihood
that creatures all around the galaxy will have done the same.

But it is chilling to think of why the silence of space might be
perpetual. It could mean Earth will go off the air, too.=BF


Charley Lindsey is a Mercury News copy editor.


=A91997 - 1998 Mercury Center.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 25

                         Re: Secrets & Conspiracies

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 21:51:45 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 12:12:03 -0400
Subject: Re: Secrets & Conspiracies


>Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 15:45:33 -0300
>From: Stanton T. Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Secrets & Conspiracies

Stan and List:

My pardon, but I meant to include the following in my last
response. To see a semblance of how such research might be
conducted, please check out the following url:

http:/www.serve.com/mahood/bluefire.htm

Meantime, please drop your blather about the NSA's in camera
response. It ill behooves your status as a scientist in
particular and your cover up argument in general. To paraphrase
Shakespeare, it is little more than much ado about absolutely
nothing.

You know that, Tom Deuely knows that, so do I, and so does anyone
who has even remotely followed the NSA's alleged involvement with
UFOs. It's a non-starter, pure and simple.

Dark Cloud






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 25

                 'Grand Father Of Mind Control' On Implants

From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 04:08:12 +0200
Fwd Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 12:07:07 -0400
Subject: 'Grand Father Of Mind Control' On Implants


Interesting article from the June 18-24, 1998 issue of Metro, in spite
of the untimely sarcasm of the headline. URL:

http://www.metroactive.com:80/metro/cover/chips-9824.html

Links are preceded by asterisks.


Stig


*******


Help! There's a chip in my body
and I can't get it out!


Illustrations by Winston Smith


In the old days people worried about having a chip on their shoulder.
Today, they worry that there's a chip IN their shoulder, implanted by
devious conspiratorial forces.


By J. Douglas Allen-Taylor


TWENTY-YEAR-OLD Jay Kats of Palo Alto shifts a little awkwardly in his
seat on the couch between his mother and father and considers the
reporter's question: How does it feel having an electronic device
implanted in his head that monitors his activities and interjects
strange thoughts into his head?

"Well, I don't really feel anything," he replies. "I don't get any
messages or thoughts or things, like my father does. But I mean, I
don't know what to compare it to. I'm supposed to have gotten this
thing in my head when I was 4, so how do I know anything different?"

At 20, Kats appears indistinguishable from thousands of other young men
growing up in Silicon Valley. A classic blue-blond, he has an ad
model's good looks and a skateboarder's lean, athletic body. A
part-time student at Foothill College, he still lives at home with his
Russian immigrant parents and an older brother. Jay Kats does not
appear to be much different from the average valley kid, a Richie
Cunningham for the '90s.

Except that Richie Cunningham never had an electronic listening device
inside of his brain.

According to Kats' parents, doctors at Stanford Hospital secretly put
the mysterious implant into their son's head during a 1982
tonsillectomy. They think that doctors at Kaiser Hospital in Redwood
City gave Edward a similar implant nine years later. Edward and Klaudia
Kats believe that the implants are the work of the Central Intelligence
Agency, originally targeting the family because they were suspected of
being Russian KGB agents. The spy charge disproven, the Kats family now
thinks they are merely being used as "guinea pigs." They say they have
been hounded for several years by intelligence agents, men who stop by
their house and drop cryptic comments, or tail them in cars when they
travel, or arrange auto accidents or other incidents in front of their
house to keep them from attending meetings.

"Have they called your editors yet?" Edward asks each time I talk to
him.

The harassment cost them their Palo Alto home, they say, and they are
now forced to sleep on the floor of Jazz For Hair, the family's
hairstyling business.

Both Edward and Klaudia Kats are multitalented; Edward studied music in
the old Soviet Union and now works as a composer and an independent
record producer. Klaudia was a professional singer; the two of them
became hairstylists after they emigrated to America. They retain Old
World manners and charm and still speak with accents that are heavily
Eastern European.

Edward explains his son's plight with great anguish. "The high school
psychiatrist told us that something is wrong with Jay. He can't
concentrate. He gets headaches. He can't sleep at night because the
people at Stanford are always sending signals, waking him up. Once this
device is implanted, it cannot be removed. My boy is doomed. They want
to prepare him for prison and then murder him."

Klaudia agrees. "We know that Jay was implanted because he started
great changes as soon as he became a teenager," she says. "He started
doing bad in school, all of a sudden. He started having big changes in
his moods=BF... happy one time, and then just quickly change over to be
angry without any reason whatsoever. He started getting into trouble
with the law. They are able to push buttons any time they want to and
get these children to commit crimes. They are doing it to blacks and to
Latinos, too. You see it, don't you?"

As for the effects of the implant on her husband, Klaudia says, "He is
in pain. They send threats and bad thoughts to him through a
wavelength. But Ed is strong. He fights them."

Edward and Klaudia say that although they have X-rays which could
possibly show the implanted devices, the X-rays were sabotaged by
doctors and technicians so that the devices are partially obscured.

The Kats family takes their allegations quite seriously. They have
written letters to the Palo Alto Police Department, the FBI,
Congressman Tom Campbell, California Attorney General Dan Lungren and
President Clinton, to name a few. They filed a lawsuit against Stanford
Hospital in federal court, which was dismissed.

And they are not alone. Along with convicted Oklahoma City Federal
Building bomber Timothy McVeigh, who reportedly believes that the
federal government tracked him during the '90s through an electronic
monitoring device (which he says the Army clandestinely implanted in
the legs of American soldiers during the Gulf War), we appear to be
surrounded by many such people who believe they are victims of
electronic harassment. Implanted Mind People. IMPs.


(Illustration by Winston Smith)


Chip Shape


SANTA CLARA COUNTY resident David Duval believes he was kidnapped and
implanted with an electronic monitoring device while he was attempting
to buy drugs in San Francisco in 1990. He thinks he is now part of some
sort of experiment to track the drug trade. "My comings and goings are
electronically monitored and then physically reported, probably by city
and county departments, transportation agencies and operators," he
writes. "And to top it off, some sort of electromagnetic current seems
to swirl upon my head and facial areas at particular times of the day,
causing me extreme discomfort." He thinks that vacuum cleaners are
being used as some sort of time stamp for distant recorders, since
people are always coming up to him, eager to clean the carpet around
him.

The net, of course, is full of IMP links.

The *Mind Control Forum outlines the complaints of Tannie Braziel, an
African American professional who owns her own Los Angeles-based
paralegal and publishing business: "[Braziel] is also the victim of a
particularly vicious electromagnetic attack involving racially and
sexually slurring voices and battering sensations. They are ordering
her to give up her business."

The Forum also recounts the story of Paul Pietzonka, who writes that
after receiving flu shots at the University of Iowa, he knew that "the
first shot was some type of transponder or tracking device because they
can seem to find me anywhere I'm at, and the second was a tiny crystal
similar to what would be in a radio transmitter for the purpose of
interfacing with my brain and a computer." The Forum synopsis adds that
"Paul goes on about perpetrators, the technology, failed attempts to
shield from it and how to fortify the body against it nutritionally."

Edward Kats operates a *Web site of his own with a detailed account of
the family's claims, including copies of Edward's and Jay's brain
X-rays. The Web site is part of an online linkage that includes
hundreds, perhaps thousands, of Western Hemisphere and Western European
citizens who believe that they have been involuntarily implanted with
some sort of electronic monitoring or thought-sending device.

The first thing that comes to mind is: These people can't be serious,
can they? There is such a temptation to dismiss these claims of
technological invasion as some sort of advertising hype leading up to
the release of the new *X-Files movie. It was *The X-Files television
show, after all, that brought into recent popular consciousness the
idea that extraterrestrial aliens were snatching people up into their
spaceships, planting bugs in their brains and then dropping them back
into the midst of an unsuspecting world.

Or are we witnessing some sort of new and exotic post-industrial
technology-driven mental disorder? If so, no one seems to have given it
a formal name yet. The Mind Control Forum identifies adherents as
"psychotronics victims," but that just seems to be their own newspeak
configuration. Evan Harrington, a doctoral candidate in social
psychology at Temple University who has studied IMPs extensively, says
that there is a temptation to classify these people as paranoids, but
not all of them are. "Generally speaking, the clinical diagnosis of
paranoia might be made on some of those who believe they have
implants," Harrington writes. "But the Paranoid Personality Disorder
diagnosis represents a belief that everyone is out to get me, rather
than the belief that it is just the government. Some of these people
might be diagnosed as paranoid, but I doubt that most or all would."


(Photo by Christopher Gardner)

(Text: The Kats family--Ed (left), Klaudia and their two sons--believe
that agents of the CIA implanted electronic devices inside of Ed and
son Jay to monitor their thoughts and actions.)


The Devil Made Me Do It


THE HUMAN NOTION of someone or something trying to invade and control
the mind is not new. At least as far back as Cro-Magnon times, human
beings sawed holes in their heads to let the evil spirits back out.
Trepanning, it was called, and the procedure lasted into the 17th
century. By the beginning of the Christian epoch, the belief had risen
among some that humans were not responsible for bad deeds; they had
merely been possessed by a supreme evil spirit. The age of science
brought forth science fiction, and with it the idea that it was
otherworld aliens who were attempting to exert control over the human
brain. And then came the '60s, when everything started being blamed on
the government, including such fantasies as sending radio broadcasts
through the fillings in people's teeth.

What do the alleged manipulators themselves say about all this? Perhaps
smarting from all the bad publicity he has garnered over the various
millennia, the devil has not released any books lately and has
adamantly refused to appear on Leno. If the extraterrestrials are
talking on this subject, SETI hasn't deciphered it yet. The CIA denies
they are planting devices in people's brains, but since the CIA's
record of denials is so vast, few are inclined to believe them.
Stanford Medical Center and Kaiser Hospital of Mountain View deny being
involved in any such experimentation.

But each denial only adds fuel to the fire, proof to the true believers
that a coverup is being orchestrated and engineered. A woman once
called the Metro office, telling a complicated story about how "they"
were after her. After a long listen, the employee said, "Ma'am, I'm
sorry. I can't help you. I'm just an intern." There was a long pause at
the other end of the line. "Oh," the woman finally said. "I see.
They've gotten to you, too."

Santa Clara University law professor Alan Scheflin isn't about to deny
that many IMPs are making "truly idiotic claims of complete nonsense."
Having studied the subject for years, Scheflin is considered by many to
be the "grandfather of mind control." In 1978 he co-authored a book on
the subject, The Mind Manipulators (the Kats family has one of the few
available out-of-print copies, with many passages highlighted). But
unlike most scientific or academic observers of the phenomenon,
Scheflin believes that some of the claims of implantation are true. He
says that clandestine mind-control experiments have been done in this
country for years.

The most insidious and notorious experiments were conducted by the CIA
during the 1950s and '60s under the code name MKULTRA. The CIA director
at the time, Allen Dulles, initiated MKULTRA in 1953 in order to help
win what he called the "brain warfare" battle with the Soviet Union.
The CIA sponsored secret experiments inside and outside this country on
subjects using biochemical research, psychosurgery and electrical
stimulation of the brain. In one series of experiments in San Francisco
in the 1960s, MKULTRA agents dropped LSD in the drinks of unsuspecting
persons to gauge their reactions. CIA-sponsored experiments in Montreal
led to a suit by victims against the Canadian government and the CIA,
eventually resulting in a settlement.

The regular U.S. Armed Forces also participated. "At Tulane University
in the 1970s, the Army implanted electrodes into the subjects' brains
and then gave them mescaline and other drugs to monitor their effects,"
Scheflin says, adding that the government to this day refuses to
release information on the experiments.

Scheflin says that in order to conduct the experiments needed to
perfect an electronic mind-control system, "you need a captive
population." He suggests two institutions within the United States
where such experimentation could possibly still be taking place:
prisons and mental hospitals.

California once made a serious effort to conduct mind-control
experiments, part of which involved psychosurgery (cutting out parts of
the brain to affect the psychological makeup) and projected plans for
the implanting of tracking devices inside the brains of members of the
state's prison population. In the early 1970s, under the Reagan
gubernatorial administration, the state attempted to establish a Center
for the Study and Reduction of Violence at UCLA. According to Scheflin,
the purpose of the center was to "look for a biochemical or
physiological cure for violence." Projected activities also included
studying the effects of giving amphetamines to "violence-prone"
children in certain majority African American and Latino schools.

Law Enforcement Administration Agency funds were secured for the
project, but when details of the plan were released in California, it
was shelved in a storm of protest. But some of the California Violence
Center's projects have recently resurfaced in other parts of the
country.

Following formal complaints from a number of organizations, the federal
Office of Protection from Research Risks has begun investigating a
recent Columbia University study of "violent tendencies" in youth.
Between 1994 and 1995, Columbia University tested the brain chemistry
of 34 African American and Latino boys with dosages of the chemical
fenfluramine, which has been linked to heart-valve damage in adults (it
is the "fen" in the diet drug fen-phen). The fenfluramine helped
scientists determine the levels in the boys' brains of the natural
chemical serotonin, which is suspected of triggering aggression in
humans. The boys were all chosen because they each had older brothers
who had been arrested for juvenile crimes.

Vera Hassner Sharav, director of the New York-based Citizens for
Responsible Care in Psychiatry and Research, condemned the Columbia
University violence study. "These experiments are not being conducted
to try to cure any condition within the patients," she says. "They are
inducing a condition solely for the purpose of studying it. It's
reprehensible."

Sharav says she does not know of any instances of electronic brain
experimentation going on in this country. "This is not to say yes or
no," she said in an interview from her New York office, "but that sort
of thing would not be published in the regular medical journals."

But Sharav says that scientific experimentation on uninformed citizens
involving drug manipulation of the brain is "extensive, probably being
done at about a dozen centers around the country." She also noted that
some of these experiments may have moved outside the country, where
they are next to impossible to track.

Alan Scheflin notes that another common complaint of the conspiracy
theorists, destruction of parts of their brains by radio waves, is
already practiced on a regular basis in such locations as Stanford
Medical Center. In a procedure called radiosurgery, doctors can destroy
cancerous brain tissue without incision by focusing laser beams on the
targeted area from three different locations. Clearly such operations
offer medical benefits, but Scheflin thinks they also present a danger.

"The more you learn how to cure people, the more you learn how to harm
them," Scheflin told a Dallas mind-control conference in 1994. "For
every step forward in relieving mental illness, you can take a step
backward in causing it. And so, for people whose interest is in control
of the mind, their data comes from how to help the mind, and so there
is no step forward that does not involve equally, in the hands of
malevolent people, a step backward."



Brain Deep


WHEN THE KATS FAMILY insists that electronic control devices are being
implanted in people's brains at the Stanford Medical Center, they are
not wrong.

One of the Stanford doctors doing such implants is Gary Heit, a tall,
athletic, dark-skinned man with a curly, salt-and-pepper beard, a quick
smile, an easygoing sense of humor and a r=E9sum=E9 in brain surgery that
stretches from Cornell University to UCLA to the University of Paris.
Deep inside brains, Heit attaches wires leading to sophisticated
electronic units the doctor has hidden under the skin of his patients'
chests. Passing a remote-control device over these chest units, Heit
can program electrical jolts to be sent to affect and disrupt certain
functions of his patients' brains. But contrary to what the Kats family
is claiming, Heit has no interest in performing his implants in secret.
In fact, like Count Rugen in The Princess Bride, Heit wants his
patients awake and aware during the entire procedure specifically so
they can know what's going on and can tell him how it feels.

But Gary Heit does not spy on his patients or try to direct their
thoughts toward evil purposes. His specialty involves using the Deep
Brain Stimulator (DBS), a pacemaker-type device doctors hope will
eventually be used to prevent chronic pain. For now, its function is to
help stop the tremors associated with Parkinson's disease.

Once in place, the DBS bombards the targeted brain cells with regular
bursts of electrical charges, disrupting their activity in some way and
effectively preventing the tremors. Although Heit admits that
scientists really do not know exactly why the procedure works, he says
that it is a tremendous step up from the general procedure of simply
cutting out the tremor-causing cells. "With surgery, if you make an
error and cause side effects, you can't correct it," he says.

Heit says that researchers are working toward a merger of a number of
areas of medicine he calls neuromodulation. "Work is being done right
now on limb prostheses that connect directly to your nerves and are
operated by the brain in a way similar to how actual limbs are
operated. We already have artificial cochlea that allow deaf people to
'hear' again. And visual prostheses--artificial eyes--are on the
horizon." He talks optimistically about the ultimate goal of deep brain
stimulation: to bring about the alleviation of chronic pain.

Still, despite these advances, the medical profession is a long way
away from the kind of mind-controlling chips that the IMPs are worried
about. For one thing, there are three distinct problems with being able
to broadcast thoughts into the human brain: the power source, the
reception and the nature of the broadcasts themselves.

An associate professor in the electrical engineering department at San
Jose State University, requesting anonymity because of work conflicts,
believes these problems make it next to impossible to conduct the kind
of mind control that the Katses and others suspect. "Presumably, you'd
be using a device inside the body that could broadcast over some
distance," he says, "so you'd need a sizable battery powerful enough to
do that. I don't know where you would hide it."

He says that broadcasting to and from a location inside the body from a
distance is not the same as the type of broadcasting done with heart
defibrillators or pacemakers. "These devices broadcast through the skin
using a magnetic field. It is useful at extremely short range, maybe a
couple of centimeters. But at a greater distance you'd have to up the
power, and it would have weird effects on televisions and cell phones
and anything else within the range. You couldn't limit the effect just
to the device you wanted to operate. To do that, you'd have to
broadcast in the electromagnetic bandwidth."

But the associate professor says this would cause even greater
difficulties.

"For want of a better term, the human body is like a big bag of salt
water, and that limits the electromagnetic frequencies that you can
efficiently use to broadcast. At high frequencies, you would get an
incredible loss of information as soon as you pass through the skin. At
low frequencies, you would retain all of your information, but you
would have to have a huge antenna to capture it and broadcast. And
exactly where would you mount this antenna surreptitiously inside a
human body?"

And that, says the associate professor, would be the least of the
problems in broadcasting to control someone's thoughts. "Because in the
final analysis," he says, "we don't know how to hook up thoughts."

Each of these three problems he considers "almost insurmountable at the
present time, given our present technology. You'd have to have a leap
in technology in each of them." In other words, the San Jose State
associate professor believes that the type of electronic mind control
envisioned by the IMPs is just not presently possible.



High-Tech Fiction


TEMPLE UNIVERSITY psychologist Evan Harrington believes these charges
of a grand government conspiracy to control peoples' minds are merely
proof of grand self-delusion, something at which human beings excel.

Harrington says conspiracy theories have been on the upswing since the
Watergate scandal shook Americans' faith in political parties.
Nowadays, they are fed by Internet forums. He says that he once became
a member of an Internet chat discussion list made up almost entirely of
40 to 50 people who believed that they were being mind-controlled by
the CIA. "Many of them would search the Internet each day for proof of
their hypotheses," he says. "Then they would introduce some new
incident to the group that evening, and other people on the list would
begin to include these things in their own memories. I mean, you would
literally watch false memories being created right before your eyes.
Other people would say, 'Yeah, that happened to me.' And they're not
faking it when they say they believe it. They really do."

Harrington believes that conspiracy theory should be viewed in the same
way that we view any prejudice. "It is a study of how ordinary thinking
can go wrong. People start out with preconceived notions. Stereotypes.
A hunch. And they begin to ignore all inconsistencies in the
information. They pay attention only to those things that confirm their
theories." He called such theories a logical extension of the malaise
people experience as they believe that they have lost control of their
society. "They feel they have been thrown about by the winds of
fortune--controlled by evil giants," Harrington says.

It is easy to dismiss the claims of the Kats family and the other
Implanted Mind People because--unless you are one who believes that
Agent Scully really got sucked up into that alien spaceship--the
technology they describe does not seem possible. And the Implanted Mind
People can offer no real proof of their theories except one: The fact
that they seem so crazy just proves that the government has succeeded
in making them look like they are, and therefore shows that what the
IMPs are saying must be true. Otherwise, why would the government go to
so much trouble to hide it? Does that sound crazy?

Still, there is one small nugget of rational wariness that rattles
around in the braincases of Implanted Mind People. If there were some
elements of the government somewhere working on some sort of secret
mind-control experimentation, would we know about it? Probably not.
After all, how many citizens knew about the Manhattan Project until the
mushroom clouds were rising over Hiroshima and Nagasaki? How many
people knew about the Tuskegee Experiment until 30 years after it
commenced? How many people knew about John Travolta before Men in Black
came out?

As for me, I'm not ready to believe you, Mulder, not just yet. But as
I'm walking down Santa Clara Street, I always make sure I take a quick
glance to check behind the ears of everybody I meet. And, just to be on
the safe side, I'm keeping these tonsils until the day I die.


>From the June 18-24, 1998 issue of Metro.


Copyright =A9 Metro Publishing Inc. Maintained by Boulevards New Media.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 25

                       Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'

From: James Easton <pulsar@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 23:02:35 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 12:14:43 -0400
Subject: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'


Regarding...

>Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 20:17:16 -0300
>From: Stanton T. Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Who is Jerome Clark?


Stanton wrote to Peter Brookesmith,

"Thank you, Duke, for  demonstrating all 4 of Friedman's laws
for Debunkrs, even if you only paraphrased #3 If you can't
attack the people, attack the data. 1.What the public doesn't
know , I am not going to tell them. 2. Don't bother me with the
facts,my mind is made up; and 4. Do your research by
proclamation, not investigation. It is much easier".


Stanton,

No doubt you'll be aware of the following:


  _Skeptics' UFO Newsletter_ by Philip J. Klass. #43, Jan, 1997
404 "N" Street, SW, Washington DC 20024          (C)  1997

   [SIX ISSUES $15 for US/CANADA, OVERSEAS AIR MAIL IS $20/YEAR]


==============================================================

_National Security Agency (NSA) Responds To SUN's Request And
Declassifies Revealing Portions Of its Top Secret "UFO
Documents"_


    Partially declassified copies of 156 Top Secret "UFO
documents" recently obtained by _SUN_, which the National
Security Agency refused to release in 1982 in response to a
Freedom of information Request (FOIA), reveal that NSA's refusal
was to keep secret that it was eavesdropping on Soviet air
defense radar sites -- providing vitally important intelligence
for our Strategic Air Command bomber missions. When NSA
intercepted messages from Soviet radars which reported tracking
an 'Unidentifiable object,' some NSA analysts translated that
into "Unidentified Flying Objects".  Because the Soviets used
balloons carrying radar reflectors to periodically check the
performance of their air defense radars and the alertness of
their radar operators, a NSA translator-analyst would add
"Probably a balloon" where it seemed appropriate.  After UFO
organizations, such as Citizens Against UFO Secrecy (CAUS),
began to make FOIA requests to CIA and NSA in the late 1970s to
release documents involving "UFOs," NSA translator-analysts
stopped using the term UFO for the balloon-borne targets.

    Most of the 156 Comint documents obtained by SUN report the
"Probably balloon" type of slow-moving UFO.  The reports,
covering the 21-year period from 1958 to 1979, are still heavily
censored to withhold the identity/location of the Soviet radar
sites whose communications NSA was able to intercept, the dates
and other still-sensitive military information.  Following are
several typical NSA "UFO" summary reports, with still-censored
material shown as [XXXX]. The first numbers show the time when
the "UFOs'" were being tracked by Soviet radar.

[...]


_NSA ALSO RELEASES GREATLY DECLASSIFIED COPY OF TOP SECRET
DOCUMENT WHICH UFO-LECTURER FRIEDMAN CLAIMS IS EVIDENCE OF
COSMIC WATERGATE_

    To enable U.S.  District Court Judge Gesell to render an
informed judgement on the agency's rationale for not releasing
its "UFO documents," NSA provided him with a 21-page affidavit
in October 1980, classified Top Secret, which described all of
its "UFO documents" and explained the reasons for not releasing
most of them.  After studying the document, Judge Gesell ruled
in favor of NSA.  Subsequently, in response to an FOIA request
to obtain a copy of this Top Secret court document, NSA released
a heavily censored version in which about 70% of the contents
were blacked out.  UFO-LECTURER STANTON FRIEDMAN INVARIABLY
SHOWS THESE MOST HEAVILY BLACKED-OUT PAGES DURING HIS LECTURES
AND TV SHOW APPEARANCES, CLAIMING THEY PROVE A GOVERNMENT UFO
COVER-UP.


_FRIEDMAN WITHHOLDS SIGNIFICANT INFORMATION_

    Friedman knowingly withholds from his audiences the fact
that the heavily censored version of NSA's 21-page court
document disclosed that the bulk of the documents being withheld
were "communications intelligence (COMlNT) reports." Friedman
also withholds from his audience the further NSA explanation
that these Comint reports "are based on [covertly] intercepted
communications of foreign governments." In the affidavit, signed
by a top NSA official Eugene F. Yates, he said "I certify that
disclosure of past and present foreign intelligence
communications activities of NSA revealed in the records the
plaintiff [CAUS] seeks would endanger highly valuable sources of
foreign intelligence."  FRIEDMAN NEVER MENTIONS THIS AS A
POSSIBLE EXPLANATION OR JUSTIFICATION FOR NSA'S ACTIONS.

    (When Friedman presented a paper at the 1981 MUFON
conference in Cambridge, Mass., it began with a statement
attributed to Albert Einstein: "The right to search for truth
implies also a duty; one must not conceal any part of what one
has recognized to be the truth.")

    Whereas only about 30% of the originally released court
document was readable (i.e., not blacked out), roughly 75% of
the contents are now visible in the recently declassified
version.  The new release reveals that the court document
carried the highest/most sensitive classification for Comint
documents: TOP SECRET UMBRA.

[...]


_NEWLY RELEASED COURT DOCUMENT EXPLAINS PREVIOUS BLACK-OUTS_

    The original court document cited a second non-Comint
document, written by the same NSA employee, which had been
released to CAUS with some deletions.  NSA's explanation for the
deletions was heavily blacked out in the copy of the court
document originally released but are now revealed in the newly
classified version.  (The portions of the court document
previously blacked out are underlined below.)

    "The second non-Comint document is a three page undated,
unofficial draft of a monograph with a four page appendix by the
same agency employee who authored the draft referenced in
sub-paragraph a, above....It is entitled 'UFOs _and the
Intelligence Community Blind Spot to Surprise or Deceptive
Data_'. In this document, the author discusses what he considers
to be a serious shortcoming in the Agency's COMINT interception
and reporting procedures -- the inability to respond correctly
to surprising information or deliberately deceptive data. He
uses the UFO phenomenon to illustrate his belief that the
inability of the U.S.  intelligence community to process this
type of unusual data adversely affects U.S. intelligence
gathering capabilities. Deletions in this document were made as
follows:

(1) All  of the title after UFO, _which addresses the perceived
shortcoming_ and all of paragraph one, which discusses the
_employee's perception of the negative implications of the
handling of the UFO phenomena as it demonstrates what he
believes is the less than optimum ability of the intelligence
community to process and evaluate highly unusual data_...

[...]

[End]



It's asserted that you may not fully have explained the
perspective of some documents released under the FOIA, i.e.,
that you neglect to acknowledge they are often evidence which
does not substantiate claims of a 'cover-up'.

As you know, one of your favourite 'party pieces' during debates
was to reference the aforementioned NSA documents and show the
'blacked out' pages or NSA submission which led to Judge Gesell
ruling in favor of the NSA.

For example, whilst in the UK, if I recall to participate in a
1996 Oxford University debate on the subject of UFOs, you
appeared on the nationally broadcast 'breakfast' TV program 'The
Richard and Judy Show' and when asked, "A lot of stuff you
believe is being covered up by various governments", responded:

"The National Security Agency, which is a major cover-up
agency... now this is a legal document, that's 75 percent
blacked out [document shown] and this is only the justification
to a Federal Court Judge for not releasing 156 UFO documents
they admit they found, but they wouldn't even show them to him".


Some six months after the publication of the above Skeptics' UFO
Newsletter, on 27 June, 1997, you appeared on the 'prime time'
UK ITV network broadcast 'Strange But True?' televised 'UFO'
debate.

In view of the fact the NSA documents and court ruling had since
been demystified, I wondered what you might replace them with.


On the question of a government 'cover-up', you claimed this was
"easy to prove" and cited as evidence:

"A group of us went after the NSA. We found that they had over
150 UFO documents. They refused to release them to us, and to
the Federal court Judge. We went after the CIA... 'Freedom of
Information', people think is the magic tool that unlocks all
the doors, it doesn't. Took me 5 years to get a released CIA UFO
document [document shown], on which you can read 8 words, not
very exiting words.

There's no question that they're withholding data, CIA, NSA,
DIA..."


Presumably you no longer displayed the NSA documents or
submission to the Federal Court, as both had largely been
explained.

Yet, you still implied that the original "150 UFO documents" had
never been released at all, either to yourself or the Federal
Court Judge.


We can perhaps also conclude you never had any intention to,
otherwise you wouldn't have mentioned the NSA documents or
Federal court proceedings, hardly now evidence of a 'cover-up',
in the first place.


I wouldn't have brought this up, other than it relates to your
recent comments to Peter Brookesmith, when you said of
"Friedman's laws for Debunkers":

"1 .What the public doesn't know, I am not going to tell them."


I wondered if you realised your own 'debunking' might be
considered somewhat selective, not necessarily faithful to the
facts and perhaps is seen to fall short of satisfying your own
criteria.

As Philip Klass suggests, does it ring hollow when you proclaim,
"The right to search for truth implies also a duty; one must not
conceal any part of what one has recognized to be the truth"?



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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 25

                  Ray Stanford [was: Re: Veteran Ufologist

From: bruce maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 23:45:25 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 12:34:21 -0400
Subject: Ray Stanford [was: Re: Veteran Ufologist


>From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose)
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 03:24:32 +0200
>Subject: Veteran Ufologist Becomes Successful Amateur Paleontologist

[see:
http://www.ufomind.com/cgi-bin/maillist-today.cgi?file=/ufo/updates/1998/jun/m23
-001.shtml --ebk]

>As many of you will know, Ray and Rex Stanford became famous in the
>50's for their alleged telepathic contact with aliens and the
>subsequent UFO sightings. Some of these were confirmed by photographic
>evidence, but one, which took place on November 6, 1954, is worth
>special notice, as it was confirmed by sworn statements by policemen.

Ray was active in ufology up through the '80's, but seems to
have "quieted down" since he married Shiela some 10 or so years
ago.

In April 1988 he publicized the results of his brief
investigation into the Ed Walters photographs. He appeared on TV
and in print calling them a fraud because the first 5 pictures,
Ray claimed, coul not have been taken on the day and at the time
Ed said they were taken. Ray's conclusion was based on a study
of the cloud imagery in the photos and upon the weather
conditions. Ray was so confident of his conclusion that he
publcly stated that if he was wrong he would exit the UFO field
of research.

WELL.....

The paper he wrote to support his conclusion was analyzed on the
same day that he published it and "went public" on TV etc. It
was discovered that Ray had used the WRONG DIRECTION for the
sighting line. Once the correct direction was picked and the
sky/clouds in the photos were compared with the weather, there
was no contradiction. Hence on the very next day Ray went public
again....to announce that "bad data" had led him to the wrong
conclusion and he admitted that the photos probably were taken
on the day and at the time Ed said. (He did not, however,
retract his opinion that the photos were a hoax, but now he had
no hard evidence on which to base his conclusion.)








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 25

                     Ufomind "Aiding Foreign Terrorists"

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 12:27:42 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 12:27:42 -0400
Subject: Ufomind "Aiding Foreign Terrorists"




From: Ufomind Mailing List Archive

http://www.ufomind.com/misc/1998/jun/d21-001.shtml


Miscellanea #104: Ufomind Aiding Foreign Terrorists, etc.

From: campbell@ufomind.com (Glenn Campbell, Las Vegas) Date:
Sun, 21 Jun 1998 16:20:40 -0800


----- (Reformatted by Moderator) -----

Ufomind Aiding Foreign Terrorists

Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 08:37:47 -0400 (EDT)
From: [Anonymous]
Commenting on: http://www.ufomind.com/area51/org/

By manipulating your constitutional rights, you have
simultaneously helped domestic and foreign terrorist groups to
be more fiscally efficient. You've done their targetting for
them. Look at all this work they do not have to spend money and
personnel on! They are grateful for Americans like you. You've
collected valuable intelligence for enemies, who WILL file and
perhaps use what you have disseminated. As far as the middle
finger from one of the guards, I think it was well provoked and
well deserved. The unwritten story is that this anonomous guard
probably was disciplined beyond charring. Managers really care
about political correctness these days. The other grand expose
that I think is just wonderful is the residential addresses you
have published. What is yours? Oops, I guess we won't go into
that! I wonder how you feel if one of the guards was victimized
as a result of your responsible journalism. Apparently this
government pays them well a couple of their residences have been
taken from them-foreclosures and such. You folks seem to have
caused alot of good people alot of stress. If you are in to
openess, tell us all about yourselves-YOUR most closely guarded
secrets, your banks account balances-your address and phone
number. I guess we won't go there either.

[ GC: The residential addresses he is referring to can be found
at http://www.ufomind.com/area51/org/security/#names_of_d along
with an explanation for why they were published.

The Cammo Dude with the upraised finger can be found at
http://www.ufomind.com/area51/org/security/gallery.shtml ]

================================================================


[other non-relevant messages snipped --ebk]

+--------------------------------------------------------------+
|                    UFOMIND MAILING LIST                      |
|       Supporting the World's Largest Paranormal Website      |
|       www.ufomind.com         Moderator: Glenn Campbell      |
|                                                              |
| Archived at: http://www.ufomind.com/misc/                    |
| Submissions to: ufomind@lists.best.com                       |
| "unsubscribe"/"subsingle" to: ufomind-request@lists.best.com |
+--------------------------------------------------------------+

RELEVANCE OF THIS MESSAGE: Housecleaning

<<<>>>





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 25

                    J. Bond Johnson's Fort Worth Pictures

From: Neil Morris <Neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 14:29:34 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 13:19:20 -0400
Subject: J. Bond Johnson's Fort Worth Pictures

Dear All,

I know this subject has caused a great deal of gnashing of teeth
of late, but I don't appologise for bringing it to the fore once
again. I too was quite taken aback when JBJ popped up making his
statements over the new reprints of his original pictures taken
in Gen Ramey's office, everybody knew it was the decoy balloon
debris, didn't they?. Well I thought it, but after a short and
informative exchange with JBJ he was good enough to mail me a
scan of a portion of the "Marcel" right shot which, out of
curiosity, I had a look through.

Since that time last week I regret my wife has become a bit of a
computer widdow<g>, it seems the more I look at this scan the
more I keep on finding. I know all you people who have looked at
these shots over the years will be after my guts about this but
there are items in these pictures that need questioning and
resolving, my own pet question is why are there symbols on one
of the beams that look remarkably like those seen in the AA
debris footage ?, and IF they are there on the original negs
what bearing does this place on the thorny question of the rest
of the AA footage.?

Well this is'nt a binary newsgroup<g> so I don't intend to
download megabytes of images to push my point, but I have made
all my images available for download on the Internet at:

http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/ftw-pics/index.htm

As this is my own personal workstation machine, it may be a
little slow, I would also ask that this address not be cross
posted at this time until my finding are either verified or
discounted. But before jumping down my throat please check out
the images yourself.

Steve Kaeser in the US has kindly set up a mirror of my site
here in the UK but his site may not carry any very recent
updates. I have infact placed some new images there today Steve.
Steve's mirror is at:

http://www.konsulting.com/steve/roswell/ros-images.htm

Happy symbol hunting.
Best Regards
Neil.

--
*        *         *         *         *         *         *         *
Neil Morris.       /101101101 Virtual Bumper Stickers Inc 10110101010\
Dept of Physics.   1                                                 1
Univ of Manchester 0                                                 0
Schuster Labs.     1  Computer Programmers DO IT with BITS of BYTES  1
Brunswick St.      0                                                 0
Manchester.        1                                                 1
UK.                \0101010110010110110010110101101011011110101011010/
G8KOQ


             E-mail: neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk

Roswell and Alien Autopsy Archive->   http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/
Dave Willetts Home Page->     http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/dave_willetts/
Mike Sterling Home Page->     http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/mike-s/
Tim Morgan Home Page   ->     http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/tim-m/

*        *         *         *         *         *         *         *





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 25

                             Re: New Jet or UFO

From: Sue Strickland <strick@H2Net.net>
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 23:43:43 -0600
Fwd Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 12:50:00 -0400
Subject: Re: New Jet or UFO


>Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: New Jet or UFO?
>From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
>Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 14:42:45 -0400
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>From: Sue Strickland <strick@H2Net.net>
>>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: New Jet or UFO?
>>Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 01:46:15 -0600

>Dear Mark,

I am sorry if I offended you. I very much appreciate the
thoroughness of the material you and Don L. have provided me.
Your work seems to be a careful, thorough compilation of UFO
reports. I didn't know you had compiled so much research on the
classifications and reports of UFOs. I especially like the
layout of the material and the graphics you provided.

After you read this message from me and note the responses from
other members on this list to it, you may also come to
appreciate my paranoia.

Enough. Down to work, back on task.

I still am not sure what I saw, but it does appear to be some
sort of unconventional aircraft, manufactured by other than
human intelligence, even if the craft was being piloted by
humans.

I make these wild  assumptions based solely on the information
that Don L. and you have given me. If a comparison were to be
made between the aircraft I saw and whatever known aircraft is
currently manufactured by humans, it would appear that we are "a
bit behind in technology."

I think I hear Don L. Did you say, "Duh"?

The descriptions, photos and drawings helped, but didn't quite
hit the mark. I did notice that the photo of the Boomerang
aircraft shared one thing in common with the aircraft I saw.
They both would have appeared to be "cloaked" If those lights
hadn't been placed where they were on the Boomerang.

I had a very difficult time seeing any outline of the Boomerang
in the photo, let alone any projections, or wings.

That is what I meant when I said in answer to your question
about the shape of the aircraft I saw, "try as I could to
concentrate on seeing the shape, or wings, I could not... there
was no value difference between the background and the vehicle."
And, according to the reports you provided me, I was closer than
any of the other reported observers. I did not see any rim of
lights around the aircraft, just that one blinking red light.
There was no sound, no smell, no rushing of air. I had no ill
effects.

I did not tell you what the 2 individuals looked like that I saw
in the aircraft, because some of it is vivid in my memory. The
one thing that disturbs me is that I cannot recall what their
eyes looked like. I do remember being surprised that their heads
seemed in proportion to the rest of their bodies...which from
past experience with Greys was not the case. I wanted to keep
that to myself. I was surprised to learn that most of the
descriptions given by the reported observers matched my
observations very closely.

If I were to guesstimate the height and weight of the occupant
who walked from the front to the rear of the aircraft, I would
say he was 130-135 lbs., and about 5'9". He had to bend his head
slightly to avoid hitting the top of the canopy. I could see
only the head and upper torso of the pilot (who was sitting
down) right up in front, within 2' of the canopy.

When the aircraft tilted back, I saw the angle and arc of the
dashboard, and I saw no controls, levers, buttons or lights.


Unfortunately, I could not tell from the drawing you provided
how big the aircraft was perceived to be in relation to the
occupants. The canopy in that drawing did not seem long enough,
compared to what I saw.

The one occupant I saw walking from the front to the rear went
about 10'-15' before he was no longer visible through the
canopy.

I would be interested in seeing the drawing you mentioned having
by Hillary Evans. I probably should draw you a picture too. I
used to be a pretty good artist. But when I try drawing UFO
stuff, it begins to look like I never took an art class...and
I'm embarassed to admit now that art was my initial major!

 --Sue>






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 25

                           Re: Radar and civilians

From: Jakes Louw <louwje@telkom.co.za>
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 08:47:35 +0200
Fwd Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 12:51:29 -0400
Subject: Re: Radar and civilians


>Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 12:37:18 -0500 (CDT)
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Secrets & Conspiracies

> I never implied that the military didn't have the better toys and
>couldn't keep their own data secret. The issue is whether the
>civilian toys --which aren't controlled by the military --are
>good enough for our purposes.

and

>From: Steve Burrows <S.Burrows@uq.net.au>
>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Are there radar tapes of mass sightings
>Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 22:48:26 +1000

>Or is there no such equipment on the market
>such as small, portable low range radar units?
>If not, lets look at building them! (I used to be a radar
>engineer before computers came along).

Yes, guys!

This is something that has puzzled me for ages: with the
availability of advanced technology in the private sector, as
well as the ex-Communist Bloc equipment that is now available
via mail-order, why are investigators struggling to obtain
verifiable evidence?

Unless certain investigators would prefer *not* to resolve the
UFO/ET issues, as their flow of income would be reduced by
Johnny-come-lately and his state-of-the-art GPS/Digital
VHS/thermal sight combo, coupled to an integrated broad-band
RADAR. (?)

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: if I was in a high-
incident area of UFO sightings and visitations, I'd *seriously*
be thinking along these lines.

Granny Smith testifying that she saw a pink ball with spinning
blue and red lights counts for zip, except when it comes to
statistical research.

If there are regular FT's seen over the North Sea, then damn it,
get out there with a flipping tripod and some technology! I know
for a fact that the UK guys can pick up Russian 3rd generation
passive IR nightsights and image intensifiers for as little as
200-300 Pounds!

I've got  contacts in the US, UK, and Turkey, that can source
the stuff for you.


Jakes E. Louw
louwje@telkom.co.za





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 25

                               Prior Restraint

From: Joseph Trainor <Masinaigan@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 08:29:32 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 13:15:28 -0400
Subject: Prior Restraint

Dear List:

Access to Kent Steadman's cyber-newspaper, Orbit, has been
blocked by parties unknown.

On Wednesday, June 24, 1998, I received an email from a UFO
Roundup reader who told me that his attempts to reach the
"Atomic Bomb on Cydonia?" news story in a recent issue of Orbit
had been blocked.

An attempt by Jon Hendrix to reach the Orbit story on an
anomalous spiked object heading for Earth was also blocked.
That issue of Orbit is (or used to be) at
http://www.eagle-net.org/phikent/orbit1a.html.

Another post by Norio Hayakawa of Citizens Against the New World
Order stated that computer access to all Eagle Net websites had
been blocked.

I myself attempted to access the "Spiked Object" Orbit story at
8:10 a.m., Thursday, June 25, 1998. I received this message:
"Forbidden: You don't have permission to access
/phikent/orbit1a.html on this server."

I urge other list members to try this site.  Also, if anyone has
Orbit editor Kent Steadman's email address, I would appreciate
having it.  I would like to interview him.

It appears to me that this is a clear-cut case of "prior
restraint" against Mr. Steadman's newspaper, an action which
violates the USA's First Amendment.

If the New York Times has one single ounce of integrity, it
would publish the contents of Orbit just as it did the Pentagon
Papers back in 1971.

But don't hold your breath waiting.

Meanwhile, here's my recommendation to wannabe censors of any
political persuasion: if you don't like the content of Orbit or
CNI News or UFO Roundup, don't read it.  But let other human
beings make up their own minds.

Joseph Trainor
Editor
UFO ROUNDUP







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 25

                 Re: Seeking Info on Wurtsmith 1975 Sighting

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 01:28:34 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 12:54:40 -0400
Subject: Re: Seeking Info on Wurtsmith 1975 Sighting


> From: Diana Botsford <diana@oznet.com>
> To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net>
> Subject: Seeking Info on Wurtsmith 1975 Sighting

> I'm looking for a reported UFO incident relating to Wurtsmith,
> Michigan in 1975.  I need to know the exact date or dates and
> what was believed to have happened.

> Much thanks in advance to anyone who can help.

> Diana Botsford
> Publisher/Forum Manager
> UFO Forum  http://forums.msn.com/ufo


Dear Diana:

This is almost certainly the Wurtsmith Air Force Base events of
30 OCT 1975 starting around 2210 hrs (10:10 PM).

"Night-lights" and odd silent "copters" were all over this SAC
base. Speeds estimated up to 1200 MPH! ( quite odd )

One unidentified unlighted 'copter' hovered over the weapons
storage area. As a SAC base, home base for the 40th Air Division
and the 379th Bomb Wing, you may imagine what sort of weapons
were stored there.

1 UFO departed to the West, while another went North. There were
numberous witnesses to these events.

Much more detail can be found in the following sources:

1) The UFO COVERUP (formerly titled Clear Intent) is available
in many libraries under either title. Authors: Lawrence Fawcett
& Barry J. Greenwood. My copy is Prentice Hall, 1984 ISBN
0-13-137712-4 Page 41.

2) CASEBOOK of a UFO INVESTIGATOR by Raymond Fowler, Prentice
Hall, 1981 ( paperback page 189. )

3) CUFOS: IUR journal, Volume 3 number 4.

Source #1 gives a lot of detail, including one witness who saw a
saucer shaped craft. This happened three nights after sightings
at Loring AFB in Maine.

Wurtsmith AFB is at about 83:23W - 44:28N, which is three miles
Northwest of Oscoda, MI.

Best wishes

-  Larry Hatch

Please email me directly for details on how to quickly look
up sightings like this 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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 25

                            'On The Bus To Utica'

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 98 11:19:04 PDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 18:39:02 -0400
Subject: 'On The Bus To Utica'

Hi, everybody,

The following poem by Carl Dennis appears in
the July 6, 1998, issue of The New Republic
(p. 44):

On the Bus to Utica

Up to a year ago I'd have driven myself to Utica
As I've always done when visiting Aunt Jeannine.
But since last summer, and the bad experience in my car
With aliens, I prefer bus travel. Do you believe
In intelligent peoples elsewhere in our universe
More advanced than we are who might be visiting?
Neither did I till experience forced me
To widen the narrow notion of the possible
Common to people like me who have faith in science.
It happened one night last fall after the Rotary meeting.
I'd lingered, as chapter chairman, to sort my notes,
So I wasn't surprised when I finally got to the lot
To find my car the only one there, though the shadows
Hovering over it should have been a tip-off
And the strong odor I had trouble placing --
Salty, ashy, metallic. My thoughts were elsewhere,
Reliving the vote at the meeting to help a restaurant
Take its first steps in a risky neighborhood.
So the element of surprise was theirs, the four of them,
Three who pulled me in when I opened the door
And one who drove us out past the town edge
To a cleared field where a three-legged landing craft
Big as a moving van sat idling. In its blue-green light
I caught my first good look of their faces.  Like ours,
But with eyes bigger and glossier, and foreheads bumpier
With bristles from the eyebrows up, the hair of hedgehogs.
No rudeness from them, no shouting or shoving.
Just quiet gestures signaling me to sit down
And keep calm as we rose in silence to the mother ship.
I remember the red lights of the docking platform,
A dark hall, a room with a gurney where it dawned on me
Just before I went under there would be no discussions,
No sharing of thoughts on the fate of the universe,
No messages to bring back to my fellow earthlings.
When I woke from the drug they'd dosed me with
I was back in the car, in the Rotary parking lot,
With a splitting headache and a feeling I'd been massaged
Hard for a week or two by giants.  Now I feel fine
Though my outlook on life has altered.  It rankles
To think that beings have reached us who are smugly certain
All they can learn from us is what we can learn
From dissecting sea worms or banding geese.
Let's hope their science is pure at least,
Not a probe for a colony in the Milky Way.
Do you think they've planted a bug inside me?
Is that why you're silent?  Fear will do us more harm
Than they will.  Be brave.  Speak out.


Tell me something you won't confide to your friends
Out of fear they may think you strange, eccentric.
If you're waiting for an audience that's more congenial,
More sensitive than the one that happens
To be sitting beside you now on this ramshackle bus,
I can sympathize.  Once I waited too.
Now, as you see, I take what's offered.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 25

                                 Re: Flaming

From: Max Burns <AlienHype1@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 15:11:29 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 18:48:33 -0400
Subject: Re: Flaming


Errol, and all readers of UpDates, over the last few months the
on going saga of the Sheffield Flying Triangle incident has, I
am sure entertained and bemused or puzzled most of the readers
of UpDates.With the back and forth between myself and Mr David
Clark.

There has been substantial amount's of mud slinging in both
directions with others throwing wood on the fire just when you
thought the flames were about to die out up they came again from
the dying embers of this row.

David has insulted me I have insulted him, his friends have
insulted me and I have insulted them. All in all, when all is
said and done this is not good for ufology.

It is certainly slowing down my research due to the slow speed
that I type at and the lenghy replies I have been posting, so
first of all.

I would like to congratulate David on his recent acolade from
his peer's, and to apologise for any of the personal comments
that I have made against his character.

Although I did not start this futile exchange of smart alec
comment's I certainly have assisted in its continuation.

However I still stand by my report, and statements of the
witneses contained in my report titled. The Sheffield Incident.

Obviously David has a different version of events to myself and
his is much easier to proove, that does not make it correct, The
razor is just to broad for me.

Since when has the subject of UFOs and Alien visitation and all
other aspects of ufology been open to the cut of the Razor.

If the Razor applied with the amount of people involved from the
hallowed hall's of acadeam, we by definition would have solved
the enigma wrapped up in a riddle by now. You see what im
getting at the Razor does not apply to this subject, or we would
have solved it by now.

The simplest explanation rule for this subject will not fit and
if the Razor wont fit you must aquit.

And I still require answers to questions I have raised, if any
of the readers of UpDates have personal questions about my
report then do not hesitate to contact me.

comments please.

PS, David you still need that check up from the neck up. (JUST
KIDDING)

Max Burns





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 25

                  Re: J. Bond Johnson's Fort Worth Pictures

From: Neil Morris <Neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 14:29:34 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 18:33:38 -0400
Subject: Re: J. Bond Johnson's Fort Worth Pictures

[LIST ONLY --ebk]

Dear All,

I know this subject has caused a great deal of gnashing of teeth
of late, but I don't appologise for bringing it to the fore once
again. I too was quite taken aback when JBJ popped up making his
statements over the new reprints of his original pictures taken
in Gen Ramey's office, everybody knew it was the decoy balloon
debris, didn't they?.

Well I thought it, but after a short and informative exchange
with JBJ he was good enough to mail me a scan of a portion of
the "Marcel" right shot which, out of curiosity, I had a look
through.

Since that time last week I regret my wife has become a bit of a
computer widdow<g>, it seems the more I look at this scan the
more I keep on finding. I know all you people who have looked at
these shots over the years will be after my guts about this but
there are items in these pictures that need questioning and
resolving, my own pet question is why are there symbols on one
of the beams that look remarkably like those seen in the AA
debris footage, and IF they are there on the original negs what
bearing does this place on the thorny question of the rest of
the AA footage?

Well this isn't a binary newsgroup <g> so I don't intend to
download megabytes of images to push my point, but I have made
all my images available for download on the Internet at:

http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/ftw-pics/index.htm

As this is my own personal workstation machine, it may be a
little slow, I would also ask that this address not be cross
posted at this time until my finding are either verified or
discounted. But before jumping down my throat please check out
the images yourself.

Steve Kaeser in the US has kindly set up a mirror of my site
here in the UK but his site may not carry any very recent
updates. I have infact placed some new images there today Steve.
Steve's mirror is at:

http://www.konsulting.com/steve/roswell/ros-images.htm

Happy symbol hunting.
Best Regards
Neil.

--
*        *         *         *         *         *         *         *
Neil Morris.       /101101101 Virtual Bumper Stickers Inc 10110101010\
Dept of Physics.   1                                                 1
Univ of Manchester 0                                                 0
Schuster Labs.     1  Computer Programmers DO IT with BITS of BYTES  1
Brunswick St.      0                                                 0
Manchester.        1                                                 1
UK.                \0101010110010110110010110101101011011110101011010/
G8KOQ


             E-mail: neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk

Roswell and Alien Autopsy Archive->   http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/
Dave Willetts Home Page->     http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/dave_willetts/
Mike Sterling Home Page->     http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/mike-s/
Tim Morgan Home Page   ->     http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/tim-m/

*        *         *         *         *         *         *         *





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 25

                     Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'

From: The Duke of Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 15:44:42 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 18:51:24 -0400
Subject: Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'


With the Duke's compliments:

>Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 23:02:35 -0400
>From: James Easton <pulsar@compuserve.com>
>Subject: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>Regarding...

>>Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 20:17:16 -0300
>>From: Stanton T. Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Who is Jerome Clark?

Thanks, James. And while you wait for me to gather a few
last items necessary to continue my musings on the identity
of Jerome Clark, here's one I prepared earlier:

Stan Friedman's "TOP SECRET/MAJIC" has a chapter on those
who have been negative about the MJ-12 documents, and in it
Friedman shares with us his Top Ten "debunker principles of
logic, gleaned from many years of contact with them". It is
interesting to compare these with Friedman's own practice
here and, occasionally, elsewhere.

1 What the public doesn't know, don't tell them.

If you are not persuaded by the evidence offered by the
proponents of a "Roswell incident" in 1947, you will need
extra help in believing in the MJ-12 papers. Egregious by
its absence from Friedman's book is any mention of Robert
Todd's devastating expose of the lies, fantasies and
half-truths habitually spun by the chief Roswell witness,
Major Jesse Marcel. Todd published his findings in December
1995. Friedman's book went to press no earlier than May
1996.

2 Don't bother me with the facts. My mind is made up.

Friedman makes much of the USAF Blue Book Special Report #14
which, he says is "never mentioned" by debunkers, but
"point[s] to the existence of extra-terrestrial vehicles".
SR14 does no such thing and, contrary to Friedman's claims
in hundreds of lectures, is quite explicit on the point
throughout. The famous chi-square tests that show that
"unknowns" in UFO sightings are apparently different in kind
from the "knowns" are not born out by the mirror graphs that
inspired them, and are conclusively qualified by two
comments by the authors.  Of the 12 best reports of
"unknowns", from which the SR14 authors attempted to
construct a generalized model of a flying saucer, they
remark: "...some of the cases of the KNOWNS, before
identification, appeared fully as bizarre as any of the 12
cases of good UNKNOWNS, and, in fact, would have been placed
in the class of good UNKNOWNS had it not been possible to
establish their identity." Earlier, the authors note, "The
danger lies in forgetting the subjectivity of the data at
the time that conclusions are drawn from the analysis. It
must be emphasized, again and again, that any conclusions
contained in this report are based NOT [sic] on facts, but
on what many observers thought and estimated the true facts
to be." This probably explains why most (but not "all")
debunkers don't bother greatly with SR14 - it supports their
case rather powerfully. And one wonders why the USAF would
bother to fund this exhaustive study (or the later Condon
Report) if it already had a crashed saucer and alien corpses
in its possession.

3 Absence of evidence is evidence of absence

In practice, Friedman actually follows the rule "absence of
evidence is evidence". In noting "there was a complete lack
of any valid evidence consisting of physical matter in any
case of a reported unidentified aerial object", SR14 echoes
Gen. Nathan Twining's letter of 23 September 1947,
reproduced by Friedman, which remarks on the "lack of
physical evidence in the shape of crash recovered exhibits
which would undeniably prove the existence of these
objects". Friedman maintains Twining (as an alleged MJ-12
member) knew about the above-top-secret Roswell evidence but
could not say so in a merely 'secret' letter. Given that
Twining says UFOs are "real and not visionary or
fictitious", wouldn't it make more sense for him to have
kept dead silent about physical evidence, if he knew it
existed?

4 Select the data that matches your conclusions

Observing this rule, Friedman chooses to quote linguist Dr
Roger Westcott as supporting the authenticity of the
Hillenkoetter briefing, without mentioning that Westcott
later qualified his conclusion so heavily that it amounted
to a retraction. Westcott is not an expert in forged
documents, another fact omitted by Stan. And see above under
Rules 1 and 2.

5 If at first a scenario supporting your theory crumbles
under the weight of the facts, try, try again to prop up
your theory with another scenario, then another

Friedman breaks this rule. He has stuck to his scenario over
both Roswell and MJ-12 through repeated assaults, and
despite the thinness of his evidence. Friedman has objected
to the wretched Santilli "autopsy" film, saying: "What I
cannot do... is tell you that this film was made by company
XYZ, on January 39, 1992 at this studio. I don't have the
genesis of it, but the burden [of proof] isn't on me...."
But with MJ-12 Friedman does carry the burden of proof. And
there is nothing in Top Secret/Magic that, in ufologist Ed
Stewart's words, "provides multiple, independent,
link-by-link, verified and direct chains of evidence that
establishes the genesis/provenance of the MJ-12 documents".

6 Hearsay testimony is acceptable if it supports you, but
unacceptable if it supports the other guy

Friedman accepts the hearsay (and second-hand) evidence of
Barney Barnett that a flying saucer crashed on the Plains of
San Agustin, but rejects archaeologist Dr Winfred Buskirk's
direct denial that he was anywhere near a crashed saucer in
New Mexico in 1947 on the grounds that he was obeying
military orders to remain silent. This logic however need
not apply to Major Jesse Marcel, for some reason.

7 It is important to be right, not truthful

Having been reminded by Friedman that he has in the past
sued those who criticize his work, I leave it to readers to
make up their own minds on this one. However it is curious
that Friedman makes no mention of the rumours circulating in
ufology about MJ-12 from 1980 onward, or the famously fake
"Aquarius" and "CIA/MJ-5" documents that were originally
produced in support of the MJ-12 papers. ( All were
presented as all coming from the same sources.) While there
is no reason to say Friedman is dishonest, he does not
always tell the whole of the truth in this book.

8 Loudly proclaim the truth of your testimony, especially if
no one else can check it

Friedman is meticulous about providing references most of
the time (it has to be said that his bibliography is a model
of its kind, with a full list of works by UFO skeptics).

9 Pepper your publications with references to as many
personal (i.e. unverifiable) interviews as possible

Friedman is no more and no less guilty of spicing his
writings with interview material and personal anecdotes than
anyone else, so it seems fatuous to hold this against his
opponents.

10  Don't mention references that don't support your theory.
The public won't know the difference.

See Rules 1 & 2 above. On BBSR14, Friedman makes no mention
of Allan Hendry's demolition of the statistics (although
Hendry does appear in the bibliography, and he does seem
genuinely perplexed by the activities of debunkers).
Friedman also seems to have missed Christopher Allan's
authoritative hatchet job on the claim that Canadian
scientist Wilbur Smith ever wrote anything genuinely "top
secret" (he "classified" his writings himself) or wrote
anything trustworthy on UFOs. Nor does he mention the
unsuccessful attempts to sell a fiction book based on MJ-12
by William Moore and a co-writer, believed by many to be
Richard Doty, before the MJ-12 papers were made public.

And so one could go on.

best wishes
Pickanit D. Moriarty
Less Bunk, More Bunkup






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 25

                     Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'

From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@connectmmic.net>
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 15:50:35 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 18:53:19 -0400
Subject: Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'


>Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 23:02:35 -0400
>From: James Easton <pulsar@compuserve.com>
>Subject: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>>Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 20:17:16 -0300
>>From: Stanton T. Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Who is Jerome Clark?


Now this is an interesting one.


>  _Skeptics' UFO Newsletter_ by Philip J. Klass. #43, Jan, 1997
>404 "N" Street, SW, Washington DC 20024          (C)  1997

>_National Security Agency (NSA) Responds To SUN's Request And
>Declassifies Revealing Portions Of its Top Secret "UFO
>Documents"_

[...]

>Partially declassified copies of 156 Top Secret "UFO
>documents" recently obtained by _SUN_, which the National
>Security Agency refused to release in 1982 in response to a
>Freedom of information Request (FOIA), reveal that NSA's refusal
>was to keep secret that it was eavesdropping on Soviet air
>defense radar sites

[...]

>    Most of the 156 Comint documents obtained by SUN report the
>"Probably balloon" type of slow-moving UFO.  The reports,
>covering the 21-year period from 1958 to 1979,

[...]

>    "The second non-Comint document is a three page undated,
>unofficial draft of a monograph with a four page appendix by the
>same agency employee who authored the draft referenced in
>sub-paragraph a, above....It is entitled 'UFOs _and the
>Intelligence Community Blind Spot to Surprise or Deceptive
>Data_'. In this document, the author discusses what he considers
>to be a serious shortcoming in the Agency's COMINT interception
>and reporting procedures -- the inability to respond correctly
>to surprising information or deliberately deceptive data. He
>uses the UFO phenomenon to illustrate his belief that the
>inability of the U.S.  intelligence community to process this
>type of unusual data adversely affects U.S. intelligence
>gathering capabilities. Deletions in this document were made as
>follows:

>(1) All  of the title after UFO, _which addresses the perceived
>shortcoming_ and all of paragraph one, which discusses the
>_employee's perception of the negative implications of the
>handling of the UFO phenomena as it demonstrates what he
>believes is the less than optimum ability of the intelligence
>community to process and evaluate highly unusual data_...


Please correct me if I am wrong:

1. Most of 156 UFOs reported in NSA documents refered to the same
type of object, e.g. soviet balloons;

2. From 1958 to 1979 (21 years) NSA should have gotten an average
of 8 reports a year;

3. For Intelligence Services (???), after 156 observations, the
damn Soviet Ongoing Balloons were still 'surprising information
or deliberately deceptive data'.  They expressed 'inability to
respond correctly'.

4. A distressed employee issued a document that should have been
entitled: 'Balloons and the Intelligence Community Blind Spot to
Surprise or Deceptive Data'

A true skeptic, unless he has embraced a religion, should be
skeptical about everything, espacially skepticism - why not? A
true liar lies about lies.  For the sake of skepticism then,
please solve some simple equations:

        156 - most = ?

        declassified - (patially declassified) = ?


Last one.  How can we come to the conclusion:

        156 * balloons = UFO phenomena

        ???


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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 25

                      Re: 'She Blinded Me with Science'

From: Sean Jones <Tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 20:05:39 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 18:41:49 -0400
Subject: Re: 'She Blinded Me with Science'


Hi Errol, Hi All

For those who are looking for more scientific blunders have a
quick look at these. -------


1) Renee Blondlot discovers the N-Ray - named after his
university (the University of Nancy). Many other prominent
scientists verify and extend his work before it is revealed that
the phenomenon is a result of self-deception.

2) Pons and Fleischman discover the cold fusion. Their work is
verified at several research centers, but these verifications
are eventually withdrawn when errors are found in each
experimental setup.

3) The precession of Mercury's orbit is attributed to a small
planet orbiting even closer to the sun. Several astronomers
actually observe this planet - called Vulcan, but it is
eventually revealed not to exist. Precession is eventually
explained by general (not special) relativity.

4) Astronomer Percival Lovell draws maps of the canals on Mars.
Better resolution of Martian surface reveals that his
imagination had "connected the dots" of random Martian features
into an elaborate pattern of non-existent canals.

5) Albert Einstein alters GR when he realizes that is predicts a
dynamic (expanding or contracting) universe. This modification
allows a static universe model, matching what was known of the
universe at the time. When Hubble detects expansion of universe,
Einstein disowns the modification and calls it his greatest
error.

6) Geologists reject theory of continental drift when first
proposed. Only when a plausible mechanism (plate techonics) is
proposed is the theory adopted.

7) Mendel's laws ignored for decades until rediscovered by other
scientists.

---
    In an infinite universe inifinitely anything is posible.
                       Sean Jones
 Homepage--http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Zone/1745/index.htm
         Research 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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 25

                     Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'

From: Stanton T. Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 22:48:23 -0300
Fwd Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 22:54:48 -0400
Subject: Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'


> Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 23:02:35 -0400
> From: James Easton <pulsar@compuserve.com>
> Subject: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

> Regarding...

> >Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 20:17:16 -0300
> >From: Stanton T. Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Who is Jerome Clark?

> Stanton wrote to Peter Brookesmith,

> "Thank you, Duke, for  demonstrating all 4 of Friedman's laws
> for Debunkrs, even if you only paraphrased #3 If you can't
> attack the people, attack the data. 1.What the public doesn't
> know , I am not going to tell them. 2. Don't bother me with the
> facts,my mind is made up; and 4. Do your research by
> proclamation, not investigation. It is much easier".

> Stanton,

> No doubt you'll be aware of the following:

>   _Skeptics' UFO Newsletter_ by Philip J. Klass. #43, Jan, 1997
> 404 "N" Street, SW, Washington DC 20024          (C)  1997

>    [SIX ISSUES $15 for US/CANADA, OVERSEAS AIR MAIL IS $20/YEAR]

<snip>

Sorry James, the facts are different.

As might be expected from PJK's 30 years of misrepresentation
this is a very inaccurate description of what I have said and
how I say it. In my longer college presentations I told the
story of the CAUS actions against the CIA and NSA and show every
page of the 21 page affidavit starting with very lightly
censored to heavily censored,  leading to laughter. Far more
dramatic than just showing a few blacked out pages. Then I tell
of the few very heavily censored CIA UFO documents it took me 5
years to get, (3 out of 14) which the CIA somehow didn't find
and the NSA did. One page has 8 readable words.

Just last week I received 3 CIA documents not previously
released. But the 3 oldies have not had one word added.

Once the new version of the affidavit became available, I noted
it, often showing it and note that the NSA supposedly "released"
all 156 UFO documents.. a line or 2 of each, now using whiteout
instead of black ink. I even added a footnote to my paper "UFOs:
Earth's Cosmic Watergate"1997. The new version is only 20%
blacked out. The 156 documents have been released, about 2 lines
per page - using whiteout not blackout."

Notice how PJK claims to be psychic and know what is on the 90+%
of the document pages whited out. In case people haven't noted
it,TV and debates, almost never give time for a detailed
explanation of anything... and Klass, when unchallenged, is





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 25

                             Re: Prior Restraint

From: "Donnie W. Shevlin" <dshevlin@primary.net>
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 20:38:09 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 22:44:25 -0400
Subject: Re: Prior Restraint

UFO UpDates - Toronto wrote:
>
> From: Joseph Trainor <Masinaigan@aol.com>
> Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 08:29:32 EDT
> To: updates@globalserve.net
> Subject: Prior Restraint

> Dear List:

> Access to Kent Steadman's cyber-newspaper, Orbit, has been
> blocked by parties unknown.

<snip>

He's correct. I have attempted many avenues to reach that
server/service. It's locked up tight. Below in the registration
information for the URL www.eagle-net.org. This is public
information that you may get with a URL name search. I x'd out
his phone and address. I would suggest contacting him first by
mail. If that is unsuccessful, email me and I will give to you
voice or snail mail addr.

I will attempt some other means of making it to his site.

DonnieS

"We're a speck of dust in a vast universe, still we think we're
something."


Registrant:
EagleNet (EAGLE-NET4-DOM)
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxx xxxxx, xx xxxxx
US

Domain Name: EAGLE-NET.ORG

Administrative Contact:
Jumper, Tod J  (TJJ14)  ToddyBear@HOTMAIL.COM
xxx-xxx-xxxx (FAX) xxx-xxx-xxxx
Technical Contact, Zone Contact:
Networks, FastDns  (GD184)  reg@FASTDNS.NET
(FAX) xxx-xxx-xxxx
Billing Contact:
Jumper, Tod J  (TJJ14)  ToddyBear@HOTMAIL.COM
xxx-xxx-xxxx (FAX) xxx-xxx-xxxx

Record last updated on 12-Aug-97.
Record created on 12-Aug-97.
Database last updated on 25-Jun-98 04:14:22 EDT.

Domain servers in listed order:

NS.HOST4U.NET                209.150.128.30
NS2.PROPAGATION.COM          209.150.129.2


The InterNIC Registration Services database contains ONLY
non-military and non-US Government Domains and contacts.
Other associated whois servers:
American Registry for Internet Numbers - whois.arin.net
European IP Address Allocations- whois.ripe.net
Asia Pacific IP Address Allocations- whois.apnic.net
US Military- whois.nic.mil
US Government- whois.nic.gov





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 25

                          Re: 'On The Bus To Utica'

From: Pamela Stonebrooke <galactic_diva@mail.telis.org>
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 18:28:17 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 22:32:45 -0400
Subject: Re: 'On The Bus To Utica'


>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Subject: on the bus
>Date: Thu, 25 Jun 98 11:19:04 PDT

>Hi, everybody,

>The following poem by Carl Dennis appears in
>the July 6, 1998, issue of The New Republic
>(p. 44):

Many thanks to Carl Dennis.  We owe him our gratitude not only for his
eloquence but also for his courage.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 25

                              Filer's Files #25

From: George A. Filer <Majorstar@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 21:16:55 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 21:56:54 -0400
Subject: Filer's Files #25

Filer's Files #25-1998 MUFON Skywatch Investigations
George A. Filer,    MUFON Eastern Director,
June 25, 1998, Majorstar@aol.com  609 654-0020

Senator Barry Goldwater, a retired Air Force Reserve Brigadier General and
pilot with many decades of flying experience, recently passed away, but should
not be forgotten. He is quoted as saying, "I certainly believe in aliens in
space.  They may not look like us, but I have very strong feelings that they
have advanced beyond our mental capabilities."  He said, he was refused
permission to check the Air Force' files on UFOs.  "I think some highly secret
government UFO investigations are going on that we don't know about--and
probably never will unless the Air Force discloses them."  He said, that he
put faith in the reports of the Air Force, Navy, and commercial pilots who
reported instances where a UFO would fly near them--right off their plane's
wing--and then just zoom away at incredible speeds.  "I remember the case in
Georgia in the 1950's of a National Guard plane going after a UFO and never
returning.  And I recall the case in Franklin, Kentucky, when four military
planes investigated a UFO.  One of them exploded in midair and no one knows
why." Thanks to AGETI Archive editor 9A4AG.

NEW EYGPT, NEW JERSEY

Thursday night, July 19, 1998,  a father was annoyed by the unusually loud
noise of about eight helicopters flying low over the town rattling the windows
of his home.  New Egypt is only a few miles from McGuire Air Force Base where
C-141s, four engine cargo aircraft, and KC-10 tankers regularly fly low over
his home.  Several neighbors came out to complain about very loud helicopter
noise and their dishes shaking.  He stayed out a few minutes with his dog
trying to discern where the helicopters had gone, but none were visible.
There was a low cloud layer so he thought they might be above the cloud layer.
Three lights were moving back and forth for ten minutes, so he called his
entire family out and the neighbors across the street to see the show.  The
lights It oscillated in the sky for several minutes.  He stated it reminded
him of spot lights being moved through the sky, but there were no light beams
shooting up from the ground.  The lights would dim and change colors.  The
lights were red to pink, blue, and white.  It was the wildest thing he�s seen
in his whole life.  The lights were to the north of New Egypt away from the
base.  Several miles to the north, he noticed strange colored lights hovering
in the sky, that he estimated at the size of a large house.  There were three
separate lights changing colors in the sky.  They flew together and became one
and then disappeared by shooting off to the west at incredible speed.
Virtually, everyone heard the helicopters that this is the first time they
have heard this late at night.  Editor�s note:  I called Mc Guire Public
Affairs Office and they confirmed that there had been several reports of
lights that shot off quickly, and that Air Force aircraft were not
responsible.

Evelyn and Russell M. Galson report a sighting on Wednesday, June 17, 1998, at
7:20 PM on Hurfville Crosskeys Road in Turnersville, NJ.  The weather was
overcast and humid.  Sunset was about 40 minutes away.  Evelyn said, "As Russ
and I went past a construction site I noticed an object just below tree level
about 30 feet above the ground.  The object was unusually white.  At arm�s
length it was two inches long.  It was shaped like a thick boomerang and had
one bright white light.  It would actually be on the left of the object
towards the end.  The UFO�s wing span was about fifty feet long and eight feet
thick.  We couldn't pull over to observe the object because of traffic, so we
went around to the Glassboro--Williamstown road.  When we got to the other
side, which didn't take us long, it was no longer there.  Thanks to Evelyn
Galson.

On Tuesday, June 16, 1998, in Paramus, NJ at 8:32 PM, Vinny Polise and another
witness saw two black orbs or spheres traveling from south to north. The UFOs
were both solid black or brown and were traveling at a slow rate of speed.
They were high up in altitude.  They were going in and out of the clouds.  The
first one appeared and move slowly, then the second was about two miles behind
the first one and several minutes behind.  Both UFOs moved at the same speed
and same pattern of flight.  Both objects were small and there were planes in
the area, but neither paid attention to the other. Thanks to Vinny Polise,
Ufocontat@aol.com.

FLORIDA

There was a sighting in the Pensacola/Gulf Breeze area on Saturday night, June
20, 1998, around 9:30 PM according to Ray Pollock.  It was a craft hovering
over the parking lot of the new Wal-Mart on Highway 98, east of Gulf Breeze.
There were 10 to 15 witnesses based on calls to the sheriff's office or Gulf
Breeze Police.  Attempts are being made to contact as many of these witnesses
as possible.  It is reported that lights from the parking lot actually
illuminated a portion of the craft as well as its own lights.  Channel 3, the
local TV station reported the story, but there are no pictures as far as we
know.  Details are sketchy and when more is known it will be posted on the
Gulf Breeze Website http://www.gulfbreezeufos.com  Thanks to Ray Pollock
UFOPOLLGB.  Editor�s Note: John Thompson ISUR/MUFON checked with Manager Joe
Shirley at the Wal-Mart who said he had heard that some Wal-Mart customers
reported the sighting to the Santa Rosa Sheriff�s Department.  His employees
had not seen anything.  Joe also talked to Captain Collier, who said that none
of his deputies  saw the UFO and that Public Affairs Officer was handling all
inquiries. (850-983-1100).

MICHIGAN

Jeff Westover reports "UFO sightings are on the increase in Michigan's 'thumb-
area,' seemingly centered on Marlette and Brown City."  Last night's odd amber
lights (common UFOs to this area) made another appearance.  On June 17, 1998,
high altitude star-like objects zigzagged across the sky and local residents
heard "high pitched whirring" sounds as neighborhood animals became agitated.
These are just the latest events in rural Sanilac, Tuscola, Lapeer, St. Clair
and Huron counties (the 'thumb area').  This latest flap seems to have begun
in late November 1997, when a Genesee County Deputy Sheriff drove under an
unmoving and massive lit object on US-23 five miles south of Flint.  He
reported his sighting to Michigan MUFON.  A few days later, December 1, 1997,
a Marlette man watched a massive lit object hovering motionless above Peck,
Michigan in southern Sanilac County.  It vanished into thin air when two
airplanes, possibly military approached it.  On December 13, 1997, a southern
Sanilac County Police Officer, along with his partner and an entire family,
witnessed a UFO hovering over Brown City for upwards of an hour before it
departed.  Official police documents show this event as actually occurring.
They further show Selfridge the Air National Guard in Mount Clemens, Michigan
advising the police dispatcher "that it was probably a helicopter that was
sighted and there was nothing much that could be done from that end."  I've
spoken to one of the two police officers and I can tell you that the sound of
his voice alone told me that he was witness to something other than a
helicopter.  Two nights later, on December 15, 1997, a Marlette, Michigan
woman watched a huge silent saucer, with round lights on the bottom of the
craft.  Each light was much larger than the full moon.  It drifted slowly
above her home.  Thanks to Peter Gersten CAUS. and Jeff Westover.

OHIO CIGAR

On Monday, June 14, 1998, Steve Neeley reports three witnesses observed a very
shiny cigar shaped UFO make a 90 degree turn at 8:15 to 8:30 PM.  We were at
the Marion Fish and Game Club when we noticed an object at an altitude of 3000
to 5000 feet.  It was very shiny, which was strange as the sun was very low on
the horizon.  Kyle using his rifle scope (3 by 9) looked at the object and
asked me to look using my scope.  The object was cigar shaped very shiny
metallic looking like a mirror.  We estimate the size at 65 to 80 feet in
length.  We watched it travel north for about five minutes, when it then made
a 90 degree turn to the east and moved away at a high rate of speed.  The
entire event lasted about 6 to 7 minutes.  My son Doug also witnessed the
craft.  Thanks to Steven J. Neeley, Director Ohio Skywatch International
http://www.geocities.com/soho/5782  stneeley@bright.net.

INDIANA

Kenny Young reports that on June 20, 1998, in Valparaiso,  Mike C. his
daughter 12, and her friend aged 13, observed two Unidentified Flying Objects
between 12:00 and 12:30 a.m. CDT.   The northwestern Indiana city of
Valparaiso is 45-miles southeast of Chicago, Illinois.  Both sightings lasted
about five minutes.  The objects appeared as 'star-like' lights without
running lights.  The first sighting was reportedly of one object moving
quickly in a southerly direction before making an abrupt turn upwards or to
the north, then vanishing from sight.  The second sighting was made about ten
minutes later.  This sighting also involved an object that  appeared as three
star-like lights, flying line-abreast.  The speed of the second object was
faster than the first object.  It was moving west before making an abrupt turn
towards the south, finally disappearing.  The E-mail correspondent stated: "My
daughter is very intelligent, is a member of the National Junior Honor
Society, and knows quite clearly what airplanes look like, both in daytime and
night conditions.  She has stated emphatically that these were NOT airplanes.
"No sound was reported in conjunction with the sightings and no other
witnesses have been located.  Kenny Young-- UFO Research
http://home.fuse.net/task

UFO SPOTTED OVER IN DES PLAINES, ILLINOIS

On Sunday, June 14, 1998, at 10 p.m., Susan G. was working at the computer at
her home in Des Plaines, when she noticed a strange object beyond her window.
Des Plaines, a Chicago suburb is famous as the home of the first McDonald�s
Restaurant.  "The UFO was moving from south to north," Susan reported.  "I was
facing east when I saw it between 30 to 50 degrees above the horizon."  She
described the UFO as a discoidal object with "multi-colored flashing and
blinking lights around its edges."   It was flying near Des Plaines River Road
and Route 294, for about four seconds before it passed behind a building.  It
seemed to be round and flat, like a pancake with a dome in the middle.  I was
alone at the time, shutting down my computer. UFO Roundup Vol#3 25, June 21,
1998, Joseph Trainor editor.

ARE PLASMAS CAUSING UFO, CROP FORMATIONS AND ABDUCTION REPORTS?

Webster�s defines plasmas as high temperature ionized gases composed of
electrons and positive ions in numbers that are electrically neutral.
Confinement of plasma for thermonuclear reactions is achieved by magnetic
fields.  Let�s look at some apparent unrelated facts that start to build a
hypothesis.
Eve Frances Lorgen writes: I have a question concerning the globe or orb
shaped UFO seen in several locations near by air traffic areas.  Has there
been any air collision, or accidents in these vicinities where numbers of
people died?  Has any group of people who died from other reasons?  Editor�s
Answer:  These plasmas or orbs have been observed in close proximity to
several airliners.  Aircrews such as the Swiss Airlines 747 reported a near
miss August 9, 1997.  In years past, there have been unexplained accidents
that may have involved these plasmas or UFOs hitting or coming too close to an
aircraft.  Aircraft instruments have been influenced and the high electrical
or atmospheric forces generated by these plasmas could adversely effect an
airliner.

Small orbs and plasmas have also been video taped within abductee�s bedrooms.
These plasmas float around homes or cars, where no apparent high voltage
electrical magnetic forces seem to exist.  The plasmas often seem tied to
microwave energy and may operate with an apparent intelligence.  They may move
closer, respond to blinking lights and the like.  Some plasmas may be caused
by the tremendous stresses within the Earth itself.  Sometimes they are
referred to as Earth Lights, and are often seen before and during earthquakes.
The human mind and central nervous system are very susceptible to being
adversely effected by these plasmas.  We are just starting to understand some
of the ramifications of electromagnetism on the body and our minds.  The vital
spark of life itself seems electromagnetic in nature.  The Earth itself is a
giant electrical dynamo and a good conductor of electricity surrounded by a
good dielectric called our atmosphere.  Higher up above our atmosphere is the
ionosphere that is also a good conductor of electricity.  One only has to
watch an electrical storm to see the tremendous electrical power at work.  It
is know this power formed into lightning can kill or maim us.  Our minds and
bodies are finely tuned electrical systems.  The currents flowing through our
bodies are measured in nanoamperes and microvolts, and we can be disrupted by
comparatively small amounts of the electrical energy around us.  As you read
this material thousands of small electrical currents are being switched off an
on in your body and brain.  Did you feel it?  We are very susceptible to
electropollution in the US due to our advanced industrialization and few laws.
UFO sightings and abductions are particularly high in the US.  I wonder if
there is a connection?  Almost anywhere there can be surprisingly strong
electrical plasmas and microwaves that have been generated by storms, within
the earth or from man made machines like radars and radios.  These machines
can cause illness such as Microwave Sickness whose symptoms are low blood
pressure and slow pulse.  The plasmas can take any shape or color.  Our brains
will attempt to make sense of any object in front of our eyes.  We can
interpret these electrical plasmas as lights, aliens, ghosts, craft  or UFOs.

CROP CIRCLES AND DRAGONS

The United Kingdom�s  Marlborough-Pewsey Gazette & Herald of June 4, 1998. The
mystery continues into the formation of strange shapes imprinted on the
countryside as more crop circles appear in the Marlborough area.  Crop
formations appeared on land at West Overton, Winterbourne Bassett and
Lockeridge last week to the amazement of villagers, tourists and enthusiasts,
but to the despair of farmers.  Land owners at West Overton have put up signs
asking crop circle viewers not to enter the fields and cause more damage than
that done by the elusive forces.  There is no definitive explanation for the
formations that have become an annual addition to the summer landscape --and
not only in Wiltshire. British fields hosted 250formations last year, 40 of
them in Wiltshire. Germany, Italy and Israel have also had several this year.
But Francis Blake, co-ordinator of the Wiltshire Crop Circle Study Group, says
the latest formations at Lockeridge and West Overton could relate to the
ancient belief in ley [earth energy] lines.  She said the 200 foot formation
at Lockeridge has been described by researchers as a dragon shape on lines
also known as dragon energy.  Mrs Blake says she cannot explain the
formations, but their complexity convinces her they are not man made.  "When
they are small circles, badly made I am as cynical as the next person," she
said.  "But these are not just a five minute job. "She said a good bench mark
was an experiment by the Soil Association to make a crop circle in 1993, which
took nearly a month to plan and a day to make.  The complex dragon and West
Overton circles formations seem to have appeared overnight, with no reports of
unusual activity in the area beforehand. Thanks to Gerry Lovell. Far
Shoreshttp://www.farshore.force9.co.uk.

Editors note:  Recent sampling of the crop formation and soil samples indicate
high Electro magnetic and microwave effects have occurred within these fields.
One farmer in England who hired guards to watch his fields to prevent hoaxers
from hurting his crops.  While under guard, the crop formations developed in
30 seconds to a maximum of five minutes.  Photographs of the fields often show
cloudy white shapes, colored lights or other odd phenomenon.  Certain fields
with crop formations contain unusual semi-molten iron that may be related to
meteor dust.  Plasmas or strong electrical fields may be forming the crop
formation designs about this iron like dust.  The crop formations indicates
uniform layered effects and constant forces are operating.  The intricacies of
the designs indicate an intelligence is at work.  The plasmas themselves may
posses a type of intelligence or the plasmas are being used by higher
intelligence to form the intricate patterns.  Silver fluorescence found on
some abductees has also been present in the crop circles.  Plasmas can be made
in a laboratory using Tesla Coils.  There are strong indications all these
strange occurrences are tied together and represent forces we are only
beginning to understand.  Our computers operate with electricity a type of
plasma.  Much of our world would come to a stop without it.  Are these plasmas
trying to tell us something?  Those crop formations look like communication to
me.

SILVER FLOURESCENCE OR GLOW MARKS TIED TO ABDUCTIONS

Eve Frances Lorgen  writes:  "I know of another female abductee who has very
odd foot problems.  Both feet were terribly affected, cracking and oozing and
having great difficulty healing.  She thinks it's from some alien experiment
or strange auto-immune disorder." Answer:  I suggest she have her blood tested
for abnormalities.  There is evidence that Electro magnetic radiation can
cause harmful effects on the body.  If abductees are taken into space it's
logical that they suffer the effects of space sickness.  If plasmas are
causing this they could suffer from the effects of plasmas.  It is apparent an
advanced technology will better understand how to use these plasmas.

Joel Carpenter writes, I just wanted to mention that ordinary "baby powder"
fluoresces like crazy under black light.  Before people start wondering if
they were taken apart and stitched back together like Frankenstein by the
Greys, maybe the investigator should ask them if they used Johnson's Baby
Powder or similar, that day.  Test samples of perfumes, skin cremes,
ointments, antiperspirants.  Many will glow.

In a side note, hypnotists often use a strobe light flashing at alpha-wave
frequencies to ease a person into a trance.  There is some research that once
in this state of hypnosis the brain can receive telepathic signals.
Theoretically, the person may read thoughts and be guided telepathically by
the hypnotist.  There is in effect a kind of mind control occurring without
either the hypnotist or his subject being aware of it happening.  One of the
dangers of hypnotism is considered to be confabulation on the part of the
subject.  Now we can speculate that the hypnotist is actually putting thoughts
into the head of their subject.

MOST UFO SIGHTINGS NEAR WATER

New York MUFON�s Larry Clark reports that he has plotted the location of UFO
sightings throughout the country.  It came about after reading a statement in
J. Vallee that suggested sightings concentrations were in rural areas in the
center of the U.S.  That didn't seem right (or perhaps current) so I decided,
since the UFOINFO reports were available, to plot two years worth using a
large map of the U.S. and Canada.  Using Tripmaker I located each place and
put a yellow colored pin in for each sighting.  Where there were numerous
concurrent sightings, or many within a short time and area, I indicated it
with a red pin.  It certainly favored the general coastal areas and Great
Lakes over the interior, except for SW Colorado, SW Ohio, and Phoenix. Of
course this was an exploratory, and not a scientific project.  The
concentrations in SW Colorado and SW Ohio may simply be because there is
better organization, monitoring, and reporting of sightings in those areas.
Southwest Ohio and Kentucky were noted as a concentration area even in the
fifties.  The east-west coast concentrations may just be because of population
density.  Even so, I think this was a useful exercise, and the method would be
sound if there were a way of getting all the reports for the area being
monitored.  And, if we were getting the total of reports in the New York
area, I think it would be a useful task at a state or regional level.  I have
reviewed a huge number of published reports.  I still think there is something
to the large number of reports to UFOs near, entering, and exiting bodies of
water.  I heard recently there is increased sightings in the St. Lawrence
river and Montreal area. Thanks to Larry Clark NY MUFON.

Editor�s Notes: Larry�s plotting agrees with my observations that most UFOs
are seen near water.  Ron Hannivig reports he has two credible, separate
reports of UFOs diving into small lakes up in the Thompson/Ararat Township,
Pennsylvania area back in the late 1970's.  He also researched and documented
a November 1974 incident in Carbondale, PA.  I personally saw one come out of
a small lake in 1980.  Can plasmas operate under water?  In past years,
thousands of people visited  Wanaque Reservoir in North Jersey to watch  UFOs
come in and out of the water.  They had beautiful blinking spinning lights
kind of like plasmas or UFOs.

Please send your reports and letters to George A. Filer at 609 654-0020.
The 29th Annual MUFON Conference will be held this weekend in Denver, Colorado
at the Renaissance Denver Hotel, 3801 Quebec Street.  Call 1800-HOTELS-1 for
reservations.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 25

                     Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 98 21:02:46 PDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 23:01:50 -0400
Subject: Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'


> Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 15:44:42 -0400
> From: The Duke of Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com>
> Subject: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

> With the Duke's compliments:

> >Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 23:02:35 -0400
> >From: James Easton <pulsar@compuserve.com>
> >Subject: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'
> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

> >Regarding...

> >>Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 20:17:16 -0300
> >>From: Stanton T. Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Who is Jerome Clark?

> Thanks, James. And while you wait for me to gather a few
> last items necessary to continue my musings on the identity
> of Jerome Clark, here's one I prepared earlier:

That's right, guy -- keep it personal.  I should have thought,
however, that you already have your hands full translating
Klass' sentences into consensus-reality sentiment.

> 10  Don't mention references that don't support your theory.
> The public won't know the difference.

> Hendry does seem genuinely perplexed by the activities
> of debunkers).

In your dreams, buddy.  Hendry, who was a friend of mine and an
all around good guy, was not "perplexed" by the debunkers and
their activities in the slightest.  He saw right through them and
had nothing but contempt for them.  Go to the bibliography of The
UFO Handbook and try to find any references therein to Klass and
Menzel.  Their absence is not accidental.

> Friedman also seems to have missed Christopher Allan's
> authoritative hatchet job on the claim that Canadian
> scientist Wilbur Smith ever wrote anything genuinely "top
> secret" (he "classified" his writings himself) or wrote
> anything trustworthy on UFOs.

The name was Wilbert, not Wilbur, and the last word on
this fascinating, complex, and exasperating man does not
belong to Christopher Allan.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 25

                             Re: Prior Restraint

From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 23:24:47 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 23:29:49 -0400
Subject: Re: Prior Restraint


>From: Joseph Trainor <Masinaigan@aol.com>
>Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 08:29:32 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net

>Dear List:

>Access to Kent Steadman's cyber-newspaper, Orbit, has been
>blocked by parties unknown.

>An attempt by Jon Hendrix to reach the Orbit story on an
>anomalous spiked object heading for Earth was also blocked.
>That issue of Orbit is (or used to be) at
>http://www.eagle-net.org/phikent/orbit1a.html.

>I urge other list members to try this site.  Also, if anyone has
>Orbit editor Kent Steadman's email address, I would appreciate
>having it.  I would like to interview him.

>Joseph Trainor
>Editor
>UFO ROUNDUP


Have you tried this one:
http://members.aol.com/phikent/orbit/orbit.html

Sue






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 25

                          Re: Occam's Razor and UFO

From: Melanie Mecca <natural.state@erols.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 22:45:00 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 23:25:43 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFO

> Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 11:38:10 -0300
> From: Stanton T. Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

<snip>

> You are wasting people's time with theoretical
> claptrap.  The simplest explanation for the best observations(by competent
> observers, investigated by competent investigators like Jim
> McDonald, Bruce Maccabee, John Schuessler etc) whose appearance,
> texture, protuberances clearly indicate they were manufactured,
> and whose behavior-- high speed and no speed, sharp turns, lack
> of noise, exhaust, visible external engines indicates they were
> not made on earth, because if they had been in the 1940s, 1950s,
> we Earthlings would be using them as military craft. They would
> make wonderful weapons delivery and defense systems, able to fly
> circles around anything we have been flying.

> Since we are still building F-16,17,18, MIG 29, Mirage 5 etc,
> what was built back then wasn't built by us, therefore it was
> built at some Extraterrestrial location. Of course that doesn't
> answer all the questions. It just says "not made here". Occam's
> razor applies. ET vehiciles. Have any of you splendid writers
> done field investigations, visited archives, had a security
> clearance? Talk is cheap.

> Stan Friedman

Cheap indeed - mental %$#@!#&(*&% is more like it.  Put the
prose-loving commie pinko, spliff-toking, Wisdom of Insecurity,
dis-information specialists of the alien advance force in their
place!

(- ahem -) I've been wondering for some time what the real motive
underlying the protestations of the rabid "non-ETHers" could be,
and I think I've finally figured it out.  IF you can explain, not
the vehicles (red herring that masks the fearfulness underlying
this position), but the occupants, as solely multi-dimensonal
entities, and maintain that they've always been around as
fairies, wights, sprites, gnomes, demons, spirits, or whatever,
THEN you can believe that our tomorrows will be much like our
todays, and the millenia of yesterdays.  This hypothesis frees
you of the burden of assimilating impending CHANGE.  You can
laugh at the worries of Dave Jacobs, ignore the growing number of
individuals coming forward with abduction experiences, and
continue to believe that since there are no ETs, we will not be
troubled, because after all, the fairies didn't cause the
collapse of Celtic society, did they?  You can believe that this
planet will just keep rolling along for centuries with no major
unforeseen disruptions to its prime species, the crown of
creation, from those outside of our planet and (the kicker) Out
of Our Control!  GOTCHA!

Ok, flame on if you like.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 26

                  P1947: UFO Book/award (publicity release)

From: Tom Tulien <AFSDialog@AOL.COM>
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 23:34:48 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 00:25:36 -0400
Subject: P1947: UFO Book/award (publicity release)

http://www.gale.com/gale/pressroom/ufoaward.html

"A superb book!"
=97 Judge from the Benjamin Franklin Awards

The UFO Book by Jerome Clark
Wins Benjamin Franklin Award

June 1998, Detroit =97 Visible Ink Press is proud to announce that The UFO=
 Book:
Encyclopedia of the Extraterrestrial by Jerome Clark won the 1998 Benjamin
Franklin Award in the Science/Environment category. The Benjamin Franklin
Awards, which celebrate excellence in editorial and design in book=
 publishing,
are sponsored by the Publishers Marketing Association. In the same category,
The Handy Space Answer Book=99, one of the two runners-up, also represented
Visible Ink Press.

Judges of the Benjamin Franklin Awards come from all areas of the industry,
including major newspaper and trade media reviewers, bookstore and library
buyers and reviewers, non-competing publishers, artists and writers who=
 serve
the industry.

The UFO Book ($19.95, Visible Ink Press, published October 1997) is an
authoritative encyclopedia that probes the UFO controversy from every angle.
As one judge of the Benjamin Franklin Awards wrote:

"The UFO Book is an exhaustive, non-judgmental look at the history of
unidentified flying objects in the world. The writing is top-notch and clear
and every detail was obviously painstakingly planned out."

Aimed at the layperson, The UFO Book focuses on crucial UFO cases,=
 phenomena,
theories, beliefs, research projects, personalities and hoaxes, thereby
covering virtually every important aspect of the UFO story. Also included is=
 a
helpful resource section that guides the explorer to related publications,
associations and Web sites. Laid out in an encyclopedic A-Z format, entries
are detailed, insightful and carefully approached, always striving for
balanced coverage that allows readers to draw their own conclusions.

About the Author: Jerome Clark is vice-president of the J. Allen Hyneck=
 Center
for UFO Studies and is editor of its bimonthly International UFO Reporter.=
 For
12 years Clark served on the editorial staff of the UFO magazine Fate. A
frequently consulted expert on physical phenomena, Clark recently worked on
A&E=92s "Where Are All the UFOs?" program. He is also the author of=
 Unexplained!
Strange Sightings, Incredible Occurrences & Puzzling Physical Phenomena,=
 also
from Visible Ink Press, a revised and expanded edition of which will be
published in September 1998. Mr. Clark lives in Canby, Minnesota.

The UFO Book: Encyclopedia of the Extraterrestrial by Jerome Clark. 705=
 pages.
Paperback. 70 photos & illustrations. ISBN: 1-57859-029-9. $19.95. Pub Date:
October 1997. To request a review copy please contact Marilou Carlin at
313-961-2242 x 1639. Please send tear sheets to Marilou Carlin, Visible Ink
Press, 645 Griswold, Ste. 835, Detroit, MI 48226.
###
REVIEWS

"Clear, in-depth, cross-referenced and user friendly ... engrossing reading
that can fill a few hours or a few minutes. In one volume an incredible=
 amount
of research that is a must read for anyone mildly curious about UFO's and
extraterrestrials."
=97 Independent Publisher

"By far the most comprehensive book on the UFO phenomenon. The UFO Book=
 really
delivers and ... it's a real bargain!"
=97 B.K. Bookman (www.jorsm.com)

"The best bargain around =97 it has instantly become our #1 recommended UFO
book."
=97 UFOMind (www.ufomind.com)

"An excellent reference at a discount."
=97 UFO Paranormal Books (www.nauticom.net)

"The most comprehensive and up-to-date source of its kind ... thoroughly
researched and objectively written ... a remarkable volume."
=97 ParaStore (www.parascope.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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 26

                     Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'

From: Stanton T. Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 08:30:36 -0300
Fwd Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 11:35:17 -0400
Subject: Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'


> Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 15:44:42 -0400
> From: The Duke of Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com>
> Subject: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

> With the Duke's compliments:

> >Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 23:02:35 -0400
> >From: James Easton <pulsar@compuserve.com>
> >Subject: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'
> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

> >Regarding...

> >>Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 20:17:16 -0300
> >>From: Stanton T. Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Who is Jerome Clark?

> Thanks, James. And while you wait for me to gather a few
> last items necessary to continue my musings on the identity
> of Jerome Clark, here's one I prepared earlier:

> Stan Friedman's "TOP SECRET/MAJIC" has a chapter on those
> who have been negative about the MJ-12 documents, and in it
> Friedman shares with us his Top Ten "debunker principles of
> logic, gleaned from many years of contact with them". It is
> interesting to compare these with Friedman's own practice
> here and, occasionally, elsewhere.

<snip>

Peter, I guess you must still be upset at losing the l995 debate
at Oxford University Debating Society.

Thanks for approving of my bibliography in TOP SECRET/MAJIC.

My goal in life is not to convince the extremists at either end
of the opinion spectrum, but rather the 80% Healthy Agnostics.

David Rudiak did a splendid job of point by point refutation of
Bob Todd's vicious attack on Jesse Marcel.

I cannot spend the time dealing with the rest though I might
suggest you dig in to Disinformation. The English were great at
it in WW 2.

I do have some splendid articles from New Mexico newspapers about
the huge ammunition dump explosion in the early hours of July 16,
l945. (Trinity Site).

STF





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 26

                 Eagle-Net Websites Shut Down By Government

From: Joseph Trainor <Masinaigan@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 06:44:47 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 10:18:44 -0400
Subject: Eagle-Net Websites Shut Down By Government


Dear List:

Here's the latest on the Eagle-Net controversy.

Any comments would be appreciated.



From: GroomWatch@aol.com
To: Masinaigan@aol.com
Subject: Re: Eagle-Net websites shut down by government hackers?
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 09:58:32 EDT


Hello, Joseph

Thank you for your email letter and thank you for your concern
about what seems like a temporary shutdown of Eagle-Net
websites.

All Eagle-Net websites are still inaccessible.

This has been going on for at least one week.

Todd Jumper, webmaster of Eagle-Net (Citizens Against the New
World Order) has not been able to receive any communication from
his server.

The Eagle-Net carries some of the most pertinent information
(and probably some of the most disturbing ones to the
"government") not covered by the regular media.

Several controversial websites are also part of the Eagle-Net
websites.

I myself cannot access my own website on the Eagle-Net.

I just want to know the answer.

Why the shutdown?

And who is behind this?

Thanks, Joseph, for your concern.

Please relay this to your readers.


from Norio





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 26

                  Re: J. Bond Johnson's Fort Worth Pictures

From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 06:56:17 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 10:31:30 -0400
Subject: Re: J. Bond Johnson's Fort Worth Pictures

>Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 14:29:34 +0100
>From: Neil Morris <Neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
>To: Ufo Updates List <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: J. Bond Johnson's Fort Worth Pictures.

>Dear All,

>I know this subject has caused a great deal of gnashing of teeth
>of late, but I don't appologise for bringing it to the fore once
>again. I too was quite taken aback when JBJ popped up making his
>statements over the new reprints of his original pictures taken
>in Gen Ramey's office, everybody knew it was the decoy balloon
>debris, didn't they?. Well I thought it, but after a short and
>informative exchange with JBJ he was good enough to mail me a
>scan of a portion of the "Marcel" right shot which, out of
>curiosity, I had a look through.

>Since that time last week I regret my wife has become a bit of a
>computer widdow<g>, it seems the more I look at this scan the
>more I keep on finding. I know all you people who have looked at
>these shots over the years will be after my guts about this but
>there are items in these pictures that need questioning and
>resolving, my own pet question is why are there symbols on one
>of the beams that look remarkably like those seen in the AA
>debris footage ?, and IF they are there on the original negs
>what bearing does this place on the thorny question of the rest
>of the AA footage.?

Neil, since our private exchanges on this I have looked at this
material a number of times, and have been in contact with others
who are working with some large prints from the U of T.  What I
see is one strut with some squiggles on it, which look like
where glue was applied to stick on the foil/paper.  One strut
which someone claimed had "heiroglyphics" on it turns out to
only have reflections from the bulb flash.

I've looked and looked and I just do not see any heiroglyphics
anywhere, nor do I see anything else strange.  I see a bunch of
junk from a weather balloon and radar target.

I think that Bond Johnson wants so badly to be THE Roswell
photographer that he has put things into people's minds which
simply are not there in the photographs.

If there were symbols looking like those in the AA film, what
would that prove?  Ray Santilli's former associate Gary
Shoefield has told us that the film is a hoax.  I still have
questions on where, how and by whom it was hoaxed, but I am
willing to take Gary's word on this that it is a fake.


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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 26

               UK MOD on Sheffield to Politician Helen Jackson

From: Max Burns <AlienHype1@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 12:00:10 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 13:09:51 -0400
Subject: UK MOD on Sheffield to Politician Helen Jackson


Due to questions raised in the Houses of Parliament
on the 24th March 1998 by the labour MP for Hillsborough
Sheffield, Helen Jackson MP, several questions were
tabled, one question in particular was. Were there any ufo
reports to the police on either the 24th or the 25th March
1997.

The reply was given.
There were no ufo reports to the police on either the 24th
or 25th March 1997. Although there are several reports in
the police log reporting ufo�s (unidentified flying objects)
This one in particular is very important as lights in the sky
reported to the police may be mis identifercations and
although unexplained, and to the observer is a ufo
(unidentified flying objects) it may or may not be something
else for example aircraft lights, however I am not aware of
any aircraft that fly at extremely low altitudes and  flying
speeds of less than sixty mph or that use Glowing orange
lights.The Bryan Haslam report to the police is precise and
the sightings occurred in daylight in which he describes
Exactly what the other witnesses to the triangle saw two
hours later about ten miles from his location
On the same evening, and as we do not have anything here
in the UK which is the size of a football pitchTriangular in
shape which is lit up all around and has the ability to hover,
this is a firm ufo sighting, not just light in the sky, with its
inclusion in the police log of the incident, it is ludicrous to
discount this sighting just because it occurred two hours
before the main aspect of this incident, as some have tried
to do.And by definition with its inclusion in the police log of
the incident and by its description this is clearly a valid
ufo sighting reported to the police on the the 25th March
pertaining to the night of the 24th March 1997.
Which  confirms that Helen Jackson MP has indeed been
lied to during the tabling of questions in the House
of Parliament. And the question  must be asked.
Why is a member of parliament being lied to?
Which is a very serious offence.
Why have the MOD taken this stance if nothing has occurred
that night?

comments please the facts are clear

Max Burns








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 26

                           Re: Sheffield Incident

From: Max Burns <AlienHype1@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 10:25:03 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 13:06:06 -0400
Subject: Re: Sheffield Incident


It has been claimed that the radar was not operating at
RAF Linton On Ouse on the 24th March 1997.

However this information must be dis-information as the
circumstances regarding how I obtained the news
That the ufo was tracked on radar preclude the possibility
of the radar operator fabricating this information.

Due to the fact that there had been no media reporting of
this incident apart from local radio in the Sheffield area
And the radio signal from the local radio would not have
reached a far a field as York. Also there had been no
reporting on the local radio pertaining to any ufo reports at
that time.As RAF Linton On Ouse is at least seventy miles
from the incident, and the information came to myself at
09.30 on the 25th March 1997, the chance of  the radar
operator guessing the precise area and the exact time of
The thirteen ufo sightings, which also coincided with the
Militiary activity in the skies over the town of Dronfield
The city of Sheffield and the surrounding rural area�s. I
believe is a statistical improbability, as far as I am
Concerned the radar operator from the Royal Signals at
Linton is telling the truth, and could not have made up such
a precise story on a wild guess (his identity is known to me
but for obvious reasons is to be kept secret)







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 27

                     Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'

From: Tim Matthews <matthews@zetnet.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 08:10:04 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 09:11:57 -0400
Subject: Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'


> From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> To: updates@globalserve.net
> Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'
> Date: 26 June 1998 16:35

> Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 08:30:36 -0300
> From: Stanton T. Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'

> > Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 15:44:42 -0400
> > From: The Duke of Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com>
> > Subject: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'
> > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

> > With the Duke's compliments:

> > >Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 23:02:35 -0400
> > >From: James Easton <pulsar@compuserve.com>
> > >Subject: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'
> > >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

> > >Regarding...

> > >>Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 20:17:16 -0300
> > >>From: Stanton T. Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
> > >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> > >>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Who is Jerome Clark?

> > Thanks, James. And while you wait for me to gather a few
> > last items necessary to continue my musings on the identity
> > of Jerome Clark, here's one I prepared earlier:

> > Stan Friedman's "TOP SECRET/MAJIC" has a chapter on those
> > who have been negative about the MJ-12 documents, and in it
> > Friedman shares with us his Top Ten "debunker principles of
> > logic, gleaned from many years of contact with them". It is
> > interesting to compare these with Friedman's own practice
> > here and, occasionally, elsewhere.

> <snip>

> Peter, I guess you must still be upset at losing the l995 debate
> at Oxford University Debating Society.

> Thanks for approving of my bibliography in TOP SECRET/MAJIC.

> My goal in life is not to convince the extremists at either end
> of the opinion spectrum, but rather the 80% Healthy Agnostics.

> David Rudiak did a splendid job of point by point refutation of
> Bob Todd's vicious attack on Jesse Marcel.

> I cannot spend the time dealing with the rest though I might
> suggest you dig in to Disinformation. The English were great at
> it in WW 2.

And you're not bad at it either, Stanton. I think we all know by
now that no alien craft crashed at Roswell and that MJ-12 is a
fake. Incidentally, why haven't we heard anything from Ufologists
about other explanations for Roswell - for instance the USAF were
touting a story about experimental rocket-powered flying wing
aircraft coming down in New Mexico in 1947 a couple of years
ago???

After all there are, of course, several crash sites to choose
from, so the USAF might be right!

> I do have some splendid articles from New Mexico newspapers about
> the huge ammunition dump explosion in the early hours of July 16,
> l945. (Trinity Site).

What about the CIC documents that suggest a German-American
origin for 'flying saucers'?

Don't hear much about them either, do we?







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 27

                 MOD Documents Prove UFO Cover Up In The UK

From: Max Burns <AlienHype1@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 13:33:39 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 09:03:44 -0400
Subject: MOD Documents Prove UFO Cover Up In The UK

To Updates
From Max Burns
Subject MOD documents proove there is longterm
ufo cover up in  the uk connected re Sheffield and
all uk ufo events


I have in my possession sixteen documents recovered
from the public records office at Kew London
which confirm at least seven secret departments, operating
inside the armed forces who have been Carrying out
investigations into the subject of UFOs in a covert manner,
including the sending out of field Operatives to interview
witnesses pertaining to UFO sightings, as well as interaction
between similar American groups, and the playing down of
the whole subject so as to not fuel an outcry for a public
Investigation into the subject of UFOs in the Houses of
Parliament, in one communication between UK and US
Groups  it is mentioned with regard to UFOs here in the UK
that as we play down the subject, UFOs have only been
mentioned in the houses of Parliament one in the last five or
six years, (60's0 and then only in a perfunctory way.

All these secret groups who the MOD claim do not exist,
all operate behind the scenes of the front window
letter writing ufo office at Whitehall, now known as Air staff 2a.

These documents were kindly given to me by Matthew Williams
truthseekers@btinternet.com

Max Burns







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 27

                  Re: J. Bond Johnson's Fort Worth Pictures

From: Neil Morris <Neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 22:40:18 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 10:11:13 -0400
Subject: Re: J. Bond Johnson's Fort Worth Pictures


> Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 06:56:17 -0400
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: J. Bond Johnson's Fort Worth Pictures

> >Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 14:29:34 +0100
> >From: Neil Morris <Neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
> >To: Ufo Updates List <updates@globalserve.net>
> >Subject: J. Bond Johnson's Fort Worth Pictures.

>
> Neil, since our private exchanges on this I have looked at this
> material a number of times, and have been in contact with others
> who are working with some large prints from the U of T.  What I
> see is one strut with some squiggles on it, which look like
> where glue was applied to stick on the foil/paper.  One strut
> which someone claimed had "heiroglyphics" on it turns out to
> only have reflections from the bulb flash.

> I've looked and looked and I just do not see any heiroglyphics
> anywhere, nor do I see anything else strange.  I see a bunch of
> junk from a weather balloon and radar target.

> I think that Bond Johnson wants so badly to be THE Roswell
> photographer that he has put things into people's minds which
> simply are not there in the photographs.

> If there were symbols looking like those in the AA film, what
> would that prove?  Ray Santilli's former associate Gary
> Shoefield has told us that the film is a hoax.  I still have
> questions on where, how and by whom it was hoaxed, but I am
> willing to take Gary's word on this that it is a fake.

> Bob


Bob and all,

Before looking at this scan, for I only have a portion of the
left lower section of the Marcel-Right picture I was as
convinced as the next person that what was in those pictures was
a weather balloon. After spending many hours with that scan I am
now far from sure. Please note I'm not working opticaly with a
raw print but using a scan of only part of a print which I am
enlarging,at times several hundred percent and also selectively
stretching contrast levels of features which might only cross an
very few data levels,I think some of these features might be
very difficult to view with the eye alone, but they are there.

Please view my results some of which have only been placed on my
web site in the last 24 hrs, there are features in there that
should not be in balloon wreckage, since when did a weather
balloon use metal box sections with stamped out holes and will
someone please explain what mechanism used the feature I call
the "caseing". both these features are in plain view but to see
the detail you need to select the right light level range to
kill the clutter in the image. I have also resolved out features
hidden in deep shadow on the original photo which I suspect
would be totally overlooked by eye, these features seem to have
a great deal of regular structure far to small for me to see in
the resolution of scan I am currently having to work with. I am
not saying this IS alien technology, it might be, but I can
think of no part many of these components would play in a
weather balloon. That film emulsion can hold a hell of a lot of
data some of it is extreamly subtle in depth this seems to be
one way of extracting it.

I might as well use this platform to make a plea, is anyone on
this list willing to loan me one or a set of prints, I have
started the process of trying to obtain a set myself but at this
point the date of their arrival seems far distant. I have the
equipment to hand that will let me make optical resolution scans
at 1200dpi, this will produce huge files but my intention is to
burn them onto cdrom, I also have that equipment on hand, the
problem is the source material
any kind offer considered<VBG>

Best Regards
Neil.


--
*        *         *         *         *         *         *         *
Neil Morris.       /101101101 Virtual Bumper Stickers Inc 10110101010\
Dept of Physics.   1                                                 1
Univ of Manchester 0                                                 0
Schuster Labs.     1  Computer Programmers DO IT with BITS of BYTES  1
Brunswick St.      0                                                 0
Manchester.        1                                                 1
UK.                \0101010110010110110010110101101011011110101011010/
G8KOQ


             E-mail: neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk

Roswell and Alien Autopsy Archive->   http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/
Dave Willetts Home Page->     http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/dave_willetts/
Mike Sterling Home Page->     http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/mike-s/
Tim Morgan Home Page   ->     http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/tim-m/

*        *         *         *         *         *         *         *






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 27

                  Re: J. Bond Johnson's Fort Worth Pictures

From: Stanton T. Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 16:57:33 -0300
Fwd Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 10:06:18 -0400
Subject: Re: J. Bond Johnson's Fort Worth Pictures


> Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 06:56:17 -0400
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: J. Bond Johnson's Fort Worth Pictures

> >Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 14:29:34 +0100
> >From: Neil Morris <Neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
> >To: Ufo Updates List <updates@globalserve.net>
> >Subject: J. Bond Johnson's Fort Worth Pictures.

<snip>

> I've looked and looked and I just do not see any heiroglyphics
> anywhere, nor do I see anything else strange.  I see a bunch of
> junk from a weather balloon and radar target.
>
> I think that Bond Johnson wants so badly to be THE Roswell
> photographer that he has put things into people's minds which
> simply are not there in the photographs.
>
> If there were symbols looking like those in the AA film, what
> would that prove?  Ray Santilli's former associate Gary
> Shoefield has told us that the film is a hoax.  I still have
> questions on where, how and by whom it was hoaxed, but I am
> willing to take Gary's word on this that it is a fake.
>
> Bob


Bob Shell is right on! There is nothing in the photos
that wasn't in the 19 year old prints I have and nothing
that comes even close to matching the I-beam replica
and symbols that Design Engineer Miller Johnson put
together from the testimony of Dr. Marcel. years ago.. STF







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 27

                         Video of 'UFOs' Around MIR

From: Susan Cerdan <sunset@sunet.net>
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 17:28:41 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 10:14:59 -0400
Subject: Video of 'UFOs' Around MIR

Dear Friends,

The tapes of the UFOs flying around and about the Russian Mir
Space Station are here and they're absolutely wonderful. This
video footage was taken off the TV screen of a person who had
set up four satelitte dishes in his yard for this purpose,
downloading the NASA images. Fortunately they did not erase or
edit out the UFOs, they couldn't have, as the signal was direct
and unedited. The author was seeing what NASA was seeing, at the
same time. This is a professionally done, edited version taken
from a two hour tape of the author talking and talking, a lot of
the blurry and fuzzy images directly from NASA have been
removed. Otherwise the tape is just as the technicians at NASA
in Houston viewed it, quite extraordinary!

I only have seven tapes right now but can obtain more if I run
out. There are images of one, two and three UFOs passing by with
blinking lights, some cross very near the Mir as if looking in
the windows, if that is possible. Others come from the upper
screen downward, in huge groups of twenty or more, some come
from the lower right of the screen and go left, in all, quite
amazing!

If you are interested in having a copy, please send your money
order or check for $25.00 which will cover the postage, tape
itself and the editing, made out to;

Susan "Sunset" Cerdan
1720 26th Ave.
Vero Beach, Florida 32960

Any questions, call me at Tel: (561)-569-1421.

Love & Light,

Susan





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 27

               Nua Blather: Below Scottish Lochs and Churches

From: Dave Walsh <dave@nua.ie>
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 17:33:04 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 10:08:12 -0400
Subject: Nua Blather: Below Scottish Lochs and Churches

*******************************************************************
NUA BLATHER  NUA BLATHER NUA BLATHER
Weekly free email of Dogma Destruction,
Forteana and High Weirdness

By Daev Walsh   Email: blather@nua.ie
Web: http://www.nua.ie/blather/
*******************************************************************
June 26 1998  Published By:  Nua Limited  Vol 2. No. 7
*******************************************************************

BELOW SCOTTISH LOCHS AND CHURCHES
Paul Harrison, a 'Loch Ness Monster researcher' is said to be on the
hunt for 'personal sightings, photographs or family stories'
concerning Nessie in general, and a copy of the elusive 1930s MacRae
film of the beast in particular.

A shroud of doubt and obscurity surrounds this film since F.W.
Holiday talked about it in his 1968 book *The Great Orm of
Loch Ness*. I haven't myself read this book, but I have read
variations of the tale -- Dr. MacRae, a retired doctor residing at
Loch Duich had managed to capture the alleged beastie on film, at 100
yards or so. I recently perused Holiday's *The Dragon on the Disc*
(ISBN 0-8600-7056-5, Norton ISBN: 0393063364), an interesting book,
especially the accounts of Lionel Leslie planting 5lb of gelignite in
Lough Fadda, Co. Galway in October 1965, in order to raise the beast
witnessed by Georgina Carberry. *The Dragon on the Disc* seeks to tie
human traditions -- both historical and prehistoric -- of disc and
snake motifs together, to show a connection between the UFO and lake
monster phenomenon. Now, while I'm inclined to suggest that this is
the case - but on a spectrum that encompasses *other* beliefs, motifs
and paranormal goings-on, not unlike the suggestions of John Keel,
Holiday seems to get a smidgen too giddy for my liking, and after
building up some compelling cases of recurring disc and serpent
motifs at ancient sites, seems to fall at the last fence through his
own untethered conjecture.

Thus, when I hear that Holiday claims that the MacRae film is "the
most sensational wildlife film of all time", I tend to reserve
a considerable degree of doubt.

To un-digress, the MacRae film was allegedly placed in a London bank
vault, apparently to avoid ridicule. McRae, a Mr Alastair Dallas and
an unnamed third party are apparently the only ones to have ever seen
the film, according the Inverness Courier of June 6th 1998. A
Colonel Donald Cameron has also been mentioned. More anon,
as I shall have to do some scouring of the files.

Assuming that Holiday wasn't being 'wound up' when this tale was
related to him by Alastair Dallas, some 30 years after the alleged
event, the films are probably rotting away in a vault somewhere, and
rest assured, Mr. Harrison isn't the only one who would like to get a
gander at them. Anyway, here's his address.

Paul Harrison
Nunneley Way,
Markey Harborough,
Leicestershire,
LE16 7EG,
United Kingdom

(Inverness [Scotland] Courier - Monday, June 6th 1998)



MORE SCOTTISH APOCRYPHA

More news from Scotland -- or more precisely, Gordon Rutter,
mycologist extraordinaire, informs us that a new mailing list has
been created, 'specifically for discussion relating to Rosslyn Chapel
the Knights Templar'.

To subscribe go to
http://www.onelist.com/subscribe.cgi/rosslyntemplar


Gordon tells us (for it is he who is the perpetrator) that 'The list
is dedicated to discussion and theorising about Rosslyn Chapel,
founded during the 14th century, an intriguing building with
many links to the Knights Templar and from there to many other
esoteric fields. Discussion on this list is restricted to things
relating to Rosslyn, all aspects of the Knights Templar, and
anything relating to these two topics. (Quite a broad remit when you
consider that Rosslyn has been given as a repository of everything
from the Ark of the Covenant to Jesus' earthly remains). If you're
familiar with the writings of Baigent, Lincoln, Haisman, Bauval,
Hancock, Knight and Lomas or similar authors then that's what we're
about.'




WHERE'S BARRABAS WHEN YOU NEED HIM?
'A country without village idiots is not worth living in. Without
them there is no way of knowing who are sane.'

- Oliver St. John Gogarty, considering the advantages of living in
Dublin over London, *As I Was Going Down Sackville St.* (ISBN:
0862783941)


Just three weeks ago, Blather mentioned a court case where an alleged
John the Baptist was tried. This week, Jesus Christ himself was
deemed insane and unfit to stand trial for assault, and after
claiming that the entire court was in on the deal, was removed from
the court has been detained at the pleasure of the Irish taxpayer.

Jesus, a.k.a. David Dunleavy (34), a native of Kilrush Co.
Clare, claims to be the victim of an international conspiracy
involving the 12 Apostles and MI5.

Pending trials include the self-styled 'Tooth Fairy' for alleged
Dental Larceny, 'The Easter Bunny' for alleged terrorist activities,
and 'Santa Claus' for alleged surrealist burglaries.
(The Irish Independent, Wednesday, 24th June 1998
http://www.independent.ie/1998/174/d11a.shtml)


HOW TO GET A HEAD IN DUBLIN
Page 6 of the Irish Times, Friday June 19th 1998 had a curious little
sidebar mention of a 'Skull Found in Phoenix Park'. A passer-by
happened upon the skull by the Wellington Monument, and alerted
Garda=ED. I wonder if the current archaeological exhumation taking
place at nearby Croppy's Acre -- the burial site of rebels executed
during 1798 rising -- is in anyway related?

Persons wishing to claim are presumably invited to contact
the State Pathologist, Dr. john Harbison, at the City Morgue.



A WEE HOAX
Steven Alan Smith writes from the USA to tell Blather that 'your
Mothman story [My story? - Blather] reminded me of something that
happened in my home town (pop. 4000), when I graduated from high
school in 1966.

'One of my classmates pulled off an amazingly successful stunt. Six
miles away from my town was Frontnac, a town with 100 or 150 people.
A mile away was "Old Frontnac" the original site of the town on the
river before they built the railroad. There's a graveyard there with
the monumental gravemarker of a man who was a hero in the American
Civil War. Tony dressed up as a Civil War general and walked
around the monument at night. Only one other person was in on it --
the first night he brought some people out there who would become the
first terrified witnesses. It went on for maybe three or four days
and then he came out and exposed himself. [I gather Mr. Smith doesn't
refer to any illegal exhibitionism on the part of his colleague -
Blather]

'What an incredible three or four days. It was the only thing people
could talk about. It was truly a good thing he didn't carry it on any
longer because the spooked Frontnac town constable was becoming a
dangerous man and might have shot someone.'



MAGONIA NEWS

From: Mark Pilkington at Magonia. . .
(http://www.magonia.demon.co.uk)



24th June 1998

ETH Bulletin #4
What drives the UFO hoaxers? The ETH fades from view

A Cause For Concern
Flying Saucer Review - The descent into madness

The Concrete Dream
Three flavours of UFO encounter

Virtual Banality
John Rimmer considers the borders of reality

17th June 1998

Angel Hair
John Harney combs the evidence

The Ubatuba Magnesium
UFO wreckage or just a pile of slag?

The Philosophical Double Cross
Eugenia Macer Story investigates right wing channelers, finding clues
in some unlikely places

=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D


Dave Walsh
Friday June 26th 1998


Feedback and comments to <blather@nua.ie>

Have your say: http://www.nua.ie/blather/blabber

*******************************************************************

CALL FOR PAPERS CALL FOR PAPERS CALL FOR PAPERS CALL FOR PAPERS

Internet World Ireland Conference
Venue: Dublin   Date: Tuesday, October 20th 1998
Conference Title: The Network Economy
Conference Organisers: Internet World Ireland, Nua

The Internet creates a Network Economy, a network connecting people
and business, not machines. This conference will explore the business
rules for operating with a network environment.

The conference organisers are honoured to have Esther Dyson as
keynote speaker. Naming her Number 12 in Upside's Elite 100, Upside
recently wrote that Dyson's "stature is based entirely on her
ability to influence others with her ideas rather than directly
control companies or huge amounts of capital."

The topics that the Network Economy Conference will to cover include:
principles for doing business within a network, online communities,
relationship marketing, online brand building success stories, case
studies that illustrate best business practice within a network
environment.

Send a 200 word synopsis of proposed talk before July 15th to:
speak@nua.ie


********************************************************************


NUA INTERNET SURVEYS
A weekly newsletter, Internet Surveys is a free digest of the most
interesting surveys containing data relating to the Internet.
It is available by sending an email to
<surveys-request@lists.best.com>
with the word "subscribe" in the body of the message.

NUA WHAT'S NEW
A monthly newsletter, What's New is a free monthly newsletter
highlighting the new additions, happenings and changes at Nua.
It is available by sending an email to
<whatsnew-requestlists.best.com>
with the word "subscribe" in the body of the message.

NUA NEW THINKING
New Thinking is a free, weekly, 500-word email column, whose
objective is to contribute to a practical philosophy for The
Digital Age. It is available by sending an email to
<newthinking-request@lists.best.com> with the word "subscribe" in
the body of the message.

*******************************************************************

SPONSORSHIP:
While Blather will always remain free to the subscriber, Nua is
always willing to talk to interested parties with regard to
sponsorship.
Contact Daev Walsh: <daev@nua.ie>

*******************************************************************

For the Blather archives, please go to:
http://www.nua.ie/blather/archives/index.html


*******************************************************************
NUA MISSION STATEMENT
*******************************************************************

To excel in the establishment and development of online relationships and
brands.

For further information on how Nua can help your organisation get the best
out of the Internet, contact our marketing director, Mary Gorman
<mary@nua.ie> or our representative in New York, Niall Swan <nswan@nua.ie>

Mary Gorman:   mailto:mary@nua.ie
Niall Swan:    mailto:nswan@nua.ie


*******************************************************************

NUA LIMITED
Nua, a vibrant, innovative, Irish company whose focus is in helping
progressive organisations adapt to the new environment created by the
Internet. We have the management/marketing, design and technical
skills to truly understand your unique situation, and to translate
that understanding into a successful Internet presence for you.

Nua has received an array of awards since its genesis in 1996. Among
those are the coveted "Best Overall World Wide Web Business
Achievement" the top prize for website development in Europe.
http://www.nua.ie/about/review.html
SUBSCRIBING TO BLATHER
Send an email to:
<blather-request@lists.best.com>
with the word
subscribe
in the body of the message. An automatic acknowledgement
should be returned to you by e-mail within a few minutes.

UNSUBSCRIBING
Send an email to
<blather-request@lists.best.com>
with the word
unsubscribe
in the body of the message.

TECHNICAL PROBLEMS
If you are having any technical problems,
please email the Nua Webmaster at: <web@nua.ie>.

*******************************************************************


____________________________________________________________________
NUA : Internet Consultancy & Developer         http://www.nua.ie/
Dave Walsh <daev@nua.ie> Tel: +353-1-676-8996  Fax: +353-1-661-3932
Read Blather: http://www.nua.ie/blather - weekly weirdness by email







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 27

                        [lunascan] Cross on the Moon?

From: Francis Ridge <slk@evansville.net>
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 16:33:55 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 10:29:01 -0400
Subject: [lunascan] Cross on the Moon?


Check this out:

http://www.evansville.net/~slk/lune.htm

Fran

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

THE LUNASCAN PROJECT (TLP): An Earth-Based Telescopic Imaging (EBTI)
program using live and recorded CCD technology to document and record
Lunar Transient Phenomena (TLPs).

The Lunascan Project HomePage
http://www.evansville.net/~slk/lshomepage.html

The Project's Mission Statement :
http://www.evansville.net/~slk/miss.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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 27

                   Terraserver Shows Off Sensitive Sights

From: Mark LeCuyer <randydan@wavetech.net>
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 18:11:37 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 10:36:56 -0400
Subject: Terraserver Shows Off Sensitive Sights

From: Alien Astronomer
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/6583

TerraServer shows off sensitive sights
By Alan Boyle, MSNBC
June 26, 1998 4:36 AM PT

A free Internet archive of aerial images includes hard-to-get
photographs of U.S. spy installations, intelligence experts say.

On Wednesday, they were hard to get on the Web as well: Due to high
traffic, lots of users found it difficult to connect with the site.

The Microsoft (Nasdaq:MSFT) TerraServer project, offering almost 180
million overhead images taken  from airplanes and satellites, was
formally unveiled Wednesday at a computer trade event for
governmental agencies in Washington.

But the Web site was active even before its official debut, and John
Pike of the Federation of American Scientists cruised around the site
looking for overhead pictures of sensitive areas. Aerial intelligence
imagery is one of Pike's specialties, and he was amazed at what he
found.

He said there were aerial photos of Raven Rock, Md., the Pentagon
bunker north of the Camp David presidential retreat; and Mount
Weather, Va., the underground complex operated by the Federal
Emergency Management Agency. Those two facilities are thought to be
designed to house government leaders in the event of an emergency.
Another photographic subject was Camp Perry, Va., which houses a
training complex for the CIA's Directorate of Operations.

"I was able to find each of those in about 10 minutes or so," he
said.

Pike said the photos are publicly accessible by other means - after
all, they originally came from the U.S. Geological Survey. But in the
past, the red tape was a formidable hurdle for image-hunters.

"You're putting in one place the one-stop access to a large chunk of
what's available instead of having to go through all these channels,"
said Jeffrey Richelson, author of "The U.S. Intelligence Community."

Area 51 missing

NBC producer Robert Windrem, an expert on U.S. intelligence, said the
database also includes photos of sensitive communications facilities
near Sugar Grove, W.Va.; Remington, Va.; and Warren Grove, N.J.

Images of Nevada's Area 51, the focus of UFO lore, are not included
in the database ... yet. The current database covers an estimated 45
percent of the contiguous United States plus a smattering of areas
around the rest of the world. But the partners behind TerraServer say
more images will be added to the database, with the entire United
States likely to be covered next year.

The partners behind TerraServer say they came under no government
pressure to block out the images, which come from a USGS aerial
survey as well as Russian satellite photos.

For the rest of the article visit:
http://www.developer.com/news/stories/062698_terraserver.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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 27

               Re: Eagle-Net Websites Shut Down By Government

From: Steven Kaeser <steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 19:13:56 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 10:33:55 -0400
Subject: Re: Eagle-Net Websites Shut Down By Government


Please forward this reply back to the original source if possible.

>From: Joseph Trainor <Masinaigan@aol.com>
>Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 06:44:47 EDT
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Fwd: Eagle-Net websites shut down by government hackers?

>Dear List:

>Here's the latest on the Eagle-Net controversy.

>Any comments would be appreciated.

>From: GroomWatch@aol.com
>To: Masinaigan@aol.com
>Subject: Re: Eagle-Net websites shut down by government hackers?
>Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 09:58:32 EDT

>Hello, Joseph

>Thank you for your email letter and thank you for your concern
>about what seems like a temporary shutdown of Eagle-Net
>websites.

>All Eagle-Net websites are still inaccessible.

This description seems to be indicative of a hardware, web-server
problem. Are all WEB SITES on this particular server down, or is
this spread across a number of servers?

>This has been going on for at least one week.

>Todd Jumper, webmaster of Eagle-Net (Citizens Against the New
>World Order) has not been able to receive any communication from
>his server.

The server is a piece of hardware.  Has an attempt been made to
contact the web hosting firm?  It appears from the description
that the webmaster operates this site from a distance (which is
not unusual), and in my case I would have been on the phone with
the hosting firm to find out why I couldn't get into my site.

>The Eagle-Net carries some of the most pertinent information
>(and probably some of the most disturbing ones to the
>"government") not covered by the regular media.

>Several controversial websites are also part of the Eagle-Net
>websites.

>I myself cannot access my own website on the Eagle-Net.

>I just want to know the answer.

>Why the shutdown?

>And who is behind this?

>Thanks, Joseph, for your concern.

>Please relay this to your readers.

>from Norio

I know nothing about Eagle-Net, so I can't speculate as to what
the problem might be.  However, the fact that a web site has
problem is not uncommon. Just because it happens to deal with
subjects that are uncomfortable for the government, it would be
highly unlikely that hackers would be utilized to bring it down.
In the first place it is far too visible an action, and there are
probably more subtle ways of dealing with such "annoyances".

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 27

                     Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'

From: The Duke of Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith]
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 22:09:34 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 10:39:49 -0400
Subject: Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'


With the compliments of the Duke of Mendoza:

>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Friedman's Laws for
'Debunkers'
>Date: Thu, 25 Jun 98 21:02:46 PDT

>> Hendry does seem genuinely perplexed by the activities
>> of debunkers).

>In your dreams, buddy. (etc)

By exercising some economy, Jerome misquotes me, but I see
how the syntax of the original -

"Friedman makes no mention
of Allan Hendry's demolition of the statistics (although
Hendry does appear in the bibliography, and he does seem
genuinely perplexed by the activities of debunkers)"

- led him to think I was referring to Hendry. I meant,
actually, that *Stan* seems perplexed by the activities (and
motives) of debunkers, even granting in TS/M that they seem
to be sincere. Clearly I should have parsed my own post
before prodding the "send" button. Apologies for the
resulting lack of clarity. I might add I happen to think
Hendry's book one of the best ever written on the subject.

>The name was Wilbert, not Wilbur,

I stand corrected. Sometimes, it seems, the keyboard
reproduces the English gottal stop of its own accord.

Perhaps Jerome would care to enlighten us further if he
considers Chris Allan to have misunderstood Wilbert Smith. I
don't suppose Mr Allan thought he was having the last word
on the subject, but his opinion *was* informed by a fairly
damning testimonial from Smith's boss. Cover-up job, I
suppose.

This post also gives me the opportunity to say
"Congratulations!" on winning the Benjamin Franklin Prize,
Jerry.

best wishes
Persona D. Maskingtape
Iron Mask






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 27

                     Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'

From: The Duke of Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith]
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 22:09:28 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 10:47:45 -0400
Subject: Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'


With the compliments of the Duke of Mendoza:

>Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 08:30:36 -0300
>From: Stanton T. Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'

>Peter, I guess you must still be upset at losing
>the l995 debate at Oxford University Debating
>Society.

Grow up, Stan.

And what was that about "If you can't attack the data,
attack the man"?

best wishes
Pintoford D. Molehill
Station Chief







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 27

               Re: Eagle-Net Websites Shut Down By Government

From: Kerry Ferrand <kferrand@rocketmail.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 19:07:39 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 10:49:30 -0400
Subject: Re: Eagle-Net Websites Shut Down By Government


> From: Joseph Trainor <Masinaigan@aol.com>
> Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 06:44:47 EDT
> To: updates@globalserve.net
> Subject: Fwd: Eagle-Net websites shut down by government hackers?

> Dear List:

> Here's the latest on the Eagle-Net controversy.

> Any comments would be appreciated.

Before jumping to all sorts of absurd paranoid conclusions has anyone
actually contacted the sysadmin(s) of "eagle-net" and asked them what's
going on?..sounds like it could be as simple as someone fluffing a
unix chmod command and accidently removing access rights to an entire
class of users. Whats that old saying about not atributing anything to
conspiracy when stupidy would do?

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 27

                    Re: Any More News Regarding Roswell?

From: James Easton <pulsar@compuserve.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 22:28:42 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 10:52:22 -0400
Subject: Re: Any More News Regarding Roswell?

Regarding...

>From: KRandle993@aol.com [Kevin Randle]
>Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 11:44:55 EDT
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Any More News Regarding Roswell?


Kevin,

Sorry it's taken some time to respond to the above, I wanted to
hopefully clarify the source of the 'TR-3A' sketch which is almost
identical to Kaufmann's supposed recording of the 'Roswell' alien
spacecraft.

The comparative sketches are still on my web site at URL:

http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/pulsar/kaufman1.jpg


I understand that the artists impression of the theoretical
'TR-3A' aircraft originated from:

'America's New Secret Aircraft'
by Gregory Pope
'Popular Mechanics', December 1991
Page 34.

I wonder if someone might have a copy of that issue and confirm
it is the correct source.

If so, the initial question is whether this pre-dates the first
known appearance of Kaufmann's sketch.

I would have to expect Kaufmann's similar three-profile drawing
didn't appear until some time after the 'Popular Mechanics'
publication.


Regarding the recently discovered April 1949, Top Secret
document, 'Unidentified Aerial Objects', a USAF Directorate of
Intelligence's briefing for the Joint Intelligence Committee,
you commented:

>What we observe in this document, however, is not the all-knowing,
>access to every classified report. Instead, we find the authors
>speculating that the flying objects might be a domestic project and
>their suggestion that any such project be revealed to the Air Force
>because of its responsibility for air defense. In other words, the
>authors of the top-secret report did NOT have complete access to
>everything. They admitted that there were areas they were not allowed
>to examine.

[...]

>The point is that no mention of the Roswell case, and a high
>classification does not lead to the conclusion that nothing happened.
>SCI rears its ugly head here and we must make allowances for it.

We should be aware of that possibility, but surely this report
solidifies the overall perspective which has become
significantly clearer in recent years and which consistently
indicates the US government and military had no knowledge of any
evidence pertaining to a recovered 'flying saucer'.

That's what 'UFO' research set out to achieve, a clear
understanding of these issues and continually alleging this
nefarious 50 year cover-up, is merely making unsubstantiated
allegations in the face of the factual evidence which continues
to be exposed.


On Kaufmann's claims:

>>There were two points about Kaufmann's claimed copy of his original
>>'Top Secret' report.

>>The first was why he had a copy at all, did he routinely make
>>duplicates of 'secret' documents for his own files?

>A very good question and I have suggested that it be asked of Frank
>Kaufmann. I intend to ask it on the first opportunity I have to speak
>to Frank in person.

Noted.

>>Secondly, how was he was able to make what seems allegedly to be an
>>exact copy, complete with letter-heading bearing the name and
>>address of 'Headquarters, Roswell Army Air Field', a typed reference
>>[S1CP/JAM/sfm] and partly typed, partly hand-written date [only the
>>typed '1947' is clear].

>>Although there were no photocopiers available in 1947 (the
>>electro-photographic process wasn't publicly demonstrated until 22
>>October 1948), he could indeed have photographed the document.

>>What did he do then though, send the film to Kodak for processing?

>I notice in reading about spying in the Civil War that messages to
>be taken to Richmond were routinely taken to Washington for copying
>by the Union before they were taken on to the 'Confederate capital.
>I mention this only to suggest that copying of documents was
>accomplished long before 1947.

Accepted, however the question here is of course how Kaufmann
was able to make what looks to be about an 'A4' sized copy of
his 'report'. As mentioned, this essentially consists of
drawings with notes, some of the notes having been 'blacked out'
as might have been an officially released, yet partly classified
document.


>>What about the possibility of clarifying these issues with Frank
>>Kaufmann and also querying why, if the copy letter-heading relates
>>to a document he sent (rather then a letter he might have received),
>>the reference doesn't contain FK's initials?

>I have suggested that these questions would be more appropriately
>addressed to Frank Kaufmann. He will have the answers for them.

This would be welcome and we look forward to any developments.


>The creatures described by Frank have grown a little bit over the
>years, but when we remember that we're talking about events that are
>over 50 years old, a few minors changes should be expected,
>especially when we remember all the reporting that was done last
>year. For clarification, I might suggest a look at the work done by
>Elizabeth Loftus and Richard Ofshe.

[...]

>What we must remember is that there has been a lot of material
>published about the Roswell case that is inaccurate.

>I think of the stories told by Gerald Anderson and even J. Bond
>Johnson. Johnson, who told me originally that General Ramey had told
>him it was a weather balloon now claims that Ramey didn't tell him
>that.

Appreciated on both counts and it's almost an impossible
situation.

Probably the most ostensibly credible witness testimony I have
seen is Glenn Dennis's. How could such a sincere and
conservative elderly gentleman concoct such an elaborate and
emotional story, if there was no truth to it at all.

As we now realise, there's no exceptions and even if we
charitably accept that Glenn didn't intend to cynically deceive
anyone, all that glitters certainly isn't gold.


>When we begin to deal with a situation that has a huge monetary
>stake, such as that that now surrounds Roswell, the situation is
>going to become even more confused. All we can do is attempt to wade
>through this, expose the hoaxes as we find them, and continue to
>work.

Sentiments which I'm sure Robert Todd, Karl Pflock, Philip Klass
and many of us would commend.

My thoughts were that Kaufmann's claims and supporting material
are not so much evidently questionable as appearing to be
blatantly bogus.

More importantly, there were now obvious questions and resolving
them was achievable.



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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 27

                           MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4

From: The Duke of Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith]
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 22:53:23 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 10:53:47 -0400
Subject: MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4


Forwarded with the compliments of the Duke of Mendoza, who
asks only that you do not shoot the messenger, because he
will only shoot back, and would remind you that he has
medals & spoons to prove he can do it better than you.

------------------------------------------------------------

MAGONIA ETH BULLETIN

No. 4, June 1998

Editor: JOHN HARNEY

------------------------------------------------------------

EDITORIAL

The main reason for the establishment of this modest
publication was to deal with the accusation by supporters of
the ETH that ufologists who favour the psychosocial
hypothesis ignore those cases that provide evidence of
extraordinary physical events and concentrate on those where
psychological explanations seem plausible. Unfortunately,
the ETH supporters often cite cases which have already been
explained. They are either unaware of these explanations or
they discount them because they cannot bear to see their
precious evidence gradually whittled away until there is
nothing left.

------------------------------------------------------------

PATHETIC CHEATS - THE UFO HOAXERS

Credulous ufologists

Of course, most ufologists think they are too clever to be
taken in by hoaxers. It is quite obvious to them which
reports are not to be taken seriously. Unfortunately the ETH
believers are so desperate for apparently good cases that
they are easily taken in by obvious hoaxes, so long as they
are not too much like the old-fashioned contactee stories.

The believers are particularly susceptible to cases
involving alleged physical evidence. A good example is the
business of the Ubatuba magnesium samples, which arrived on
the desk of a Rio de Janeiro society columnist in 1957 with
a note claiming that they had come from a flying saucer
which had exploded in flames over a beach near Ubatuba, Sao
Paulo. Some ufologists actually believed the story, but the
more scientific ones pointed to the fact that experts failed
to establish what method had been used to manufacture the
samples as evidence that they were of extraterrestrial
origin. Few of them wanted to write it off as a hoax after
all the time and money that had been spent on the case,
especially as physical evidence is so hard to come by.

ETH enthusiasts are equally reluctant to write off the
Trindade Isle photographs, despite the fact that they were
taken by a man with a reputation as a trick photographer and
the fact that the statements of the numerous other alleged
witnesses to the sighting remain suspiciously unavailable.

Jerome Clark continues to plug the Trans en Provence UFO
landing case (only one witness), despite the detailed and
devastating study of the alleged landing traces conducted by
Eric Maillot. Of course we all know about those awful French
sceptics, who make Philip Klass look credulous in
comparison!

When you wish upon a star

In his study of hoaxes and hoaxers, Nick Yapp writes:

We are often caught up in a hoax, because we leap at the
opportunity that a hoaxer seems to present to us. And once
we have leapt, there can be no twisting in mid-air and
turning back. And the further or the higher we have leapt,
the longer the hoax will run and the more helplessly we
shall be enmeshed in it. We all have our weaknesses and we
all have our dreams. We swallow what Jiminy Cricket tells
us, that when we wish upon a star our dreams will come true.
Hoaxers know this, consciously or sub-consciously. (1)

Experimental hoax

In 1970 an experiment, which demonstrated the truth of
Yapp's assertions about hoax victims, was carried out in
Warminster. An organisation called the Society for the
Investigation of Unidentified Flying Object Phenomena
(SIUFOP) devised a simple hoax with the intention of
assessing the competence and objectivity of UFO
investigators.

Warminster, in Wiltshire, was the location chosen for this
experiment because of its high density of skywatching
ufologists. The scheme was to provide those watching on
Cradle Hill with a simple visual stimulus, to introduce
photographic evidence inconsistent with the stimulus and to
observe the effect this evidence had on subsequent
investigation, recording and publicity. (2)

The experiment consisted of shining a 144 watt lamp, fitted
with a purple filter, in the direction of a group of
skywatchers on Cradle Hill, about three quarters of a mile
away. Four SIUFOP members were among the skywatchers. One of
them had a camera mounted on a tripod and pretended to take
photographs when the light appeared. There was also a fake
UFO detector, which had been synchronised to sound a buzzer
15 seconds after the light appeared. When the light
disappeared, the photographer took two genuine photographs,
which could be used for comparison purposes. The two
preceding frames had been previously exposed with UFO images
superimposed on the landscape as seen from Cradle Hill.

The earlier pictures had been taken from a different
position and the images of the UFOs did not correspond with
the light seen by the skywatchers. In these pictures two of
the row of street lamps shown in them were out, but they
were on in the two pictures taken just after the incident.

The next stage of the hoax was the one where it was likely
to fail, or at least to arouse strong suspicions among the
ufologists present. The photographer, Mr Foxwell, asked if
anyone could get the film developed for him. One of those
present actually agreed, without asking any awkward
questions, to have it developed. It was handed to him and
the pictures eventually appeared in Flying Saucer Review.

Genuine faked photographs

The photographs were examined by FSR's experts who
pronounced them genuine, as they totally failed to spot any
of the deliberate inconsistencies and made a number of
glaring errors in their attempts to interpret them.

David Simpson and Ken Raine of SIUFOP attended a meeting of
FSR experts in September 1970. Although they gave them some
hints which would probably have enabled them to detect the
inconsistencies, their suggestions were ignored and the hoax
remained intact.

In SIUFOP Newsletter No. 19 (January 1971) David Simpson
published an article about the Warminster UFO photographs
entitled The Hoax of 1970? . In this he criticised the
investigations carried out by FSR consultants, giving his
reasons. He also asked why no one had bothered to interview
the photographer. However, FSR failed to take these broad
hints. The only visible effect of them was a brief comment
by editor Charles Bowen: "By mid-January, 1971, news had
reached me that there had been a little lightweight
criticism of the Cradle Hill photographs." (3)

Pathetic cheats

The hoax lasted for two and a half years and was ended when
Mr Foxwell confided in a friend who also happened to be a
friend of Carl Grove, who happened to be a contributor to
FSR. Charles Bowen was furious and denounced the hoaxers as
pathetic cheats.

In his summary of the experiment Simpson wrote:

The vast amount of literature published leads one to the
conclusion that the pictures were considered very
significant by UFO researchers, yet despite this and their
impressive list of consultants, the investigators concerned
did not analyse the evidence critically. Not once did they
interview Mr Foxwell, yet without his photographs the
sighting would have been insignificant. Their statements and
actions were often not those of people trying to understand
a strange event, but those of people prepared to ignore
relevant criticisms in order to support a cause. (4)

Of course, most UFO hoaxers never confess, so their not
unwilling victims are kept pleasantly mystified
indefinitely.


References

1. Yapp, Nick. Hoaxers and their Victims, Robson Books,
London, 1992, 204

2. Simpson, D.I. Experimental UFO Hoaxing , MUFOB New Series
2, March 1976.

3. Bowen, Charles. Progress at Cradle Hill , Flying Saucer
Review, 17, 2, March/April 1971, 11 4. Simpson, op. cit.

------------------------------------------------------------

THE FADING ETH

There seems to be some misunderstanding about our attempts
to analyse reports which are believed by some to constitute
evidence in favour of the ETH. Our theory is quite simple.
The null hypothesis is that not one of the available UFO
reports represents a genuine sighting of an extraterrestrial
spacecraft. Some reports remain unexplained because of
insufficient or inaccurate data.

It is already becoming clear that, when faced with
conflicting evidence or testimony about a case, ETH
supporters reject or suppress evidence which indicates a
mundane explanation in favour of that which points to an
alien spacecraft. There is also a tendency to believe that
when the sceptical explanation doesn't fit (some sceptics
are rather too keen on force-fitting explanations), then one
is justified in accepting the ET explanation, rather than
looking for another likely solution to the problem.

The one great weakness of the ETH is the notion that it is
supported simply by failing to find satisfactory
explanations for puzzling UFO reports. This means in
practice that ETH supporters are often reluctant to consider
mundane explanations. Anyone who explains any of their
cherished cases is simply labelled as a debunker. For
example, serious ETHers tend to pick out radar-visual cases
as strong evidence to support their cause, because these are
obviously neither hoaxes nor hallucinations. Jerome Clark
thinks that the RB-47 case of 17 July 1957 is a good
example. Yes, but hasn't Philip Klass, after a great deal of
research, provided a detailed explanation for the incident?
Hasn't Clark noticed? Of course he has. His comment is:
Despite a convoluted reinterpretation by debunker Philip J.
Klass, who speculated that a complex series of radar errors
and the fortuitous appearances, consecutively, of a meteor,
the star Vega, and an airliner were responsible for the
event, the incident remains as puzzling today as it was in
the early morning hours of July 17, 1957. (1)

Here we have a clue to the mentality of ETH proponents. If
it's explainable, then the explanation must be simple and
obvious. A convoluted explanation won't do, especially if it
is provided by a debunker.

Clark's principal, often repeated, objection to the
psychosocial hypothesis (PSH) is that it is merely an
exercise in literary criticism as opposed to the scientific
study of multi-witness reports and hard evidence by ETH
ufologists. Yet, when we ask for details of those reports
allegedly ignored by the literary critics and armchair
ufologists, what do we get? Nothing, apart from a few very
old cases, nearly all of which were satisfactorily explained
years ago.

In fact, Clark doesn't like dwelling on particular cases, as
they always fall apart when subjected to careful, critical
examination - literary or otherwise. He prefers to rely on
the cumulative effect of hundreds of reports which, if taken
at face value, tend to suggest that the ETH might be a
rational explanation for them. He also praises the work of
Michael D. Swords who argues that the existence of
space-travelling ETs is possible. I entirely agree that it
is possible, but is it actual? What we need is hard
evidence, not scientific speculation.

If we look at the UFO literature we can see that the few
good books are written by those who favour the PSH. Some
potentially good books are badly flawed and rendered
practically worthless to serious students of the subject
because they have had the ETH clumsily grafted on to them,
simply because that's what the punters want to read. (For
those who can't read too well, there are usually lots of
silly sketches and the usual ludicrous fake photographs of
UFOs, and even more ludicrous photographs of ETH ufologists
at silly conferences.)

However, there are signs that this sort of thing is at last
on the way out. The American UFO Magazine announces that is
broadening the scope of its coverage , which means, in
practice, that it is gradually being changed to just another
magazine which tediously rakes over the details of the
X-Files, Star Trek, and other science fiction TV series and
films. In Britain, similar things are happening to Alien
Encounters, which is also devoting lots of space to SF films
and computer games. British UFO magazines have always had
difficulty in filling their pages, because most British ETH
proponents are either semi-illiterate, or as mad as hatters,
or both. The few sane and literate ones are only pretending
- not very convincingly - to support the ETH in order to
sell their books to the credulous hordes.

American ETH enthusiasts appear to be much better educated
and more intelligent. This means that they can retail their
lies, fantasies and pseudo-scientific gobbledygook more
smoothly and effectively. However, I suspect that the
American public are beginning to become bored with their
absurd posturings and intellectual dishonesty.

With the gradual and inevitable demise of the ETH, ufology
will fade into obscurity and become a subject of interest
only to a handful of psychologists and folklorists.


Reference

1. Clark, Jerome. The UFO Book: Encyclopedia of the
Extraterrestrial, Visible Ink, Detroit, 1998, 507

------------------------------------------------------------

LETTERS


Re hoaxing and why do Walton's gang keep it going after all
this time. Money plays a part - i.e. there was always the
prospect of a film, a TV show and so on. Without re-reading
the case, I don't know how much police involvement there
was, and whether it constituted a significant waste of
police time/resources.

With the passage of time persons involved in a hoax are less
likely to admit to it, since the public tend to forget about
the original case. Who would care that much if the MJ-12
forger were to admit it now? Also, ufology being what it is,
a confession after a long lapse of time will likely not be
believed (the usual he was forced to say this by the
authorities argument). Also, what would the other hoaxers
say were one of the party to own up? Would they all defend
their original position or not? Would they risk being sued
for fraud (making money from the publishers, film company,
etc.)?

In November 1952 six people claimed to witness a desert
contact between Adamski and a man from Venus. All signed
affidavits to this effect. That was 45 years ago, yet not
one, to my knowledge, has ever since recanted and admitted
the said event never took place. And who would care now if
one did? Would Adamski diehards even believe any such
admission now? I doubt it.

Christopher D. Allan, Stoke on Trent

----

Whatever the solution to the Travis Walton story, we should
not overlook the obvious fantasy elements in it. Such as
meeting the hazel-eyed, sandy-haired, dark-skinned human
being who escorts him through a sort of air lock into a huge
room, where they descend down a short, steep ramp. In this
room is the craft in which they arrived and two or three
other flying saucers, oval craft 45 ft in diameter, rather
smaller than his which was 60 ft in diameter and 16 ft high
(The Walton Experience, pp 121-124). This is not too
different from George Adamski being led from the scout ship,
down some steps into the landing bay of the mother ship.
Walton has added some 1970s touches to the story and fleshed
it out, but the plot is the same. George is led into a room
where he meets other crew members, including women. Travis
is led into a room where there is another man and a woman.

Then there is the episode just before that when Travis plays
with the controls and sees the stars whizzing around.

We should not take the descriptions of what happened the
night of Travis's disappearance too literally; the guys in
the truck were obviously scared out of their wits and it
seems like human nature to envisage them making the light
ever more concrete and menacing as they talked excitedly on
the way back. The scarier the light was, the more they could
excuse themselves for running away and leaving poor Travis
to his fate.

Travis's story, which only covers a brief period, reads like
a dream, perhaps even a nightmare he had the night he got
back. Perhaps he didn't wander around, but in some sort of
fugue state got into a motel somewhere and holed up for a
few days, till his senses returned.

If there is a solution, it probably lies in the notes made
by the law enforcement authorities, reporters and others at
the time, not in books written two or three years later,
when the ufologists, news persons and ghost writers had
woven the story into a neatish narrative.

Peter Rogerson, Manchester

Note for paranoid ufologists: This letter arrived unsealed.
Although it had a first-class stamp, was correctly addressed
and was postmarked 15 June, it was not delivered until 19
June.

------------------------------------------------------------

For readers who do not already subscribe to or exchange with
our quarterly journal Magonia, full details may be obtained
from the Editor:

John Rimmer, John Dee Cottage, 5 James Terrace, Mortlake
Churchyard, London SW14 8HB UK.

e-mail johnr@magonia.demon.co.uk

------------------------------------------------------------

MAGONIA ETH Bulletin

This is available on the Magonia web site and only a limited
number of printed copies are available. Please address all
correspondence, articles, etc. to the Editor:

John Harney
27 Enid Wood House
High Street,
Bracknell
Berkshire RG12 1LN
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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 27

                     UFO Sightings In Russia (Gerasimov)

From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose)
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 06:12:24 +0200
Fwd Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 11:06:56 -0400
Subject: UFO Sightings In Russia (Gerasimov)


Forwarded from "alt.ufo.reports".

Stig

*******


Subject:      *** -U-F-O-  Sightings in R U S S I A  ***
From:         Vladimir Gerasimov <vladg@ix.netcom.com>
Date:         1998/06/26
Message-ID:   <6mvls8$5c2@dfw-ixnews10.ix.netcom.com>
Newsgroups:   alt.ufo.reports


As the communist-regime fell in the late 80's, a great deal of
the Russian UFO-files has been given light (along with the rest
of the Soviet allies files). We now been told that the entire
Soviet armed forces, a total of 15 million people over ten years
(1979-1989), was involved in a UFO study that turned up forty
major incidents, including one that prompted fears of starting
an accidental nuclear war. As a result of the study hundreds of
UFOs were recorded and some were photographed. Some of the
reports and some of the photos are clearly faked. But in other
cases there were multiple witnesses...

Unfortunately, until late 80-s, the UFO subject was forbidden to
discuss in our country. Any talks on this matter might get you
in trouble. As local residents say, they have been noticing
strange flying objects for a long time. Those objects were
shaped as spheres, black "boats", domes, plates and so on. Also,
there have been weird places, where people felt like being
observed or were afraid of presence of something odd. When the
ban of ufological information was removed, the explorers
attention was drawn to abnormal events near Mobelka village. The
results of the first expeditions (Perm's Bachurin's group,
Muhortov's group) were a sensation. In 1989, this information
got out to the Mass Media. Since then, the members of our group
have been studying this place.

If anyone has any kind of information or links to web sites
about Russian Sightings please email me at:

dmitryg@mailcity.com

I'm currently working on a big web site which will include a
huge library of Russian Sightings including the now famous
Russian UFO Crash in Tunguska and other sites..... yes there
were UFO Crashes in Russian ..... Roswell Incident was not the
only one UFO Crash in History....there were many more.... " The
Truth is There...."

Vlad G.










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 27

             SOHONEWS 1998-06-26: SOHO Observations Interrupted

From: Scott Jordan <sjordan@sympatico.ca>
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 05:08:55 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 11:11:50 -0400
Subject: SOHONEWS 1998-06-26: SOHO Observations Interrupted


Check this out.


Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 14:55:11 -0400 (EDT)
From: Luis Sanchez Duarte <lsanchez@esa.nascom.nasa.gov>
Subject: SOHONEWS 1998-06-26: SOHO Observations Interrupted
To: sohonews@esa.nascom.nasa.gov


SOHONEWS - June 26, 1998
------------------------

SOHO spacecraft observations interrupted

26 June 1998. At 01:16 Paris time on 25 June 1998 (23:16 GMT 24
June), during routine maintenance operations, ground controllers
lost contact with the SOHO (Solar and Heliosopheric Observatory)
spacecraft and the satellite went into Emergency Sun
Reacquisition (ESR) mode. The ESR mode is activated when an
anomaly occurs and the spacecraft loses its orientation towards
the Sun. When this happens, the spacecraft automatically tries
to point itself towards the Sun again by firing its attitude
control thrusters under the guidance of an onboard Sun sensor.

Efforts to re-establish nominal operations did not succeed and
telemetry was lost. Subsequent attempts using the full NASA Deep
Space Network capabilities have so far been unsuccessful.

ESA and NASA engineers are continuing with the task of
re-establishing contact with the spacecraft.

The SOHO mission is a joint undertaking of ESA and NASA. The
spacecraft was launched aboard an Atlas II rocket from Florida
on 2 December 1995 from the Cape Canaveral Air Station. Mission
operations are directed from the control center at NASA Goddard
Space Flight Center in Maryland, USA.

In April 1998 SOHO successfully completed its nominal two-year
mission to study the Sun's atmosphere, surface and interior.
Major science highlights
include:

* the detection of rivers of plasma beneath the surface of the
Sun;

* the discovery of a magnetic 'carpet' on the solar surface that
seems to account for a substantial part of the energy that is
needed to cause the very high temperatures of the corona, the
Sun's outermost layer;

* the first detection of flare-induced solar quakes;

* the discovery of more than 50 sungrazing comets;

* the most detailed view to date of the solar atmosphere;

* spectacular images and movies of Coronal Mass Ejections, which
are being used to improve the ability to forecast space weather.


_____________________________________________________________________________
To subscribe to SOHONEWS send mail to Majordomo@sohomail.nascom.nasa.gov with
an empty 'Subject:' line and 'subscribe sohonews' as the body of the message.
To send information to be distributed in SOHONEWS, please, send e-mail to
editor@sohomail.nascom.nasa.gov
_____________________________________________________________________________
Luis Sanchez Duarte
SOHO Science Data Coordinator





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 27

                    Chat with Astronomer Tom Van Flandern

From: Yvonne Hedenland <vonni_h@email.msn.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 21:51:54 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 11:04:53 -0400
Subject: Chat with Astronomer Tom Van Flandern


Well known Astronomer Tom Van Flandern will join the UFO forum
on Tuesday, June 30th at 6pm, PT for a special chat to discuss
the Philosophy of Science.

From his work with The Society for Planetary SETI Research to
the founding of Meta Research (an organization founded in hopes
of exploring the more unusual aspects of science).

Van Flandern has made a mark in the field and in our
conciousness for being a maverick astronomer who pushes the
envelope forward so that we can follow.

This chat is available at  http://forums.msn.com/UFO The
Briefing Room chat can 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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 27

                           Re: Sheffield Incident

From: Andy Roberts <Brigantia@compuserve.com>
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 07:47:14 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 11:19:42 -0400
Subject: Re: Sheffield Incident

Dave Clarke is away for a few days in the Lake District. I would
hate for Max to have his nonsensical rants go unchallenged, so
until Dave gets back from his MI5 briefing, sorry,
'holiday'.............

I've followed the 'Sheffield Incident' thread, which has largely
been between Dave Clarke and Max Burns, with interest.

I know both these people.

I know Dave well and have written several books with him and
investigated numerous cases of anomalous phenomena.

I have also played a small role in helping to investigate this
case, having spent tens of hours now discussing and evaluating
with David each component of the case and every possible
permutation of the available evidence.

I know Max slightly, and have questioned him closely on his
claims. I have yet to be even vaguely impressed by either his
'evidence' or the paranoid way in which he conducts himself.

We are lucky to have been able to follow the case from the
inside, rather than looking at a story published several years
after the event in a UFO book or magazine, or even a finished
case report. Updates readers have had the unique chance to watch
from the inside the development of a significant UK UFO case,
claim and counter claim.

_This_ is ufology. Nitty, gritty stuff. Strangely there are no
aliens anywhere in sight, only humans engaged in what they do
best. That is debating the nature of reality and interpreting it
badly.

Max and his claims aren't going to go away. As has been
mentioned before he has stated to several UK ufologists last
year that he intends to make this case the 'British Roswell'.
Indeed, had it not been for Dave Clarke's research into the case
it would have become just that, as the UK UFO community and most
of its magazines and journals are _desparate_ for such an event,
and not too particular about any 'facts' which might get in the
way.

However, Max, whilst twisting the evidence one night, made the
fatal error of  changing his theory from that of a _UFO_ crash
to one of a jet being shot down _by_a UFO. This was a crucial
error in his thinking as it is far easier to posit the crash of
something for which we have no evidence, and which can be
claimed to have been removed leaving no trace, rather than
alleging one of her majesties finest fighting planes (all of
which have numbers and named crew) has been destroyed by the
alien menace. More significantly Max has never gone into what
evidence lay behind this change of heart. One minute he's
telling anyone who will listen that he knows exactly where the
crash site of the UFO is, the next he's waffling about the loss
of a Tornado.

As a relevant aside here at last years BUFORA conference I
queried Max about the 'crash' site which he said he has been to
and was familiar with. It was quickly apparent that he had no
knowledge of the Derwent Moors (I've been walking them for
twenty five years) as all the place names I ran by him
(including one I made up!) were met by blank stares. He later
claimed that he knew all along but was just testing me!

So it goes.

Max alleges that Dave Clarke has said one thing, then another
and so on. Aside from the fact that Max hasn't actually seen
much of Dave's work on the case what, he fails to grasp is that
altering one's view, backed by evidence is known  as
_developing_ a theory. Max has claimed from word one that he
believes an extraterrestrial craft  was involved, the only
change in his theory being exactly what crashed. All requests
for substantiating evidence have been met with long  silences
followed by interestingly structured emails which take us down
the road to nowhere. Dave however has investigated each and
every part of this multi-faceted mystery and come up with
evidence and explanations which _fit in with each other_.

Max claims that: '.... the radar was not operating at RAF Linton
On Ouse on the 24th March 1997. However this information must be
dis-information as the circumstances regarding how I obtained
the news That the ufo was tracked on radar preclude the
possibility of the radar operator fabricating this information.'

Well he would say that, wouldn't he? He then goes on to tell us
he can't reveal the source of this information. Highly
convenient. This is just one of many witnesses Max quotes but
who must remain hidden from the rest of us. Dave on the other
hand uses no primary witnesses or sources who are not available
and checkable.

Max's use of witnesses who claim to have seen triangles and UFOs
is all well and good but where has he produced one single proper
case report into any one of these witness claims? Also using
witness sightings of 'something' which took place in the vague
time zone that evening is pointless. There is just no connection
other than in Max's head. He has fallen into the classic
beginner ufologist trap of seeing many small pieces of a jigsaw
and making his own picture up, throwing away those irregular
pieces which don't seem to fit.

The _ultimate_ proof of what happened that night in 1997 may
never be known, but the tendency of evidence strongly suggests
that a comet-sensitised public, unused to a clear night sky,
made a series of misperceptions, based on natural and man made
objects coupled with two sonic booms. We also know there _was_
military activity and there _may_or _may not_ have been some
form of covert training operation. There was also a small
airplane of a commercial nature in the area which has yet to be
identified. This _may_ have been part of a covert military
training exercise, a covert drugs drop, or just a private pilot
who didn't declare himself to the authorities.

In other words a complicated series of coincidental events which
have been melded together into a UFO shoots jet story by,
well,................

The _only_ person who suggested that a UFO may have been
involved has been Max Burns, spinning this belief out of
disparate witness statements. His basic plea seems to be 'why
can't you believe what the witnesses said they saw'.

Why indeed. We would happily believe those witnesses, but the
_evidence_ just doesn't support their narrative. He has yet to
issue one _ well investigated_ and corroborated report of a
witness seeing a UFO/flying triangle _anywhere_in the Peak
District that night. His desultory report consists of short
statements about what people told him they saw, no
investigation, just free standing narrative.

Max displays little awareness and knowledge of issues
surrounding the perception and reporting of 'UFOs' and is quite
content to accept everything at face value.

Max further confounds his case by failing to extend his own line
of reasoning to those witnesses who don't agree with him, or who
have offered alternate solutions to the one he promotes.

Rather than weigh up the evidence and statements from official
sources he dismisses this as a 'cover story'. Rather than listen
to what experienced field investigators are telling him (not
just us, I hasten to add) he accuses them of being
'disinformation agents'. Rather than investigating he believes,
and the more he believes the less he feels he has to
investigate.

Let's just have a brief example of this.

Max has no problem, for instance, _believing_ a drug taker
living in a horse-box to whom Max sold marijuana to at the time
of his interview.

Yet he _cannot_ believe that anyone who gainsays him is not
working for the government or, heaven forbid, even darker
agencies.

Strange logic.

The fact that no-one can now question this itinerant sky watcher
as he has moved on seems not to bother Max, because he believes
him and therefore we should too. The fact that he _can_question
the relevant official agencies doesn't interest him, because he
_doesn't_ believe them and therefore they must be the bad guys.

It's the logic of the X Files generation. Dumbed-down ufology
for the hard of thinking.

All Max _has_developed in this case is his increasingly
ludicrous claims that certain investigators (and anyone who
supports them!) are part of some for of government cover-up. I
must admit I have had a great deal of fun with this aspect of
Max's belief system. If he is stupid enough to believe Dave and
I are working for the government then I feel it is our duty to
encourage this belief as much as we can! If he can't even work
out who employs us then what hope has he in unravelling a
complex UFO case?

Despite all the Max waffle and obfuscation the matter is
reducible to his claim that a Tornado Jet was shot
down/'vanished' by an ET craft with possible loss of pilot and
co-pilot. All else is immaterial. Dave Clarke and myself have
repeatedly challenged Max to prove the following, and we issue
that challenge again:

       What is the serial number of the jet
       What is the name of airfield it flew from
       What are the names of the pilot and co-pilot

Max has failed to do provide this information to date, and has
also stated that even if he knew these facts he wouldn't share
them. Both of these points sum Max and his approach up in a
nutshell.

I've always been a firm, ahem, 'believer', that oft times it's
the ufologists making the wild and unsubstantiated claims who
need investigating as much as the witnesses, and this case is no
different. I realise that Updates is a genteel list where ad
hominem attacks are frowned upon so I wouldn't want to frighten
anyone with some Max Fax. But I would advise those of you out
there who wish to know a little more about Max Burns' character,
his modus operandi and his thought processes, to check out
issues 2 and 3 of my occasional journal, The Armchair Ufologist.

This is available, courtesy of that nice Mark Pilkington, at:

http://www.magonia.demon.co.uk/armchair

if it's not there now it will be any day now.

Dave Clarke also has a feature length article on the incident in
the current issue of UFO Magazine (the UK version). Well worth
reading although certain things have changed and new evidence
has come to light in the few months since it was written.

We're not going to let Max off the hook. He's made extraordinary
claims and now he's going to have to prove them. Every time he
makes a claim or statement it will be challeneged and
unravelled. Every new piece of evidence he comes up with will be
scrutinised until it is clear just what it is evidence _of_.
This is ufology in northern England at the end of the 20th
century and it's exciting stuff!

ufology: delicious hot, disgusting cold

Happy Trails

Andy







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 27

                   'Most Stunning Case Ever' - SoCal MUFON

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 13:44:58 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 13:44:58 -0400
Subject: 'Most Stunning Case Ever' - SoCal MUFON




From: 'Sightings On The Radio'

http://www.sightings.com/ufo/mufonstunn.htm


'Most Stunning Case Ever' Tracked By MUFON Director In SoCal
From JERRY GLASS <jglass@pe.net>
MUFON State Section Director
6-27-98


TIMELINE

6/16/98 -- Big Bear, CA (above Running Springs), three 3.0
earthquakes.

6/17/98 -- Hwy 330 - 4:00 PM. Kathryn (a psychologist who
resides in Running Springs) sees military helicopter traffic
flying between Running Springs and Norton AFB (which is now
officially closed).

6/17/98 -- Hwy 215 - 9:00 PM. San Bernardino, near the
University. Mike (a former Marine) and John (an on-duty SBPD
officer) see a Green Fireball they discribe a bright as a
'stadium in the sky' fly toward Running Springs.

6/17/98 -- Hwy 330 - 9:30 PM. LeAnn (a student studying to be a
Forensic Medical Examiner), her son and boyfriend (Tim), while
traveling up Hwy 330 (between San Bernardino and Running
Springs) at the 5000' level, see a Green Fireball in a ravine
hovering 200' above the Running Springs Fresh Water Plant.
Boyfriend reports two small red orbs hovering near Fireball.
While driving they saw the object for 30 seconds.

6/17/98 -- Hwy 330 - 9:30 PM. California Highway Patrol vehicle
passes LeAnn's car. The patrolman's identity is presently
unknown.

6/18/98 -- San Bernardino - 3:00 PM. John, coming off-duty,
wakes up Mike and points out Green Fireball egressing Hwy 330
and now traveling south. John points out two red objects near
Green Fireball.

6/18/98 -- San Bernardino - 3:00 PM. Abel (who is delivering
newspapers) sees the Green Fireball with three smaller red
objects, leave Hwy 330 and then hold a stationary position. Abel
who is close to home, races home grabs his wife and a video cam,
and heads to 40th and Del Rosa where he VIDEO TAPES the craft!
At site, Abel and wife meet another man who says he saw craft at
both 9:00 PM and 3:00 AM.. Abel doesn't have his name but knows
where he lives.

6/18/98 -- Highway 330 - 3:00 PM. Kathryn traveling north at the
3000' level passes by a military convoy of six trucks with
troops.

6/18/98 -- Highway 330, 9:05 PM. LeAnn, son and boyfriend return
to the site where they saw the Fireball. In the trees they see
the Green Fireball again (son says it's 200' across) and VIDEO
TAPE it with several smaller orange orbs. First, she tapes it on
automatic, and when the object moves, they follow it and switch
video to manual, and catch the object changing colors. LeAnn
reports (as do all the others) the object was so bright, it hurt
her eyes. LeAnn played the tape while I was on the phone and I
could hear their interaction.

Misc -- Abel's boss says other delivery people report heavy
military traffic on the mountain road.

Summation to date: On Sunday, I will visit LeAnn, Abel, and see
their videos, fill out MUFON reports, make copies of the tapes,
then post the photos to the web site. All the witnesses involved
have agreed to a joint meeting, along with myself and fellow SB
State Section Director, Cinde Costello to corroborate their
data.

Sightings HomePage







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 27

                    A Different Kind Of Abduction Report?

From: Lehmberg@snowhill.com
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 98 12:58:48 +500
Fwd Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 14:38:49 -0400
Subject: A Different Kind Of Abduction Report?

Greetings honored list;

This strange tale was provided to me by a person I have known for
some years...


~~~

I have been walking down this street for 53 years. Let's see
now... that's right... I was 28 the first time I saw this old
eucalyptus tree. Then, the sidewalks were young. Now, b'Jesus,
you have to pick your way though the rubble and weeds. All the
green's gone... all the good times. Then, I had a lovely young
lady on my arm. Mary Ann was her name. Now, a cane is my only
companion... and, of course, Them!

They also walk here with canes. Not because they are of an age,
like me, but to imitate. They think this is the way it's done.
If I could only communicate with them. Oh God, I've tried! They
are watchin' me all the time and doin' as I do. What was it my
grand daughter Alisha Ray used to say when she was in
kindergarten something about tell? Show and tell! That was it,
Show and Tell. Well, I'll tell you, 81 doesn't make for good
showin' and that's a fact. I sleep a lot and eat a little. These
old eyes ain't good for readin'. I miss that old TV box. I'd
even set through one of those damn game shows! The only kick I
get is seein' them try to do what I do. If I rub my nose they
rub theirs - or that stump they've got I call a nose. I don't
laugh, though. They don't like it if I laugh. The last time I
laughed They kept me from eating for almost a week.

I just wish I was of an age that I could show them what a man
can be and do. If I had just one other person to interact with
so they would know Man. But it's all gone. The time's right,
now. I've got so little of it left. I must finish it, once and
for all!

They came about 18 months' ago. Why They picked me to show Them
our ways - if that's what I'm here for - I don't know. There are
five of them left, but three of them are swelling around the
middle (little ones comin', I expect). If I don't stop it they
will take over my world. I've made my plans. The cost is not too
high, after all, I've had all my good years. What ever it is
I'll pay the price. I have to do it. I have to eliminate Them,
once and for all. Why I should give a damn, I don't know. Ten
hours after they hit Oxnard we were all gone. I was picked up
that first hour and held. Why didn't I die?

I know I'm the only one around here with two legs. Now I've
waited as long as I can for someone to come along. I just wish I
could figure out why they all left but the five. Let's face it,
I know I'm it. I've thought much about the future. When I'm gone
it will be better clean of all this.

About a month ago I went down to the water. There's this boat,
DELIVERANCE, and at high tide I'll cut her loose. You see, this
time of year we have this wind called Santa Ana. If I can
have'em all aboard early before she starts to blow, I think I
can make it. This damned leg is my big problem. I've got it
figured out that the 29th is the highest tide of the year. If
the wind comes at the right time I'll do it.

For the last two weeks I've come down to the boat every day and
set around on her. They also come. These last three days I've
fooled around with the sails, raising and lowering them. They're
getting the feel of her. They like it when the sail's flappin'.
I can tell 'cause of the green shine on their skins. I don't
move so fast, so they've slowed down to my speed. But when the
time comes I've got to move and this will throw Them out of
step.

I know that there has to be more people some place. So if some
one finds this and DELIVERANCE is not on the beach I've made it,
and may God have his mercies. It will be time for you to pay
your price. Luck to you and me.

~~~

This seemed to me to be taken from life. The writer was enigmatic about its
motivation, and is not the kind of person to concoct outlandish tales. You decid
e.


Lehmberg@snowhill.com

Restore John Ford






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 27

             CE: U.F.O. Historical Revue is out!/CIA involvement

From: Jan Aldrich <jan@CYBERZONE.NET>
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 12:51:21 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 14:35:09 -0400
Subject: CE: U.F.O. Historical Revue is out!/CIA involvement

Greetings List,

The first issue of the U. F. O. Historical Revue (UHR) was found
in the old mail box today.

I had previously announced that it would contain an article
about "Unusual U. S. Coastal Aerial Observations during World
War II" and the continuation of the Just Cause article on the
summer of 1997.

Well, I didn't know what Barry would have to say, however, he
pointed out something that few had commented on concerning the
CIA.  It is obvious, but few in the popular or the UFO press
have mentioned it.

I expect lots of fun times with the CIA in the near future!

UHR is available from:  P. O. Box 176, Stoneham, MA 02180 $15
per year US and $20 Foreign.

A little supplemental information on the CIA is given below:

The CIA was involved with UFOs from the very beginning in 1947.
There is an indication of this in the USAF Directorate of
Intelligence files. However, most CIA/USAF correspondence on any
matters was withheld by the CIA, so the extent of it is not
possible to say. (DI Decimal correspondence file 1948 (AAF items
from 1947 included), National Archives II)

In 1947, the CIA did establish a liaison with the USAF DI, ONI,
etc. to read all incoming intelligence reports. (DI 1948 Decimal
files)

At the beginning of 1952 the CIA was specifically mentioned in a
memo as an agency was to receive copies of UFO reports from the
USAF. (DI 1952 Decimal files)

The file of "UFO Reports Found After the Transfer of Project
Blue Book Files" had most of the distribution sheets attached.
The CIA, NSA and other agencies inside and out of the Air Force
routinely received multiply copies of UFO reports.  (National
Archives II)

Certain Naval intelligence reports in the Air Force files also
indicate distribution in multiple copies to the CIA.

When I interviewed Col. Friend, he told me he did not deal
directly with the CIA, however, he did deal frequently with the
AF liaison to the CIA.

Another good article on CIA involvement may be found in  the
International UFO Reporter, Fall 1997, "The CIA's UFO History"
by Mark Rodeghier.  (Center for UFO Studies, 2457 WEst Peterson
Ave., Chicago, IL 60659.)

Best regards,

Jan
--
Jan Aldrich
Project 1947
http://www.iufog.org/project1947/
P. O. Box 391, Canterbury, CT 06331, USA
Telephone: (860) 546-9135






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 27

                     Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'

From: "Stanton T. Friedman" <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 15:50:32 -0300
Fwd Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 19:50:13 -0400
Subject: Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'


> From: Tim Matthews <matthews@zetnet.co.uk>
> To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'
> Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 08:10:04 +0100

> And you're not bad at it either, Stanton. I think we all know by
> now that no alien craft crashed at Roswell and that MJ-12 is a
> fake. Incidentally, why haven't we heard anything from Ufologists
> about other explanations for Roswell - for instance the USAF were
> touting a story about experimental rocket-powered flying wing
> aircraft coming down in New Mexico in 1947 a couple of years
> ago???

It is almost impossible to deal rationally with someone who makes
the absurd claim "We all know that no alien craft crashed at
Roswell and that MJ-12  is a fake." I know a number of scientists
who accept neither conclusion. .. so your claim is obviously
false...

STF








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 27

                     Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 14:36:59 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 19:56:06 -0400
Subject: Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'

Dear Duke:

In the unlikely event that there is  a UFO sighting in your
particular duchy,  would you please be so kind as to indicate
both Longitude and Latitude?

Thank you (in advance) for holding your breath while I smoke.

-  Larry Hatch


=    =    =   =   =   =   =  =   =

t







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 27

                Rosie O'Donnell Discusses Abductions And ETs

From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose)
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 23:09:43 +0200
Fwd Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 19:53:18 -0400
Subject: Rosie O'Donnell Discusses Abductions And ETs

From the National Enquirer.

http://www.nationalenquirer.com:80/mod03/mod03-story-1406.html


Stig


*******


Rosie O: Why I Believe In Space Aliens


'Extraterrestrial life is something we should all be curious about'


-- Rosie O'Donnell to ENQUIRER readers


A courageous Rosie O'Donnell admits on an upcoming show that she firmly
believes in space aliens and close encounters -- and she wonders if a
spot behind her ear is an alien implant!

In a show she's already taped -- scheduled to air on July 20 -- the
Emmy Award-winning talk show hostess chats with author and alien
encounter expert Whitley Strieber, who believes extraterrestrials
implanted an object in his ear.

Rosie told The ENQUIRER: "Extraterrestrial life is something we should
all be curious about."

And Strieber -- author of the best-selling "Communion" and the new book
"Confirmation" -- told The ENQUIRER in an exclusive interview: "Rosie
told me she believes space aliens are real.

"And she believes our experiences with aliens are something that should
be taken seriously.

"A celebrity of Rosie's stature willing to declare herself on behalf of
the close encounter witness is just wonderful.

"After reading 'Confirmation,' Rosie contacted me and invited me on her
show to discuss aliens. She takes this subject very seriously and was
willing to go on record saying that she did.

"While Rosie told me she has no memory of an encounter, she did talk
about implants -- and she pointed to a place right behind her right ear
and said if she had gotten an implant that would be the spot.

"She turned for me to look at it. It was visible. It was a gray area
centered on a gray dot on the side of her head behind her right ear."

Strieber said he didn't want to put words into Rosie's mouth or reveal
all the details about what she says on her show, but he believes the
spot behind her ear is worth looking into.

"I didn't examine the spot. It would have to be examined by a doctor,"
he said. "But anyone could see it."

Then during a commercial break, an audience member disclosed, the
popular hostess turned to her audience, touched her ear and did say, "I
really think I could have one of those implants."

Said Strieber: "Rosie's interest in encounters is high enough that even
if she doesn't have the memory of an encounter, it's very possible she
had one. An ultrahigh level of interest with no apparent knowledge of
anything ever happening always suggests the possibility that there may
be something Rosie doesn't remember."

Strieber said the full revelations Rosie will make on the show "will be
a moment never to be forgotten.

"When we were together, I felt the same bond that is often so strong
with other close encounter witnesses. She is just like the rest of us,
full of questions that really need to be answered."

While Strieber said Rosie told him she couldn't remember an alien
encounter, a friend said the star has wondered in private if she did
have an encounter of her own.

"She was very interested in talking about one of the encounters
Strieber writes about -- when two aliens came into his bedroom at
night," the friend revealed.

"He was awake and clearly saw them, but he was too paralyzed to cry out.

"Rosie suspects she may have had a similar experience with aliens. She
can't remember the details, but she has a vague sense that something
happened. She's very excited that Strieber described his experience.
She couldn't wait to have him on the show."

Rosie even shocked her TV audience during a commercial break after
Strieber described how aliens came into his bedroom at night, the
audience member said.

"Rosie said, 'That's happened to me!' "

It wasn't the first time Rosie has talked openly on TV about her belief
in aliens. Last year when Dan Aykroyd appeared on her show, she told
him: "You and I, we believe in this so we're not wacko. We totally
believe in this stuff."

The friend added: "Rosie has been intrigued by UFOs all of her life.
She has a huge library of books on the subject. She watches 'The
X-Files' religiously.

"She thinks space aliens are trying to get a message through to us."







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 28

                     Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'

From: The Duke of Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith]
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 23:19:45 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 03:05:24 -0400
Subject: Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'


>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
>X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; U)
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'

>Dear Duke:

>In the unlikely event that there is  a UFO sighting in your
>particular duchy,  would you please be so kind as to indicate
>both Longitude and Latitude?

Gladly. If in the UK (the Duchy moves in mysterious ways) I will
also supply Ordnance Survey grid references if possible for the
delectation of your Brit readers.

>Thank you (in advance) for holding your breath while I smoke.

Hmm, unlikely. If I were not a gentleman, and thus proscribed
from wagering on a certainty, I would bet that my cigarettes,
imported at huge expense from Russia, smell vastly worse than
yours to those yuppie pinklungs whose sensibilities are so
costive that they are in deep denial over the truth that tobacco
smoke is not only deeply flavorsome but a prime source of
vitamins and minerals.

The fact is, non-smokers are just afraid of the Truth About
Smoke.

Dictated remotely from temporary shipboard location (submerged)
approx 24deg30min E, 37deg10min N. Great view of the lighthouse
through the periscope.

best wishes
Parkdrive D. Marlboro
Toke Analyst







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 28

                     Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 98 19:35:23 PDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 03:00:51 -0400
Subject: Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'


> Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 22:09:34 -0400
> From: The Duke of Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith]
> Subject: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

> With the compliments of the Duke of Mendoza:

> >To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
> >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Friedman's Laws for
> 'Debunkers'
> >Date: Thu, 25 Jun 98 21:02:46 PDT

>. I might add I happen to think
> Hendry's book one of the best ever written on the subject.

So do I.  A masterpiece, albeit a flawed one (perhaps like
all masterpieces; I feel the same way about Huck Finn or
Moby-Dick), and surely on the top 10 of any list of great
UFO books in English.


> Perhaps Jerome would care to enlighten us further if he
> considers Chris Allan to have misunderstood Wilbert Smith. I
> don't suppose Mr Allan thought he was having the last word
> on the subject, but his opinion *was* informed by a fairly
> damning testimonial from Smith's boss. Cover-up job, I
> suppose.

Having done a fair amount of study of Smith for the
long entry in my UFO encyclopedia, I would say that Smith
was modest and responsible in what he did (and what he
subsequently claimed) concerning Project Magnet,
exaggerated accounts of which owe more to Keyhoe
than to Smith himself.

Where Smith becomes a bewildering and
exasperating character is where he becomes an utterly
uncritical devotee of channeled mush dished out from
the kitchens of cosmic fast-food joints.

> This post also gives me the opportunity to say
> "Congratulations!" on winning the Benjamin Franklin Prize,
> Jerry.

Thank you very much, Peter. I appreciate the sentiment.
And that gives me the chance to ask you a question:
wasn't I supposed to get a review copy of your and Paul's
new book?  I've been looking forward to it, and I mean that
in the best sense.  Though we often disagree, I always find
you interesting.  Paul, too.

Cordially,

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 28

                          BWW Media Alert 19980627

From: <BufoCalvin@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 23:23:09 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 03:14:17 -0400
Subject: BWW Media Alert 19980627

Bufo Calvin
P O Box 5231, Walnut Creek, CA  94596
Internet: BufoCalvin@aol.com
Website: <A HREF="http://members.aol.com/bufocalvin">http://members.aol.com/bufo
calvin<;/a>
<A HREF="surprise link to Amazon.com">http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=048
6230945/bufosweirdworldA/<;/a>
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED (permission is granted to reproduce or redistribute this
edition of Bufo's WEIRD WORLD 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).

June 27, 1998

Welcome to all the new subscribers!  Something apparently sent a big upsurge
of people this way.  Famed UFO lawyer Peter Gersten's name was mentioned by a
couple of people, but I don't know specifically what's up.  Also seemed to
have more visitors to the website, so it may be a link.  If you know what
happened, let me know :).

For all you new people, listings are generally Pacific, unless otherwise
noted.

Thank goodness for THE DISCOVERY CHANNEL, one of the darlings of the academic
set (in my opinion).  If it wasn't for them, I wouldn't have much to report on
this week (THE SCIENCE CHANNEL is also affiliated).

TELEVISION

THE DISCOVERY CHANNEL
Saturday, June 27, 10:00 PM, UFOS DOWN TO EARTH: UNCOVERING THE EVIDENCE
(Roswell)
Sunday, June 28, 1:00 AM, UFOS DOWN TO EARTH: UNCOVERING THE EVIDENCE
(Roswell)
Sunday June 28, 1:00 PM, ARTHUR C. CLARKE'S MYSTERIOUS WORLD: THE RIDDLE OF
THE STONES (British megaliths)
Sunday, June 28, 1:30 PM, ARTHUR C. CLARKE'S MYSTERIOUS UNIVERSE: THE PUZZLE
OF THE PYRAMIDS
Sunday, June 28, 2:00 PM, STRANGE BUT TRUE: SEPARATED AT BIRTH, HAUNTED HOTEL
Sunday, June 28, 2:30 PM, ANIMAL X: PSYCHIC ANIMALS
Tuesday, June 30, 5:00 PM, TRAVELERS: LAS VEGAS (includes UFO buffs)
Friday, July 3, 10:00 PM, UFOS DOWN TO EARTH: DEEP SECRETS (claims of
government-held saucers)
Saturday, July 4, 2:00 AM, UFOS DOWN TO EARTH: DEEP SECRETS (claims of
government-held saucers)
Sunday, July 5, 1:00 PM, ARTHUR C. CLARKE'S WORLD OF STRANGE POWERS: STIGMATA
- THE WOUNDS OF CHRIST?
Sunday, July 5, 1:30 PM, ARTHUR C. CLARKE'S MYSTERIOUS UNIVERSE: INTO THIN AIR
(strange disapperances)

THE SCI-FI CHANNEL
Runs re-runs of SIGHTINGS weekdays at 4:00 PM and 8:00 PM, and on Sundays at
11:00 AM and 7:00 PM.

THE SCIENCE CHANNEL
Runs weird programming at 6:00 AM, 6:30 AM, 2:00 PM, 2:30 PM, 10:00 PM, and
10:30 PM.
___________________________

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 Media Alert the same way. Also, please let me know if
there is something in the media you think I should cover. Deadline is Tuesday, t
he 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.  For more information on OPUS, see its we
bsite at http://members.aol.com/josephxx3






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 28

                      Re: 'She Blinded Me with Science'

From: RobIrving@aol.com
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 00:34:47 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 03:18:22 -0400
Subject: Re: 'She Blinded Me with Science'

> Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 20:05:39 +0100
>  To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>  From: Sean Jones <Tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
>  Subject: Re: 'She Blinded Me with Science'

Sean,

A few comments on your list of 'scientific blunders'...

As I understood your original request, it was for examples
whereby conventional science has rejected or ignored novel ideas
(which were later accepted) because consensus within its 'ranks'
assumed it knew better at the time.

>4) Astronomer Percival Lovell draws maps of the canals on Mars.
>Better resolution of Martian surface reveals that his
>imagination had "connected the dots" of random Martian features
>into an elaborate pattern of non-existent canals.

This could also be seen as a case of science correcting itself
as more information emerged, leading to better understanding -
the progression of knowledge. To portray this as a trail of
ignorance renders the point you wish to make to your scientist
friend meaningless. You may as well castigate Ptolemy for his
map, or describe Columbus's mistaken notion that he was sailing
west to India as a 'blunder', rather than the process of
discovery.

In any situation it's not unusual for new ideas to be regarded
with healthy scepticism until it's seen how they'd fit within
the wider scheme of what's already known. What I think you are
looking for are examples where the progression of knowledge was
thwarted by unreasonable bias towards existing facts, thus
preventing them from being superceded.

As usual, belief is the problem. It is a major problem as far as
the ETH is concerned, although perhaps not in the way your are
thinking.

The Lowell story is essentially similar to the recent
disconfirmation of the Mars Face at Cydonia. Rather than
avoiding the notion of intelligent goings -on much closer to
Earth than conventional wisdom tells us, scientists, in the form
of NASA, met it head on. They were probably quite confident of
the outcome because as scientists they understand how adept we
are at imposing speculative order on what we see, as Lowell did.

The crucial difference being that Lowell accepted the new data,
unlike those still pushing the 'face' theory, who provide yet
more weight to Leon Festingers observation that if we are
committed enough to a particular belief, disconfirmation can
make it even stronger. Festinger liked nothing better than to
use 'flying saucer' enthusiasts as an example of this.

Similarly, your example of continental drift and plate
tectonics. This is how science would be expected to work. As you
say, when a plausible mechanism was put forward (plausible
because it resisted criticism and survived experimental testing)
it replaced whatever theory went before it. The case you give of
Einstein rejecting his own modification is an equally good
example of what we expect from the scientific process. It is not
unusual for people to wrongly second-guess themselves. In fact,
it should be of concern to us when they don't.

The fact that physicists were so quick to accept Einstein's
revolutionary ideas rather negates the point you are making.
Once natural dissonance to any idea is overcome, if the idea
solves more problems than it creates we are likely to (or
should) pay attention to it. All your examples show is that
occasionally we don't. Physicists were uncertain about
Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle for years. However, it
eventually made sense... just as the ETH may one day make sense,
if only its proponents would.

>1) Renee Blondlot discovers the N-Ray - named after his
>university (the University of Nancy). Many other prominent
>scientists verify and extend his work before it is revealed
that >the phenomenon is a result of self-deception.

Blondlot's N-Rays are often cited as a perfect example of
'pathological' science. Although other scientists confirmed his
work, it is important to remember that their number didn't come
close to a consensus, and N-Rays were never universally
accepted. It is also worth considering the historical context in
which they were 'discovered' - in the wake of all manner of
other 'invisible' rays, such as X-Rays (these, btw, were
initially rejected as a hoax by the eminent British scientist
Lord Kelvin).

Also - & this is what initially inspired my comments - you can't
mention Blondlot's story on a UFO list without drawing attention
to the manner in which his misperception was revealed; it is an
ideal example of the value of hoaxing in revealing
self-delusion, or worse.

The integral tool of Blondlot's equipment for demonstrating
N-Rays was a prism. With this prism surrepticiously pocketed by
another scientist, Blondlot continued to see what he thought he
was seeing. The hoax was a simple but highly effective method of
settling the issue without the usual equivocation and ambiguity.
That Blondlot accepted his error was a credit to his level of
intellectual honesty, in contrast to any number of familiar
names around here.

Ufology is littered with self-styled 'truthseekers' who avoid
withdrawing their claims in the face of overwhelming contrary
evidence. As I argued with Greg Sandow, it's little wonder why
people, rightly or wrongly, are so dismissive of the subject as
a science.

>2) Pons and Fleischman discover the cold fusion. Their work is
>verified at several research centers, but these verifications
>are eventually withdrawn when errors are found in each
>experimental setup.

Where is the blunder? Science has yet to properly explain how
nearly a hundred research organisations in many countries
achieved excess energy by the Pons-Fleischmann cells, and
others. Too little is known about quantum effects for this to be
dismissed so easily (and, indeed, dishonestly).

>3) The precession of Mercury's orbit is attributed to a small
>planet orbiting even closer to the sun. Several astronomers
>actually observe this planet - called Vulcan, but it is
>eventually revealed not to exist. Precession is eventually
>explained by general (not special) relativity.

Like the Aetherius Society, some physicists still believe there
is a presently undiscovered planet in our solar system.

>7) Mendel's laws ignored for decades until rediscovered by
other >scientists.

It's often a matter of waiting for complimentary research to
catch up. Take, for example, the plight of Subrahmanyan
Chadrasekhar, whose ideas on what came to be known as black
holes were refused even by his own mentor, the eminent British
astronomer Sir Arthur Eddington. Mendel and Chadrasekhar only
had to wait for forty or so years for just recognition. John
Michell, who imagined  the existence of black holes in 1783, had
to wait a lot longer (and you don't hear *him* moaning).

A better example of the myopic arrogance of conventionalism
concerns Goethe, who wrote a paper on the subjective nature of
our perception of colours that was immediately dismissed as
'unscientific' (due to his not being a scientist) only to be
confirmed experimentally a century later.

One problem in all this is how you expect scientists to react in
the face of big claims with little verifiable evidence. The
recent 'Best Ten cases' discussion here, typically inconclusive
as it was, should have considered a different criterion: What do
ETHers consider to be the ten (or even one) best articles of
evidence that they would feel confident in presenting to a
science-minded audience?

I suspect the answers would be the same, a list of historical
cases. What this amounts to in terms of 'logic' is inductive
reasoning: The observations (witness reports) are generalised to
form a hypothesis, then any additional observations are seen to
justify this hypothesis.

Apart from this being built, layer upon layer, of non sequiters
- Mark Cashman's comparitive categorizations of events/shapes,
etc., for example - this 'rationale' relies heavily on the
veracity of witnesses and the impartiality of investigators,
something of an unfortunate track record in ufology. Worse, it
appears that it is left up to the 'debunkers' to continually
expose the myriad 'exaggerations' made in the name of the
subject. Its proponents should be policing themselves if they
want to be taken seriously in a scientific context.
(Mythologically, it's fine.)

While Mark Cashman may argue that multiple witness reports
amount to some kind of repeatability, in scientific terms it
doesn't. In fact, this form of inductive reasoning is
demonstrably false, and often borders on the disingenuous.

If, as Mark suggests, the traditional process of scientific
discovery is "inappropriate" to phenomena such as UFOs, that's
tough. Don't expect this process to change. When myth mixes with
science, which is more likely? Will myth rise to the level of
science, or will science adapt to the level of myth?

As David Deutsch writes: 'Shoddy explanations that yield correct
predictions are two a penny, as UFO enthusiasts,
conspiracy-theorists and pseudoscientists of every variety
should (but never do) bear in mind.'

In an earlier post you (or Don Ledger) opined...

>>It never ceases to amaze me at the two-headed
>>approach that "science" takes on the pursuit of truth, which is
>>[1] their truth and [2] the great unwasheds' truth. The latter of
>>course is all of the other ignoramouses that are not those
>>shining knights of the first truth, the "scientisits".

The biggest misconception of all in this discussion is that
'Science' is some kind of body that acts as one, to the
exclusion (or suppression, as some would have it) of others.
This is bunk. Today there are more living scientists than dead
ones. Science is human construct, and its followers consist of
an energetic mix of differing opinion, just like UFO Updates.
That's the crux: people (including scientists) are fallible, and
all equally prone to the same influences. Pull back the curtain
and you will find no Wizard, only us.

Incidentally, talking of blundering British Astronomers, in 1957
the Astronomer Royal, Sir Harold Spencer Jones, offered a
journalist his opinion that "space travel is bunk" - two weeks
before Sputnik 1 was launched.

And good luck with your scientist friend. I have a neighbour who
is just as annoying (he thinks quantum-theoreticians are
"attention seeking").

Rob






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 28

                     Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'

From: Donald  Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 09:26:00 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 09:52:04 -0400
Subject: Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'


> From: Tim Matthews <matthews@zetnet.co.uk>
> To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'
> Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 08:10:04 +0100

<snip>

> And you're not bad at it either, Stanton. I think we all know by
> now that no alien craft crashed at Roswell and that MJ-12 is a
> fake. Incidentally, why haven't we heard anything from Ufologists
> about other explanations for Roswell - for instance the USAF were
> touting a story about experimental rocket-powered flying wing
> aircraft coming down in New Mexico in 1947 a couple of years
> ago???

> After all there are, of course, several crash sites to choose
> from, so the USAF might be right!

> > I do have some splendid articles from New Mexico newspapers about
> > the huge ammunition dump explosion in the early hours of July 16,
> > l945. (Trinity Site).

> What about the CIC documents that suggest a German-American
> origin for 'flying saucers'?

> Don't hear much about them either, do we?

Nor should we.

Why waste time chasing after some pipe dream of a theory that the
Germans had a functional flying saucer. Look at the technical
aeronautical data at the time. There's no indication anyone was
exploring these areas at the time. Jets yes, England and
Germany., but not the US.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 28

                       Re: Video of 'UFOs' Around MIR

From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 10:07:01 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 10:21:55 -0400
Subject: Re: Video of 'UFOs' Around MIR


Dear Friends,

>From: Susan Cerdan <sunset@sunet.net>
>To: "UFO Updates" <updates@globalserve.net>,
>Subject: re; "UFOs Surrounding Mir", tapes are ready!
>Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 17:28:41 -0700

>The tapes of the UFOs flying around and about the Russian Mir
>Space Station are here and they're absolutely wonderful. This
>video footage was taken off the TV screen of a person who had
>set up four satelitte dishes in his yard for this purpose,
>downloading the NASA images. Fortunately they did not erase or
>edit out the UFOs, they couldn't have, as the signal was direct
>and unedited. The author was seeing what NASA was seeing, at the
>same time. This is a professionally done, edited version taken
>from a two hour tape of the author talking and talking, a lot of
>the blurry and fuzzy images directly from NASA have been
>removed. Otherwise the tape is just as the technicians at NASA
>in Houston viewed it, quite extraordinary!

>I only have seven tapes right now but can obtain more if I run
>out. There are images of one, two and three UFOs passing by with
>blinking lights, some cross very near the Mir as if looking in
>the windows, if that is possible. Others come from the upper
>screen downward, in huge groups of twenty or more, some come
>from the lower right of the screen and go left, in all, quite
>amazing!

>If you are interested in having a copy, please send your money
>order or check for $25.00 which will cover the postage, tape
>itself and the editing, made out to;

If this information was obtainable by someone from the 'general
public', then that would mean it does not fall under the category
of 'Hide from the Public'. Therefore shouldn't NASA oblige anyone
asking that this footage be posted on a website for anyone to
see?

I understand it takes money to reproduce videotapes and mail
them, but if I had this kind of information, I would be putting
it on the web for anyone who would be interested for free or
urging NASA to do it. They can't withhold this kind of
information if 'Joe Public' already has it, right?  If it's that
important, to me that would be a priority. Unfortunately many of
us will not send $25 to benefit from this. Has NASA seen this
videotape? It would make it alot easier to force them to make it
public, which it apparently is already.

Sue







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 28

                       Re: Video of 'UFOs' Around MIR

From: Susan Cerdan <sunset@sunet.net>
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 15:22:14 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 21:32:14 -0400
Subject: Re: Video of 'UFOs' Around MIR


>Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 10:07:01 -0400
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Video of 'UFOs' Around MIR

>If this information was obtainable by someone from the 'general
>public', then that would mean it does not fall under the category
>of 'Hide from the Public'. Therefore shouldn't NASA oblige anyone
>asking that this footage be posted on a website for anyone to
>see?

>I understand it takes money to reproduce videotapes and mail
>them, but if I had this kind of information, I would be putting
>it on the web for anyone who would be interested for free or
>urging NASA to do it. They can't withhold this kind of
>information if 'Joe Public' already has it, right?  If it's that
>important, to me that would be a priority. Unfortunately many of
>us will not send $25 to benefit from this. Has NASA seen this
>videotape? It would make it alot easier to force them to make it
>public, which it apparently is already.

>Sue

Dear Sue,

"Joe Public", set up a certain amount of satellite dishes, in a
certain way, stayed up all night viewing the direct download and
capturing the images for months at a time, then wrote to all
these people, UFO researchers such as John Mack, nuclear
physicist Stanton Friedman, tried to get his local TV station to
play it etc, to no avail. No one wanted to touch it with a ten
foot pole! He sent a letter to me, I jumped on it and did
something about it. If you want to do something also, that which
is within your expertise, or knowledge, go for it. Publish it on
the internet!

Write to NASA, I did, their reply was: "No government agency is
currently responsible for investigating UFOs because there is no
factual evidence that alien life exists on other planets or that
UFOs are related to aliens". I should have known better, after
thirty years as a researcher, but at least I tried!

Of course NASA has seen it, they downloaded it! He just happened
to be there when the images were flying around the Mir. Yes, you
can do the same thing, set up the dishes, stay up all night for
a couple of months and record the
best images, edit it and advertise it. Good luck!

Love & Light,

Susan Sunset









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 28

                         Re: MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4

From: Jean van Gemert <jeanvg@dds.nl>
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 17:08:59 +0200
Fwd Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 20:57:07 -0400
Subject: Re: MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4

>Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 22:53:23 -0400
>From: The Duke of Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith]
>Subject: MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>MAGONIA ETH BULLETIN
>
>No. 4, June 1998

>Editor: JOHN HARNEY

[...]

>There is also a tendency to believe that
>when the sceptical explanation doesn't fit (some sceptics
>are rather too keen on force-fitting explanations), then one
>is justified in accepting the ET explanation, rather than
>looking for another likely solution to the problem.

And PSH supporters are of course the informed authorities
when it comes to choosing the most "likely solution to the
problem". :)

>The one great weakness of the ETH is the notion that it is
>supported simply by failing to find satisfactory explanations for
>puzzling UFO reports.

Translation: Puzzling UFO reports that are consistent with the
ETH can't be true therefore the ETH supporters have not looked
long and good enough for "satisfactory explanations".

[...]

>example, serious ETHers tend to pick out radar-visual cases
>as strong evidence to support their cause, because these are
>obviously neither hoaxes nor hallucinations. Jerome Clark
>thinks that the RB-47 case of 17 July 1957 is a good
>example. Yes, but hasn't Philip Klass, after a great deal of
>research, provided a detailed explanation for the incident?

No, but I wouldn't place bets on John Harney to know about any
rebuttal in the first place. Even *without* Sparks' recent
massive response to Klass you'd would be hard-pressed not to
notice the obvious omissions of crucial sighting data in Klass'
account, but only if one bothered to compare it to original
reporting of course.

But John Harney seemingly never did that, and which brings me
back to the point I intend to make. PSHers want ETH-supportive
cases dead (their desperation obvious from their refuge to Klass'
writings) killing off those cases that don't fit their PSH.

>ufologists, what do we get? Nothing, apart from a few very
>old cases, nearly all of which were satisfactorily explained
>years ago.

Well, In John Harney's imagination perhaps.

>In fact, Clark doesn't like dwelling on particular cases, as
>they always fall apart when subjected to careful, critical
>examination - literary or otherwise.

Harney should take off the blindfold and start reading Clark's
book properly, a number of "classic" cases are discussed in great
detail.

[...]

>If we look at the UFO literature we can see that the few
>good books are written by those who favour the PSH. Some
>potentially good books are badly flawed and rendered
>practically worthless to serious students of the subject
>because they have had the ETH clumsily grafted on to them,

[...]

>American ETH enthusiasts appear to be much better educated
>and more intelligent. This means that they can retail their
>lies, fantasies and pseudo-scientific gobbledygook more
>smoothly and effectively. However, I suspect that the
>American public are beginning to become bored with their
>absurd posturings and intellectual dishonesty.


Translation: "I am right, anyone who dares to disagree is an idiot".

If this is the quality of PSH discourse nowadays I'm glad I'm not
one of its supporters, with their awfully inflated sense of
importance and unrestrained disdain to those with whom they don't
agree.  Harney's self-righteous outburst just serves to establish
the point that reason is not on their list of priorities.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 28

                     Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'

From: John Rimmer <johnr@magonia.demon.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 17:06:57 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 20:58:07 -0400
Subject: Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'


>Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 15:50:32 -0300
>From: "Stanton T. Friedman" <fsphys@brunnet.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'

>It is almost impossible to deal rationally with someone who makes
>the absurd claim "We all know that no alien craft crashed at
>Roswell and that MJ-12  is a fake." I know a number of scientists
>who accept neither conclusion. .. so your claim is obviously
>false...

>STF

Could we have some details of these scientists, such as their
names and qualifications to make judgements on MJ12 and Roswell?
Have they published anything on these topics?


--
John Rimmer
Magonia Online: http//www.magonia.demon.co.uk
"Interpreting Contemporary Vision and Belief"







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 28

                      Re: 'She Blinded Me with Science'

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 98 13:36:18 PDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 21:03:49 -0400
Subject: Re: 'She Blinded Me with Science'


> From: RobIrving@aol.com
> Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 00:34:47 EDT
> To: updates@globalserve.net
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: 'She Blinded Me with Science'

> > Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 20:05:39 +0100
> > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> > From: Sean Jones <Tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
> > Subject: Re: 'She Blinded Me with Science'

> Sean,

> A few comments on your list of 'scientific blunders'...

> As I understood your original request, it was for examples
> whereby conventional science has rejected or ignored novel ideas
> (which were later accepted) because consensus within its 'ranks'
> assumed it knew better at the time.

> >4) Astronomer Percival Lovell draws maps of the canals on Mars.
> >Better resolution of Martian surface reveals that his
> >imagination had "connected the dots" of random Martian features
> >into an elaborate pattern of non-existent canals.

> This could also be seen as a case of science correcting itself
> as more information emerged, leading to better understanding -
> the progression of knowledge. To portray this as a trail of
> ignorance renders the point you wish to make to your scientist
> friend meaningless. You may as well castigate Ptolemy for his
> map, or describe Columbus's mistaken notion that he was sailing
> west to India as a 'blunder', rather than the process of
> discovery.

This is a remarkably charitable reading of the Mars canal
controversy, about which historian of science Michael T.
Crowe had this to say, at the conclusion of one of the most
comprehensive reviews in the current literature: "the price
paid by the astronomical community in loss of credibility,
internal discord, methodological misconceptions, and
substantive errors, as well as the efforts wasted on the
observation of ambiguous detail, was far too high" (The
Extraterrestrial Life Debate 1750-1900, Cambridge
University Press, 1986).

> As usual, belief is the problem. It is a major problem as far as
> the ETH is concerned, although perhaps not in the way your are
> thinking.

"Belief" is not the problem with the ETH's more rational
proponents, of course. List readers may be interested to know
how often the epithet "true believer" has been leveled even at
astronomers who have taken seriously the idea of intelligent
life on other worlds. The abuse hurled at SETI advocates, for
example, parallels that at ETH advocates. Sometimes the
parallels are indeed unexpected and peculiar. Carl Sagan,
for example, used to sound like a contactee fellow traveler when
he'd moon about how signals from benign ET civilizations could
save us from blowing ourselves up and bring on a golden New
Age.

It's also worth noting that SETI-bashers have on occasion
compared their colleagues unfavorably to ufologists, since unlike
SETI people ufologists at least have something they can point to
as an arguable body of evidence bearing on the question. SETI
astronomers have only inference and faith (and a handful of
highly ambiguous signals which till fairly recently they were too
embarrassed to parade as possible justification for their
activities), and not a few astronomer critics have accused their
ET-believing colleagues of being engaged in a quest that is
fundamentally religious.

> The Lowell story is essentially similar to the recent
> disconfirmation of the Mars Face at Cydonia. Rather than
> avoiding the notion of intelligent goings -on much closer to
> Earth than conventional wisdom tells us, scientists, in the form
> of NASA, met it head on. They were probably quite confident of
> the outcome because as scientists they understand how adept we
> are at imposing speculative order on what we see, as Lowell did.

> The crucial difference being that Lowell accepted the new data,
> unlike those still pushing the 'face' theory, who provide yet
> more weight to Leon Festingers observation that if we are
> committed enough to a particular belief, disconfirmation can
> make it even stronger. Festinger liked nothing better than to
> use 'flying saucer' enthusiasts as an example of this.

Wrong on all counts. Lowell did not accept the new data but went
to his grave in 1916 convinced of the reality of the canals. In
fact, neo-Lowellist views continued in astronomy for several
decades afterwards, and one sees their shadows even in the daffy
ET speculations in which Donald Menzel indulged in his first
UFO-bashing book in 1953. An excellent paper on the curious
ideas of astronomers concerning ET life earlier in this century
can be found in Michael D. Swords' splendid "Astronomers, the
Extraterrestrial Hypothesis, and the United States Air Force at
the Beginning of the Modern UFO Phenomenon" (JUFOS 4 [n.s.,
1992]).

Festinger's ideas about cognitive dissonance have been
pretty well challenged in the sociology of religion literature.
When Prophecy Fails (1956), which he cowrote, is an interesting
(I reread it only recently) book full, alas, of flaws. unaddressed
ethical questions, and at least one historical error so whopping
as to take the breath away. Unfortunately, one of his principal
arguments hangs on this historical error -- which I'm willing to
wager Rob has missed.

Our friend here is also wrong when he asserts, oddly albeit
self-servingly, that "Festinger liked nothing better than to use
`flying saucer' [why the scare quotes, by the way?] enthusiasts
as an example." To the best of my knowledge, Festinger wrote
about only one flying-saucer group, though he and his associates
took care to note that saucers were only one of many notions
that Dorothy Martin ("Marian Keech") and her followers dropped
into their particular metaphysical stew.  Martin, who lived till 1992
(she died in Sedona, Arizona), was more akin to a spirit
medium/channeler than she was even to other contactees such
as Adamski, Fry, Angelucci, and contemporaries -- much less to
ufologists who rejected the very notion of communication with
benign carnates or discarnates from the cosmos.



> Ufology is littered with self-styled 'truthseekers' who avoid
> withdrawing their claims in the face of overwhelming contrary
> evidence. As I argued with Greg Sandow, it's little wonder why
> people, rightly or wrongly, are so dismissive of the subject as
> a science.

I would love to be around, 25, 50, or 100 years from now, to
witness the cottage industry in history, sociology, and philosophy
of science literature on the subject of how scientists of this
century managed to miss the most important phenomenon of

their time. Sadly for the debunkers, truth always outs. It may take
its time, but it gets there, and the best cases -- which earlier Rob
confessed to knowing nothing or little about -- still await
accounting and attention. At least, that is, if one holds that
scientific controversies are about evidence, not the sorts of ex
cathedra pronouncements Irving traffics in.


> Apart from this being built, layer upon layer, of non sequiters
> - Mark Cashman's comparitive categorizations of events/shapes,
> etc., for example - this 'rationale' relies heavily on the
> veracity of witnesses and the impartiality of investigators,
> something of an unfortunate track record in ufology. Worse, it
> appears that it is left up to the 'debunkers' to continually
> expose the myriad 'exaggerations' made in the name of the
> subject. Its proponents should be policing themselves if they
> want to be taken seriously in a scientific context.
> (Mythologically, it's fine.)

The debunkers sure have done a lousy job, from Grudge onwards,of
explaining the most puzzling cases. Complacently, Irving acts
as if the bashers have proved themselves over and over again,
only to be ignored, when in fact it is the debunkers who have
failed, over and over and over and over again, to present
plausible explanations for the best cases. Is it any wonder that
persons more open-minded about UFO cases and better read in UFO
history than Irving remain intrigued?

I cite numerous examples in my UFO Encyclopedia. There also
Brad Sparks looks in meticulous detail at the debunkers' failure
to come to grips with the RB-47 case. In the end it looks very
much (as Allen Hynek used to say) that the battle is between
pragmatists/realists/investigators and medievalists. Rob thinks
he talks a good game, but all he can do is mutter about all
sorts of forever undetected (or maybe forever undetectable)
negative evidence which will end the issue and whose existence
we "believers" foolishly refuse to take on faith, proving that
we're whatever terrible thing Rob needs to believe we are at the
given rhetorical moment.

I am always amused at those who, like Rob, would have us believe
UFOs are a question for the social sciences, even as they rattle
on and on about the utter worthlessness, under all circumstances
and at all times, of what they call "anecdotal evidence." In a
forthcoming paper, "On Some Unfair Practices Towards Claims of
the Paranormal," sociologist of science Marcello Truzzi -- a
skeptic, incidentally -- observes the following:

"Scoffers use a ... foreshortening towards issues of evidence.
It is common to hear statements to the effect that there is no
evidence supporting a claim when in fact it is merely INADEQUATE
evidence that has been presented. Evidence is always a matter
of degree, some being extremely weak, but even weak evidence can
mount up (as shown by meta analysis) to produce a stronger case.
Weak evidence is often discounted, however, by assertions that
it (most commonly anecdotal rather than systematic and
experimental evidence) falls below some threshold of what
science should consider evidence at all. This, of course,
eliminates the evidential basis for most of clinical medicine
and the social sciences, but that seems to hold no terror for
the scoffer who invokes such criteria."

Perhaps nobody has written better on the role on anecdotal
testimony in science than David J. Hufford, whose 1982 book The
Terror That Comes in the Night (University of Pennsylvania
Press) should be read by all who are interested in controversies
at the edges of science. (So should Hufford's various papers in
folklore and medical journals as well, where he pursues
arguments and evidence further.) Hufford shows, devastatingly,
what has happened in a number of areas in science and medicine
when so-called anecdotal testimony (i.e., the actual experience
of the person telling the story) was summarily ignored and the
experience reinvented so that the explainer could explain it.
In the end, of course, the explainer explained only what he'd
made up. As Hufford writes:

"It was just such a rejection of untutored observation that
delayed for so long the `scientific' discovery of the giant
squid, gorillas, meteors and any number of other wild and
wonderful (but apparently unlikely) facts of this world. In
those cases, post hoc scientific rationalization was used to
explain how people came to believe in such things. Seasoned
fishermen were said to mistake floating trees with large root
systems for huge animals attacking their boats; farmers were
said to have overlooked iron-bearing rocks in the midst of their
fields until they were pointed out by lightning; and in this
case [the Old Hag experience] `children and savages' were said
to have difficulty knowing when they were awake and when they
were asleep" -- even though the victims, people of all ages,
cultures, and educational levels, insist they were not
"dreaming," that they were fully conscious when they heard and
saw weird things.

It is not as if, as Rob childishly argued Mark Cashman had said
(Mark had said no such thing), all eyewitness testimony is 100%
accurate. Mark was showing how it can be useful, and under what
circumstances, and how we can measure such things, even if only
generally. In a real world things are not black and white, and
Mark was arguing that we do not live in a cartoon universe.
Hufford shows how no attempt to explain an anomalous claim can
safely discard what those who have experienced it say about it.

Reading arguments like Irving's, coming from somebody who knows
little about our subject yet who is quick to tell us what we
think and how dumb or blind or gullible we are, I sometimes
think I've entered that cartoon universe. Why are we dealing
with this guy at all? Is there any other subject than ufology
about which you need to know practically nothing to act as if
you are expert enough to tell the real experts they
know nothing at all?


> As David Deutsch writes: 'Shoddy explanations that yield correct
> predictions are two a penny, as UFO enthusiasts,
> conspiracy-theorists and pseudoscientists of every variety
> should (but never do) bear in mind.'

Notice the usual debunking sleight of rhetoric: UFO "enthusiasts,"
conspiracy theorists, and pseudoscientists are crammed together in
one bombastic outburst, as if the three were indistinguishable, or even
as if one UFO "enthusiast" were the same as another (George Adamski
and Peter Sturrock indistinguishable? Wendelle Stevens and Mark
Cashman? Frank Scully and Stuart Appelle? Billy Meier and Michael
Swords? Ray Palmer and Isabel Davis? Frank Edwards and Allan
Hendry? Ed Komarek and Walter Webb?), and the "shoddy explanations"
are hurled at us out of nowhere, so that it is impossible to defend
oneself, much less know what Deutsch is talking about in specific; or
maybe (as seems more likely) he is talking about nothing at all. One
is reminded of Orwell, who said of sentences and sentiments like
Deutsch's, they give "an appearance of solidity to pure wind."

Whenever this sort of debunkerspeak comes to eye or ear, I get
the gloomy impression that I have learned more about the debunker
(about whom I had no curiosity in the first place) than about whatever
it is he's trying to debunk. All I learn from the quote is that David
Deutsch is phobic about UFOs, and not especially rational on the
subject. Pardon me while I yawn.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 28

                         Re: MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4

From: "Jerome Clark" <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 98 15:14:48 PDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 22:00:27 -0400
Subject: Re: MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4


> Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 22:53:23 -0400
> From: The Duke of Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith]
> Subject: MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

> Forwarded with the compliments of the Duke of Mendoza, who
> asks only that you do not shoot the messenger, because he
> will only shoot back, and would remind you that he has
> medals & spoons to prove he can do it better than you.

> ------------------------------------------------------------

> MAGONIA ETH BULLETIN

> No. 4, June 1998

> Editor: JOHN HARNEY

> ------------------------------------------------------------

> EDITORIAL

> ------------------------------------------------------------

> PATHETIC CHEATS - THE UFO HOAXERS

> Jerome Clark continues to plug the Trans en Provence UFO
> landing case (only one witness), despite the detailed and
> devastating study of the alleged landing traces conducted by
> Eric Maillot. Of course we all know about those awful French
> sceptics, who make Philip Klass look credulous in
> comparison!

Reason No. 1,947 I Am Not a Believer in the PSH (Psychosocial
Hypothesis to the sentimental, Purely Speculative Hypothesis to
the rest of us): These poor guys just can't get their facts
straight. I'd accuse them of feeding and watering a belief
system -- in their adored phrase -- if I could bring myself to
use that sappy and redundant expression.

In The UFO Book (p. 563) and The UFO Encyclopedia, 2nd Edition
(p. 898), I note the debunkers' objections to the
Trans-en-Provence case and in fact end the entry with them,
under the subhead "Lingering Questions." Unless (and I know PSH
rhetoric is unusually fluid; words don't always mean what they
seem to mean) Harney equates "reporting" with "plugging," his
comment is simply out to lunch (American slang for crazy).
Dishonest is the uncharitable adjective that comes to mind.

I am glad, though not in the least surprised to learn, that the
PSHers believe Trans-en-Provence has been "devastatingly"
debunked. I, on the other hand, am the victim of sad experience,
which involved the unhappy circumstance, years ago, of believing
debunkers before I had heard the other side. I am reminded of my
friend Marcello Truzzi's observation that he believed Philip J.
Klass had demolished all the important UFO cases -- until he
read what the ufologists had to say about what Klass had to say.
(And then, of course, he actually got to KNOW Klass, always an
education in itself.)

In the real world, where things aren't simple, it is possible
now only to say that the French debunkers have raised serious
questions which need to be addressed. If they are not addressed,
ufologists will be justified in reducing the case's significance
to, at the least, the "unproved" category, and conceivably
worse.

On the other hand, since the PSHers love to lavish attention on
me as the focus of all that is evil in ufology, I must deliver
to them some profoundly disappointing news: a panel of American
scientists, with no previous involvement in UFO research or
controversy, is about to weigh in with a public statement which
will deliver the needle to the Purely Speculative rhetorical
balloon. Among the cases the panel has taken up for review is
Trans-en-Provence. From what I can gather from a sketchy
preliminary reference the scientists made to T-en-P, it didn't
exactly hold to the Harney/French debunker view. Meantime, I
await the panel's final judgment, presumably arrived at devoid
of the special ideological pleading Harney and his cohorts bring
to the discussion.

And this brings up an interesting question: Why does Harney
falsely characterize me as "pushing" Trans-en-Provence even in
the face of my airing of the questions the French critics raise?
I really don't know Harney (whom I know only as a name on the
Magonia editorial board), but I don't honestly think he's
dishonest. I do, however, suspect that he suffers from a common
PSH affliction: the absolute inability to change one's mind
about anything, or to imagine that anyone else could, either,
even when confronted with new information and evidence. When was
the last time a Purely Speculative Hypothesizer changed his mind
or admitted he was wrong about anything? Just curious.

If I am proved wrong about Trans-en-Provence, I'll admit it.
Unlike PSHers, I don't pretend to be infallible, and I certainly
don't want to be wrong. All I am saying is that we can afford --
knowing the way rhetoric gets inflated in the heat of pitched
ufological battle (and the T-en-P debunking piece I read was not
exactly cool to the touch) -- to wait a little while longer,
till final (or effectively final) word is in. I have adjusted my
views to accommodate new developments. Has that ever been true
of PSHers, in any but the most self-serving
sense?

> The one great weakness of the ETH is the notion that it is
> supported simply by failing to find satisfactory
> explanations for puzzling UFO reports. This means in
> practice that ETH supporters are often reluctant to consider
> mundane explanations. Anyone who explains any of their
> cherished cases is simply labelled as a debunker. For
> example, serious ETHers tend to pick out radar-visual cases
> as strong evidence to support their cause, because these are
> obviously neither hoaxes nor hallucinations. Jerome Clark
> thinks that the RB-47 case of 17 July 1957 is a good
> example. Yes, but hasn't Philip Klass, after a great deal of
> research, provided a detailed explanation for the incident?
> Hasn't Clark noticed?

I had to pick myself off the ground after reading this and am
still having some difficulty managing to keep thoughts and
fingers focused on the keyboard. Why am I laughing? See The UFO
Encyclopedia, 2nd Edition, pp. 761-90.

> Clark's principal, often repeated, objection to the
> psychosocial hypothesis (PSH) is that it is merely an
> exercise in literary criticism as opposed to the scientific
> study of multi-witness reports and hard evidence by ETH
> ufologists. Yet, when we ask for details of those reports
> allegedly ignored by the literary critics and armchair
> ufologists, what do we get? Nothing, apart from a few very
> old cases, nearly all of which were satisfactorily explained
> years ago.

"Satisfactorily explained" in your dreams, Harney. And you
expect us to take you seriously? Or maybe it's your view that 50
years of failed explanations deserves another 50. It's this sort
of empty polemic that causes me not to take Harney automatically
at his word when he harumphs that the Trans-en-Provence case has
been "devastatingly" debunked and "satisfactorily explained."

Those who want to know what my real objections to the Purely
Speculative Hypothesis are, not what Harney's self- serving
paraphrase of same is, are directed to The UFO Book, 492-504,
and The UFO Encyclopedia, 2nd Edition, 749-59. (I also urge
curious readers to go to Thomas E. Bullard's hard-hitting
critique "Folkloric Dimensions of the UFO Phenomenon" [JUFOS 3,
1991] and the follow-up "Fresh Air, or Air Castles in Folklore
Theory?" [JUFOS 4, 1992].) The PSH is looking more and more like
one of ufology's most unkillable canards. It's a house of cards
I wouldn't want to be standing in during the mildest summer
breeze. Or maybe even while somebody was breathing
outside the door.

> In fact, Clark doesn't like dwelling on particular cases, as
> they always fall apart when subjected to careful, critical
> examination - literary or otherwise. He prefers to rely on
> the cumulative effect of hundreds of reports which, if taken
> at face value, tend to suggest that the ETH might be a
> rational explanation for them. He also praises the work of
> Michael D. Swords who argues that the existence of
> space-travelling ETs is possible. I entirely agree that it
> is possible, but is it actual? What we need is hard
> evidence, not scientific speculation.

Here Harney staggers into the downright wacky. "Clark doesn't
like dwelling on particular cases." What? Huh? Is this a joke? I
have just had published a two-volume, 1200-page work (1035 of
text) which "dwells on particular cases" in often greater detail
than anywhere else in the literature, weighing evidence and
judging which conventional explanations work and which don't,
bringing to bear in a number of instances information heretofore
unavailable, and pointing to a number of cases which stubbornly
resist solution, for reasons about which I could hardly be more
specific. Harney, you are full of ... erroneous assertions.

Which brings me to the second point: the consistent failure of
the Purely Speculative Hypothesizers to come to grips with the
case Michael Swords presents, in several papers, some of great
length, with extensive citation in the scientific literature,
for the compatibility of exobiological speculation about the
nature of ET life with ufology's ETH. Over and over again,
however, when forced (always, it seems, by me) even to mention
Swords' work -- surely among the most important theoretical
writing in the history of the UFO literature -- we get the sort
of vague, passing, grudging acknowledgement Harney gives us
above, before the PSHer quickly gets off the subject and
retreats to his beloved hand-waving (or -wringing).

Makes you wonder just how much the Purely Speculative
Hypothesizers believe their own ...um ... uh ... opinions.

The apostate,

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 29

                        Re: 'Eliptical' Crop Circles

From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 20:01:45 PDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 08:53:25 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Eliptical' Crop Circles


>From: "Leanne Martin" <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: "Eliptical" Crop Circles
>Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 23:25:02 PDT

>>Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 17:48:58 -0400
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: UFO UpDate: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 3, Number 24

>>From: Joseph Trainor <Masinaigan@aol.com>
>>Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 11:52:50 EDT
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 3, Number 24
>>Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 10:47:29 EDT

>>     UFO ROUNDUP
>>Volume 3, Number 24
>>June 14, 1998
>>Editor: Joseph Trainor

>>CROP CIRCLE APPEARS IN AN
>>OLIVE GROVE IN CROATIA

>>     On Tuesday, June 8, 1998, a crop circle appeared
>>on Hvar Otok, a large island in the Adriatic Sea just
>>off the shore of Croatia.  The formation was found beside
>>an olive grove on a farm in Poljica, near Jelsa.

>>     The "ellipse" was found in a hillside field of grass
>>by Marko Huljic, owner of the olive grove.  "Based on the
>>opinion of the discoverer Marko Huljic, that kind of trail
>>couldn't have been made by a car, or an agricultural
>>machine."

>>     "On the relatively straight meadow with the
>>overgrown grass, two continuous ellipses in the range
>>of 40 centimeters (20 inches) are there.  The ground
>>with the bent grass is one meter (3.3 feet) in diameter.
>>The length of the external ellipse is 4.8 meters, and the
>>width is 3.6 meters."

>>     "The trail of this unexplained phenomenon has been
>>confirmed also by Ivo Zupanovic, Vladimir Huljic, Nikola
>>Zenchic and others."  Meanwhile, "fantastic stories"
>>about the crop circle "are circulating around Poljica."

>>     Hvar island is 256 kilometers (160 miles) south of
>>Zagreb.  It's also 112 kilometers (70 miles) southeast
>>of Sibenik, Croatia, the site of a reported UFO landing
>>back in January 1998.  (See the Croatian newspaper
>>Free Dalmatia for June 9, 1998, "UFO at olive field
>>near Jelsa?"  Many thanks to Mirko Crnchevic for
>>forwarding the newspaper article.)

><snip>

>Ladies and Gentlefolk,

>The above story prompts me to put forward an hypothesis for
>discussion on the whole 'crop circle' issue.

>We call these events "crop circles" for the obvious reason -  the
>common shape caused in the fields. But we have here the very
>distinct shapes of eliptoids, or 'stretched' circles. Why should
>this occurrance be so different?

>Tonight, go outside with a torch and shine it vertically to the
>ground.
>You should, of course, see a circular bright spot. Then slowly
>tilt the beam away from you until you can see the bright spot
>change shape.

>Anything come to mind?

>I suggest that it is quite possible that 'crop circles' are the
>result of satellite based beam experiments - perhaps even
>targeting experiments from the S.D.I. The complex shapes and
>accurate patterning of some of them suggest a very obvious
>control process.

>The fact these Croatian ones are not quite circles may indicate
>that the beams originated from a point directly above areas where
>other 'circles' are really circles.

>Notice, too, that they always seem to appear in open fields and
>don't overlap structures that impede 'image quality'. This
>suggests that they are being produced in such a way so as to
>facilitate easy checking with satellite photography.

Dear List,

As a followup to the query I raised in the above post I note the
following "from UFO UpDate: Filer's Files #25"

<BIG snip>

"The complex dragon and West Overton circles formations seem to
have appeared overnight, with no reports of unusual activity in
the area beforehand. Thanks to Gerry Lovell.

FarShores  http://www.farshore.force9.co.uk.

Editors note:  Recent sampling of the crop formation and soil
samples indicate high Electro magnetic and microwave effects
have occurred within these fields.

One farmer in England who hired guards to watch his fields to
prevent hoaxers from hurting his crops.  While under guard, the
crop formations developed in 30 seconds to a maximum of five
minutes."

<snip>

Some of you may recall that a year or two ago there was a report
in some main stream media about a proposed 'theoretical'
microwave link to an orbital solar power collecting source. I
think we may be seeing the results of experiments along these
lines, with ever more complex designs being the result of fine
tuning of the targeting system.

Looking at it as an economical resource - when you throw
billions of dollars (U.S.) into the 'Star Wars' weapons system,
and your main enemy disappears with a whimper, what else are you
going to do with all that
hardware floating above us?

Regards,

Leanne Martin
Computer Engineer $ WANG GLOBAL Australia






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 29

                      Re: 'She Blinded Me with Science'

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 00:29:58 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 08:59:23 -0400
Subject: Re: 'She Blinded Me with Science'

> From: RobIrving@aol.com
> Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 00:34:47 EDT
> To: updates@globalserve.net
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: 'She Blinded Me with Science'

> Apart from this being built, layer upon layer, of non sequiters
> - Mark Cashman's comparitive categorizations of events/shapes,
> etc., for example

To exactly what are you referring Rob?

I have never created a comparative categorization of events /
shapes of UFOs. I have created a catalog of UFO reports which
show some similarities of appearance. This level of
systematization, arising directly from an examination of the
data, is, of course, far from a non-sequiter (a phrase not
readily comprehensible in this context, in any event).

I have also created a behavioral classification system for UFO
reports. Again, this system represents only a basic level of
classification of UFO reports based on common features which are
frequently reported. Being based on the data, this system also
easily escapes being "layer upon layer of non-sequiters".

If you can show me that either of these systems are not
consistent with the underlying data, then I will thank you for
helping me improve them.

Please note that neither of these classification systems even
require OEH - they are simply classifications based on reports.

> While Mark Cashman may argue that multiple witness reports
> amount to some kind of repeatability, in scientific terms it
> doesn't. In fact, this form of inductive reasoning is
> demonstrably false, and often borders on the disingenuous.

Since I have never argued this, I suspect it is your logic which
is at fault.

I have, however, suggested, that multiple independent
observations, especially via separate systems (i.e. radars at
different frequencies, eyes and radars, eyes and photographs)
represent a higher standard of validity than single witness
observations, and a challenge to the analyst.

> If, as Mark suggests, the traditional process of scientific
> discovery is "inappropriate" to phenomena such as UFOs, that's
> tough

I would suggest you read the papers on this subject at my
website, where I point out that standard science is appropriate
for application to UFOs, but where I also point out that UFOlogy
is not experimental science, but is more akin to astronomy and
sociology than to physics.

------
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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 29

                         Re: MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 00:14:35 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 09:01:52 -0400
Subject: Re: MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4

>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: "Jerome Clark" <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4
>Date: Sun, 28 Jun 98 15:14:48 PDT

<Giant snip>

>> In fact, Clark doesn't like dwelling on particular cases, as
>> they always fall apart when subjected to careful, critical
>> examination - literary or otherwise. He prefers to rely on
>> the cumulative effect of hundreds of reports which, if taken
>> at face value, tend to suggest that the ETH might be a
>> rational explanation for them. He also praises the work of
>> Michael D. Swords who argues that the existence of
>> space-travelling ETs is possible. I entirely agree that it
>> is possible, but is it actual? What we need is hard
>> evidence, not scientific speculation.

>Here Harney staggers into the downright wacky. "Clark doesn't
>like dwelling on particular cases." What? Huh? Is this a joke? I
>have just had published a two-volume, 1200-page work (1035 of
>text) which "dwells on particular cases" in often greater detail
>than anywhere else in the literature, weighing evidence and
>judging which conventional explanations work and which don't,
>bringing to bear in a number of instances information heretofore
>unavailable, and pointing to a number of cases which stubbornly
>resist solution, for reasons about which I could hardly be more
>specific. Harney, you are full of ... erroneous assertions.

<snip>

As far as the giant snips go, I think everyone is holding their
own. But as far as the "best case" scenario goes, I have to side
with Harney, unless Clark is willing to give us his best ten.
Harney seems to be saying the ETH argument is composed of a
series of cumulative errors. Clark (see above) says this isn't
the case at all, but cleverly avoids the ten best cases issue.

Would it help if we moved the goal post to twenty? The point --
which Jerry himself knows very well, whichever theory is
applicable -- is this and this only: which ten (20 or 30) cases
make your argument?

If you aren't willing to cite ten conclusive cases in favor of a
particular hypothesis, then one may be forgiven for wondering how
"conclusive" your argument is in the first place.

So the question remains (and seems unlikely to go away any time
soon): Which ten specific cases (you wrote the UFO encyclopedia,
after all, so ten cases should tumble off the tongue fairly
easily) do you find most evidential and supportive of an
Extraterrestrial Hypothesis?

No more generalizations, please, just your ten best cases. If
you've got fifty best cases, fine; we just want to see the first
ten.

Which ten ET-indicative cases are you willing to stand behind?

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 29

                  Science Panel Urges Study Of UFO Reports

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 09:42:44 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 09:42:44 -0400
Subject: Science Panel Urges Study Of UFO Reports





From: The Washington Post site at:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPcap/1998-06/29/075r-062998-idx.html



Panel Urges Study Of UFO Reports Unexplained Phenomena Need
Scrutiny, Science Group Says

By Kathy Sawyer Washington Post Staff Writer Monday, June 29,
1998; Page A01

Some supposed UFO sightings have been accompanied by unexplained
physical evidence that deserves serious scientific study, an
international panel of scientists has concluded.

In the first independent scientific review of the controversial
topic in almost 30 years, directed by physicist Peter Sturrock
of Stanford University, the panel emphasized that it had found
no convincing evidence of extraterrestrial intelligence or any
violation of natural laws.

But the panel cited cases that included intriguing and
inexplicable details, such as burns to witnesses, radar
detections of mysterious objects, strange lights appearing
repeatedly in the skies over certain locales, aberrations in the
workings of automobiles, and radiation and other damage found in
vegetation.

The 50-page review, being released today, asserts that the
scientific community might learn something worthwhile if it can
overcome the fear of ridicule associated with the topic and get
some funding for targeted research to try to explain these
occurrences.

"It may be valuable to carefully evaluate UFO reports to extract
information about unusual phenomena currently unknown to
science," the report stated, adding that such research could
also improve understanding of, and in some cases debunk,
supposed UFO events.

For example, Earth science researchers have eventually accepted
several phenomena "originally dismissed as folk tales,"
including meteorites and certain types of lightning, the panel
noted.

The findings are from a four-day workshop held in Tarrytown,
N.Y., followed by a second three-day meeting in San Francisco,
both last fall. The results are published in the current issue
of the Society for Scientific Exploration, which was established
by Sturrock.

The inquiry involved scientists from the Massachusetts Institute
of Technology, Cornell and Princeton universities, the
universities of Arizona and Virginia, and institutions in France
and Germany, among others. A panel of nine physical scientists
analyzed presentations by eight UFO investigators, who were
encouraged to present their strongest evidence. The project was
funded by Laurance S. Rockefeller through his LSR Fund because
of a belief, the report said, that "the problem is in a very
unsatisfactory state of ignorance and confusion."

The panel suggests the scientific community has suffered a
failure of curiosity regarding UFOs. Despite an abundance of
reports over the last 50 years, "and despite great public
interest, the scientific community has shown remarkably little
interest in this topic."

Asked about the conclusions, a sampling of scientists and
officials outside the panel expressed surprise that a topic with
such a high "giggle factor" might be reincarnated for serious
study, possibly further blurring the lines between legitimate
research and the "lunatic fringe." Some said they would never
comment on the touchy topic, and some said they would reserve
judgment until they had read the report.

In a telephone interview, Sturrock said that he hopes at least
some scientists "will read the report and become curious. . . .
The challenge is to do good science on this issue. It's
difficult."

Some reported UFO incidents could have been caused by rare
natural phenomena, such as electrical activity high above
thunderstorms, or other known physical effects, the panel found.
But there were some phenomena they could not easily explain.

The existing evidence from past cases is unlikely to produce
either a solid debunking or other satisfactory explanation of
the reports, the panel found. But "new data, scientifically
acquired and analyzed (especially of well-documented, recurrent
events) could yield useful information," it said.

To be credible to the scientific community, future UFO
"evaluations must take place with a spirit of objectivity and a
willingness to evaluate rival hypotheses" that so far has been
lacking, the report said.

sparse, suggests microwave, infrared, visible and ultraviolet
radiation, although "a few cases seem to point toward high doses
of ionizing radiation, such as X-rays or gamma rays."

Radar detections of UFOs. Scientific study would require the
cooperation of military authorities. An example occurred in
January 1994, in the skies above Paris, when an airborne crew
saw "a gigantic disk" more than 3,000 feet in diameter. The disk
was detected on military radar for 50 seconds, slowed abruptly
from 110 knots to zero, then disappeared.

Semi-regular sightings of strange lights (such as those in
Hessdalen, Norway, and Marfa, Tex.), in some cases associated
with measured magnetic disturbances.

Apparent gravitational and/or inertial effects, as in a case
that occurred in Ohio in 1973. A number of witnesses, both on
the ground and in an Army Reserve helicopter, saw lights,
including a powerful green glow, and a "cigar-shaped gray
metallic object," during which time the helicopter ascended
although its controls were set for descent. Scientists
apparently failed to investigate the one item of physical
evidence -- a magnetic compass that had begun to spin during the
event and was subsequently removed because it was unserviceable.

Injuries to vegetation and other ground traces. In a 1981 case
in Trans-en-Provence, France, a witness reported an ovoid object
emiting a low whistle as it flew in for a landing. Police and
special UFO researchers found two concentric circles and other
traces that, when subjected to laboratory analysis, showed the
soil had been heavily compacted, though without major heating,
and there were symptoms of aging in the plants there. A
toxicologist concluded that some, though not all, of the effects
could have been caused by powerful microwave radiation.

The Sturrock group said that because of advances in knowledge
and technical capability, chances of significant learning are
greater now than 30 years ago when the Air Force and the CIA
supported a two-year investigation by the Colorado Project,
directed by Edward U. Condon. That 1968 report concluded that
"further extensive study of UFOs probably cannot be justified in
the expectation that science will be advanced."

The Air Force last year made public its latest report on the
infamous 1947 incident near the town of Roswell, N.M., which
gave rise to a whole flying-saucer culture of paranoia, up to
and including the fictional television program "The X-Files."
Titled "The Roswell Report: Case Closed," that report, like the
Sturrock panel, reiterated earlier conclusions that there is
no evidence of aliens or their spaceships.

         =A9 Copyright 1998 The Washington Post Company







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 29

                       Re: Video of 'UFOs' Around MIR

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 03:42:13 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 09:05:57 -0400
Subject: Re: Video of 'UFOs' Around MIR

>From: Susan Cerdan <sunset@sunet.net>
>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Video of 'UFOs' Around MIR
>Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 15:22:14 -0700

>>Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 10:07:01 -0400
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Video of 'UFOs' Around MIR

>>If this information was obtainable by someone from the 'general
>>public', then that would mean it does not fall under the category
>>of 'Hide from the Public'. Therefore shouldn't NASA oblige anyone
>>asking that this footage be posted on a website for anyone to
>>see?

>>I understand it takes money to reproduce videotapes and mail
>>them, but if I had this kind of information, I would be putting
>>it on the web for anyone who would be interested for free or
>>urging NASA to do it.

<snip>

>>Sue

>Dear Sue,

<snip>

>Of course NASA has seen it, they downloaded it! He just happened
>to be there when the images were flying around the Mir. Yes, you
>can do the same thing, set up the dishes, stay up all night for
>a couple of months and record the
>best images, edit it and advertise it. Good luck!

>Love & Light,

>Susan Sunset

Hello Susan,

I think you missed Sues' point in your response to her. I believe
what Sue was saying was, that information that affects all
mankind, belongs to mankind. If your "Joe Public" has information
that belongs in the hands of the people, her suggestion that it be
published on the open web is not only sound, but morally the
correct thing to do. It makes much more sense than 'commercial
marketing' that will only reach a few. You didn't address that
aspect of her comments. Your response boils down to; he did the
work and if you want to see it you'll have pay.

This is a major peice of evidence (if it isn't simply ejected
frozen urine or the like.) Your friend cannot copyright it, and
he has no right to hold something like that (if it's real)
hostage for money.

Hey, this is America, everybody's allowed to make a living. But
this moves into the very grey area of the peoples right/need to
know as opposed to your friends' right to earn a buck for the
work that he did.

Sue and Joe both make a valid claim. When given the humanitarian
motivation behind Sues' idea about how it should be distributed,
it tips the scales in favor of Sues' approach and makes "Joe" and
-his motives- look more commercial than caring.

It is a tough call because after all, the guy did put all the
work in securing it. At $25 bucks a throw though it really makes
it look like Joes' number one consideration here is 'profit' and
not simply to serve, help, or enlighten humanity. Which is where
Sue was coming from.

"Do the Right Thing!" <G>

Post the information on the Internet so that -everyone- can
access it. It "belongs" to _all_ of the People, not just the few
that your "ads" will reach or the even smaller percentage who
will go as far as ordering it.

The People have a right to see information of this nature without
having to pay a heavy looking price. If it affects all, it
belongs to all.

Solamente mis dos centavos.

John 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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 29

                      UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 3, Number 26

From: Joseph Trainor <Masinaigan@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 07:20:11 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 09:11:56 -0400
Subject: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 3, Number 26


     UFO ROUNDUP
Volume 3, Number 26
June 28, 1998
Editor: Joseph Trainor

NASA LOSES CONTACT WITH
SOHO SPACE OBSERVATORY

     On Wednesday, June 24, 1998, at 7:16 p.m., flight
controllers at NASA's Goddard Spaceflight Center in
Greenbelt, Maryland lost contact with the Solar and
Heliospheric Observatory (SOHO) satellite.
     Launched on December 2, 1995, SOHO is an
orbiting satellite of the "Great Observatories" program
and is jointly operated by NASA and the European Space
Agency.
     According to the NASA press release of June 26, 1998,
"SOHO went into emergency sun reacquisition mode, and
ground controllers lost contact with the spacecraft at
7:16 p.m....This mode is activated when an anomaly occurs
and the spacecraft loses its orientation towards the Sun.
When this happens, the spacecraft automatically tries to
point itself toward the Sun again by firing its attitude control
thrusters under the guidance of an onboard Sun sensor."
     The NASA press release did not describe the nature
of the "anomaly."
     "Efforts to re-establish contact with SOHO did not
succeed, and telemetry was lost.  Subsequent attempts
using the full NASA Deep Space Network capabilities
have so far also not been successful."
     "Engineers at NASA and ESA are attempting to
re-establish contact with the spacecraft."
(Many thanks to Kent Steadman of the CyberSpace
Orbit for forwarding the NASA news release.)
(Editor's Note:  SOHO is the second major satellite to
go haywire in orbit recently.  Last month, the
communications satellite Galaxy IV rotated out of
position and lost contact with Earth.  Also, on
January 10, 1997, SOHO photographed a mysterious
object between Earth and the Sun, which NASA
subsequently identified as a sun-grazing "proto-comet."
See UFO Roundup, Volume 2, Number 3 for more
details.)

MYSTERIOUS EXPLOSION
IN NORTHERN CHILE

     Early Sunday morning, June 14, 1998, at 4:30 a.m.,
two men were driving a truck from the Andes west to
La Serena, a city in northern Chile, when "a huge
explosion of light" lit up the sky.
     The two drivers were employed by the copper
mine in the Valle del Elqui, near Vicuna, 100 kilometers
(60 miles) east of La Serena.  Both communities are
in the province of Coquimbo about 380 kilometers
(240 miles) north of the national capital, Santiago
de Chile.
     According to ufologist Luis Sanchez Perry, the
explosion was heard within a radius of 200 kilometers
(120 miles).
     The truck was "near a place called Chapilco, when
he was blinded by the brilliant white light.  He couldn't
see anything for a few seconds."
     "He was with his partner" at the time, and "everything
lighted up like it was a summer day (11 a.m.)."
(Editor's Note: Late June is a winter month in Chile and
the other countries of the southern hemisphere.)
     "The white burst of light had a duration of eight
seconds approximately."
     The case is being investigated by ufologist
Patricio Diaz of La Serena.  (Muchas gracias a Luis
Sanchez Perry para esas noticias.)

UFOs REPEATEDLY VISIT
CHILE'S BIGGEST DAM

     A very large, dark, disc-shaped UFO visited the
huge hydroelectric dam at Lago (Lake) de Colbun
in southern Chile on May 16, 1998.
     The UFO was witnessed by over 30 people,
who described it as a a gigantic disc, "dark (not
black), with a big orange light on the bottom (middle)
and small lights that moved around on the outer
part (rim) of the object."
     Lago de Colbun is Chile's biggest hydroelectric
dam and one of the largest in South America.  It's
located 200 kilometers (120 miles) south of
Santiago de Chile.
     The UFO hovered at 1,000 meters (3,300 feet)
above the ground and remained in view for 20 minutes
before flying across the lake and into the Andes.
Witnesses described the object as "so big that it
seemed to cover the whole valley."
     According to ufologist Luis Sanchez Perry,
Lago de Colbun has seen many UFO visitations in
recent months.
     "They call the UFOs robones (thieves) because
that they say they steal electricity," Luis reported.
"Before they had the high-tech plant, they didn't have
many blackouts (one or two in a month), but now they
have three in a week."
     "UFOs have been seen coming out of Lake Colbun
near the high tension wires, absorbing electricity,
absorbing water, and some of them have gone at high
speed through the valley towards the hydroelectric
plant," coming within a few hundred meters of the
dam before disappearing.  (Otra vez, muchas gracias
a Luis Sanchez Perry para esa historia.)

BLUE FIREBALL IN DAYLIGHT
STARTLES ARIZONANS

     A blindingly-bright blue fireball shot across the
sky south of Phoenix, Arizona on Thursday afternoon,
June 18, 1998, and was seen by hundreds of amazed
onlookers.
     Witnesses from the Phoenix suburbs of Chandler
and Ahwatukee south to Tucson reported seeing the
object pass over, heading west.  Some witnesses
reported seeing "a blue fireball," others "a reddish
or orange streak."
     According to the Arizona Star, the event "followed
a much-publicized exploding meteor seen by hundreds
of Arizonans June 7 and news accounts of meteorites
that hit a New Mexico barn and a Tennessee home on
June 13."
     "'I was sitting on the back porch, and I saw the
long, red streak coming down from the sky,' said
John Botimer of Ahwatukee."
     "Carleton Moore, director of Arizona State University's
Center for Meteorite Study, said his office received more
than 90 calls Thursday and Friday about the daytime
fireball seen south of the Phoenix area."
     "Astronomers say an asteroid named Oljato may be
responsible."
     "Swarms of asteroid chunks strung along the orbit
of a large asteroid could theoretically cause a rush of
bright meteors when Earth crosses the orbit, says
UA (University of Arizona) astronomer Dan Durda."
     "Earth was crossing one of the orbits of the asteroid
Oljato on June 8, he said."
     "'It's just conceivably possible that the June 7 fireball
may have been associated with Oljato,' he said, 'But it's
more likely just a statistical fluke."
(Editor's Comment: There have been a lot of "statistical
flukes" during the month of June, and not just in
Arizona.  See UFO Roundup, Volume 3, Numbers 24
and 25 for details on recent sightings in Italy and
Argentina.)
     Elsewhere in Arizona, a skywatch group led by
Rob Meyer encountered a "a large multi-colored light
object" Friday night, June 19, 1998, in the red rock
canyons near Sedona (population 7,920).
     When one of the party spotted a strange glow in
the canyon, Meyer "picked up the night vision
equipment and asked everyone to observe the
phenomenon."  He then began "pulsing his flashlight
in the direction the light was coming from."
     "As he kept flashing, another light appeared and
flashed back in response...Two in the group saw several
Orbs pass by which they could see with through the
night vision equipment."
     Minutes passed and more bright spherical UFOs
appeared.  "As the evening ended," the group all "faced
the area where the lights were coming from and
observed another sequence of pulsed flashes."
     Meyer then "asked the group to send Love
telepathically to where the light was, and all of a sudden,
the most spectacular flashing of multi-colored lights
appeared in the same sequence Rob had flashed with
his flashlight."  (See the Arizona Star for June 21, 1998.
Many thanks to Errol Bruce-Knapp for forwarding the
Sedona story.)

ANOTHER GLOWING UFO
SIGHTED IN FIRENZE, ITALY

     Late Saturday evening, June 20, 1998, "a strong
white light" moved into position above Monte Morello,
a peak south of Firenze (Florence), Italy "and remained
visible for more than half an hour."
     The UFO was first reported near the city's
international airport in nearby Peretola, where it "was
observed by dozens of eyewitnesses and by airport
personnel."  The object was described as having
"a dull white glow."
     Firenze is 200 kilometers (120 miles) north of Rome.
(See the Italian newspaper La Nazione for June 21, 1998.
Grazie a Renzo Cabassi, Nico Montigiani e Edoardo
Russo di CISU per questo rapporto.)

SQUADRON OF V-SHAPED UFOs
SEEN OVER MONTREAL

     Late Saturday night, June 20, 1998, Kayla S. and
her husband "were sitting in our backyard and watching
the stars because it was unusually clear and the
visibility was great.  I was 'hoping' to see a UFO but
did not really expect it."
     The couple, who live in a suburban neighborhood
between Dorval and Lachine, just south of Montreal,
Quebec, Canada, watched the sky for a while.  "Then,
at around midnight," Kayla reported, "I screamed,
'UFO, UFO!  It looks like something weird, honey.'"
     "My husband was also watching the strange sight.
We both saw an L-shaped formation that seemed to be
made up of about five different V-shaped objects.  It
could have been a flock of birds except for the fact of
the speed they were going at.  It traversed the sky
in about four seconds."
(Editor's Note:  Four seconds from horizon to horizon
equals 3,600 miles per hour.)
     "We lost sight of it because of the trees and the
houses and the speed of it.  The color of each of the
separate V-shaped objects was a kind of opaque
grey, translucent almost.  If it hadn't been so crystal
clear that night, then there was no way we would have
ever been able to see this."  She added that the UFO
formation was "traveling due south" towards the
Adirondack Mountains of the USA's northern New
York state.  (Email Interview)

GREEN FIREBALL AND BLACK
HELICOPTERS SIGHTED IN
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA

     On Wednesday, June 17, 1998, at 9:30 p.m., a
waitress, her son and her boyfriend were driving on
California Highway 330 from the city of San
Bernardino (population 164,164) to the ridgeline
town of Running Springs (population 4,195) when
a strange green glow illuminated the sky.
     "She stated, 'The sky literally lit up,' and about
5,000 feet (1,515 meters) above the mountain road,
and 200 yards to the right of her car and over a
building with a flagpole hovered a huge 'fireball.'"
     According to Jerry Glass of Southern California
MUFON, subsequent investigation by members of
his group determined that the building was the
Running Springs Fresh Water Plant.
     The waitress stated, "The fireball was green,
luminescent," describing the glow as "forty times
brighter than the brightest flashlight I've ever seen,
with rays of light shooting out."
     According to Jerry Glass, "Her boyfriend was in
the passenger seat and he saw the object for 30
seconds while the car continued to drive."
     The woman's attention returned to the road as
their vehicle rounded a sharp turn and nearly "rushed
off a cliff.  She said two other cars were following
closely.  One was a California Highway Patrol
vehicle, which after the curve raced by her car."
     The woman reported her encounter to the local
sheriff's department, the Federal Aviation Administration
and the National UFO Hotline.
     Running Springs is eight miles (11 kilometers)
northeast of San Bernardino, a city approximately
63 miles (102 kilometers) east of Los Angeles.
     Earlier that afternoon, on June 17, 1998, a woman
psychologist from Running Springs was returning home
from her office in Redlands when "she observed black
military helicopters taking off from Norton Air Force
Base at the junction of Highways 30 and 330,
traveling up Highway 330 and flying over her jeep."
     According to Glass, Norton Air Force Base was
reportedly closed during a recent Defense Department
phaseout of military bases.
     The following day, Thursday, June 18, 1998, at
about 3 p.m., the same woman passed "a convoy
of six military vehicles carrying troops" on the same
road.  SoCal MUFON continues to investigate
these reports.  (Many thanks to Jerry Glass of
MUFON for this news story.)

MORE UFO ACTIVITY IN
MARLETTE, MICHIGAN

     On Wednesday, June 17, 1998, at 11 p.m.,
Michigan ufologist Jeff Westover spotted "five
star-like objects in the sky moving very fast,
three moving due north and two to the south-
southeast.  One of the southerly-moving objects
intersected with a westbound jet.  This particular
object had a veering movement to it.  The other
four seemed to go very fast on a straight path."
     On Saturday, June 20, 1998, at 11 p.m.,
Westover was driving into Marlette (population 1924)
when he spied "a brilliant reddish-orange light" just
above the southern horizon.
     "I hurriedly made it through town, past the bright
street lights and through heavy cruising traffic, and
out into the south end of town," Jeff reported.  "It was
still there, 20 degrees above the horizon, almost
directly in front of me and bobbing like a boat on
choppy seas.  The single light was jumping around
slightly.  Then it happened.  I pulled off onto a side
road on a slight hill and parked the car, waiting to see
if the light would reappear...binoculars ready."
     "Sure enough, it reappeared within two minutes
and was flying bright, although not giving off any glow
or halo.  It seemed to be like a ball of fire, concentrated
and bright.  Through the binoculars it was a bright ball
of reddish orange light, brighter than any star in the sky,
and seemed to have a bobbing motion to it.  And then
it simply vanished before my eyes...It suddenly reappeared
at 20 degrees and then dropped to the ground.  I lost sight
of it at that point."  (Many thanks to Jeff Westover of
MUFON for this news story.)

TWO GIRLS SEE A UFO IN
VALPARAISO, INDIANA

     On Saturday, June 20, 1998, just after midnight, two
junior high school girls, aged 12 and 13, "observed two
UFOs" in the sky over their hometown of Valparaiso,
Indiana (population 24,414), a city located 45 miles
(72 kilometers) southeast of Chicago, Illinois.
     The girls described the UFO as "a 'star-like' object
without running lights."  The UFO "was moving gradually
in a southerly direction before making an abrupt turn
upward and to the north."
     At 12:10 a.m., the girls saw a second object that
"appeared to consist of three star-like lights flying
line-abreast.  The speed of the second object was said
to be much faster than the first, and it was moving west
and rising in an abrupt turn towards the south, finally
disappearing from sight."
     According to Mike Caldwell, father of the 12-year-old
girl, his daughter is a National Junior Honor Society
student and "knows quite clearly what an airplane looks
like, both in daytime and night conditions.  She has
stated emphatically that this was not an airplane."
(Many thanks to Kenneth Young of Tri-States Advocates
for Scientific Knowledge, T.A.S.K., for this report.)

GAS GIANT FOUND IN NEARBY
SOLAR SYSTEM

     Astronomers this week found a large planet
similar to Jupiter in a neighboring solar system.
     The yet-unnamed gas giant is "three times closer"
to Earth "than any of the 11 other 'extrasolar' planets
that have been found in the past two years," according
to the report in USA Today.
     "'This has astronomers bristling and squirming in
their seats,' says astronomer Geoffrey Marcy of San
Francisco State University, whose team has found
seven of the twelve known planets beyond Pluto."
     "Marcy's team used telescopes last week to detect
a telltale wobble in the parent star, called Gliese 876,
that was caused by the gravitational tug of a planet."
     "Two teams of Europeans independently confirmed
the find," according to the June 27, 1998 edition of
Science News.
     "The newly found planet is nearly twice the mass
of Jupiter and the first extrasolar planet that orbits its
star in an elongated loop rather than a circle.  It takes
61 days to orbit the star at an average distance of
about 18.5 million miles, one fifth the distance between
the sun and Earth."
     "'We don;t know what it's made of, but we'd guess
it's like our own Jupiter, a big ball of hydrogen and
helium gas with some methane and ammonia thrown
in,' Marcy says."
     "Gliese 876, in the constellation Aquarius, is about
15 light years or 87 trillion miles (139 trillion kilometers)
away.  With a weight of just a third of the sun, it is the
smallest and lightest star known to have a star around it.
The star has just one percent of the sun's brightness."
     "Since most stars in our 100-billion-star Milky Way
galaxy belong to this lighter class, astronomers suspect
there may be many more planets awaiting discovery."
     "'We're seeing these Jupiters in 10 to 15 percent of
the stars we're studying.  We'll eventually get to the
point where maybe we can find Earthlike planets
around other stars,' says Charles Beichmann of NASA's
Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif."  (See
USA Today for June 25, 1998, "Scientists find
closest-yet new planet," by Paul Hoversten.)
(Editor's Comment: Twice the mass of Jupiter, eh?
I've got an idea.  Why don't we call this newfound
gas giant Krypton?)

WRITERS EXPLORE SECRET
PROJECT AT EGYPT'S
GREAT PYRAMID

     A team of three investigators, including Lynn
Picknett, Clive Prince and Simon Cox, infiltrated
Egypt's Great Pyramid on March 31, 1998 and
found evidence of a secret archeological project
underway, according to their report in the July 1998
issue of Fortean Times.
     Picknett and Prince wrote, "There is secret
tunnelling in the Great Pyramid.  We should know.
We found evidence for it--and secretly captured it on
camera and video."
     Just before the Pyramid closed April 1 for
renovations, Picknett, Prince and Cox entered the
Pyramid and "were about to duck down the small
entrance into the King's Chamber, Simon (Cox)
pointed out an anomalous feature.  There in the
wall was an old, padlocked metal grille where--
just a few months before--there was a solid
stone block."
     The trio found "fresh cement" around the grille,
proving that it had been installed recently.
    "Shining a torch (flashlight) through the grille, we
could see the electric cable installed by (German
archeologist) Rudolf Gantenbrink in the early
1990s, and we could hear the noise of a nearby
generator or possibly drill."
     "Simon says that this tunnel connects up with
the northern 'air shaft' that comes out of the
King's Chamber.  And up the shaft there's a heap
of rubbish--including plastic water bottles--that's
too far up to have come from tourists in the King's
Chamber, but which has obviously been dropped
from the other side by workers in the new tunnel."
     "They're also doing other things in the Great
Pyramid.  A month before (February 28), Simon
had managed to get down to the pit in the
Subterranean Chamber beneath the pyramid
and found that there was a false floor covered
with sand and debris to conceal the evidence
of recent digging."
     "Interestingly, the gaffir (attendant) of the
Second Pyramid, after finding out that Simon had
already spotted the cover-up, told us that three
new chambers had been discovered behind and
above the walls of the King's Chamber, which
is obviously where the tunnel now leads."  (See
Fortean Times #112 for July 1998, "Flex, Lies
and Videotape" by Lynn Picknett and Clive Prince,
page 37.)
(Editor's Comment: Ever since the Great Pyramid
closed for renovations back on April 1, rumors
have been flying of new chambers discovered,
secret UNESCO digs, and a convoy of military
vehicles loaded with soldiers in "desert cookie"
camoflauge uniforms with no national or unit
insignia.  My favorite is the story of the life-sized
statue supposedly discovered in one of the alleged
new chambers--a statue of a man with unmistakably
African features sitting in the lotus position and
gazing up an 'air shaft' at the star Sirius.)

from the UFO Files...

1947: FORGOTTEN FLIGHT

     Nearly all ufologists are aware of the fact that
pilot Kenneth Arnold was out searching for a missing
U.S. Marine Corps transport plane on June 24, 1947
when he spotted his "flying saucers."
     But few remember the other plane that went
missing the same week a UFO crashed at Roswell.
     On Thursday morning, July 3, 1947, a C-54 cargo
plane with four propellor engines took off from
Kindley Field on Bermuda--destination Florida.
     Aboard was a U.S. Army Air Corps crew consisting
of six men.  Pilot: Major Ralph B. Ward of Concord,
New Hampshire.  Co-Pilot: Major Clyde R. Inman of
Boise, Idaho.  Navigator: Major John R. Sands Jr.of
Jacksonville, Florida.  Radio Operator: S/Sgt. Ernest
D. Fey of New Orleans, Louisiana.  Plus S/Sgt. Andrew
S. Bagacus of Townsend, Wisconsin and Sgt. Fred E.
Fricks of Chattanooga, Tennessee.
     The C-54 was scheduled to touch down on the
runway at Morrison Army Air Field in Palm Beach,
Florida at around 2:30 p.m.  By 6 p.m., Ward's plane
was listed as "overdue."
     "Ships and planes raced out to play their role in the
by now all-too-familiar search pattern extending from
the coast of Florida to Bermuda.  Hunters scanned the
seas all night for a glimpse of light.  By dawn the air-sea
rescue operation was in full swing, with hopes high of
finding the fliers alive."
     "Early Friday morning, July 4 (1947), a large Army
transport C-74 reported sighting wreckage on the sea
300 miles northeast of West Palm Beach, Florida."
     The USS Orion was sent to investigate.  Hours
later, Major L.R. Humphreys, commanding the 5th Air
Rescue Squadron, told newsmen that the Orion "found
an oxygen bottle, two yellow seat cushions and some
aircraft plywood--all believed to be Army aircraft
equipment, but none of it identified as belonging to
the plane."
     "Air Transport Command (ATC) headquarters
announced that the search for the C-54 and its crew
was officially abandoned as of Tuesday, July 8, 1947.
According to the statement, the only wreckage found
in the course of the 100,000-square-mile search by
Army,. Navy and Coast Guard planes and surface
vessels was that picked up by the Orion.  No other
debris, bodies, oil slick or clues turned up.  The ATC
alone flew 52 sorties involving 422 hours of flight."
     The C-54 disappeared fifty-one years ago, the day
before the UFO crash at Roswell.  Major Ward and
his crew are still missing.  (See LIMBO OF THE LOST
by John Wallace Spencer, Bantam Books, New York,
N.Y., 1973, pages 20-22.)

ROUNDUP CORRIGENDA: Daev Walsh of Nua Blather
informs me that the country's proper name is Republic
of Ireland, not "Eire" as reported in last week's issue.
I stand corrected, Daev.  Thanks for writing.

FUN UFO WEBSITES: For more on the Sedona UFO
encounter, drop in at Rob Meyer's website.  It's at
http://www.sedonavortexconnection.com/robmeyer
     You'll find the Running Springs, California UFO
sightings discussed in depth at this site.  Log in at
http://www.neptune.net/mufon/wwwboard/wwwboard.
html
     Follow Jeff Westover's UFO adventures at this
site...http://www.geocities.com/CollegePark/Quad/
1365/ufo.html
     Be sure to drop in at our parent site, UFO INFO,
with its fine array of news, features, photos and
transcripts.  Set your browser for http://unfoinfo.com
     Back issues of UFO Roundup can be accessed
and downloaded at our archive.  Feel free to drop in
any time at http://ufoinfo.com/roundup and add to
your personal UFO library.

     Tomorrow, June 29, is the anniversary of the
Council of Pisa in 1408.  At the time, the Roman
Catholic Church had two rival popes, Gregory XII
in Rome and Benedict XII in Avignon, France.
Each one claimed to be the real McCoy.  The
Council of Pisa came up with an interesting solution
to this dilemna.  The council impeached both of
them and elected a new guy, Peter Philarges, as
Pope Alexander V.  Talk about a new broom and
a clean sweep!

     Barring impeachment, we'll be back next weekend
with more saucer news from "the paper that goes
home--UFO ROUNDUP."  See you then.

UFO ROUNDUP: Copyright 1998 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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 29

                       Scientists: UFOs Warrant Study

From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 09:01:01 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 10:00:16 -0400
Subject: Scientists: UFOs Warrant Study

As seen on Good Morning America today from:

http://www.jse.com/PR_UFO_98.html


          <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>

           STANFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS RELEASE

 Embargoed until June 29, 1998

       STANFORD CONTACT:

David Salisbury, Science Writer, Stanford University News
Service, phone: 650-725-1944

SOCIETY FOR SCIENTIFIC EXPLORATION CONTACT:

Marsha Sims, Executive Editor, Journal of Scientific
Exploration, phone: 650-593-8581, fax: 650-595-4466

FOR COMMENT CONTACT:

Prof. Peter Sturrock, workshop director, phone: 650-723-1438

Prof. Von R. Eshleman, panel co-chair, phone:  650-723-3531

Dr. Thomas Holzer, panel co-chair, phone:  303-397-1567

Scientific panel concludes some UFO evidence worthy of study

Stanford, CA, June 29, 1998 --- In the first independent review
of UFO phenomena since 1970, a panel of scientists has concluded
that some sightings are accompanied by physical evidence that
deserves scientific study. But the panel was not convinced that
any of this evidence points to a violation of known natural laws
or the involvement of an extraterrestrial intelligence.

The review was organized and directed by Peter Sturrock,
professor of applied physics at Stanford University, and
supported administratively by the Society for Scientific
Exploration, which provides a forum for research into
unexplained phenomena. The international review panel of nine
physical scientists responded to presentations by eight
investigators of UFO reports, who were asked to present their
strongest data. Von R. Eshleman, professor emeritus of
electrical engineering at Stanford, co-chaired the panel.

Although UFO reports date back 50 years, the information
gathered does not prove that either unknown physical processes
or alien technologies are implicated. But it does include a
sufficient number of intriguing and inexplicable observations,
the panel concluded. "It may be valuable to carefully evaluate
UFO reports to extract information about unusual phenomena
currently unknown to science." To be credible to the scientific
community "such evaluations must take place with a spirit of
objectivity and a willingness to evaluate rival hypotheses" that
has so far been lacking, it added.

This conclusion differs from that reached by Dr. Edward U.
Condon, director of the Colorado Project, in his 1968 UFO
report. He concluded that "further extensive study of UFOs
probably cannot be justified in the expectation that science
will be advanced thereby." It is very similar, however, to the
conclusion reached by the American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics' Kuettner Report issued two years later, which
advocated "a continuing, moderate-level [research] effort with
emphasis on improved data collection by objective means and on
high-quality scientific analysis."

In the current study, the scientific panel focused on incidents
involving some form of physical evidence, including photographic
evidence, radar evidence, vehicle interference, interference
with aircraft equipment, apparent gravitational or inertial
effects, ground traces, injuries to vegetation, physiological
effects on witnesses, and debris. Of particular concern are
reports that UFO encounters may be hazardous to people's health.
Some witnesses have reportedly suffered radiation-type injuries.
These reports led the panel to draw the attention of the medical
community to the possible health risks involved.

The scientists found that some of the reported incidents may
have been caused by rare natural phenomena, such as electrical
activity high above thunderstorms or radar ducting (the trapping
and conducting of radar waves by atmospheric channels). However,
the panel found that some of the phenomena related to UFOs are
not easy to explain in this fashion.

Further analysis of the evidence presented to the panel is
unlikely to shed added light on the causes underlying the
reports, the scientists said. Most current UFO investigations
lack the level of rigor required by the scientific community,
despite the initiative and dedication of the investigators
involved. But new data, scientifically acquired and analyzed,
could yield useful information and advance our understanding of
the UFO problem, the panel said.

The reviewers also made the following observations:

   1.The UFO problem is not a simple one, and it is unlikely
that there is any simple, universal answer.

   2.Whenever there are unexplained observations, there is the
possibility that scientists will learn something new by studying
them.

   3.Studies should concentrate on cases that include as much
independent physical evidence as possible.

   4.Continuing contact between the UFO community and physical
scientists could be productive.

   5.Institutional support for research in this area is
desirable.

The review panel consisted of Von Eshleman; Thomas Holzer, High
Altitude Observatory in Boulder, Colo.; Randy Jokipii, professor
of planetary science, University of Arizona, Tucson; Francois
Louange, managing director of Fleximage, Paris, France; H. J.
Melosh, professor of planetary science, University of Arizona,
Tucson; James J. Papike, professor of earth and planetary
sciences, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque; Guenther Reitz,
German Aerospace Center, Institute for Aerospace Medicine,
Cologne, Germany; Charles Tolbert, professor of astronomy,
University of Virginia, Charlottesville; and Bernard Veyret,
Bioelectromagnetics Laboratory, University of Bordeaux, France.
Eshleman and Holzer served as co-chairs of the panel.

The UFO investigators who presented evidence were Richard
Haines, Los Altos, Calif.; Illobrand von Ludwiger, Germany; Mark
Rodeghier, Center for UFO Studies, Chicago; John Schuessler,
Houston; Erling Strand, Ostfold College, Skjeberg, Norway;
Michael Swords, professor of natural science, Western Michigan
University, Kalamazoo; Jacques Vallee, San Francisco; and
Jean-Jacques Velasco, CNES, Toulouse, France.

The study was initiated by Laurance S. Rockefeller and supported
financially by the LSR Fund.

                           ###

Complete Report and Supporting Documents On Line

The Journal of Scientific Exploration is the quarterly
peer-reviewed research journal of the Society for Scientific
Exploration, an interdisciplinary organization of scholars
formed to support unbiased investigation of claimed anomalous
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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 29

                         Re: MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4

From: The Duke of Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith]
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 09:46:07 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 10:05:11 -0400
Subject: Re: MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4


Compliments of the Duke:

>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: "Jerome Clark" <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4
>Date: Sun, 28 Jun 98 15:14:48 PDT

>On the other hand, since the PSHers love to lavish attention on
>me as the focus of all that is evil in ufology,

Jerry, that's because you have such a lovely pair of horns. If my
musical training does not fail me, one is pitched in E and the
other in B-flat. And you blow them both so delicately. :-)

>I must deliver
>to them some profoundly disappointing news: a panel of American
>scientists, with no previous involvement in UFO research or
>controversy, is about to weigh in with a public statement which
>will deliver the needle to the Purely Speculative rhetorical
>balloon.

According to the Reuters report I was forwarded today:

"    The 50-page review was being released later Monday in a
publication of the Society for Scientific Exploration. The
society was established by Peter Sturrock of Stanford
University, who directed the inquiry."

Neither Sturrock nor the SSE are consistent with the notion of
"no previous involvement in UFO research or controversy". Who
else was on the panel?

But at least, according to Reuters,

"The study by an international panel emphasized that it had
found no convincing evidence of extraterrestrial intelligence or
any violation of natural laws, the Post said."

So how does all this forward the defense of the ETH, or the
disposal of the PSH? I ask myself, waiting with whiskers akimbo
for a copy of the full report to hit cyberspace.

best wishes
Plasmodium D. Malarial
Nasty Itch






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 29

                          Re: Two 'New' UFO Crashes

From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 13:14:07 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time)
Fwd Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 18:20:48 -0400
Subject: Re: Two 'New' UFO Crashes


Hi everyone,

In an article by Robert K. Lesniakiewicz in the May/June 1998
issue of Graham Birdsall's UFO Magazine (UK), we read of two
previously unknown UFO crashes in Poland.  Brief excerpts follow
below <my comments are in triangular brackets>.


I suspect that most UFO enthusiasts in the West will be
surprised to learn that we have had such an event reported on
Polish soil.  But here perhaps is an even bigger surprise - we
have evidence of THREE such crashes!

1. In the summer of 1938 in Czernica, near Jelenia Gora (Jelenia
Gora Province), a UFO crashed in the area.

According to Soviet and Russian authors, ev- dence and wreckage
recovered from the crash site was seized by Nazi Germany after
the invasion of Poland one year later.

This inspired Nazi scientists to construct a "disco-plane" which
they labelled the V-7, (the 'Haunebu' or 'Vril'). Others refer
to it as the Ay-7 or Be-7. <This account is similar to CSETI's
1936 Black Forest, Germany UFO crash account although the year
and locations are very different.  Again we see evidence of a
possible NAZI connection with UFOs.>

2. On 21 January 1959, in Gdynia...(snip) <This is the same as
CSETI's 1959 Feb 21 - Gdynia, Poland UFO crash account except
that the month is January, not February.>

3. On 15 March 1997, close to the town of Wegorzewo, Suwalki
Province, a UFO was seen to explode in the air before crashing
to the ground at 5:00 pm. Its remains were immediately gathered
by soldiers of the Polish Army.

The Army denied all knowledge of the inci- dent at the time, but
since then, Army spokesman Col. Zdzislaw Czekierda of the
General Staff, has publicly stated that "...the General Staff of
the Polish Army have had a special division which gathered and
evaluated all information about UFO sightings and close
encounters with aliens since the early 1980s". How many
high-ranking military officials in the West have come forward to
make such startling admissions? <Maybe someone should get in
touch with General Czekierda to find out more details about the
Polish Army's findings.>


Nick Balaskas
Physics and Astronomy
York University







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 29

                       Re: Video of 'UFOs' Around MIR

From: Rod Eastman <darkstar@carrollsweb.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 15:16:53 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 18:26:12 -0400
Subject: Re: Video of 'UFOs' Around MIR


> Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 03:42:13 -0500
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Video of 'UFOs' Around MIR

> >From: Susan Cerdan <sunset@sunet.net>
> >To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Video of 'UFOs' Around MIR
> >Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 15:22:14 -0700

> Hello Susan,

<snip>

> "Do the Right Thing!" <G>

> Post the information on the Internet so that -everyone- can
> access it. It "belongs" to _all_ of the People, not just the few
> that your "ads" will reach or the even smaller percentage who
> will go as far as ordering it.

> The People have a right to see information of this nature without
> having to pay a heavy looking price. If it affects all, it
> belongs to all.

> Solamente mis dos centavos.

> John Velez

I'll go one better! If the gentleman that made the videos will post
it on the net for ALL to see, I'll send him $50.00 for all the effort
he put into it, surely the effort is worth that.

Darkstar@Carrollsweb.com <Rod>






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 29

                         Re: MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4

From: "Jerome Clark" <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 98 12:17:09 PDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 18:18:50 -0400
Subject: Re: MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4


> Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 00:14:35 -0500 (CDT)
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4

> >To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
> >From: "Jerome Clark" <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4
> >Date: Sun, 28 Jun 98 15:14:48 PDT

> <Giant snip>

> >> In fact, Clark doesn't like dwelling on particular cases, as
> >> they always fall apart when subjected to careful, critical
> >> examination - literary or otherwise. He prefers to rely on
> >> the cumulative effect of hundreds of reports which, if taken
> >> at face value, tend to suggest that the ETH might be a
> >> rational explanation for them. He also praises the work of
> >> Michael D. Swords who argues that the existence of
> >> space-travelling ETs is possible. I entirely agree that it
> >> is possible, but is it actual? What we need is hard
> >> evidence, not scientific speculation.

> >Here Harney staggers into the downright wacky. "Clark doesn't
> >like dwelling on particular cases." What? Huh? Is this a joke? I
> >have just had published a two-volume, 1200-page work (1035 of
> >text) which "dwells on particular cases" in often greater detail
> >than anywhere else in the literature, weighing evidence and
> >judging which conventional explanations work and which don't,
> >bringing to bear in a number of instances information heretofore

> >unavailable, and pointing to a number of cases which stubbornly
> >resist solution, for reasons about which I could hardly be more
> >specific. Harney, you are full of ... erroneous assertions.

> <snip>

> As far as the giant snips go, I think everyone is holding their
> own. But as far as the "best case" scenario goes, I have to side
> with Harney, unless Clark is willing to give us his best ten.
> Harney seems to be saying the ETH argument is composed of a
> series of cumulative errors. Clark (see above) says this isn't
> the case at all, but cleverly avoids the ten best cases issue.

Dennis, I have great respect for you, but not when you're waxing
dumb like this. I shouldn't have to tell you, since I suspect a
degree of disingenuousness on your part here, that the evidence
for UFOs as extraordinary, apparently intelligently guided
physical phenomena consists of BOTH good cases and the much
larger pattern of sighting data worldwide for these past decades.
It amazes me that I should have to be explaining this to you. Is
this some sort of game?

> Would it help if we moved the goal post to twenty? The point --
> which Jerry himself knows very well, whichever theory is
> applicable -- is this and this only: which ten (20 or 30) cases
> make your argument?

How childish. How Klassic.  If you want specific examples of
solid, puzzling cases, my UFO Encyclopedia is full of them,
and I refer you to it. Your copy should be arriving imminently.

In the meantime, if you can't let go of Klass-like challenges,
let me issue one to you:  Show me where (1) a skeptic of ball
lightning has demanded the top 10-20 cases that conclusively
prove its existence and (2) a proponent has acknowledged the
legitimacy of the challenge and responded to it. Then you can
also tell me whether that ended the debate.

No science I've ever heard of works that way, but Klassic
rhetoric certainly does. I would have thought better of you. It
makes me wonder anew at how much the Sage of N Street, S.W., has
corrupted discourse in this field.

Let me repeat: if you want good cases, go to my encyclopedia.
You'll find them with no difficulty, and you can even count them
if you wish.

> If you aren't willing to cite ten conclusive cases in favor of a
> particular hypothesis, then one may be forgiven for wondering how
> "conclusive" your argument is in the first place.

What "particular hypothesis" are you talking about?  I would be
interested -- after, of course, seeing the ball-lightning
challenge answered above -- if you would let me know which 10
particular cases in your opinion conclusively disprove the
hypothesis that UFOs are extraordinary phenomena (which is what
I am talking about and have been talking about all along).
Then, since you're talking 20 here, let me throw in another 10.
When you've responded to the BL challenge, you -- who are so
focused on the ET heresy -- can tell us which 10 cases
conclusively disprove the ETH.

I eagerly await the list, and if we don't see it, I may be
forgiven for wondering how "conclusive" your argument is in the
first place.

And that leaves me wondering: why are you guys so focused on
final answers?  My position all along is simply that the ETH is
a reasonable provisional hypothesis for at least some UFO
phenomena. (Let me refer again to the work you guys just can't
seem to come to grips with: Mike Swords' papers on the
compatibility of current thinking about exobiology with
ufology's ETH.) I do not think it is proved. I don't think any
hypothesis about UFOs has been proved; otherwise, we wouldn't
call them UFOs. What the ETH, unlike its competitors, has going
for it is this: it is hard at this stage to conceive an
alternative interpretation which assumes (as the best reports
seem to suggest) that UFOs exhibit both advanced technology and
intelligent control.

Of course, in some quarters, as we have seen, this is such a
vile heresy that the heretic -- ESPECIALLY the apostate heretic
-- must be driven from the field or (by sleazy innuendo, in
Harney's latest broadside, which Dennis, whom I would have
judged a good friend, can't bring himself to criticize) called a
liar and a charlatan whose writing is too contaminated with
heresy to be of any value. Let's be open about this, Dennis: is
this your view?

But really, though it serves debunkers' interest (and you're
sure sounding like one here, Dennis), the two questions really
are separate, and -- as the science panel's statement indicates
-- it is investigation and documentation of the puzzling
physical phenomena associated with UFO reports that ought to be
our primary concern right now.  Or are investigation and
documentation so threatening that they ought to be buried under
endless pointless, and (at this stage) unprovable speculation?
Maybe, after all, that's the point.

Let us reflect on the grand words of Ed Ruppelt, than whom none
has put it better:

"What constitutes proof? Does a UFO have to land at the River
Entrance to the Pentagon, near the Joint Chiefs of Staff
offices?  Or is it proof when a ground radar station detects a
UFO, sends a jet to intercept it, the jet pilot sees it, and
locks on with his radar, only to have the UFO streak away at a
phenomenal speed?"

The apostate,

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 29

                       'Scientific Panel' - Good News

From: Brian Straight <brians@mdbs.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 09:08:42 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 10:22:55 -0400
Subject: 'Scientific Panel' - Good News

I see in my newspaper today (and I heard on Public Radio on the
way in), that the panel of scientists reviewing UFO reports has
concluded that UFOs are, in fact, worthy of investigation.

Sounds like a step in the right direction.

Cautiously optimistic,

Brian






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 29

                         Re: MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 98 11:39:46 PDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 18:14:16 -0400
Subject: Re: MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4


> Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 09:46:07 -0400
> From: The Duke of Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith]
> Subject: MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

> >To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
> >From: "Jerome Clark" <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4
> >Date: Sun, 28 Jun 98 15:14:48 PDT

> >I must deliver
> >to them some profoundly disappointing news: a panel of American
> >scientists, with no previous involvement in UFO research or
> >controversy, is about to weigh in with a public statement which
> >will deliver the needle to the Purely Speculative rhetorical
> >balloon.

> According to the Reuters report I was forwarded today:

> "    The 50-page review was being released later Monday in a
> publication of the Society for Scientific Exploration. The
> society was established by Peter Sturrock of Stanford
> University, who directed the inquiry."

> Neither Sturrock nor the SSE are consistent with the notion of
> "no previous involvement in UFO research or controversy". Who
> else was on the panel?

Sturrock merely brought the scientists together.  They had no
previous involvement in UFO study,  For their names, see IUR,
Winter 1997-98, p. 11.

> But at least, according to Reuters,

> "The study by an international panel emphasized that it had
> found no convincing evidence of extraterrestrial intelligence or
> any violation of natural laws, the Post said."

> So how does all this forward the defense of the ETH, or the
> disposal of the PSH? I ask myself, waiting with whiskers akimbo
> for a copy of the full report to hit cyberspace.

The panel was not formed, as I understand it, to study the
ETH but to consider the evidence for UFOs as a potentially
worthwhile subject of scientific investigation.  Why should it
endorse the ETH coming out of the gate?  None of the
panel's findings, which stress the puzzling and unexplained
physical dimensions of the phenomenon, is consistent with
the Purely Speculative Hypothesis.  It is, however, consistent
with the hated and dreaded ETH -- a subject to be taken up
in due course, but not for now, unless one wants to put cart
before horse.  One imagines a whole lot of weeping, hair-
pulling, and gnashing of teeth going on in all sorts of places
right now.  What a beautiful day this is.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 29

                     Re: Scientists: UFOs Warrant Study

From: Keith Wyatt <gunbunnyxx@yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 10:31:34 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 18:11:43 -0400
Subject: Re: Scientists: UFOs Warrant Study


> Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 09:01:01 -0700
> From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net>
> To: updates@globalserve.net
> Subject: Scientists: UFOs Warrant Study

> As seen on Good Morning America today from:


Well it is about time! I'm glad to see scientist finally decide to
help in solving this mystery and they are welcome to help investigate
these incidents!







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 29

                     Re: Scientists: UFOs Warrant Study

From: Geoff Price <Geoff@CalibanMW.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 14:31:25 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 18:31:51 -0400
Subject: Re: Scientists: UFOs Warrant Study

>Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 09:01:01 -0700
>From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Scientists: UFOs Warrant Study

>As seen on Good Morning America today from:

>http://www.jse.com/PR_UFO_98.html

Good to run into some genuine good news, eh folks?  I hope much
of this list would be happy to join me in a cheer for Peter
Sturrock for carrying this torch.

In other news, I see the war of spin is already on, with Nick
Humphries using the press release as a springboard for taunting
ETH proponents on usenet and describing the study as "if
anything" adding "to the PSH (Psychosocial Hypothesis)". Classy
job, Nick.

Personally, I didn't notice anything objectionable, or
particularly unexpected, in any of the report that I read, but I
didn't have time this morning to get into the detail. Any
salient sections deserving of comment/rebuttal/further discussion
on the list?









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 29

                      Re: 'She Blinded Me with Science'

From: RobIrving@aol.com
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 17:26:12 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 18:30:22 -0400
Subject: Re: 'She Blinded Me with Science'

>  Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: 'She Blinded Me with Science'
>  From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
>  Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 00:29:58 -0400
>  To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

Mark,

>  Please note that neither of these classification systems even
>  require OEH - they are simply classifications based on reports.

Okay. The obviousness of that is duly noted.

>  > While Mark Cashman may argue that multiple witness reports
>  > amount to some kind of repeatability, in scientific terms it
>  > doesn't.

>  Since I have never argued this, I suspect it is your logic which
>  is at fault.

I don't think so...

Your exact words: 'For instance, one could cite any reliable
multiple witness observation as, in essence, a repetition of the
observation.'

Please explain the difference between my "...repeatability" and
your "repetition of the observation". My guess is it hinges on
the meaning of observation. Are you using it in its scientific
context, or as merely 'sighting'.

Are you trying to tell us that a multiple witness sighting is
essentially a repetition of a witness sighting? I would credit
you as not being so redundant. If you are using the term
'observation' in its scientific form then, as I stated, what you
are saying is pseudoscientific bunk.

What is most revealing to me is that you don't appear to realise
why.

>  > If, as Mark suggests, the traditional process of scientific
>  > discovery is "inappropriate" to phenomena such as UFOs...

>  I would suggest you read the papers on this subject at my
>  website...

I have. Your exact words: 'These complaints are based on a
specific view of science and its data which is not necessarily
appropriate to phenomena like UFOs.'

Perhaps we should incorporate a science of semantics into the
ETH?

Rob






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 29

                         Re: MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4

From: John Rimmer <johnr@magonia.demon.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 22:35:15 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 18:33:45 -0400
Subject: Re: MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4


>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: "Jerome Clark" <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4
>Date: Sun, 28 Jun 98 15:14:48 PDT

<snip>

>On the other hand, since the PSHers love to lavish attention on
>me as the focus of all that is evil in ufology, I must deliver
>to them some profoundly disappointing news: a panel of American
>scientists, with no previous involvement in UFO research or
>controversy,is about to weigh in with a public statement which
>will deliver the needle to the Purely Speculative rhetorical
>balloon.

I think you should read a little bit more of the report before
blowing your entertaining two-tone horn (copyright: Duke of
Mendoza) about it. Phrases like "there was no convincing
evidence pointing to unknown physical processes or to the
involvement of extraterrestrial intelligences" are not going to
get the PSHers quaking in the boots, they simply serve to
demonstrate how Entirely Threadbare the ETH is. No needle there,
I'm afraid.

As for "a few reported incidents may have involved rare but
significant phenomena such as electrical activity", well, no
problems there either. Sounds like our old friends the Earth
Lights may be getting rehabilitated. Well I can live with that;
"rare but significant phenomena" are just the sort of chappies
that can provide the trigger for a whole range of psychological
states that are interpreted by the witness through their social
perceptions. Good Lord! In the far off innocent days when
corn-circles were something fresh and lovely I was quite happy
to go along with the "plasma vortex" hypothesis, until the
evidence, i.e. the sheer silliness of the phenomenon, required a
change of mind. See, Jerry, we crusty old PSHers *can* change
our minds.

Incidently, you say you don't know anything about John Harney.
Until his retirement a few months ago he was a Senior Scientific
Officer at the UK Meteorological Office, where he had worked for
a great number of years. These people know quite a lot about
strange things that happen in the sky, you know -- far more than
most English majors. He's also been studying the UFO phenomenon
for even longer than you Jerry; I think his involvement goes
back to the mid '50s.

I will see if our Patron P.L.A.Driftwood can persuade him to
respond to your comments in more detail.
--
John Rimmer
Magonia Online: http//www.magonia.demon.co.uk
A member of the P.L.A.Driftwood International Conspiracy Cartel






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 29

                        CNN Interviews Peter Sturrock

From: Jared Anderson <jared@valuserve.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 15:40:03 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 18:50:49 -0400
Subject: CNN Interviews Peter Sturrock

CNN aired an interview with Peter Sturrock of the Society for
Scientific Exploration today at about 3:25 PST. Sturrock discussed
some fundamental aspects of UFO evidence including, luminosty, radar,
radiation, and physical trace cases. and advocated the need for futher
understanding of the phenomenon and it's relevance to science.

The CNN article can be seen here:

http://www.cnn.com/TECH/space/9806/29/ufo.report.ap/



SSE web page is here:

http://www.jse.com/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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 29

                     Re: Scientists: UFOs Warrant Study

From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 17:58:59 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 21:32:59 -0400
Subject: Re: Scientists: UFOs Warrant Study


>Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 09:01:01 -0700
>From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Scientists: UFOs Warrant Study

>           STANFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS RELEASE

> Embargoed until June 29, 1998

>       STANFORD CONTACT:
>David Salisbury, Science Writer, Stanford University News
>Service, phone: 650-725-1944

>SOCIETY FOR SCIENTIFIC EXPLORATION CONTACT:

>Marsha Sims, Executive Editor, Journal of Scientific
>Exploration, phone: 650-593-8581, fax: 650-595-4466

>FOR COMMENT CONTACT:

>Prof. Peter Sturrock, workshop director, phone: 650-723-1438

>Prof. Von R. Eshleman, panel co-chair, phone:  650-723-3531

>Dr. Thomas Holzer, panel co-chair, phone:  303-397-1567

>Scientific panel concludes some UFO evidence worthy of study

>Stanford, CA, June 29, 1998 --- In the first independent review
>of UFO phenomena since 1970, a panel of scientists has concluded
>that some sightings are accompanied by physical evidence that
>deserves scientific study. But the panel was not convinced that
>any of this evidence points to a violation of known natural laws
>or the involvement of an extraterrestrial intelligence.

>[...]

The conclusions of this panel are cause for a small celebration,
I think. Although they are couched in very cautious words, and
they failed to recommend taking any witnesses' reports into
consideration, and they went out of their way to downplay the
likelihood that UFOs are piloted or controlled by intelligent
creatures not from Earth, it's still an advance towards opening
scientists' minds. The discovery in recent years of extra-solar
(large) planets probably played a role in giving the panel the
courage to go as far as it did. It should cause the "giggle
factor" to be used just a bit less frequent and to be less
threatening. But of course members of CSICOP and other
debunker-types will attack the panel and its conclusions
strenuously, as usual.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 29

              Furor Over False Memories Puts Hynpotherapist In

From: Bicycle Bob Soetebier <bikebob@Walden.MO.NET>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 18:07:47 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 21:19:02 -0400
Subject: Furor Over False Memories Puts Hynpotherapist In

On the front (page 1A) of the Sunday, June 28, 1998 issue of the
"St. Louis Post-Dispatch" there is a longish article (continued
on page 10A) entitled, "Furor over false memory outs
hypnotherapist in the spotlight." The article concerns
"hypnotherapist" Geraldine A. Lamb of Kirkwood, MO (a suburb of
St. Louis, in St. Louis County, Missouri.)

Perhaps someone who has graphics/"frames" capabilities (as a
Commodore-128 user -- with text-only, UNIX-shell ISP account
access -- I do not) could check out the article on-line via the
"Post-Dispatch" web site:

http://www.stlnet.com


Here are a couple of short excerpts from the article:

----------------------------------------------------------------

...she [the client/patient] spent four years and tens of
thousands of dollars in the bizarre world of a hypnotherapist
who talked to ancient dieties and convinced her she was the
victim of satanic abuse.

[....]

On Friday, St. Louis County Circuit Court Judge John Kintz
sentenced Lamb to 30 months in state prison, the dramatic end of
a criminal case with national significance. Lamb and two
co-defendents, psychologists who practiced in the Creve Couer
[MO] counseling center she founded, are believed to be the first
people in the nation to face criminal charges that included
allegations of implanting false memories during psychotherapy.

.... The two psychologists allowed Lamb to use their names on
fraudulent bills she submitted to insurance companies. Both
pleaded guilty to misdemeanors. They were placed on probation
and ordered to make restitution. In April, Lamb pleaded guilty
to two counts of insurance fraud and one misdemeanor count of
practicising psychology without a license. In a her plea
bargain, the felony charges that included implanting false
memories were dropped.

[....]

The judge heard how Lamb encouraged clients to seek advice from
a patient who "channeled," or communicated with an ancient
Egyptian goddess named Amon and the Blessed Virgin Mary. But he
didn't hear a single expression of regret from the 58-year old
hypnotheapist.

[....]

---------------------------------------------------------------


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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 29

                       Scientists: UFOs Warrant Study

From: Jean van Gemert <jeanvg@dds.nl>
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 02:00:41 +0200
Fwd Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 21:29:02 -0400
Subject: Scientists: UFOs Warrant Study


>Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 14:31:25 -0700
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Geoff Price <Geoff@CalibanMW.com>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Scientists: UFOs Warrant Study

>In other news, I see the war of spin is already on, with Nick
>Humphries using the press release as a springboard for taunting
>ETH proponents on usenet and describing the study as "if
>anything" adding "to the PSH (Psychosocial Hypothesis)". Classy
>job, Nick.

Yup, talk about some serious misrepresentation! Perhaps Nick
didn't read it before he proceeded to mouth off about it? :) He
seems a little "impulsive" lately when it comes to debating the
merits of the ETH.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 29

                                  'Victor'

From: Andy Denne - A.U.R.A. <aura@telekabel2.nl>
Date: Mon, 30 Jun 1997 01:51:13 +0200
Fwd Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 21:27:26 -0400
Subject: 'Victor'

Hello people,

I just came across a BBC-newsposting about the AA and Alien
Interview that claims "Victor"'s supposed to be dead.

Does anyone out there know what's true about this claim?

I wonder, if this is true, why didn't we hear about it?
Well,
So much from Holland, I'm back to celebrating our soccer-teams victory
of today 2-1 ! :-)

Greetingz,

Andy Denne
A.U.R.A.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 29

                       Re: Video of 'UFOs' Around MIR

From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 19:03:58 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 21:22:09 -0400
Subject: Re: Video of 'UFOs' Around MIR


>From: Susan Cerdan <sunset@sunet.net>
>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Video of 'UFOs' Around MIR
>Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 15:22:14 -0700

>>Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 10:07:01 -0400
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: Sue Kovios <bradford@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Video of 'UFOs' Around MIR

<snip>

>> Has NASA seen this
>>videotape? It would make it alot easier to force them to make it
>>public, which it apparently is already.

>>Sue

>Dear Sue,
>Of course NASA has seen it, they downloaded it! He just happened
>to be there when the images were flying around the Mir. Yes, you
>can do the same thing, set up the dishes, stay up all night for
>a couple of months and record the best images, edit it and advertise it.
>Good luck!

You also missed my point here. I meant has NASA seen _your_
version of the images flying around MIR?  By writing to them and
not showing them what you have they can only discredit what they
haven't even seen and by showing them what you have would only
make it's existence more concrete and more believable and more
likely they may come clean and let everyone see it (without a fee
of course) or is that the point here. The truth should not be for
sale.

Words are cheap.  Evidence speaks volumes.

P.S. John Velez,
Thanx.

Sue







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 29

                    CNN Interactive/AP - UFO Panel Report

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 23:24:00 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 23:24:00 -0400
Subject: CNN Interactive/AP - UFO Panel Report





From: CNN Interactive

http://www.cnn.com/TECH/space/9806/29/ufo.report.ap/


Panel suggests scientific review of
reported UFO evidence

June 29, 1998
Web posted at: 10:35 AM EDT

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- Are we alone?

An international panel of scientists that convened to ponder the
possibility of extraterrestrial visitors was not about to answer
that question, but they said the physical evidence in some UFO
sightings merits further serious scientific review.

The nine-member group, the first independent review of UFO
phenomena since 1966, found no convincing evidence that
extraterrestrial intelligence was responsible for the physical
evidence. But some findings remained unexplained.

"If there is an interest in trying to get serious answers to the
UFO problem, it would be sensible for scientists to focus on the
physical evidence as opposed to witness testimony," Stanford
University physicist and panel director Peter Sturrock said in a
telephone interview Sunday.

The study, which brought together astronomers, physicists and
experts in other scientific disciplines, was launched by
philanthropist Laurance S. Rockefeller. Sturrock said the field
of UFO study "is in a very unsatisfactory state of ignorance and
confusion."

The panel's 50-page report appears in the summer issue of
Journal of Scientific Exploration.

The panel was impressed by analysis of a 1981 photograph taken
by a family on Vancouver Island, British Columbia. The picture
shows a silvery oval-shaped object that has a glow and
brightness consistent with a reflecting metal object. But the
scientists were unable to rule out a photographic hoax.

The panel examined another sighting, near Paris in January 1994.
An airline captain, co-pilot and flight attendant all reported
seeing an object resembling a gigantic disk with slightly fuzzy
edges. Swiss radar detected the object for 50 seconds.

The panel said radar reports require very specialized analysis
and an official UFO research organization would need access to
raw radar data with military approval for further study. "It is
a puzzle," Sturrock added. "The only way to get real answers is
to get scientists involved in the problem."

The group reviewed reports of unusual damage to vegetation,
ground traces of soil disturbance and physiological effects on
purported witnesses, such as marks and burns on the skin, memory
loss and double vision. The panel felt most of those reports
were weakened by the absence of an unaffected independent
witness.

Panel member Tom Holzer, a physicist with the National Center
for Atmospheric Research, said the study stopped well short of
making any conclusions that Earth is being visited by
extraterrestrial craft. "We require a bit more rigor in the
acquiring and analysis (of evidence)," Holzer said.

The last comprehensive review was when the U.S. Air Force
commissioned the Colorado Project, which issued the Condon
Report. It found no conclusive evidence of extraterrestrial
visits.





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 29

                     Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'

From: Stanton T. Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 16:02:04 -0300
Fwd Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 23:32:25 -0400
Subject: Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'


> Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 17:06:57 +0100
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> From: John Rimmer <johnr@magonia.demon.co.uk>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'

> >Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 15:50:32 -0300
> >From: "Stanton T. Friedman" <fsphys@brunnet.net>
> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'

> >It is almost impossible to deal rationally with someone who makes
> >the absurd claim "We all know that no alien craft crashed at
> >Roswell and that MJ-12  is a fake." I know a number of scientists
> >who accept neither conclusion. .. so your claim is obviously
> >false...

> >STF

> Could we have some details of these scientists, such as their
> names and qualifications to make judgements on MJ12 and Roswell?
> Have they published anything on these topics?

That you would even ask the question indicates your ignorance of
the subject.

Off-hand Dr. Bruce Maccabee, Dr. Robert M. Wood, John
Schuessler.. highly trained professionals engineers or
scientists who have worked on classified advanced research and
development projects for decades and have had to satisfy
management and professional colleagues as to their competence
and objectivity.

What are the qualifications of you brilliantly writing PSHrs?
Being good at making ridiculous proclamations??

How many classified documents have you handled?

How many archives have you visited?

How many Roswell witnesses have you talked to?

How many years have you had high level security clearances?

Have you even read Crash at Corona and TOP SECRET/MAJIC?

You seem to be unaware that I have spoken forcefully about these
topics(Roswell, MJ-12) to thousands of professional people.
including ,for example, at Los Alamos National Labs, Cornell
University,Illinois Institute of Technology, RPI, Sections of
the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics,
Management Groups at Lockheed, McDonnell Douglas, North American
Rockwell, physics classes at universities etc etc and have
received dozens of very favorable letters from professional
people at universities and technical groups.. I put the facts on
the table and always have open question and answer sessions. The
response has been extraordinarily good.

One would think you would question the absurd statment that "we
all know.."

You guys, I am sure will continue to do your research by
proclamations, often false ones. I will stick to investigation..

Stan Friedman







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 29

                       Re: Video of 'UFOs' Around MIR

From: Susan Cerdan <sunset@sunet.net>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 22:14:21 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 23:23:37 -0400
Subject: Re: Video of 'UFOs' Around MIR


From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
To: updates@globalserve.net <updates@globalserve.net>
Date: Monday, June 29, 1998 5:39 PM
Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Video of 'UFOs' Around MIR


>From: Rod Eastman <darkstar@carrollsweb.com>
>Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 15:16:53 -0500
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Video of 'UFOs' Around MIR
>
>
>> Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 03:42:13 -0500
>> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>> From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
>> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Video of 'UFOs' Around MIR
>
>> >From: Susan Cerdan <sunset@sunet.net>
>> >To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Video of 'UFOs' Around MIR
>> >Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 15:22:14 -0700
>
>> Hello Susan,

><snip>

>> "Do the Right Thing!" <G>

>> Post the information on the Internet so that -everyone- can
>> access it. It "belongs" to _all_ of the People, not just the few
>> that your "ads" will reach or the even smaller percentage who
>> will go as far as ordering it.

>> The People have a right to see information of this nature without
>> having to pay a heavy looking price. If it affects all, it
>> belongs to all.

>> Solamente mis dos centavos.

>> John Velez

>I'll go one better! If the gentleman that made the videos will post
>it on the net for ALL to see, I'll send him $50.00 for all the effort
>he put into it, surely the effort is worth that.

>Darkstar@Carrollsweb.com <Rod>



Dear John,

"Estoy tomando tus dos centavos en cuenta. Los Americanos quieren todo
gratis con tal de que no tengan que hacer el esfurzo ni el trabajo para
consequir lo que quieren."

Thanks for your input. I have worked on this project for a year, countless
telephones calls, hundreds of dollars worth, between the author and the
editor and all the people involved. The author is not charging for his
countless, sleepless nights, nor the efforts he took to make this video. I
have written countless letters, spent a huge amount of time, effort and
public relations, in all it's called, WORK. Have any of you even the vaguest
notion what that is? Are there any adults out there? Time and effort plus
materials=$.

The "advertising" is what is posted on the internet, it's free.

For all of you that vote on this being for free, come on down to Florida for
free, and help me market this video for the next year, for free. Buy the
videos out of your own pocket money, get a production company to edit them
for free and send them to Europe, New Zealand, England, Germany and Italy
FOR FREE. And don't forget to pay your light bill, phone bill, water bill
and food bill, of course unless you can get that all for free. We have a
right to all of that as human beings because we are breathing right, so it
should be free right? Your logic, not mine.

I have no ability to transfer this tape to something that can go on the
internet, do you? The author doesn't even own a computer! You can get him
one for free right? Come on down to Florida, hop on a plane if you can find
one for free, find a place to stay for free, or purchase and send me your
equipment for free, teach me how to use it for free and we'll work on it
together. Then we can fly to the middle of Timbuktu where the author lives
and see if he likes what you did and then fly over to the editing company in
Seattle to finish the tape. You buy I'll fly! Deal?

Otherwise the tape is only $25.00, you can buy one and make as many copies
as you like for all your friends. OK?

"Patience is a virtue"....

Love & Light,

Susan Sunset


-----Original 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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 29

                         Re: MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4

From: The Duke of Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 21:25:46 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 23:00:30 -0400
Subject: Re: MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4


With the compliments of the Duke of Mendoza:

>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4
>Date: Mon, 29 Jun 98 11:39:46 PDT

>Sturrock merely brought the scientists together.  They had no
>previous involvement in UFO study,  For their names, see IUR,
>Winter 1997-98, p. 11.

Okay, no problem - and their names popped up in the Stanford
press release, posted by Terry Blanton in a message dated Mon,
29 Jun 1998 09:01:01 -0700, subject: Scientists: UFOs Warrant
Study.

From accounts of the SSE panel's conclusions and recommendations
given in this and other reports dropping out of the 9th
cyberdimension into my mailbox, they seem to me entirely
unexceptionable and indeed welcome. PSH "adherents" are actually
so loosely affiliated that I have no idea whether (say) John
Harney or (say) Martin Kottmeyer would concur, even though I
have been described by Fortean Times as a member of a "magic
circle" (tee hee) connected with the Psychosocial Conspiracy.
But I see that the pouting, flame-haired giant Rimmer is not
about to
change his trousers at this report either.

>The panel was not formed, as I understand it, to study the
>ETH but to consider the evidence for UFOs as a potentially
>worthwhile subject of scientific investigation.  Why should it
>endorse the ETH coming out of the gate?

I don't know. Why should it? I am merely going by the context in
which you, Jerry, mentioned the imminent release of the panel's
findings. There seemed to be some hint that the ETH - which you
call "hated and dreaded", though I myself neither hate nor dread
it, though I do find it an unnecessary distraction - was somehow
relevant. As it turns out, it isn't.

>None of the
>panel's findings, which stress the puzzling and unexplained
>physical dimensions of the phenomenon, is consistent with
>the Purely Speculative Hypothesis.

I can't speak for others of PSH leanings (see above), but it's
always been part of my general PS hypothesis that what are to
the observer "puzzling and and unexplained" physical events are
the *most likely* to attach themselves to otherwise unsupported
beliefs about ET visitors, watchers, what-have-yous. Even if ET
*were* behind some of these, that fact would not dispose of many
psychosocial aspects of UFOs and ufology.

My scratchy old record says: "Zond IV, clickscrape, Zond IV".
Just for a change, I'll chuck in the Cosmos re-entry of 31 March
1993, which I saw, but I saw it significantly differently from
my companion, and entirely differently from the naive
conclusions about it drawn by Nick "Fake Major" Pope (who didn't
see it).

>One imagines a whole lot of weeping, hair-
>pulling, and gnashing of teeth going on in all sorts of places
>right now.  What a beautiful day this is.

Well, it's been pissing with rain today on this side of the
mountain, but Tim Henman has made it through to the
quarter-finals - so, so far, I see no reason to take to
Christian-style behavior at this report. Which, allegedly,

>is, however, consistent with the hated and dreaded ETH

But is the ETH consistent with it? That is the real question.
What is lacking for ETH proponents is a UFO case with multiple,
proven, link-by-link connections to the ETs. That's why those of
us who look askance at the ETH keep asking for ETHers to produce
one, two, 10 or 50 such examples, and why we never get an answer
(except from Mark Cashman, who wins the Mendoza Medal for
Heroism at least for having the balls to connect his money and
his mouth, regardless of the consequences).

Appeals to the problem of ball lightning have nothing to do with
anything but ball lightning, which at least has the virtue of
testable theory behind it. Here we are discussing ETs and their
connection to UFOs. No science known to me works from anecdotal
& untestable reports (even Michael Swords admits there's not
much in ufology that scientists can "do science on") that,
individually flawed though they may be, can be construed as
broad hints of something more & greater. If there is an example,
I'd be pleased to hear about it. Puzzling reports do not an ETH
make; they simply puzzle.

And no scientific hypothesis that survived experiment and became
theory has been based on generalizations from observations of
transient, *inconsistent* & *unpredictable* phenomena. This is
what the ETH is based on, and it offers more holes than links in
its chain from "data" to "conclusions". This is *not* like
watching & theorizing about thunderstorms and stars, and I do
hope I don't have to spell out why not.

It's not mentioned in the post to which I'm responding, but I
have it on good authority that someone, somewhere is working
even now on shredding Michael Swords' notions of exobiology into
teeny weeny bits, and that the results will be published
sometime this year.

best wishes
Panspermia D. Multiform
Unearthly Being






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 29

                  Contributors Comment On 'Sturrock' Review

From: Stig_Agermose@online.pol.dk (Stig Agermose)
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 04:21:00 +0200
Fwd Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 23:23:08 -0400
Subject: Contributors Comment On 'Sturrock' Review

URL:

http://www.mercurycenter.com/premium/nation/docs/ufo29.htm


Stig


*******


Published Monday, June 29, 1998, in the San Jose Mercury News

Science panel says it's worth evaulating UFO reports

BY MICHELLE LEVANDER
Mercury News Staff Writer

For more than 50 years, UFO investigators have scoured the skies
for signs of alien life -- completely snubbed by the scientific
community as cranks.

But today, in the first independent scientific review of UFO
evidence in nearly 30 years, scientists gave a faint nod in
their direction by concluding that it might be worthwhile to
evaluate UFO reports, marking a major and important shift in the
eyes of some UFO investigators.

"What we need are more scientists looking at this area if we are
going to get answers," said Peter Sturrock, the Stanford
University physicist who convened the international panel of
"skeptical" scientists. Sturrock assembled the group after being
approached by New York philanthropist Laurance S. Rockefeller,
the grandson of John D. Rockefeller and someone who reportedly
has a longstanding interest in UFOs and psychic phenomena.

Sturrock, whose Society for Scientific Exploration promotes the
examination of ideas outside the scientific mainstream, hopes
the panel's review of UFO reports, to be published today in the
alternative Journal of Scientific Exploration, spurs more solid
research in the arena.

To be sure, after a rare meeting between scientists and UFO
investigators, the scientific panel remained skeptical.
Nevertheless, they said the scientific community's refusal to
even entertain the analysis of such information has been
counterproductive.

"The history of Earth science includes several examples of the
final acceptance of phenomena originally dismissed as folk
tales," such as meteorites and sprites, the report says. "It may
therefore be valuable to carefully evaluate UFO reports to
extract information about unusual phenomena currently unknown to
science."

One UFO investigator was pleased with the findings.



Openness, evidence


Mark Rodeghier, of the Center for UFO Study in Chicago,
interprets the panel's greater openness as an important step to
bring the world of science -- which demands empirical evidence
-- closer to that of UFO observers, some of whom believe they
now know what aliens do during human abductions.

Taking a break from the national Mutual UFO Network conference,
Rodeghier said, "It would be extremely important for us to know
if aliens are visiting the Earth surreptitiously. I didn't
expect in five days that they would change their mind
completely. I think it's sufficient that they say the subject
deserves study."

For its review, the panel examined evidence such as a 1981
photograph of "a silvery oval-shaped object set against the blue
sky," taken in British Columbia -- the photographer swears it
was not a trick photo of a frisbee -- and a 1965 report by two
French submarine crews in Martinique of "a large luminous object
(that) arrived slowly and silently from the west, flew to the
south .=BF.=BF. and vanished like a rapidly extinguished light
bulb."

The last time scientists took a serious look at UFOs was in
1968, when Dr. Edward U. Condon, director of the Colorado
Project, undertook a two-year study sponsored by the Central
Intelligence Agency and the U.S. Air Force. His dismissive
conclusion: "Nothing has come of the study of UFOs in the past
21 years .=BF.=BF. and "further extensive study of UFOs probably
cannot be justified .=BF.=BF."

Already some of this panel's scientists are steeling themselves
for ridicule from peers.

"I haven't gone around and advertised I've done this. I thought
I'd wait until our report came out and then let them take their
jabs then," said Thomas Holzer, senior scientist at the National
Center for Atmospheric Research.

Still, he adds, he shares the panel's view that more openness is
needed.



Natural phenomena


Some UFO reports, the scientists concluded, could be explained
by rare natural events such as sprites, or what appear to be
huge sheets of light moving upward from cloud decks caused by
electrical activity high above thunderclouds.

Unusual radar patterns that UFO investigators interpret as
flight patterns of alien craft are likely radar echoes caused by
refraction in the atmosphere, said panel member and Stanford
professor Von Eshleman, who studies the structure of the
atmosphere through experiments on U.S. space missions.

And, the scientists said, some in their community may be more
interested in UFOs than they are willing to admit.

Sturrock said his own surveys of astronomers show that many
privately admit to interest in UFOs. Asked for his own views,
Sturrock was coy.

"I don't believe in UFOs, but they may exist whether I believe
in them or not," he said. "That's saying I don't have an opinion
I wish to share."

When pressed, panel member Eshleman said he thinks it would be
surprising if there weren't life forms on other planets. Asked
about the likelihood of complex alien societies, he said, "It's
less probable, but there's no reason to limit it anywhere."

Gregory Benford, a solar physicist at the University of
California-Irvine who has reviewed the UFO report, said that
when Condon, now deceased, wrote his initial 1968 findings on
UFO evidence, he wrote the conclusion first. Even though a
scientific panel urged more open-mindedness two years later, it
didn't carry much weight.

"He had an automatic aversion to the cranks who had surrounded
the UFO phenomenon", Benford said. In '68, he just wanted to
squash this like a bug. So he said you won't learn anything if
you study this any further.



Looking in new places


"I think that's unwarranted. If you don't look in new places,
you won't see new things."

Still, he added, while many astronomers believe that life exists
elsewhere in the galaxy, that's a far cry from believing that
UFOs are passing over your neighborhood.

"Even if some intelligent being was visiting us from a distant
star, why would they fly around and never make any contact?" he
said. "If they are hostile, why not do the obvious and wipe us
out? It would be dead easy to get in touch with us.

"Just because you are open-minded doesn't mean your brains have
fallen out."


=A91997 - 1998 Mercury Center.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 29

                  The 'Sturrock Report' On-Line @ SSE Site

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 23:58:07 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 23:58:07 -0400
Subject: The 'Sturrock Report' On-Line @ SSE Site





From: The Society for Scientific Exploration

http://www.jse.com/ufo_reports/Sturrock/toc.html


Physical Evidence Related to UFO Reports
The Proceedings of a Workshop Held at the
Pocantico Conference Center, Tarrytown, New York,
September 29 - October 4, 1997



Director
P.A. Sturrock

Scientific Steering Committee T.E. Holzer, R. Jahn, D.E.
Pritchard, H.E. Puthoff, C.R. Tolbert, and Y.Terzian

Scientific Review Panel
V.R. Eshleman (Co-Chair), T.E. Holzer (Co-Chair), J.R. Jokipii,
F. Louange, H. J. Melosh, J. J. Papike, G. Reitz, C. R. Tolbert,
and B. Veyret

Investigators
R.F. Haines, I. von Ludwiger, M. Rodeghier, J.F. Schuessler,
E. Strand, M.D. Swords, J. F. Vallee, and J-J. Velasco

Moderators
D.E. Pritchard and H.E. Puthoff


Table of Contents:
(Other Supporting Documents)
(Index of Some Photographic Evidence)

Click on headers to enter document


Abstract (First Page of report)


Preface

Section 1. Report of the Scientific Review Panel

Section 2. Introduction

Section 3. Photographic Evidence

Section 4. Luminosity Estimates

Section 5. Radar Evidence

Section 6. Hessdalen Project

Section 7. Vehicle Interference

Section 8. Interference with Aircraft Equipment

Section 9. Apparent Gravitational and/or Inertial Effects

Section 10. Ground Traces

Section 11. Injuries to Vegetation

Section 12. Physiological Effects on Witnesses

Section 13. Analysis of Debris

Section 14. Recommendations Concerning Implementation

Section 15. Web Site: Supporting Documentation


Appendix 1. The GEPAN/SEPRA Project - F. Louange; J. Velasco

Appendix 2. Procedures for Analysis of Photographic Evidence -
            F. Louange

Appendix 3. Formation Flying - V. R. Eshleman

Appendix 4. Electromagnetic-Wave Ducting- V. R. Eshleman

Appendix 5. Sprites - V. R. Eshleman

Appendix 6. SETI and UFO Investigations Compared -
            V. R. Eshleman

Appendix 7. Further Thoughts on SETI and UFO Investigations -
            F. Louange

Appendix 8. Scientific Inference - P. A. Sturrock


References


The reference for this article is:

Peter A. Sturrock et al. (1998). Physical evidence related to
UFO reports. J. Scientific Exploration, 12, 2, 179.


SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS:

(Click on titles for the table of contents of the articles)

Bounias, Michel C. L. (1990). Biochemical traumatology as a
potent tool for identifying actual stresses elicited by
unidentified sources: Evidence for plant metabolic disorders in
correlation with a UFO landing. J. Scientific Exploration, 4, 1,
1. (Note: The web pages for this article are currently under
revision)

Haines, Richard F. (1987). Analysis of a UFO photograph. J.
Scientific Exploration, 1, 2, 129.

Haines, Richard F., Vallee, Jacques F. (1989). Photo analyses of an aerial
disc over Costa Rica. J. Scientific Exploration, 3, 2, 113.

Haines, Richard F., Vallee, Jacques F. (1990). Photo analysis of
an aerial disc over Costa Rica: New evidence. J. Scientific
Exploration, 4, 1, 1.

Vallee, Jacques F. (1990). Return to Trans-en-Provence. J.
Scientific Exploration, 4, 1, 19.

Vallee, Jacques F. (1998). Estimates of optical power output in
aerial objects. J. Scientific Exploration, 12, 3 (to be
published in the Fall).

Vallee, Jacques F. (1998). Physical Analyses in ten cases of
unexplained aerial objects. J. Scientific Exploration, 12, 3 (to
be published in the Fall).

Velasco, Jean-Jacques (1990). Report on the analysis of
anomalous physical traces: The 1981 Trans-en-Provence UFO Case.
J. Scientific Exploration, 4, 1, 27.

Three more supporting documents will be put up during the month
of July, so please check back to this website:

UFO Reports Involving Vehicle Interference by Mark Rodeghier
(Center for UFO Studies)
UFO-Related Human Physiological Effects by John E. Schuessler
A Helicopter-UFO Encounter Over Ohio by Jennie Zeidman



INDEX OF SOME PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE:
(The links below point to specific pages in several of the
articles above)

Royal Canadian Air Force case
photo 1

Haines Vancouver Island case
photo 1
photo 2
photo 3

Haines and Vallee Costa Rica case
photo 1
photo 2
photo 3
photo 4
photo 5



To order a paper copy of this report, copy and paste the order
form below either into an email message to Marsha Sims or send
via postal mail or fax to:

Journal of Scientific Exploration
P. O. Box 5848,
Stanford, CA
94309-5848 USA

Phone: (650) 593-8581
FAX: (650) 595-4466
(The machine is in a private, locked office.)

email: sims@jse.com
Direct questions to Marsha Sims, Executive Editor



JOURNAL OF SCIENTIFIC EXPLORATION ORDER FORM

Please put an X in the [ ] to indicate your selections.

Order:

[ ] $10.00 - Physical Evidence Related to UFO Reports (plus
postage: [ ] $1.24 bookrate, [ ] $3.00 first class, or [ ]
$6.00, foreign airmail)

[ ] $12.50 - JSE issue 12:2 (inside USA)
(plus postage: [ ] $1.24 bookrate, [ ] $3.00 airmail)

[ ] $12.50 - JSE issue 12:2 (foreign)
(plus postage: [ ] $3.00 surface, [ ] $7.50 airmail)

Total price:

Payment:
[ ] Check (send to above address)
[ ] Charge: [ ] Visa or [ ] Mastercard

(Caution: The internet is not guaranteed to be secure. If you
wish to be cautious, make a paper copy of this form and transmit
it to us by fax or post instead.)

Card Number:

Expiration date:

Signature:

Name:

Address:

Phone:

FAX:

Email address:

Anomalous Phenomena of interest (optional):





To order any of the back issues containing the other supporting
documents, please go to our back issue order form..

Sign up for Subscription to JSE



Web Project Staff:

Marsha Sims, Manager
Jasmine Li, Supervisor
Assistants: Kathleen Erickson, Diane Foerder, Elizabeth Henderson, Ryan
Logsdon, Erin Thompson


Abstract Index | JSE Home | SSE Home






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 30

                     Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'

From: James Easton <pulsar@compuserve.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 22:44:10 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 05:42:16 -0400
Subject: Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'

Regarding...

>Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 22:48:23 -0300
>From: Stanton T. Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'


Stanton wrote:

>As might be expected from PJK's 30 years of misrepresentation this
>is a very inaccurate description of what I have said and how I say
>it. In my longer college presentations I told the story of the CAUS
>actions against the CIA and NSA and show every page of the 21 page
>affidavit starting with very lightly censored to heavily censored,
>leading to laughter. Far more dramatic than just showing a few
>blacked out pages. Then I tell of the few very heavily censored CIA
>UFO documents it took me 5 years to get, (3 out of 14) which the CIA
>somehow didn't find and the NSA did. One page has 8 readable words.


Stanton,

There's no debate that some data which comes under the 'UFO'
category has been withheld, however, clarification of the NSA
document's contents and the NSA's submission was a welcome
insight into some factors which we must take into account.


The point was, if you arraign others as "demonstrating all 4 of
Friedman's laws for Debunkers", notably, "What the public
doesn't know, I am not going to tell them", it's a double-edged
sword.

No matter what you may, or may not, reveal to College audiences,
when addressing a nationwide TV audience of _several million_,
you stated on the question of a government 'cover-up', that this
was "easy to prove" and cited as evidence:

"A group of us went after the NSA. We found that they had over
150 UFO documents. They refused to release them to us, and to
the Federal court Judge".

Which was by no means a fair reflection of the true facts and
served only to suggest these documents had never been released
or further explained.

Would you disagree?

It seems to encompass an issue which Philip Klass raised in 'SUN
#43'.


As an aside, you commented to Tim Matthews:

>Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 15:50:32 -0300
>From: "Stanton T. Friedman" <fsphys@brunnet.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'

>It is almost impossible to deal rationally with someone who makes the
>absurd claim "We all know that no alien craft crashed at Roswell and
>that MJ-12  is a fake." I know a number of scientists who accept
>neither conclusion. .. so your claim is obviously false...

'Roswell', was deserving of serious consideration as possible
evidence of an ET contact, albeit a painfully hard one.

But MJ-12? Taking a big step back and looking at this in a
realistic perspective, surely, given the dubious origins of the
'MJ-12' material and the consummate lack of any credible
supporting evidence, it's a 'millstone' on 'ufology' ever rising
beyond amateur hour.

It seems such obviously abject nonsense, that I would only
hesitate to compare it to the 'Flat Earth Society', if that
wasn't such a slur on the 'Flat Earth Society'.



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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 30

                          Detailed images of Mars?

From: Mark LeCuyer <randydan@wavetech.net>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 22:02:15 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 05:43:39 -0400
Subject: Detailed images of Mars?


From: Alien Astronomer
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/6583

Hello List Members:)

Not being an expert in the fields of photography and imaging, but
still someone with 20 20 vision, I'm having a very difficult time
seeing some of these finer detailed structures in the Mars
Cydonia region that many others tend to find without difficulty.
Especially from these totally inadequate garbage images that NASA
feeds us.

Sure, we can all see the larger structures like the tetrahedral
pyramids, the face, and the city, mostly thanks to the 20 year
old Viking images. But for some reason, no matter how hard I try,
I cannot honestly visualize these buildings, ramps, paths, doors,
men's room signs, and everything else that others see without any
problem.
I'm not saying they're not their because I really do believe they
are, I just can't tell from these images. And I mean no
disrespect to those of you who do. However, you can show me all
of the pictures you want with circles and arrows and a paragraph
on the back of each one explaining what I'm supposed to see, but
it still doesn't help. And I don't consider myself as your
average Joe Public.

I guess it all really boils down to lousy photography. Wait... I
know... we should all sue NASA for false advertising, just
kidding;).
They did lead us to believe that highly detailed images could
easily be obtained from our not so recent technological advances
in photography. If I remember correctly, several years ago we had
the ability to easily read a license plate from a car or the date
off of a quarter from earth's orbit. What's up?

As far as I can see, and by their own admissions, we should be
able to get images just as detailed as those from Mars
Pathfinder. Images just as detailed as if you were to pick up a
camera and take a picture of something no more than 10 feet away.
Why don't they zoom in for a closer look and put an end to this
controversy once and for all. They can do it. MGS is supposed to
get detailed images with a resolution of about 4 square feet. Why
then do we always see a panoramic view of several square miles?
Why not a panoramic view of 100 - 200 square yards? And why can't
the MGS camera stay fixed on a target for several seconds in
order to zoom in and take a picture at the greatest resolution
possible? They'd have to do it to read that license plate or the
date off of that quarter. No, I don't buy it!
Not for one minute.

Conspiracy? Undoubtedly. THEY ARE DEFINITELY hiding something
from us. They know they can easily fool Joe Public just as
they've been doing for decades. And I think those who have the
ability to see these things from NASA's images and then  try and
show Joe Public the same thing, well... they're playing right
into the hands of the government. Joe looks at these images and
then back at these people and says, "What the hell are you
looking at! There's nothing there!

You must all be crazy!" What do we do? I don't know, do you?

Just a thought.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 30

                     Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'

From: James Easton <pulsar@compuserve.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 22:42:30 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 05:38:36 -0400
Subject: Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'

Regarding...

>From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@connectmmic.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'
>Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 15:50:35 -0400


Serge wrote:

>Now this is an interesting one.

>  _Skeptics' UFO Newsletter_ by Philip J. Klass. #43, Jan, 1997
>404 "N" Street, SW, Washington DC 20024          (C)  1997


Serge,

The extracts referenced come from a larger document and it's
perhaps necessary to see the entire newsletter to appreciate the
full context.

Trusting Philip Klass would agree and that UpDates subscribers
will, of course, note the SUN subscription details, this is the
content of 'SUN #43':

From _Skeptics' UFO Newsletter_ by Philip J. Klass. #43, Jan, 1997
        404 "N" Street, SW, Washington DC 20024          (C)  1997

   [SIX ISSUES $15 for US/CANADA, OVERSEAS AIR MAIL IS $20/YEAR]

   ==============================================================

_National Security Agency (NSA) Responds To SUN's Request And
Declassifies Revealing Portions Of its Top Secret "UFO Documents"_


    Partially declassified copies of 156 Top Secret "UFO
documents" recently obtained by _SUN_, which the National
Security Agency refused to release in 1982 in response to a
Freedom of information Request (FOIA), reveal that NSA's refusal
was to keep secret that it was eavesdropping on Soviet air
defense radar sites -- providing vitally important intelligence
for our Strategic Air Command bomber missions.
When NSA intercepted messages from Soviet radars which reported
tracking an 'Unidentifiable object,' some NSA analysts translated
that into "Unidentified Flying Objects".  Because the Soviets
used balloons carrying radar reflectors to periodically check the
performance of their air defense radars and the alertness of
their radar operators, a NSA translator-analyst would add
"Probably a balloon" where it seemed appropriate.  After UFO
organizations, such as Citizens Against UFO Secrecy (CAUS), began
to make FOIA requests to CIA and NSA in the late 1970s to release
documents involving "UFOs," NSA translator-analysts stopped using
the term UFO for the balloon-borne targets

    Most of the 156 Comint documents obtained by SUN report the
"Probably balloon" type of slow-moving UFO.  The reports,
covering the 21-year period from 1958 to 1979, are still heavily
censored to withhold the identity/location of the Soviet radar
sites whose communications NSA was able to intercept, the dates
and other still-sensitive military information.  Following are
several typical NSA "UFO" summary reports, with still-censored
material shown as [XXXX]. The first numbers show the time when
the "UFOs'" were being tracked by Soviet radar.

 *  [XXXX] _UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS_ (UFO): (A) 0345-0520
FOUR UFO (PROBABLY BALLOONS) MOVED FROM WEST OF [XXXX] TOWARD
SOUTH, PASSED EAST OF [XXXX] AND FADED EAST OF [XXXX] ALT
11,500-13,000 FT.  (B) 0455-0520, ONE UFO (PROBABLY A BALLOON)
MOVED FROM EAST OF [XXXX] TOWARD SOUTH AND FADED EAST OF [XXXX],
ALT 11,500-13,100 FT.  (C) 0734-1025, THREE UFO (PROBABLY
BALLOONS) MOVED SLOWLY FROM SOUTH OF [XXXX] TOWARD WEST AND
PASSED [XXXX] AND [XXXX], ALT 49,200-66,000 FT.
[XXXX]

 *  [XXXX] UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS (UFO): (A) 0028-0325, FOUR
UFO (PROBABLY BALLOONS) MOVED SLOWLY FROM SE OF [XXXX] TOWARD SW
AND PASSED [XXXX].  (B) 0325-0515, ONE UFO (PROBABLY A BALLOON)
MOVED SLOWLY FROM [XXXX] TOWARD WEST, PASSED [XXXX] AND FADED
[XXXX].  (C) 0325-0515, ONE UFO (PROBABLY A BALLOON) MOVED SLOWLY
FROM NORTH OF [XXXX] TOWARD WEST AND FADED [XXXX].  (D)
1355-1630, 19 UFO (PROBABLY BALLOONS) MOVED FROM [XXXX] AND
[XXXX] TOWARD WEST AND FADED [XXXX] AND [XXXX], ALT 69,000-79,000
FT.  [XXXX]

 *  [XXXX] UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS (UFO): (A) 0010-0455, 11
UFO (PROBABLY BALLOONS) MOVED FROM [XXXX] AND WEST OF [XXXX]
TOWARD WEST, PASSED SOUTH OF [XXXX] AND ENTERED THE TERRITORlES
OF [XXXX].  (B) 0820-1135, 11 UFO (PROBABLY BALLOONS) MOVED FROM
[XXXX] AND WEST OF [XXXX] TOWARD WEST; PASSED SOUTH OF [XXXX] AND
ENTERED THE TERRITORIES OF [XXXX].  (C) 0740-0852, 15 UFO
(PROBABLY BALLOONS) MOVED OVER [XXXX], ALT 20,000-29,800FT (D)
1345-1620, 11 UFO (PROBABLY BALLOONS) MOVED OVER [XXXX] AND
[XXXX], ALT 59,000-69,000 FT.

    These Comint reports reveal that the Soviets had deployed
height-finder-type radars, capable of tracking targets up to
altitudes of nearly 80,000 ft., which could detect high-flying
U-2 aircraft on reconnaissance missions.


_NSA UFO DOCUMENTS INCLUDE A FEW VISUAL SIGHTING REPORTS_

    A few of the NSA Comint documents contain summary reports of
visual UFO sightings. Because there is no mention that the UFOs
were tracked by radar, the reports probably come from other
military facilities whose communications were being intercepted
by NSA.
Following are some of the more interesting visual UFO reports:

 *  [XXXX] REPORT SIGHTING OF UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT.  AN
UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT WAS SIGHTED BY [XXXX] BETWEEN THE
[XXXX] OF [XXXX] AND [XXXX].  THE OBJECT WAS DESCRIBED AS HAVING
A SEMI-CIRCLE SHAPE AND LOOKED LIKE AN ARC IN THE THE SKY.  THIS
OBJECT WAS ALSO NOTED AS BEING WHITE AND VERY LARGE.  IT WAS SEEN
FOR A PERIOD OF ABOUT TEN MINUTES AND IT SEEMED TO JUST HANG IN
THE SKY FOR A FEW MINUTES BEFORE MOVING ON IN A WESTERLY
DIRECTION. [XXXX]

 *  [XXXX] UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT [XXXX] A REPORT [XXXX]
STATES THAT AT [XXXX], A SMOKING LUMINOUS OBJECT MOVED THROUGH
THE AIR AT AN ALTITUDE OF APPROXIMATELY 600 METERS FROM [XXXX]
TOWARDS [XXXX] AT THE BORDER OPPOSITE [XXXX].  THE SMOKE RADIUS
GRADUALLY INCREASED IN SIZE AND DISAPPEARED.  THE LUMINOUS OBJECT
WHICH WAS IN THE CENTER OF THE SMOKE ALSO DISAPPEARED.  [XXXX]

 *  [XXXX] SIGHT THREE UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS [XXXX] AT 1915
[XXXX], THREE LUMINOUS OBJECTS WERE SEEN IN THE WESTERN PART OF
[XXXX].  THE FIRST OBJECT WAS SHAPED LIKE A HORSESHOE AND WAS
WHITE IN COLOR.  THE OTHER TWO WERE ROUND AND YELLOW IN COLOR
[XXXX]

 *  [XXXX]  _UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT_ REPORTEDLY SIGHTED
[XXXX] AT 1924 HOURS ON [XXXX] AN OBJECT WHICH APPEARED TO BE A
ROCKET OR A [XXXX] CROSSED OVER [XXXX]  MOVING FROM NORTHWEST TO
THE SOUTHEAST ITS TAIL LOOKED LIKE RED FIRE AND A FIERY TRAIL
APPEARED IN ITS PATH FOR ABOUT THREE MINUTES.  NO NOISE WAS
HEARD. [XXXX]

 *  [XXXX]  SIGHTS UFO [XXXX] SIGHTED A UFO DESCRIBED AS
SPHERICAL OR DISC-LIKE IN FORM WITH NO ESTABLISHED COLOR,
BRIGHTER THAN THE SUN, WITH A DIAMETER OF ONE-HALF THE VISIBLE
SIZE OF THE MOON.  AT THE TIME OF OBSERVATION, OBJECT WAS ABOVE
THE UPPER EDGE OF THE CLOUDS ON TRUE BEARING 120 DEGREES, AZIMUTH
080 DEGREES TRAVELING NORTH.  FURTHER OBSERVATION WAS IMPOSSIBLE
DUE TO THICK CLOUD COVER. [XXXX]

    One Comint document indicates that the Soviets launched
interceptor aircraft to "attack" the UFO.  Conceivably, this was
part of a readiness/training exercise.

    [XXXX] _Unidentified Flying Object_ (UFO): 1424-1539, ONE UFO
(PROBABLY A BALLOON) MOVED SLOWLY FROM 83 NAUTICAL MILES SE OF
[XXXX] TOWARD EAST AND FADED 16 NM SOUTH OF [XXXX] ALT
43-600-49,200 FT.
REACTION TO UFO; 1209 - 1455, ONE UFO (PROBABLY A BALLOON) MOVED
SLIGHTLY FROM [XXXX] TOWARD EAST, PASSED [XXXX], AND FADED
[XXXX], ALT 33,000-46,000 FT.  [XXXX] REACTION: 1241-1353, SIX
[XXXX] DEPARTED [XXXX] FOR ATTACKING SAID UFO OVER [XXXX] AND
[XXXX] ALT 26,200 FT, SPEED 430 KTS.  (NOTE: the next eight lines
of copy are blacked out, possibly reporting on the results of the
attempted interceptor action.)


_NSA "UFO Documents" Substantiate Assessment By Former NSA
Analyst Tom Deuley, Long-Time UFOlogist, Now A MUFON Official_

    Although the Comint documents supplied to SUN remain heavily
censored, their declassified UFO-related contents corroborate the
assessment presented at the 1987 MUFON conference in Washington
D.C.
by Thomas P. Deuley, who had worked at NSA.  Deuley said: "I
believe that I saw or held copies of the large majority of the
documents withheld [by NSA] in the FOIA suit.  Though there may
have been exceptions among the documents I did not see, none of
the documents I was aware of had any information that was of
scientific value." (In recent years Deuley has been MUFON's
corporate secretary and a member of its Board of Directors).

    In Deuley's 1987 MUFON paper, titled "Four Years At NSA -- No
UFOs," he explained that he was assigned to the agency in
mid-1978, shortly before attending that year's MUFON conference
in Dayton, Ohio.
"Before making that trip I felt it was necessary to let NSA know
that I had an interest in UFOs.  I took the matter up with my
immediate supervisor suggesting that the fact be put on the
record.  Within a week I had an appointment with some
administrative officials to discuss my trip to Dayton and my
interest in UFOs....The meeting was not formal and I did not come
away with the feeling that...they even cared about UFOs or my
personal interest in it.

    In the early 1980s, when CAUS filed its FOIA suit seeking
NSA's UFO-related documents, the agency turned to Deuley, its
"in-house UFOlogist" who held sufficiently high security
clearances, to examine its "UFO-related documents" and assess
which could be released without compromising NSA's sensitive
operations.  Now that these Comint documents have been released,
their UFO reports substantiate the wisdom of Deuley's 1987 MUFON
conference statement: "It [was] clear to me that the possibility
of damage to national security sources and methods far outweighed
the value of the information under question." Deuley concluded
his 1987 presentation by noting that during the four years he
spent at NSA, "I did not see any indication of official NSA
interest in the subject [of UFOs]."


_NSA ALSO RELEASES GREATLY DECLASSIFIED COPY OF TOP SECRET
DOCUMENT WHICH UFO-LECTURER FRIEDMAN CLAIMS IS EVIDENCE OF COSMIC
WATERGATE_

    To enable U.S.  District Court Judge Gesell to render an
informed judgement on the agency's rationale for not releasing
its "UFO documents," NSA provided him with a 21-page affidavit in
October 1980, classified Top Secret, which described all of its
"UFO documents" and explained the reasons for not releasing most
of them.  After studying the document, Judge Gesell ruled in
favor of NSA.  Subsequently, in response to an FOIA request to
obtain a copy of this Top Secret court document, NSA released a
heavily censored version in which about 70% of the contents were
blacked out.  UFO-LECTURER STANTON FRIEDMAN INVARIABLY SHOWS
THESE MOST HEAVILY BLACKED-OUT PAGES DURING HIS LECTURES AND TV
SHOW APPEARANCES, CLAIMING THEY PROVE A GOVERNMENT UFO COVER-UP.


_FRIEDMAN WITHHOLDS SIGNIFICANT INFORMATION_

    Friedman knowingly withholds from his audiences the fact that
the heavily censored version of NSA's 21-page court document
disclosed that the bulk of the documents being withheld were
"communications intelligence (COMlNT) reports." Friedman also
withholds from his audience the further NSA explanation that
these Comint reports "are based on [covertly] intercepted
communications of foreign governments." In the affidavit, signed
by a top NSA official Eugene F.
Yates, he said "I certify that disclosure of past and present
foreign intelligence communications activities of NSA revealed in
the records the plaintiff [CAUS] seeks would endanger highly
valuable sources of foreign intelligence."  FRIEDMAN NEVER
MENTIONS THIS AS A POSSIBLE EXPLANATION OR JUSTIFICATION FOR
NSA'S ACTIONS.

    (When Friedman presented a paper at the 1981 MUFON conference
in Cambridge, Mass., it began with a statement attributed to
Albert Einstein: "The right to search for truth implies also a
duty; one must not conceal any part of what one has recognized to
be the truth.")

    Whereas only about 30% of the originally released court
document was readable (i.e., not blacked out), roughly 75% of the
contents are now visible in the recently declassified version.
The new release reveals that the court document carried the
highest/most sensitive classification for Comint documents: TOP
SECRET UMBRA.

    In response to CAUS's FOIA request, NSA had refused to
release: "an account by a person assigned to NSA of his
attendance at a UFO symposium [because] it cannot be fairly be
said to be a record of the kind sought by the plaintiff."
Although the author of this report was not identified by NSA in
its court document, almost certainly it was Tom Deuley.  He may
also have authored another non-Comint document released to CAUS,
entitled "UFO Hypothesis and Survival Questions." Its last page
was not released because it would have identified the author of
the memo and his NSA affiliation.


_NEWLY RELEASED COURT DOCUMENT EXPLAINS PREVIOUS BLACK-OUTS_

    The original court document cited a second non-Comint
document, written by the same NSA employee, which had been
released to CAUS with some deletions.  NSA's explanation for the
deletions was heavily blacked out in the copy of the court
document originally released but are now revealed in the newly
classified version.  (The portions of the court document
previously blacked out are underlined below.)

    "The second non-Comint document is a three page undated,
unofficial draft of a monograph with a four page appendix by the
same agency employee who authored the draft referenced in
sub-paragraph a, above....It is entitled 'UFOs _and the
Intelligence Community Blind Spot to Surprise or Deceptive
Data_'. In this document, the author discusses what he considers
to be a serious shortcoming in the Agency's COMINT interception
and reporting procedures -- the inability to respond correctly to
surprising information or deliberately deceptive data. He uses
the UFO phenomenon to illustrate his belief that the inability of
the U.S.  intelligence community to process this type of unusual
data adversely affects U.S. intelligence gathering capabilities.
Deletions in this document were made as follows: (1) All

of the title after UFO, _which addresses the perceived
shortcoming_ and all of paragraph one, which discusses the
_employee's perception of the negative implications of the
handling of the UFO phenomena as it demonstrates what he believes
is the less than optimum ability of the intelligence community to
process and evaluate highly unusual data_...

    "The final decision is in appendix A, paragraph 10 of this
report.
This section talks about _deceptive communications tactics used
by [XXXX] against U.S.  forces_ and does not include any
reference to UFO or UFO phenomena..." [It is not known if Deuley
also authored this document.]


_BOGUS "COMINT" DOCUMENT IN NSA FILES, WHICH CLAIMS UFO SHOT DOWN
CUBAN INTERCEPTORS, CAME INDIRECTLY VIA FRIEDMAN_

    Ironically, one of the heavily blacked-out pages of the
originally released court document that Friedman so often shows
involved a bogus Comint report which indicated that Cuban air
interceptors were shot down by a UFO -- a report which NSA
received indirectly from Friedman's files.  The Cuban incident
allegedly occurred in early 1967 and a person who claimed to have
been a Comint station operator later sent the alleged report to
Friedman.  He gave a copy to _Bob Pratt_, a reporter with the
_National Enquirer_, who in turn supplied a copy to UFO
researcher _Robert Todd_.

    In early 1978, Todd used FOIA requests to NSA and the USAF to
try to verify the authenticity of the Cuban incident and quoted
from this "Comint" report.  When Todd did not receive a prompt
response, he threatened to contact the Cuban government to verify
the incident.
This prompted the FBI to visit Todd to ask how he had obtained
the report.  Todd responded that he did not know the original
source who had sent the report to Friedman, but had obtained his
copy from Pratt.

    Following is the NSA court document's report on this
incident, with the originally blacked out information shown
underlined.

    "(a) The document describing SIGINT [Signals Intelligence]
operations reports _an alleged intercept of [XXXX]
communications.
The factual circumstances of the incident reported in this record
were received by NSA from an FOIA requester other than the
plaintiff [CAUS] and are considered to be fictitious by NSA
analysts._ [XXXX]" The 15 typewritten lines which follow and
remain blacked out presumably provide more details on the
incident and the reason why NSA concluded that this "Comint
report" is bogus.  It is doubtful that either Todd or Friedman
are mentioned by name.


_SUMMARY OF NSA's RATIONALE FOR WITHHOLDING ITS UFO COMINT
REPORTS_

    The newly released "more declassified" copy of the 1980 NSA
court document offers the following explanation for withholding
the UFO Comint documents -- an explanation that was completely
blacked out on the first version released by the agency: "_The
communication sources involved in this [FOIA] case -- are the
source of extremely valuable communications intelligence covering
a broad range of kinds of information from [XXXX] and other
[XXXX] acitivities to [XXXX] and [XXXX] matters.  Release of
these documents would seriously damage the ability of the United
States to gather this vital intelligence information_...."
[End]



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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 30

                         Re: MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 22:58:02 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 06:17:15 -0400
Subject: Re: MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4


>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: "Jerome Clark" <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4
>Date: Mon, 29 Jun 98 12:17:09 PDT

<snip>

>Of course, in some quarters, as we have seen, this is such a
>vile heresy that the heretic -- ESPECIALLY the apostate heretic
>-- must be driven from the field or (by sleazy innuendo, in
>Harney's latest broadside, which Dennis, whom I would have
>judged a good friend, can't bring himself to criticize) called a
>liar and a charlatan whose writing is too contaminated with
>heresy to be of any value. Let's be open about this, Dennis: is
>this your view?

<snip>

Dear Jerry:

No, of course not. Like almost everyone on this list, I assume,
I'm bombarded with e-mail, which gets varying degrees of
attention, from none to some to full, depending on the
circumstances under which it's received (mood, time of day,
night, blood alcohol content upon arrival & so on).

Even on my best days, I don't usually respond to every paragraph
in those posts that I do respond to. Not enough hours in the
day, etc., hence the big snips. So when I decided to join in on
the Harney-Clark correspondence, no, I didn't go back and reread
every nuanced (or not so nuanced) statement or allegation in
Harney's original post. I took one graf from him and one from
you, both contiguous. I didn't review everything else in both
posts, so if he called you a liar and a charlatan, no, I
definitely don't agree, and my apology if I gave you or the List
that impression. (It was, after all, I who posted the news about
the Franklin Award, although I suppose I could have done so
facetiously.)

What I responded to in this instance was the business about the
ten cases, because I think I was partly responsible for getting
the issue started in the first place, as a result of my own
book, just finished, which looks at 50 (more or less best)
cases.

You've just finished a UFO encyclopedia, so it would be a fairly
simple matter for you to name ten of the book's best cases off
the top of your head. If you want me to read it and list them
for you, I'll do so. If you want to object to Top Ten Lists on
principle and/or philosophical reasons, then I'll respect that
as well. Duly noted.

For what it's worth, however, I don't think that such exercises
are as totally irrelevant as you apparently do. For instance,
Ronald D. Story compiled a UFO encyclopedia and then went on to
author another book based on just such a "best case" list, UFOs
and the Limits of Science -- presumably because he gave some
thought to the question. I hope I'm not giving away any trade
secrets here, when I say that someone else who occasionally
posts on this List is also presently at work on a UFO book based
on the "ten best cases" approach, and has been actively querying
various ufologists for same as a starting point.

As for the Sturrock or Rockefeller Panel, or whatever it will be
called in the future, I was encouraged by the widespread
publicity and generally respectable media treatment it received
today. Without having read the full report yet (I'm waiting for
the print version), it nonetheless appears to have been based on
a "best evidence" presentation by various UFO investigators.
This was the same approach adopted by the UFO Coalition in 1995,
when they prepared the "Unidentified Flying Objects Briefing
Document: The Best Available Evidence" for distribution. In Part
2, twelve specific cases are referred to in detail; other cases
or aspects are treated in more general terms, i.e., foo
fighters, the Scandinavian ghost rockets, and so on.

All of which is to state the obvious: some cases are better than
others (or at least *should* be), and there must be some system
for establishing gradations of evidence, or "bestness" (multiple
witnesses are theoretically better than single witnesses, and so
on). We all agree that Klaatu landing on the White House lawn in
full view of CNN, CBS, NBC and ABC cameras would tend to rank
number one on anyone's Top Ten list. If one wants to put Roswell
second, then one must have some rationale for doing so, and so
on. At the same time, if the case for the ET UFO is practically
self-evident to anyone who bothers to look at the evidence, then
there must be, say, at least a hundred such air-tight cases
within easy reach, any randomly chosen ten of which should
qualify as "best."

Again, the reason why I brought this whole issue up in the first
place was because I had just finished working on a book which
required 50 reliable cases -- and it wasn't quite the "snap" I
had anticipated. As a sidelight, I might add that the closer one
approaches the present, the harder good case histories are to
come by (a feeling, I believe, expressed by Clark himself on
occasion, although I won't put words in his mouth). Indeed, the
latter is in danger of extinction, being rapidly superceded by
abduction accounts, conspiracy theories, and more and more
Roswell ephemera.

When the Encyclopedia of Ball Lightning is published, I'll be
happy to select my ten best cases, although it would be far
easier for the author of same to provide it for me, since, after
all, he or she would be the acknowledged expert on same.

But since it's unfair to ask another to do what one wouldn't do
oneself, I will shortly post a personal list of 20 UFO cases
drawn (culled?) from the 50 mentioned earlier. I won't
necessarily defend each and everyone of them to the death if
called upon to do so, naturally, but I will throw them out there
for discussion. Or dissection. Whatever

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 30

                        Re: 'Eliptical' Crop Circles

From: Jakes Louw <louwje@telkom.co.za>
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 08:37:20 +0200
Fwd Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 06:24:27 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Eliptical' Crop Circles


>From: Leanne Martin <leanne_martin@hotmail.com>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: 'Eliptical' Crop Circles
>Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 20:01:45 PDT

>what else are you going to do with all that
>hardware floating above us?

Leanne,

I also have my suspicions about HAARP, because this project
directly involves the projection of EM radiation off the
ionosphere.

regards

Jakes E. Louw
louwje@telkom.co.za





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 30

                       Michigan Sightings Data Sought

From: Jeff Westover <jeff.westover@mailexcite.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 21:16:42 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 06:18:37 -0400
Subject: Michigan Sightings Data Sought


As many of you have read in Filer's Files, CAUS updates and UFO
Roundup much attention has been placed on a few Michigan
Thumb-area sightings, two involving police officers, during the
latter months of 1997.  There have been a few interesting
developments since I began to look into these sightings less than
a month ago.

The most interesting is a developing story on area-wide sightings
on December 2, 1997 of dics-shaped, chevron-shaped and bright
white lights (minimum of four) arranged in a horizontal plane,
evenly spaced and hovering motionless in the sky and in one case
'blinking out'.  These sightings occurred in Birch Run, Saginaw
and Peck and within 45 minutes of each other.

If anyone has any data, sightings reports, video/photographic
evidence or possible leads in this developing investigation into
Michigan's eastern lower penninsula flap or any other Michigan
area UFO events during late 1997, please contact me at:

jeff.westover@mailexcite.com

Or contact Michigan MUFON State Section Director Frank Bertrand
at 810/655-4749 or bertrandf@worldnet.att.net

Thank you in advance for any information or help that you can provide.

Jeffrey S. Westover
Volunteer sketch artist to Michigan 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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 30

                                 BAR 199807

From: <BufoCalvin@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 23:45:09 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 06:19:38 -0400
Subject: BAR 199807

Bufo Calvin
P O Box 5231, Walnut Creek, CA  94596
Internet: BufoCalvin@aol.com
Website: <A HREF="http://members.aol.com/bufocalvin">http://members.aol.com/bufo
calvin<;/a>
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED (permission is granted to reproduce or redistribute this
edition of Bufo's WEIRD WORLD 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).

June, 1998 (Vol. 1, #6)

Books mentioned in BAR can be ordered on most e-mail systems by clicking on
the hyperlink title.  This will take you to the book at Amazon.com.  You can
read more about it at that point and decide if you want to order it.  If you
do, you add it to your "shopping cart".  Then, if you want another title
mentioned here, please click on it in this post.  If you have questions,
please e-mail Bufo at bufocalvin@aol.com.  Books are also available by phone
from Greenleaf Publications at 1-800-905-UFOs (1-800-905-8367).  If you call,
please be sure to tell them that Bufo sent you.

If you have books to recommend, please let me know.  If you would like to be
named as recommending it, include that information as well and tell me you
would like to be cited.

In this issue: Featured Title, Recent Additions, and Most Intriguing

----------

FEATURED TITLE:

The Day After Roswell
( <A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/067101756X/bufosweirdworld">
The Day After Roswell (paperback)</A> )
by Col. Philip J. Corso with William J. Birnes
This Paperback Edition Published June 1998 (hardback published July 1997)
List Price: $6.99, Amazon Price*: $5.59
"Hide the truth and the truth becomes your enemy.  Disclose the truth and it
becomes your weapon."
--Col Philip J. Corso, THE DAY AFTER ROSWELL
This book, just out in paperback, is one of the most significant UFO books of
recent years.  Not necessarily because of what it says, but because of who
says it.

There can be little question that Col. Corso was, in fact, a major figure in
military intelligence.  This is attested to, among other things, by a
controversy that surrounded the publication of the hardback.  Senator Strom
Thurmond (r his office) had apparently written a foreward praising Corso's
work.  According to Thurmond's people, they didn't know at that point what the
book was going to cover.  They complained, and the Thurmond intro is not in
this edition.

What prompted the "retraction?"  Corso claims to have been responsible for
some of the debris from the Roswell "flying saucer" crash.  According to the
book, he would guess what something was, and then insinuate it into the
Research and Development process in America.  In other words, we didn't mass
produce replicas of alien technology: we used its example to influence our own
natural technological progress.

This would be a brilliant and logical way to approach it.  It would be a
little hard to explain if you simply took a functioning laser (for example),
brought it down to the local machine shop, and had them mass produce it.
Instead, you take it to a lab which is already trying to develope something
similar.  You find someone high up there you can trust (or you lie to someone
you can't and say it was recovered from the French or the Russians).  They
probably understand it better than you anyway, and can simply drop it into the
soup of ideas which always flows around a research facility.

Logical?  Yes.  Factual?  That's another whole question.  The really
interesting part (to me, anyway) is that this book was written and published.
We have three main possibilities, as I see it.  Col. Corso believes what is in
the book.  Col. Corso believes some of what is in the book.  Col. Corso is
deliberately lying.

In the first case, it seems unlikely that Corso is simply wrong.  He may
believe it because it is true.  He may believe it because he has been induced
to believe it.  Incompetence and insanity both seem unlikely to me.  If it is
true, why would Corso release what would presumably be classified information?
Corso doesn't strike me (subjectively, of course) as someone who would go
against orders for personal gain.  If he thought it was the best for Corps and
Country, he might.

In the second and third cases, we have deception.  Deception usually has a
purpose, and that is the most tantalyzing aspect...

In any event, the book is well-written. I'll admit my prejudice: it read in
some parts like it was =too= well-written.  In particular, there was an early
reconstruction of the Roswell crash events (which seemed to carefully not
contradict the popular notions of the "UFO community").  Corso says that
"These are the stories as I heard them, as people later told them to me."
Corso claims no special knowledge about the actual recovery sequence...but
wouldn't you think that would be part of the "need to know" for understanding
the recovered artifacts?  Maybe not, but it does strike me as odd that there
is essentially nothing in his version which is outside of the books.  My guess
is that this part was written mainly by his co-author, William Birnes.

I found the whole thing fascinating and plausible, and I'm sure most people
would enjoy it, at least as a good read.  However, I didn't find it
convincing.  Let me put it this way: the "what" of the book was good, but I
often find that "why" is where the real importance lies.

----------

RECENT ADDITIONS:

Some of the items recently added to Bufo's WEIRD WORLD BOOKS:

Conspiracy of Silence
(
<A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0380799189/bufosweirdworld">Co
nspiracy of Silence (paperback)</A>)
Subtitle: From Roswell to Project Blue Book What the Government Doesn't Want
You to Know About Ufos
by Kevin Randle
Paperback, July 1998 (available now)
List Price: $6.99, Amazon Price*: $5.59

Cosmic Test Tube
( <A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0963916122/bufosweirdworld">
Cosmic Test Tube</A> )
Subtitle: Extraterrestrial Contact, Theories, and Evidence
by Randall Fitzgerald, illustrated by Paul Mendoza
Paperback, May 1998
List Price: $19.95, Amazon Price*: $15.96

Extra Sensory Perception
( <A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1901881253/bufosweirdworld">
Extra Sensory Perception (Boot&Bailey)</A>
Subtitle: Are You a Mind Reader? (Elements of the Extraordinary series)
by Andy Boot & Gerald Bailey
Paperback, June 1998
List Price: $5.95, Amazon Price*: $4.76

Field Guide to North American Monsters
( <A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0609800175/bufosweirdworld">
Field Guide to North American Monsters</A>)
Subtitle: Everything You Need to Know About Encountering over 100 Terrifying
Creatures in the Wild
by W. Haden Blackman
Paperback, June 1998
List Price: $15.00, Amazon Price*: $12.00

Flying Saucers Over Los Angeles
( <A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0932813542/bufosweirdworld">
Flying Saucers Over Los Angeles</A> )
by Dewayne B. Johnson, Kenn Thomas, & David Hatcher Childress
Paperback, June 1998
List Price: $16.00, Amazon Price*: $12.80

Guardian Angels and Spirit Guides
(
<A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0451195442/bufosweirdworld">Gu
ardian Spirits and Angel Guides</A> )
Subtitle: True Accounts of Benevolent Beings from the Other Side
by Brad Steiger
Paperback, July 1998 (available now)
List Price: $5.99, Amazon Price*: $4.79

Hitler and the Occult
( <A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0879759739/bufosweirdworld">
Hitler and the Occult</A>)
by Ken Anderson
Hardback, April 1995
List Price: $26.95, Amazon Price*: $18.87

Project Moondust
(
<A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0380726920/bufosweirdworld">Pr
oject Moondust</A>)
Subtitle: Beyond Roswell--Exposing the Government's Continuing Covert Ufo
Investigation and Cover-Ups
by Kevin Randle
Paperback, July 1998 (available now)
List Price: $12.50, Amazon Price: $10.00

Psychic Explorer
( <A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0749916850/bufosweirdworld">
Psychic Explorer</A>)
Subtitle: A Down-To-Earth Guide to Six Magical Arts, Astrology, Auras, the
Tarot, Dowsing, Palmistry, ESP
by Jonathan Cainer & Carl Rider
Paperback, April 1998
List Price: $16.95, Amazon Price*: $13.56

The Randle Report (paperback)
( <A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0871318598/bufosweirdworld">
The Randle Report (paperback)</A>)
Subtitle: UFOs in the 90s
by Kevin Randle
Reprint Paperback, May 1998
List Price: $14.95, Amazon Price*: $11.96

Reincarnation
( <A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0749917873/bufosweirdworld">
Reincarnation (Stemman)</A>)
Subtitle: Amazing True Cases from Around the World
by Roy Stemman
Paperback, April, 1998
List Price: $9.95, Amazon Price*: $7.96

The Search for the Girl with the Blue Eyes
( <A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0876043953/bufosweirdworld">
The Search for the Girl with the Blue Eyes</A> )
Subtitle: A Venture into Reincarnation
Reprint
by Jess Stearn
List Price: $12.95, Amazon Price*: $12.95

UFO Sightings: The Evidence
( <A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1573922137/bufosweirdworld">
UFO Sightings: The Evidence</A> )
by Robert Sheaffer
Hardcover, May 1998
List Price: $25.95, Amazon Price*: $18.17

The Ultimate Alien Agenda
(
<A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/156718779X/bufosweirdworld">Th
e Ultimate Alien Agenda</A> )
Subtitle: The Re-Engineering of Humankind
by James L. Walden
Paperback, June 1998
List Price: $9.95, Amazon Price*: $7.96

----------

MOST INTRIGUING:

Last month's five most visited titles at Bufo's WEIRD WORLD Books were:

1. Talking to Heaven
(
<A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0525942688/bufosweirdworldA/">
Talking to Heaven : A Medium's Message of Life After Death</A> )
Subtitle: A Medium's Message of Life After Death
by James Van Praagh
List Price: $20.95, Amazon Price*: $14.67

2. Confirmation
( <A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/031218557X/bufosweirdworldA/
">Confirmation: The Hard Evidence of Aliens Among Us</A> )
by Whitley Strieber
Hardcover, 256 pages
May, 1998
List Price: $23.95, Amazon Price: $16.77
Abductee Strieber's latest, and getting considerable publicity

3. Field Guide to Mysterious Places of Eastern North America
(
<A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0805044493/bufosweirdworldA/">
Field Guide to Mysterious Places of Eastern North America</A> )
by Salvatore M. Trento
Paperback, 268 pages
May, 1997
List Price: $18.95, Amazon Price*: $15.16

4. Glimpses of Other Realities : High Strangeness, Vol. 2
( <A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1879706784/bufosweirdworldA/
">Glimpses of Other Realities: High Strangeness, Vol. 2</A> )
by Linda Moulton Howe
Paperback, 512 pages
March, 1998
List price: $27.95, Amazon Price*: $22.36

5. Secret Life of Plants
(
<A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0060915870/bufosweirdworldA/">
The Secret Life of Plants</A> )
by Peter Tompkins, Christopher Bird
Paperback, pagination unknown
February, 1989
List price: $16.00, Amazon Price*: $12.80

This is Bufo saying, "If =everything= seemed normal, that =would= be weird!"

____________________________

*Prices are set by Amazon.com.  Clicking on the link will take you to their
current listing and reflect the current price.
____________________________





___________________________

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 Media Alert the same way. Also, please let me know if
there is something in the media you think I should cover. Deadline is Tuesday, t
he 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.  For more information on OPUS, see its we
bsite at http://members.aol.com/josephxx3






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 30

                     Re: Scientists: UFOs Warrant Study

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 01:50:44 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 06:23:31 -0400
Subject: Re: Scientists: UFOs Warrant Study


>Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 17:58:59 -0700 (PDT)
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Scientists: UFOs Warrant Study

>>Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 09:01:01 -0700
>>From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net>
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Scientists: UFOs Warrant Study

>>           STANFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS RELEASE

>> Embargoed until June 29, 1998

>>       STANFORD CONTACT:
>>David Salisbury, Science Writer, Stanford University News
>>Service, phone: 650-725-1944

>>SOCIETY FOR SCIENTIFIC EXPLORATION CONTACT:

>>Marsha Sims, Executive Editor, Journal of Scientific
>>Exploration, phone: 650-593-8581, fax: 650-595-4466

>>FOR COMMENT CONTACT:

>>Prof. Peter Sturrock, workshop director, phone: 650-723-1438

>>Prof. Von R. Eshleman, panel co-chair, phone:  650-723-3531

>>Dr. Thomas Holzer, panel co-chair, phone:  303-397-1567

>>Scientific panel concludes some UFO evidence worthy of study

>>Stanford, CA, June 29, 1998 --- In the first independent review
>>of UFO phenomena since 1970, a panel of scientists has concluded
>>that some sightings are accompanied by physical evidence that
>>deserves scientific study. But the panel was not convinced that
>>any of this evidence points to a violation of known natural laws
>>or the involvement of an extraterrestrial intelligence.

Jim writes:

>The conclusions of this panel are cause for a small celebration,
>I think. Although they are couched in very cautious words,. . .

I watched it on three seperate news broadcasts here in NY. The
report was given A-1 'serious news' treatment on all three
broadcasts. (Two of which are nationally syndicated. ABC World
News and Report with Peter Jennings and WPIX (Warner Bros.
Network) Evening News with Jack Caferty. WPIX gave it the most
air time (3 mins!) and included a brief interview with Prof.
Peter Sturrock.

One of the comments that I found especially interesting came
from Prof. Sturrock. He gave a short list of things that they
considered "evidence," and among them was photographic and
videotaped material! The only qualifier (if it could be
considered that) was that he stated that modern analysis
techniques allow them to make good determinations as to the
authenticity of a given photo or tape. I found the fact that pix
and vid's were
included on his short list as encouraging as the panels findings.

> But of course members of CSICOP and other debunker-types
>will attack the panel and its conclusions strenuously, as usual.

Yeah Jim, but at least this time they are argueing with Ph.D's
and scientists. Those are the very guys they claim to defend and
represent. It'll be like watching the Pope go to war with/
against God!

They are rapidly losing the 'string' in their legs and soon
those 'legs' that they stand on will not be able to hold them
up. My deepest prayer is that the courage shown by the academic
members of this panel opens a floodgate and allows others in the
academic community to take this subject on seriously.

As far as I'm concerned the "Ice" has been officially broken! It
is cause for (minor) celebration. Although I'm still holding my,
"I told you so" in abeyance for a short while. <VBG>

Mr Klasses 'crow sandwich' sits in my freezer awaiting the
day it gets served.

Gettin there slowly but surely!

John 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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 30

                  Mission To Collect Samples Of Comet Dust

From: Mark LeCuyer <randydan@wavetech.net>
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 01:31:57 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 06:26:46 -0400
Subject: Mission To Collect Samples Of Comet Dust

From: Alien Astronomer
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/6583

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

FROM: Vince Stricherz
University of Washington
206-543-2580
vinces@u.washington.edu
DATE: June 29, 1998

February launch planned for UW mission to collect samples of
comet dust.

It might sound like something from a popular science fiction
movie, but a University of Washington astronomy professor's
nearly two-decade dream of launching an unmanned spacecraft to
collect interstellar dust from a comet is close to coming true.

Stardust will blast off from Cape Canaveral, Fla., in February.
It will be the fourth mission in NASA's Discovery series, which
captured public imagination a year ago with Mars Pathfinder. It
will be the first mission since Apollo to return samples of
space material to Earth for analysis.

UW professor Donald Brownlee, the principal investigator for the
project, expects to find clues about the formation of the solar
system and perhaps the universe itself.

"We hope to understand how comets were formed and what they're
made of," he said. "We expect them to be the preserved building
blocks of the outer planets."

Brownlee began considering such a mission in1980. The idea was
explored seriously five years later when Halley's comet
approached Earth, but it was deemed unworkable then.

For Stardust's 7-year, 3.1-billion-mile journey, solar panels
will power the spacecraft to encounter Wild 2, a comet that
altered course in 1974 after a close encounter with Jupiter. Now
instead of circling among the outer planets in our solar system,
Wild 2 (pronounced vihlt 2) travels among the inner planets. It
was discovered in 1978 during its first close approach to Earth.

Wild 2's recent arrival to the planetary neighborhood makes the
$200 million Stardust mission possible. In 2004, the craft will
pass about 75 miles from the main body of the comet. That's
close enough to trap small particles from the comet's coma, the
gas-and-dust envelope surrounding the nucleus. A camera built
for NASA's Voyager program will transmit the first-ever close-up
comet pictures back to Earth. Though the encounter will last
about 12 hours, Brownlee says the really intense activity will
be over in a matter of minutes.

The collection system will extend from the spacecraft and trap
particles as they collide with it. To prevent damaging or
altering the particles - each smaller than a grain of sand and
traveling as much as nine times the speed of a bullet fired from
a rifle - the collector uses a unique substance called aerogel.
Often called "frozen smoke," aerogel is a transparent blue
silica-based solid that is as much as 99.9 percent air. It is as
smooth as glass, something like plastic foam without the lumps.
A block the size of a person weighs less than a pound but can
support the weight of a small car.

On the trip to Wild 2, the aerogel-equipped collection panel
will be deployed to trap interstellar particles traveling in
space. During the encounter with the comet, some 242 million
miles from Earth, the opposite side of the panel will gather
bits of comet dust. Trapped particles will leave a telltale
trail through the aerogel that scientists will follow to find
the grains and extract them. Upon leaving the comet, the
collection panel will retract into its capsule.

Once the Stardust capsule parchutes into Utah's Great Salt
Desert in 2006, the particles it collects will go to Johnson
Space Center in Houston and then be parceled out to various
research facilities, including the University of Washington.
Because comets are about equal parts ice and dust, Brownlee
believes the particles will be cryogenically preserved
interstellar dust left from the birth of the solar system some
4.6 billion years ago. Such grains can be found only in the
outer solar system, he believes, because heat has destroyed them
nearer the Sun.

Brownlee's previous work collecting cosmic dust particles led to
their being named Brownlee particles. Cosmic dust was brought
back to Earth on Gemini missions in the 1960s. Later,
high-flying U2 planes and balloons gathered particles from
different levels in the atmosphere, and space dust even has been
collected from the ocean floor. "A comet mission is the logical
extension," Brownlee said.

The project is being carried out by a consortium that includes
the Jet Propulsion Laboratory and Lockheed Martin Astronautics.
When it came to picking a name, Brownlee said, it just seemed
appropriate to select "Stardust," the title Hoagy Carmichael put
on a popular tune that since has been recorded by numerous
artists, including Willie Nelson and Ringo Starr.

"I liked it because most spacecraft missions had weird, bizarre
names. They were acronyms for something," he said. "This isn't
an acronym for anything. It's just a name that people know."

                           ###

For more information, contact Brownlee at
brownlee@bluemoon.astro.washington.edu or (206) 543-8575.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 30

                     Re: Scientists: UFOs Warrant Study

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 01:25:38 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 06:32:46 -0400
Subject: Re: Scientists: UFOs Warrant Study

To Geoff, Terry all on the list, and especially to Peter Sturrock:

> From: Geoff Price <Geoff@CalibanMW.com>
> Subject: Scientists: UFOs Warrant Study

> >From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net>
> >To: updates@globalserve.net
> >Subject: Scientists: UFOs Warrant Study

> >http://www.jse.com/PR_UFO_98.html

> Good to run into some genuine good news, eh folks?  I hope much
> of this list would be happy to join me in a cheer for Peter
> Sturrock for carrying this torch.

<snip>

> Personally, I didn't notice anything objectionable, or
> particularly unexpected, in any of the report that I read, but I
> didn't have time this morning to get into the detail. Any
> salient sections deserving of comment/rebuttal/further discussion
> on the list?

I think the report, cautiously worded as one should expect, will
stand on its own.

What is surprising and welcome for me is the open press and
media coverage.

For example, the San Jose (Calif.) Mercury devoted 36
column-inches to the report, and not tongue-in-cheek! The
Mercury has a huge circulation in and around the southern San
Francisco Bay Area. It is quite literally the newspaper of
"Silicon Valley"

The Mercury almost never publishes UFO stories of any kind.

The first 8 column-inches were on the front page, right beneath
the headline story about Clinton making speeches in China!

The other 28 inches went right to the back page of the front
section, while the rest of the "Clinton Challenges Students"
article got tucked inside (page 7A next to an electronics
components ads).

Both articles got about the same amount of print.

I think this is important. Maybe a few more scientists and high
quality witnesses will be less disinclined to come forward.

Best wishes

-  Larry Hatch









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 30

                     Re: Scientists: UFOs Warrant Study

From: Nick Humphries <nick@the-den.clara.net>
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 98 11:20:36 BST
Fwd Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 09:51:30 -0400
Subject: Re: Scientists: UFOs Warrant Study


> Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 14:31:25 -0700
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> From: Geoff Price <Geoff@CalibanMW.com>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Scientists: UFOs Warrant Study

> Good to run into some genuine good news, eh folks?  I hope much
> of this list would be happy to join me in a cheer for Peter
> Sturrock for carrying this torch.

I echo that sentiment - I just wonder if people would be ready to
accept the boards findings if it eventually finds against the
ETH.

> In other news, I see the war of spin is already on, with Nick
> Humphries using the press release as a springboard for taunting
> ETH proponents on usenet and describing the study as "if
> anything" adding "to the PSH (Psychosocial Hypothesis)". Classy
> job, Nick.

To expand on the five word quote for non-Usenet readers - I found
that since the group found no evidence for the ETH, but that
there was a genuine mystery, then I thought I should warn some of
the more eager newsgroup readers that this isn't the Holy Grail
(scientific backing of the ETH) - not yet anyway. And yes, if
anything, it implies that the PSH has some credence. Call it spin
if you want, but I call it my own interpretation.

(For the record, my opinion on this whole phenomenon is that if
non-human involvement is found, then the ETH is the more likely
explaination (as opposed to alternative dimensions, time
travellers, etc). However, IMHO there's no evidence to support
it, and until then, I could probably be counted as a PSH-er)


Nick Humphries









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 30

                     Re: Scientists: UFOs Warrant Study

From: Nick Humphries <nick@the-den.clara.net>
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 98 11:19:33 BST
Fwd Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 09:49:15 -0400
Subject: Re: Scientists: UFOs Warrant Study

> Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 14:31:25 -0700
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> From: Geoff Price <Geoff@CalibanMW.com>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Scientists: UFOs Warrant Study

> Good to run into some genuine good news, eh folks?  I hope much
> of this list would be happy to join me in a cheer for Peter
> Sturrock for carrying this torch.

I echo that sentiment - I just wonder if people would be ready to
accept the boards findings if it eventually finds against the
ETH.

> In other news, I see the war of spin is already on, with Nick
> Humphries using the press release as a springboard for taunting
> ETH proponents on usenet and describing the study as "if
> anything" adding "to the PSH (Psychosocial Hypothesis)". Classy
> job, Nick.

To expand on the five word quote for non-Usenet readers - I found
that since the group found no evidence for the ETH, but that
there was a genuine mystery, then I thought I should warn some of
the more eager newsgroup readers that this isn't the Holy Grail
(scientific backing of the ETH) - not yet anyway. And yes, if
anything, it implies that the PSH has some credence. Call it spin
if you want, but I call it my own interpretation.

(For the record, my opinion on this whole phenomenon is that if
non-human involvement is found, then the ETH is the more likely
explaination (as opposed to alternative dimensions, time
travellers, etc). However, IMHO there's no evidence to support
it, and until then, I could probably be counted as a PSH-er)

Nick Humphries









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 30

                     Re: Scientists: UFOs Warrant Study

From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 06:34:42 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 09:52:41 -0400
Subject: Re: Scientists: UFOs Warrant Study


>Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 10:31:34 -0700 (PDT)
>From: Keith Wyatt <gunbunnyxx@yahoo.com>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Scientists: UFOs Warrant Study
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

>> Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 09:01:01 -0700
>> From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net>
>> To: updates@globalserve.net
>> Subject: Scientists: UFOs Warrant Study

>> As seen on Good Morning America today from:

>Well it is about time! I'm glad to see scientist finally decide to
>help in solving this mystery and they are welcome to help investigate
>these incidents!


Terry,

My bet is that they will not want to help us investigate. They
will want to take over and if any answers are found they will
take ALL the credit, act like we don't exist, and pretend they
knew there was something to this all along. That's how "real
science" works.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 30

                     Re: Scientists: UFOs Warrant Study

From: Nick Humphries <nick@the-den.clara.net>
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 98 11:19:33 BST
Fwd Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 09:50:24 -0400
Subject: Re: Scientists: UFOs Warrant Study

> Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 14:31:25 -0700
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> From: Geoff Price <Geoff@CalibanMW.com>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Scientists: UFOs Warrant Study
>
> Good to run into some genuine good news, eh folks?  I hope much
> of this list would be happy to join me in a cheer for Peter
> Sturrock for carrying this torch.

I echo that sentiment - I just wonder if people would be ready to
accept the boards findings if it eventually finds against the
ETH.

> In other news, I see the war of spin is already on, with Nick
> Humphries using the press release as a springboard for taunting
> ETH proponents on usenet and describing the study as "if
> anything" adding "to the PSH (Psychosocial Hypothesis)". Classy
> job, Nick.

To expand on the five word quote for non-Usenet readers - I found
that since the group found no evidence for the ETH, but that
there was a genuine mystery, then I thought I should warn some of
the more eager newsgroup readers that this isn't the Holy Grail
(scientific backing of the ETH) - not yet anyway. And yes, if
anything, it implies that the PSH has some credence. Call it spin
if you want, but I call it my own interpretation.

(For the record, my opinion on this whole phenomenon is that if
non-human involvement is found, then the ETH is the more likely
explaination (as opposed to alternative dimensions, time
travellers, etc). However, IMHO there's no evidence to support
it, and until then, I could probably be counted as a PSH-er)

Nick Humphries









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 30

                             Meteorite in Russia

From: Masinaigan@aol.com
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 08:04:08 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 09:55:40 -0400
Subject: Meteorite in Russia

Dear List:

     Please read the email from Jackie Jerrigan below.
Apparently a most unusual meteor crashed in
Turkmenistan in central Asia on June 20, 1998.
     Significant UFO activity was recorded elsewhere
in the world that day.
     If any of our European colleagues saw a newspaper
story on this event, I would greatly appreciate it if you
would forward the item to UFO Roundup.  Thanks!

                                             Joe Trainor

_____________________________________________

Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 18:22:17 -0400
From: jackiej <jackiej@usit.net>
To: Masinaigan@aol.com
Subject: meteorite in Russia

This is from CNN interactive for Sunday, June 28.  Have you any other
information about this meteorite?  I was unable to find any other post
about it.  Thanks for your fine Web site.  Jackie Jernigan

http://customnews.cnn.com/cnews/pna.show_story?p_art_id=2689926&p_section_name
=&p_art_type=786831&p_subcat=Astronomy+%26+Space&p_category=Sciences


Sciences:Astronomy & Space
Turkmens Want to Name
Meteorite after Leader

Reuters
28-JUN-98

ASHGABAT, June 28 (Reuters) - Scientists in Turkmenistan have
asked President Saparmurat Niyazov, focus of a flourishing
personality cult in the former Soviet state, to give his name to
a large meteorite, an official newspaper said on Sunday.

The Neitralny Turkmenistan daily, quoting the official Turkmen
Press news agency, said a large conic meteorite weighing some
300 kg (670 lbs) had landed in northern Turkmenistan on June 20.

``Noting the fact that the meteorite fell onto Turkmen land on
the eve of the sixth anniversary of Saparmurat Niyazov's
election as president, scientists have asked the head of state
to name the celestial body Turkmenbashi,'' it said.

Turkmenbashi (Head of the Turkmen) is the official title of
Niyazov, the Central Asian republic's leader since Soviet times
who was elected president on June had chosen Niyazov. There were
no other candidates running for president.

Towns, villages, military units, factories and a sea gulf in the
desert state of four million people have already been named
after Turkmenbashi, whose portraits or statues can be seen on
nearly every street corner throughout the country.

The request to confer Niyazov's name on a meteorite appears to
be the first of its kind."

----





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 30

                         Re: MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 98 08:18:41 PDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 10:02:38 -0400
Subject: Re: MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4


> Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 22:35:15 +0100
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> From: John Rimmer <johnr@magonia.demon.co.uk>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4

> >To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
> >From: "Jerome Clark" <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4
> >Date: Sun, 28 Jun 98 15:14:48 PDT

> <snip>

> >On the other hand, since the PSHers love to lavish attention on
> >me as the focus of all that is evil in ufology, I must deliver
> >to them some profoundly disappointing news: a panel of American
> >scientists, with no previous involvement in UFO research or
> >controversy,is about to weigh in with a public statement which
> >will deliver the needle to the Purely Speculative rhetorical
> >balloon.

> I think you should read a little bit more of the report before
> blowing your entertaining two-tone horn (copyright: Duke of
> Mendoza) about it. Phrases like "there was no convincing
> evidence pointing to unknown physical processes or to the
> involvement of extraterrestrial intelligences" are not going to
> get the PSHers quaking in the boots, they simply serve to
> demonstrate how Entirely Threadbare the ETH is. No needle there,
> I'm afraid.

I hope, John, that by now you have had time to read the
report and won't have to repeat misleading claims like
the above.  The panel was formed to look at a specific
question: the physical evidence associated with UFO
reports.  The scientists concluded that this evidence is
puzzling and intriguing and merits far more attention than
it has received from scientists to date.  They went on to
cite cases, such as the Coyne CE2, which involved multiply
witnessed events involving a craftlike structure which
resembled no earthly aircraft.  The panel lamented the
absence of a study of physical evidence and went no
farther beyond acknowledging the intriguing nature of
the incident.

Nothing in the panel's mission required it to judge
whether -- at the end of the investigation that the panel
made clear has barely begun -- the ETH is valid or
invalid.  All it was judging was whether the limited
question it was addressing, namely suggestive and
enigmatic but not adequately investigated, physical
evidence proved ET visitation.  Given the limited
scope of the inquiry, it could come to no other answer
than that the ETH is unproved.  Of course.  What other
conclusion could it come to, given the limitations the
panel repeatedly cited in scientific attention and
resources devoted to the issue?

The good news is that nothing in the report backs up
the sweeping dismissals we've been hearing from
the Purely Speculative Hypothesizers.  The panel
report is undiluted good news for the rest of us.

> Incidently, you say you don't know anything about John Harney.
> Until his retirement a few months ago he was a Senior Scientific
> Officer at the UK Meteorological Office, where he had worked for
> a great number of years. These people know quite a lot about
> strange things that happen in the sky, you know -- far more than
> most English majors. He's also been studying the UFO phenomenon
> for even longer than you Jerry; I think his involvement goes
> back to the mid '50s.

Thank you for bringing up Harney's name.  That gives me a
chance to ask you a question.  In his recent anti-ETH rant he
has this to say, in a piece in which I am the named figure
(except for a brief, passing reference to Mike Swords)
open-minded about the ETH; moreover, mine is the only book
cited.  Here's his penultimate paragraph:

"American ETH enthusiasts appear to be much better
educated and more intelligent [thanks, Harney].  This
means they can retail their lies, fantasies, and pseudo-
scientific gobbledygook more smoothly and effectively.
However, I suspect that the American public are beginning
to become bored with their absurd posturings and intellectual
dishonesty."

Here's my question to you, John Rimmer:  Is it your view,
as editor of Magonia (which published the slanderous
remarks above), that I am retailing "lies, fantasies, and
pseudo-scientific gobbledygook"?  Do you believe that
my views amount only to "absurd posturings"?  Is it your
view that I am "intellectually dishonest"?

I look forward to your response.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 30

                         Re: MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 98 08:48:41 PDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 18:46:45 -0400
Subject: Re: MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4


> Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 21:25:46 -0400
> From: The Duke of Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com>
> Subject: MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

> >To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
> >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4
> >Date: Mon, 29 Jun 98 11:39:46 PDT

> Here we are discussing ETs and their
> connection to UFOs. No science known to me works from anecdotal
> & untestable reports (even Michael Swords admits there's not
> much in ufology that scientists can "do science on") that,
> individually flawed though they may be, can be construed as
> broad hints of something more & greater. If there is an example,
> I'd be pleased to hear about it. Puzzling reports do not an ETH
> make; they simply puzzle.

Of course, the panel of physical scientists focused on what it
could do physical science on.  Again, as I've had occasion to ask
over and over again, why this obsession with the ETH?  Why don't
we put cart before horse?  As I have stated ad nauseam, my
position has always been that the ETH is simply a reasonable
provisional hypothesis, and nothing I have seen or read on this
list or elsewhere convinces me otherwise.  That said, so what?
Let us focus on the puzzles and the questions and the
investigatable issues, and then at the end of that we will know a
whole lot more and then can discuss ultimate causes more
fruitfully.  An approach, I realize, rejected by the PSH crowd,
by now (sadly) simply an adjunct to the debunking movement.

> And no scientific hypothesis that survived experiment and became
> theory has been based on generalizations from observations of
> transient, *inconsistent* & *unpredictable* phenomena.

Well, ball-lightning, for one thing.  Everyone really ought to
read James Dale Berry's classic work on the subject, Ball
Lightning and Bead Lightning, for the amusing and instructive
parallels between rejection of BL reports and UFO reports. Ron
Westrum once published a splendid paper in a sociology journal on
science's reception of BL vs. UFO.  I'll have to look it up (it's
buried somewhere in my thick file "Anomalies and Science"), and
if I find it, I'll list the citation.

> This is
> what the ETH is based on, and it offers more holes than links in
> its chain from "data" to "conclusions".

Nah.

> It's not mentioned in the post to which I'm responding, but I
> have it on good authority that someone, somewhere is working
> even now on shredding Michael Swords' notions of exobiology into
> teeny weeny bits, and that the results will be published
> sometime this year.

Great. 'Bout time. And I don't doubt for a second, having seen
others make the attempt, that Swords will defend himself quite
effectively, thank you.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 30

                         Re: MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 98 08:32:06 PDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 18:40:38 -0400
Subject: Re: MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4


> Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 21:25:46 -0400
> From: The Duke of Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com>
> Subject: MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

> With the compliments of the Duke of Mendoza:

> >To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
> >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4
> >Date: Mon, 29 Jun 98 11:39:46 PDT

> >From accounts of the SSE panel's conclusions and recommendations
> given in this and other reports dropping out of the 9th
> cyberdimension into my mailbox, they seem to me entirely
> unexceptionable and indeed welcome. PSH "adherents" are actually
> so loosely affiliated that I have no idea whether (say) John
> Harney or (say) Martin Kottmeyer would concur, even though I
> have been described by Fortean Times as a member of a "magic
> circle" (tee hee) connected with the Psychosocial Conspiracy.
> But I see that the pouting, flame-haired giant Rimmer is not
> about to
> change his trousers at this report either.

PSHers are not, as I had occasion to remark earlier, known to
change their minds, possibly with the sole exception of me,
having been one long ago, before I knew better, at least not
enough to refrain from writing a phenomenally silly proto-PSH
book.  Sigh.

> >The panel was not formed, as I understand it, to study the
> >ETH but to consider the evidence for UFOs as a potentially
> >worthwhile subject of scientific investigation.  Why should it
> >endorse the ETH coming out of the gate?

> I don't know. Why should it? I am merely going by the context in
> which you, Jerry, mentioned the imminent release of the panel's
> findings. There seemed to be some hint that the ETH - which you
> call "hated and dreaded", though I myself neither hate nor dread
> it, though I do find it an unnecessary distraction - was somehow
> relevant. As it turns out, it isn't.

> >None of the
> >panel's findings, which stress the puzzling and unexplained
> >physical dimensions of the phenomenon, is consistent with
> >the Purely Speculative Hypothesis.

> I can't speak for others of PSH leanings (see above), but it's
> always been part of my general PS hypothesis that what are to
> the observer "puzzling and and unexplained" physical events are
> the *most likely* to attach themselves to otherwise unsupported
> beliefs about ET visitors, watchers, what-have-yous. Even if ET
> *were* behind some of these, that fact would not dispose of many
> psychosocial aspects of UFOs and ufology.

A major problem I have with PSH ufology is simply that it's bad
social science.  The psychosocial aspects (as opposed to their
ideologized and fossilized form; see any issue of Magonia) of
ufology have fascinated me for a long time, and much of my
writing is on that subject. The PSH ideologues, unfortunately,
possess a wildly unrealistic sense of the explanatory powers of
psychosocial concepts. I prefer the empiricist approach favored
by the panel and by the hated nuts-and-bolts ufologists.  (Or, as
John Harney calls us, and me in particular, retailers of "lies,
fantasies and pseudo-scientific gobbledygook" and purveyors of
"absurd fantasies," not to mention practitioners of "intellectual
dishonesty.")

Maybe it's time you turned your keen analytical talents to the
logical. evidential, and rhetorical shortcomings of the PSH
crowd.

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 > 1998 >
   Jun > Jun 30

                       Re: Video of 'UFOs' Around MIR

From: Carlos Barboza <cbarboza@adinet.com.uy>
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 00:50:29 -0300
Fwd Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 18:43:41 -0400
Subject: Re: Video of 'UFOs' Around MIR

Hello all,

I also have a tape showing a cigar-shaped object that gets close
to MIR, It was taken by astronauts through ship's window. In the
same film (provided by a friend of mine) there is also another
UFO approximating to a Telstar satellite as it was being
repaired.

I'm going to ask you no $25 for this, but instead I will upload
it to somewhere in the internet once I manage to convert it to
video file. I must contact a friend with a video-capture card
first. I'm interested in Susan's tape but I rather wait until the
author accepts uploading it. I don't think anybody should mix UFO
research with making money from it.

Estoy de acuerdo contigo Jhon Vellez

Carlos Barboza (from Uruguay)
cbarboza@adinet.com.uy